SUED's Annual Newsletter

Page 1

NEWSLETTE R 2019 - 2 0 2 0 _

Sustainable Urban Economic Development Programme

Developing Kenya’s Emerging Municipalities into Strategic Green Growth Hubs _ Newsletter 2019/2020

Table of Contents

01 | Programme Overview


Implementation Approach


Expected Results


Implementing Agencies


Where We Work


02 | Urban Economic Planning UEP Development Process

7 8

UEP Highlights


03 | Investment Attraction


04 | Investment Climate


05 | Capacity Building


06 | Success Stories


07 | Lessons from the Field


09 | SUED’s COVID-19 Response


08 | SUED’s first Year in Pictures


SUED’s Senior Urban Economic Planning Advisor Prof. Alfred Omenya seeks insights from farmers in Mandera municipality on how to ensure that the urban economic planning process is inclusive of their needs

The Sustainable Urban Economic Development programme is a £70 million five-year programme supported by the British Government through the Department or International Development (DFID). The programme’s funding is channeled through two mechanisms; seed funding that will be used to de-risk value chain and critical climate resilient infrastructure investments to attract public-private investments into identified projects and technical assistance in four thematic areas.


Lamu Governor H.E. Fahim Twaha takes the then UK International Development Secretary Rory Stewart through a market in Lamu to show how vendors stand to benefit from SUED support SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020 in the municipality.

Project Overview


“The Process of developing our Urban Economic Plan for Iten has shown us the importance of working with the private sector to create sustainable development. Our minds have been opened” _ Elgeyo Markawet’s Governor H.E. Alex Tolgos

Supporting Market Driven growth in emerging municipalities by attracting investment for critical climate resilient infrastructure and value chain projects. Implementation Period: September 2018- August 2022 The UK Government funded Sustainable Urban Economic Development Programme (SUED) is working with 12 municipalities to develop sustainable urban economic plans and attract investment for critical infrastructure and value chain projects. The programme is doing this by working with the public and private sector to improve urban economic planning, business environment reforms and develop urban investments. The programme aims to create the right economic conditions for these emerging urban areas to grow in a way that is both inclusive and sustainable.

The programme is providing technical expertise in these key four thematic areas: 1 Urban Economic Planning: SUED is working with local institutional authorities at the county and municipal level to design and implement urban economic development plans. The urban economic plans integrate market-based approaches into the counties integrated plans emphasizing the potential of value chain development. With SUED’s support municipalities are learning how to assimilate regional corridor development initiatives into County urban economic planning. As a result, the strategies support; economic corridor planning, agro-clustering, industrial park development, special economic zones and technopole development. The plans are tailor made for each municipality and are responsive to the needs of the local population.

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

The main programme objectives are to: • • • • • • •

Strengthen capacity at municipality level to plan better for urbanisation. Support policy and legislative changes to enable greater private sector led growth. Raise investment for critical bankable, climate-resilient infrastructure and value chain projects. Develop and test capacity at municipality level to maintain key activities after the programme ends. Create climate-resilient jobs. Improve rural links with larger markets that were previously difficult to access. Poise municipalities for climate-resilient and sustainable growth.


In its thematic areas, SUED is supporting 2 Investment Attraction The programme is providing technical assistance to help facilitate productive linkages between national and county level investment promotion agencies. With SUED’s support municipalities are developing investment promotion strategies that draw in investment including public private partnerships (PPPs). The programme will work closely with them to implement the strategies and ensure that they are responsive to the market. The investment will fund commercially 4 bankable climate resilient infrastructure and value chains that have been identified in specific municipal urban economic plans. 3 Investment Climate/Business Reforms: SUED aims to work with to municipalities to help them map out the national and county level legal and regulatory environments constraining private-sector urban growth.

The programme will avail to the municipalities analytical tools to assess county level investor readiness as way of helping municipalities identify areas that they need to support to stimulate further demanddriven investment climate reform. 4 Capacity Building Specialist: With SUED’s support, municipal staff and stakeholders will receive technical assistance to enhance their capacity to develop urban administration systems and local revenue generation strategies. As a result, they will be able to sustain SUED’s programmatic efforts and enable the municipality to better manage their climate resilient infrastructure and promote investment in the municipality delivering efficient and equitable development.

SUED carries out a meeting with stakeholders and municipality staff from Kitui to learn about their capacity needs. SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020


SUED’s work with municipalities is geared towards gender and social inclusivity through enterprise development activities that will enhance the employability of marginalised populations.

Expected Programme Results/ Impact /Outcome Working closely with the county governments, SUED has established these key goals that will be achieved through the programme’s assistance: • Inclusive economic growth and poverty reduction in supported municipalities and the respective counties that they are embedded in • Increased investment in selected municipalities -including investments in climate resilient infrastructure or value chain projects

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

Implementing Agencies SUED is managed by Tetra Tech International Development. Tetra Tech provides programme management, technical oversight and coordinates implementation of activities by the subcontractors that comprise of: a. Urban Economic Planning Firm: WS Atkins International Limited b. Investment Attraction Firm: Open Capital Advisors c. Investment Climate Firms d. Capacity Building Specialist – SUED has close to 70 firms and individuals in its CBS roster


Where We Work Kathwana: •

UEP development process completed

Iten: •

UEP development process on-going

Mandera: •

Eldoret: • •

Political Economy Analysis carried out CNA process kick started


Bungoma: •

Political Economy Analysis carried out CNA process kick-started

Added municipality following increase in funding

UEP developed, adopted and publicly launched IA process kick-started

Kerugoya: • •

Political Economy Analysis carried out CNA process kick-started

Kisii: • •

UEP development process completed CoVID- free market being developed

Lamu: •

Wote: •

Added municipality following increase in funding

Political Economy Analysis carried out MOU signed between DFID and the county Government

Kitui: • • •

UEP: Urban Economic Planning IA: Investment Attraction CNA: Capacity Needs Assessment

UEP Developed and adopted IA process kick-started CNA carried out

Malindi: • •

UEP developed, adopted and publicly launched IA process kick-started

*This activities are as at August 2020 SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020


The Head of DFID Kenya Mr. Julius Court and Isiolo’s Governor H.E. Mohammed Kuti sign the MOU between DFID and Isiolo County to kick start the SUED UEP development | Newsletter 2019 -process 2020



The Head of DFID Kenya Mr. Julius Court and Kilifi’s Governor H.E. Amason Kingi commemorate the signing of the MOU between DFID and Kilifi County to kick start the UEP development process in Malindi SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

Urban Economic Development Planning


“Isiolo’s Urban Economic Plan is a light guiding the ship in the dark night ” _ Hassan Mario, Isiolo Municipal Board Chair

SUED has so far worked with six municipalities to develop their Urban Economic Plans (UEP). The programmes’ approach has been geared towards working closely with supported municipalities to complete urban economic strategies that enable them to take full advantage of their unique natural resources. The UEP development process has been one of collaboration between different stakeholders and the programme to assess the economic capabilities and development potential of the municipalities. The programme utilised a systemic process to develop an economic vision and prioritise 7 ISIOLO URBAN ECONOMIC PLAN the needed actions that would have the most impact and gain and sustain the interest of investors in the municipality. Figure 2 - UEP Development Phases

In its sequence the UEP development has four phases: Inception Phase

Diagnostics Phase

Gather initial comments through stakeholder engagement - KOM

UEP Technical Briefing Paper Phase

Policy Framework International/ National trends

Setting the principles for the development of the UEP

Economic and Demographic

Evaluating and prioritising VC opportunities

Infrastructure and Transportation provision

UEP Phase

Setting Vision & key economic sector actions

Analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats of key economic sectors

Assessing requirements & impact of shortlisted VC opportunities

Evaluating climate resilient green infrastructure opportunities

Environmental & Climate change risk profile

Development Framework & Climate resilient infrastructure

Anchor projects: Value chain opportunities

Identification of short listed VC opportunities and climate resilient infrastructure

Consultation with Municipal Board, Municipality & County officers, Businesses, Special Interest Groups

Phase 1: In the inception phase the programme shares with the municipality and key stakeholders the development process of the UEP. In addition, SUED learns about the key challenges and opportunities that affect urban economic development and economic growth in the municipality. Phase 2: SUED carries out a comprehensive and wide -assessment of the municipality’s economy, demographics, infrastructure, environment and climate change risk profile against its local, national and international context

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

Phase 3: the programme works closely with the leadership at county and municipal level to identify, assess and prioritise economic growth opportunities and infrastructure needs and the requirements needed to bring them to fruition. Phase 4: After robust stakeholder engagement and incorporation of municipal and county insights the programme supports the municipalities to finalise their UEP. The UEP details the economic growth opportunities and identifies which priority climate infrastructure is needed to implement the UEP as well as the actions that will spur economic growth


With the completion of the UEPs the programme carries out an additional three-step process to help the board formally adopt the UEP. This is because while the UEP is a nonstatutory document its purpose is to provide advise to the municipality within their existing policy and legislative framework. It helps show them how they can promote economic sectors to unlock their economic potential while enhancing the aspirations captured in their development plans. The first step is a report back to the stakeholders demonstrating to them how their inputs were integrated into the final UEP and sharing with them the reasons as to why some of the ones they had suggested did not. This step is necessary to ensure community buy in for the identified projects which help the municipality when implementing them.

Thirdly, SUED shares the UEP with the technical staff at the County to see how best to integrate the plan within the wider county systems. This session enables the technical experts at the County level to familiarize themselves with the UEP and have them see how best the County can work with the municipality to amplify the plan’s activities. Kitui, Isiolo and Malindi are the first three municipalities to launch municipality-specific urban economic plans in Kenya. With the completion and approval of the UEPs, SUED worked closely with Isiolo and Malindi municipalities to share the outputs with the wider county and publicise the completion to the public.

Secondly the programme takes the full board through the UEP and ensures that they have a deep grasp of the economic opportunities and potential infrastructure projects that they should advocate for. During this meeting the board formally adopt the UEP for inclusion into their development plans

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020


Urban Economic Planning highlights UEP kick-starting process in Malindi and Isiolo Photos 1, 2, 3, and 4





UEP Launch in Malindi and Isiolo

Photos 5, 6, 7, and 8




SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020




Investment Attraction

Investment towards climate resilient infrastructure and value chain projects SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020


Malindi’s Urban Economic Plan not only highlights tourism as a key economic sector for the municipality it also shows how Malindi can diversify its economic activities to ensure its no over-reliant on one economic sector ” _ Kilifi Governor ( Malindi is a municipality in the County) Amason Kingi shared during the Malindi UEP launch

SUED aims to deliver economic impact that is direct, measurable and far-reaching across the wide population spectrum. To do this, the programme is working with supported municipalities to build their capacity to plan and promote sustainable and inclusive investment in urban economic development. With SUED’s technical assistance municipalities will be able to align their investment promotion strategies with industrial demand and private investment appetite.

The integration of value chain development into the programme’s urban planning support has helped SUED emphasise the importance of developing value chains along emerging economic growth opportunities. In addition, SUED’s support has helped the municipalities and the wider county to see the value in coupling infrastructure investment with value chain development plans. The programme is working with the municipalities to identify which interventions can be used successfully to translate investment opportunities that have been highlighted in their respective UEPs into bankable projects. This will help yield the greatest market development that will result in the highest economic impact. The programme will work closely with the municipalities to develop business cases for the projects identified in the UEPs through feasibility studies which will help determine the investment needed while demonstrating the viability of the projects. By supporting municipalities to have projects that have complete feasibility studies will increase the propensity for both public and private investors to work with the municipalities to actualise the projects. The assessment will help guide investor on the soundness of the projects at technical, economical, social and environmental level.

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

SUED will also work closely with the municipal and county leadership to develop and implement investment promotion strategies. The strategies will help municipalities to learn how to highlight their strengths and present specific investment opportunities from the identified projects to potential domestic and foreign investors. In doing so the programme will not only help attract investors but build the capacity within the municipalities and counties for investor relationship management. The programme has kick-started its investment attraction technical assistance in three municipalities (Kitui, Isiolo and Malindi) and will expand this to the other municipalities once their UEPS are finalised. SUED has worked closely with the three municipalities to determine which projects that had been identified in the UEP will be taken through the feasibility phase and shared with investors.


Ms. Rachel Levenson from SUED’s Investment Attraction Firm shares with stakeholders in Isiolo how the programme will work with the County to draw in investors to support the projects identified in SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020 their UEP.


SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020



During the UEP development process in Kathwana, the programme held a session with the municipal board to hear from them the areas that they needed support to better their urban management of the SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020 municipality.

Investment Climate


With SUED’s support municipalities will address county-level investment climate constraints for privatesector led urban growth including support for sub-national investment promotion strategies in priority areas. Working with the 12 municipalities the programme will help them remove policy and regulatory constraints to private sector led urban growth, which may be impeding the flow of investments. The programme has entered into a framework agreement with six firms to work with the municipalities to advise them on the reform needed to remove the identified constraints as well as help them implement the reforms.

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020



Capacity Building

SUED’s Team Leader Mr. Duncan Onyango represented the programme at the Africa Investment summit and partcipated in learning sessions between countries.

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020


SUED’s work with the municipalities is geared towards building their capacity to not only design but implement economic development strategies that work. The programme is supporting these municipalities to see how best to support urban growth through integrated investment planning and improving business enabling environment as a way of talking the steps towards self-reliance and municipal revenue generation. The programme has on its roster of capacity building specialists more than 50 firms and over 40 individuals who have varied expertise that will help strengthen the municipalities capacity. The programme is additionally providing technical assistance to the Kenyan State Department of Housing and Urban Development (SDHUD) in its Integrated Programme Delivery Unit (IPDU). With SUED support, the IPDU support the Principal Secretary to better manage urban economic development at the national level. SUED’s close collaboration with the SDHUD played a key role in how the Country participated in the first ever Africa Investment Summit that was held in January 2020 in the UK. In the run up to the UK-Africa Investment summit that took place in January 2020, the programme offered substantial support to the SDHUD in preparing projects that were exhibited at the summit. Subsequently, SUED has supported the UK-Kenya partnership on the redevelopment of Nairobi Railway City that has was discussed between the UK Prime Minister and Kenya’s President Uhuru Kenyatta at the summit

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020


Kenya’s President H.E. Uhuru Kenyatta provides inputs during a panel session at the Africa Investment Summit. SUED worked closely with the Ministry of Transport, Infrastructure, Housing and Urban Development to generate content for Kenya’s presentation at the conference SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020


SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020



SUED’s Team Leader, Mr. Duncan Onyango leads a session during SUED’s consultative forum with municipalities. SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

Success Stories



Deconstructing Urban Economic Planning as a tool for spurring Economic Growth

Kilifi’s Governor H.E. Amason Kingi shares his commitment towards the development of the UEP during the celebration ceremony to kickstart the UEP development process in Malindi municipality.

CHALLENGE Urban areas are replacing nation states as the primary economic governance and driver mechanism for trade and investment. Linkages to global, regional and national networks of trade, knowledge, competitiveness and investment have a significant impact on the status and functioning of towns within global and national urban systems. The link between urbanisation and economic growth is demonstrable by the benefits experienced in urban settings from increased high-density economic activity, shorter trade links and shared infrastructure In the future urban areas are expected to account for two thirds of the world’s population. Most of this growth will occur in developing countries such as Kenya. Without proper management of the urbanisation process, the risk of weak infrastructural systems and economic disparity remains. Furthermore, the lack of strong governance systems on which to embed urban development could result in greater social and gender inequalities. With the promulgation of the 2010 Kenyan Constitution and subsequent General Elections in 2013, Kenya adopted a devolved system of government premised on addressing regional economic marginalisation and providing a platform through which public participation in regional development would be espoused. The Constitution also provides for allocation of resources to the devolved units and provides for a legislative

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

framework at the county level. Despite the positive intent of devolution, there have been challenges since its inception. An example is the little technical support counties have received to implement critical urban functions such as urban economic planning. This has further been exacerbated by the competition for limited resources within the county structure leading to insufficient allocation of funds for urban economic planning. To help prioritise urbanisation in Kenya and provide the means through which counties could manage their urban areas, Kenya enacted the Urban Areas and Cities Act (2011). In it counties were given the mandate to create municipalities. As a result, 59 municipalities were formed. These municipalities hold devolved functions from the County such as management of their urban centers and revenue collection from local businesses. However, they are also suffer from a lack of funding and capacity in the technical skills needed for key urban services. These challenges have left municipalities economically vulnerable with weakened structures that has increased their reliance on the County governments. As such, municipalities are greatly hampered in advancing inclusive urbanisation including longterm maintenance of critical infrastructure inherited from the counties and planning for future climatic changes. In addition, they have not yet developed a platform through which they can advocate for public-private dialogue and collaboration that would help them leverage on their unique market offering to investors. 22


INTERVENTIONS To help address these challenges and harness the municipal urban potential to improve economic resilience and positively impact their social and economically vulnerable population in a sustainable way, the UK Government through the Department for International Development (DFID) is funding the Sustainable Urban Economic Development Programme (SUEDSUED is working with 12 municipalities to develop sustainable Urban Economic Plans (UEPs) and attract investment for critical-resilient infrastructure and value chain projects, to better harness inclusive economic growth. The plans are aimed at assisting the municipalities and their respective counties to identify and prioritise economically viable and bankable projects that would involve the private sector and help create a conducive environment for inclusive and sustainable economic growth. To kick-start the process SUED supported three municipalities (Kitui, Isiolo and Malindi) to develop their UEPs. To do this the Programme worked closely with the local municipal and county leadership to identify sectors with the highest economic growth potential. This was done through a multi-tiered stakeholder engagement process. First, the leadership helped identify stakeholders within the community who were representative of the interest of the intended beneficiaries. Second, in-depth workshops were held with the stakeholders sharing the Programme’s objectives and how it would partner with them to identify viable economic opportunities. Thirdly, SUED held key informant interviews with the opinion leaders drawn from the community who provided local insight of the emerging opportunities. The Programme used these three approaches to ensure that there was in-depth understanding at the local level of the economic trends and context. This created the foundation through which SUED was able to assess the municipalities’ sectoral specialisms, unique demographics and social landscapes and identify the natural resources available. In addition, the Programme was able to assess the infrastructure support at municipal level and the dynamics it presented to potential investors. SUED additionally carried out business surveys to understand the types of businesses at the municipality and county level and how they operated. The Programme was keen to see how it could work with the respective municipalities to address any constraints they faced. The survey also helped to identify linkages on local business marketing strategies and economic growth prospects. In Kitui for example, limited access to

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

markets was identified as the main constraint, while for Malindi it was limited infrastructure that could support economic growth and Isiolo lacked proper drainage systems that would help the municipality manage heavy rainfalls that can flood the central business district. Furthermore, the Programme worked with the municipalities to identify socially excluded groups. This informed the UEP with the need to ensure equity in the proposed economic sectors while integrating opportunities that predominantly excluded community members could take advantage of. SUED carried an in-depth desk review of all existing County development plans that were geared towards economic development such as County Integrated Development Plans (CIDPs) and the Integrated Strategic Urban Development Plans (ISUDP). This helped the Programme to analyse the economic priorities at the County level and see how best to align the emerging opportunities to the County’s vision. It also helped the municipalities to develop the UEP as an advisory document that aligned with requirements set out in relevant legislation and strategic planning framework. The programme also worked with municipalities to understand their vulnerability to climate change and to plan their future resilience. This was embedded within their wider environment and how it related to the economic activities they could participate in. This is because certain economic sectors such agriculture are viable within particular climatic conditions. Additionally, SUED was able to determine the critical gaps in infrastructure using the climate resilience lens. SUED then worked with the municipalities to carry out further analysis on their economic and spatial planning within the context of their capacity to implement a robust economic development plan. This resulted in the programme developing a municipality specific socio-economic development profile. The profile provided the programme with insights into the current economic situation and trends incorporating the labour market and how it related to key economic sectors. This diagnostic phase helped provide a comprehensive assessment of each municipality’s economy, infrastructure and environment within the local, national and international context. Finally, the programme worked with the local leaders to develop a vision that incorporated the


CASE STUDY 1 findings from the stakeholder interactions, business surveys as well as the social inclusion study. This collaborative approach between the programme and municipalities, meant SUED identified an agreed vision that prioritised actions with the maximum potential impact on the municipality’s economy. After determining the economic sectors within the municipalities, SUED worked with the local leadership to evaluate and prioritise value chain and climate -resilient infrastructure opportunities that would be explored further to determine their investor attractiveness.

RESULT These compounded processes ensured that stakeholders at both the municipal and county level were aligned in setting the economic vision and determining which sectors to focus on. As a result, SUED was able to work with the municipalities to create a municipality-specific development framework that had key value chain and infrastructure projects. This framework formed the basis for the UEPs. The three municipalities now have an economic planning strategy that will inform their future development by incorporating best practices regionally and internationally in the development of urban areas.

Social inclusive - To ensure that the identified value chain and infrastructure projects were socially inclusive, SUED incorporated ways through which marginalized and vulnerable groups could be engaged in the economic development of the municipalities. Sustainability - The Programme ensured that the infrastructure and value chain projects identified are sustainable beyond the programme’s support. By incorporating these four key principles, SUED has helped the three municipalities develop an economic plan that will enhance their competitiveness while promoting sustainable growth. This support provides an inclusive urban and economic growth strategy enabling the municipalities to identify sectors needing prioritisation. The UEP provides a tool through which municipalities are now empowered to manage their economic development and determine how best to foster public-private collaboration through the identified projects. As a result of SUED’s support towards the UEP development process, the municipalities are now in a better position to unlock their economic potential and become self-sustaining and resilient urban centers.

The UEPs, which are the first in Kenya that are municipality-specific, will enable transformative development of the municipalities to support emerging economic growth and to create jobs. They are based on four key principles: Resilience -SUED wanted to help the municipalities identify how they could shift their economic dynamics and make them adaptive to climate change while harnessing the natural and environmental potential of their urban areas. Resource efficient -The Programme was keen to work with the municipalities to ensure that the projects selected in their UEP were resource efficient. This meant that priority was given to projects that were geared towards a circular economy and zero waste. In addition, the projects that would ensure efficiency in water and energy management were highly preferred due to existing constraints in the municipalities’ access to stable energy and water supply. Both the municipalities and the Programme invested in seeing how the economic opportunities will provide rural-urban linkage ensuring that the impact of the Programme was felt beyond the municipality.

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020



I Now Have The Confidence To Carry Out My Role. My involvement in the process enhanced my skills

Mr. Dadacha (in the brown suit) helps out as the Isiolo Governor H.E. Mohamed Kuti and the Head of DFID Julius Court as they sign an MOU between DFID and Isiolo to start of the UEP development process

“When we received the notification from the Sustainable Urban Economic Development Programme that we were successful, I was overjoyed. I couldn’t believe it. It had been a month of hard work between my teammates and I that finally bore fruit. Out of 59 municipalities, we were among the initial 10 that would be supported to develop urban economic plans. At the time, I wasn’t too sure of the magnitude of our achievement” shares Halake Osman Dadacha, Isiolo’s Municipal Manager.

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

Isiolo Municipality was one of the 10 successful municipalities that applied to benefit from the support of the UK Government funded Sustainable Urban Economic Development Programme (SUED). SUED put out a Call for Proposals (CfP) that invited all municipalities in Kenya to apply for the opportunity. Out of a possible 59, 53 applied with 10 succeeding, Isiolo among them Municipalities were required to develop a proposal that demonstrated how they would work with SUED to deliver inclusive economic growth.

“To be honest the preparation provided by SUED really helped. The information sessions held in Isiolo for all the frontier counties and the technical review conference ensured that we had the right information to help us improve the quality of our proposal.” He additionally shared. In the lead up to CfP deadline SUED had two vibrant engagement sessions with municipalities. The first session held with counties within the regional blocs helped provide clarity to the municipalities on the Programme mandate and how they could


CASE STUDY 2 take advantage of the funding opportunity. This was followed by a technical review conference which dealt with the specific needs that the CfP requested and provided the Technical Leads from the municipalities with critical information to ensure that they were compliant to the requirements of the CfP. The conference’s intended purpose was to ensure no one party had more or better information than the other

Municipal Manager and key local stakeholders to build on the existing priorities outlined in the County Integrated Development Plan as well the Capital Investment Plan. The Programme sought insights from key stakeholders to determine the main challenges experienced in the municipality and see how best to address them. As a result, the Programme was able to develop a responsive Urban Economic Plan (UEP) for the municipality.

“The selection led to tremendous excitement in the County and in particular the municipality as it was a notable feat. We were hopeful that the UK Government would work with us to develop Isiolo to show case to the world how sustainable urban economic development was done.” Mr.

“What I liked most about the UEP development process was that the technical team working with us were able to share with us how we could apply the same methodologies that they used to improve on the plan if we wanted to expand it in the future. Personally, I saw how key county and municipality specific statistics is in the planning process. They showed me the importance of critically looking at the past through the data to see what strategies worked and which didn’t. This helped both the stakeholders and I to quickly identify Isiolo’s potential economic sectors, infrastructure and value chain projects.” Mr. Dadacha shared.

Dadacha stated.

SUED’s support to the municipality is aimed at providing technical assistance through the provision of urban economic planners, investment climate advisers, investment attraction experts as well as capacity building specialists. The TA is geared towards working with the municipalities to improve their effectiveness in urban planning and management

“When we commenced the urban economic plan development process, I was keen to ensure that all stakeholders involved as this would be the first ever urban economic plan for the municipality and would greatly impact its future.” The Municipal Manager shared.

The Programme commenced its support towards the municipality to help develop an urban economic strategy that would guide the municipal and county leadership to develop Isiolo in an inclusive and sustainable way. SUED worked closely with the

SUED approach entailed a comprehensive assessment into Isiolo’s economy, demographics, infrastructure, environment and climate change risk profile utilising the locally available statistics and comparing it against national and international context. This helped the Programme to ensure that the economic growth opportunities that were prioritised through the UEP process were aligned with the municipality’s infrastructure and value chain needs as well as environmental context.

I feel empowered to carry out my role effectively. SUED’s technical support towards the development of Isiolo’s UEP has provided me with the skills to better manage the urban center.” —Mr. Halake Dadacha, Municipal Manager – Isiolo Municipality

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020



Launching the First UEPs in Kenya

The Head of DFID Kenya Julius Court formally hands over the UEP to Isiolo’s Governor Mohamed Kuti during the public launch of the plan with SUED’s Team Leader Duncan Onyango looking on.

The Sustainable Urban Economic Development Programme (SUED) is funded by the UK Government through the Department of International Development (DFID) to work with 12 municipalities in Kenya to develop Urban Economic Plans (UEPs) and attract in-vestment for critical infrastructure and value chain projects. Over the past year SUED has worked closely with three of those municipalities namely Kitui, Malindi and Isiolo to develop their UEPs. The UEP is an advisory document that helps provide a focused urban and economic development strategy for the municipalities to deliver inclusive and sustainable economic growth for the municipalities. The Programme worked with these three municipalities over the course of six months through vigorous stakeholder engagement, intuitive business surveys, social inclusion studies and helped the municipalities to prioritise economic opportunities, climate resilient infrastructure and value chain projects that would help maximise their economic potential. The Programme utilised a multi-tiered approach in preparation for the UEP launch for Isiolo and Malindi municipalities. A series of meetings were held with the municipality, county and community as well as private sector stakeholders. In these meetings the Pro-gramme shared the final UEP and how the County and Municipality will be able to utilise the plan going forward. The sessions entailed a question and answer session where participants sought clarity

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

on the UEP and were helped to see how to actualise the proposed projects. In addition, SUED utilised these sessions to explain the downstream work for the Programme including how the capacity needs assessment would provide support and guidance in areas requiring strengthening to implement the UEP. Furthermore, during these pre-sessions the role of the investment attraction firm was explained and how critical their role was in validating the identified projects and attracting investors to the municipalities. Subsequent to the formal adoption of the UEPs by the respective Municipal Boards, the Programme worked with Isiolo and Malindi counties to launch the UEP through a highly publicised event. SUED held public launches of the UEP to share broadly with the municipal residents and potential beneficiaries its strategic approach for the municipalities. In Isiolo, the county and municipal leadership were in attendance and lauded the Programme’s sup-port noting that Isiolo was the first municipality in the country to have a UEP and above all, the first of the 12 supported municipalities to launch its UEP. In Kilifi county, the Governor and his team were appreciative of the technical expertise provided by the Pro-gramme in ensuring that Malindi municipality was able to expand its unique market offer with the Governor H.E. Amason Kingi stating “The plan is going beyond the tourism sector that Malindi is known for and showing us how to diversify our economic activities to en-sure that we are not overreliant on one sector.”



SUED’s programme team seek insights from community members in Kitui on how best the programme can work with them to advance their urban economic development. SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

Lessons from the field


Best Practices in Integrating Gender and Social Inclusion (GeSI) in Urban Economic Development Planning How the Sustainable Urban Economic Development Programme (SUED) ensured gender and social inclusion in the development of municipal-based urban economic plans (UEPs) in Kitui, Isiolo and Malindi.

CONTEXT: Urban planning and design heavily influence the way people access services and utilise spaces in urban areas; while urban economic planning plays a key role in determining how individuals from different backgrounds access and benefit from economic opportunities. A socioeconomic analysis of most urban areas demonstrates that inequities in economic status amongst the population exist and can be associated with differences in age, gender, ethnicity, religion, physical ability, economic status, and culture. This lack of equity in access to opportunities and benefits can be associated with the following barriers to social inclusion: attitudinal - whereby people perceived to be different are stigmatised and denied opportunities; environmental - whereby service providing organisations such as banks and health centers not accommodating people with special needs such as pregnant and nursing mothers and also not providing services such as braille and sign language; internalised, when excluded persons may lack proactive behaviour in expressing their opinions or claiming their rights, leading to further exclusion. Inadequate and inaccurate data makes it difficult to demonstrate exclusion and benefits of inclusion; concern over cost and difficulty of disability inclusion, mostly imagined, because the costs of exclusion and benefits of inclusion have not been demonstrated widely. There is no concrete explanation on social exclusion, the excuses used to justify exclusion have to be tackled to establish commitment to inclusion. The lack of participation of excluded persons in the development of urban spaces undermines inclusive economic growth. When there is social inclusion, the previously excluded person is accepted and recognised as an individual beyond his/her gender, age,

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

disability etc.; has personal relationships with family, friends and acquaintances; is involved in recreation and social activities; has appropriate living accommodation; is employed; has appropriate formal and informal support. Inclusive development seeks to ensure the full participation of previously excluded people as empowered self-advocates in development processes and emergency responses. It works to address the barriers that hinder their access, participation and benefits.

PROGRAMME INTERVENTION/ STRATEGIES APPLIED As a way to address this, the UK Government funded SUED Programme is working with 12 municipalities in Kenya to ensure that they make their urban economic development process both inclusive and sustainable. These municipalities are supported to actively engage with the public and private sector to improve urban economic planning, business environment, develop bankable urban investments (by attracting investment for critical climate resilient infrastructure and value chain projects) and enhance municipality actors’ capacity to better manage inclusive urban economic development within their local context. Kenyan counties have been autonomous from the central government since their existence. Counties were established after the 2013 general election following the promulgation of the Kenyan constitution in 2010. Counties are, therefore, constantly learning how to best streamline their urban economic development process. Additionally, and more recently, they are in the process of operationalising their


municipalities as primary urban centers. These municipalities provide a platform through which both the national and county leadership are able to demonstrate their political goodwill for accountability on urban development. Consequently, SUED is working with selected municipalities to develop their institutional capacity with clear cut plans that will inform their development process. SUED commenced its support towards the municipalities by first working with three municipalities (Group 1) to develop responsive Urban Economic Plans (UEPs). These provided the municipalities with a focused urban and economic development strategy that would enable them to deliver inclusive and sustainable growth. The development of the UEPs is stakeholder led and responsive to the needs of the municipalities within their local context. These UEPs guide the municipalities future development by identifying value chain projects and critical infrastructure that will help unlock their economic potential. While developing the UEPs, the Programme integrated a gender and social inclusion study at each municipality to: a. Identify social groups that were most excluded in social-economic activities b. Establish when, how and why these groups were excluded c. Learn about the perceptions of the excluded groups in the community as well how they perceived themselves d. Determine the socio-economic activities that the excluded groups tend to participate in e. Determine from both excluded and included groups how the urban economic development process could ensure there is gender and social inclusion in SUED’s activities. The study utilised both primary and secondary data including focus group discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs). The study was geared towards improving the Programme’s understanding of the nuances at the municipal and county level that hindered the participation of particular groups from the UEP development process. Each municipality had a separate gender and social inclusion (GeSI)

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

study conducted.

FINDINGS: National Level:

In the Kenyan context, policies are enacted at the national level, customised and adopted by the counties then cascaded to municipalities for implementation. Kenya’s 2010 constitution provided a legislative framework through which the principle of equality and non-discrimination was espoused. The principles include the promotion of human dignity, equity, social justice, inclusivity, equality, non-discrimination and protection of marginalised groups that include both women and youth. While the constitution has been recognised globally to be one of the most progressive constitutions in the world due to the potential gains, it provides for women such as equality in leadership with the two thirds gender rule that calls for at least 33% representation from either gender in leadership positions, the framework is yet to be actualised. The gender bill that will ensure this rule is enacted has not been passed. This has continued to perpetuate a culture of lower representation by women in leadership positions further excluding them from critical decision-making roles. Furthermore, a significant number of People Living with Disability (PLWDs) are not represented at the national level due to lower employment rate in the formal sector. However, in the recent past the Country has taken a proactive role in ensuring that the needs of PLWDs are included in policies that are geared towards urban design and access. However, the need remains to ensure that their representation in leadership is encouraged as there is a risk of assumptions being made on their needs by legislatures. Youth in Kenya do not hold senior positions in the public and private sectors due to the perception of their inexperience in managing complex issues that have high impact and implications of decisions made. However, the Government has made strides in the inclusion of varied voices into its policy making processes by utilising public participation. However, with public participation, the methods used need to be targeted towards the varied population as not all people can actively participate in public forums. This is due to the tendency to listen to the most active speakers who might intimidate those with dissenting


opinions limiting the breadth of insights that can be garnered in such forums. There is need to incorporate more tech-savvy ways of public participation so as to encourage participation by youth.

County- Level

As municipalities are embedded within the county system, SUED worked with both the county and municipal leadership to carry out the gender and social inclusion study in urban economic planning development. County and Municipal Level The findings of the studies that were carried out in Malindi, Isiolo and Kitui are highlighted below. The study covers SUED’s first three municipalities as they have completed the UEP development process and have formally adopted the UEP as an advisory document. SUED has integrated the learnings shared here into its UEP development process for Kathwana, Iten and Kisii.

Gender: Laws, Policies, Regulations and Institutional Practices: At municipal level the national policies are applicable with the two-thirds gender rule applied to the municipal board. However, in the three municipalities both the Chairman and the Municipal Manager who are tasked with the bulk of decision making for the municipality are men. The women in the board are encouraged to participate however the institutional practice dictates that protocol is followed with the Chair’s opinion having prominence above other members. This may hinder women in the board from giving dissenting opinions from those of the Chair. Although such reports were not given, there might be a lack of diversity of ideas that could have enriched the urban economic development process. Cultural, Norms and Beliefs: The municipalities visited have patriarchal family systems whose cultural norm requires that women withhold their opinion if it differs from that of the male leader. Although strong women who aired their opinion were found in some municipalities and counties, and women were leaders in others, it might be possible that some women’s willingness to participate in public forums where they were required to state their

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

opinions, especially on subject matters that are perceived to be “masculine” such as urban planning shied away from speaking freely. This may have robbed the municipality of ideas on how to ensure that the urban designs created catered adequately to the needs of women such as safeguarding their security, employment opportunities and unlimited access to and ability to utilise the newly created urban spaces. For example, in Malindi, women are perceived to be the property of men especially if dowry had been paid for them. Such women are expected to not to dissent their husband’s opinions to be deemed good wives. This cultural practice greatly influences how women participate in decision making processes within and outside the home. Gender Roles, Responsibilities and Time Use: In all the three municipalities, childcare and unpaid domestic work care are predominantly left to women, which results in less time for them to engage in other socioeconomic matters. Consequently, women who choose to be self-employed opt for businesses that they can conduct near their homes. The role of men as the primary bread winners is communally upheld and women who earn more money than their husbands may receive a backlash. This is often in the form of violence against them and impacts homes where women are potentially stronger income earners than their spouses. Access to and Control over Assets and Resources: While the constitution provides equal rights to ownership of land that enables women to take an active role on decision making with regards to land use, the cultural practice has been to exclude women from inheriting family land. Furthermore, access to, and control over resources along gender continues to be heavily influenced by the patriarchal culture in the supported municipalities. Patterns of Power and Decision-Making: Like elsewhere globally, men continue to dominate leadership positions and therefore have a higher influence over decisions than women. In Kenya, in consideration of gender inclusion in leadership, women often deputize men, which gives them an opportunity to contribute to decision making. This was not the case in the three municipalities, where the women were underrepresented in leadership.


This low representation of women in the three municipalities may have reduced the contribution of women to the decision-making process. In all the municipalities the women were neither the chair or vice chairperson on the board.

Youth: The national government has aimed

to increase the uptake by youth, women and persons with disabilities in economic opportunities by encouraging both the counties and private companies to set aside 30% of its invitation to tender for them. However, while in principle this is lauded as a positive approach to engaging the youth, in practice the, youth are excluded in major contract jobs as they are perceived to be inexperienced. This has a ripple effect on their inclination to participate in county decision making processes such as urban economic planning. In Isiolo there is an added factor of radicalisation whereby unemployed youth are perceived to have a higher propensity of becoming violent extremists. With the municipality having added pull and push factors that would cause them to be radicalised, it greatly disfavours them when it comes to seeking economic opportunities or actively participating in public forums. In Kitui, youth representation in leadership positions remains low hampering their level of influence in development decision making. People Living with Disabilities: PLWDs in Malindi are organised under the Association of People with Disabilities Kenya (APDK). While policies have been put in place to protect PLWDs, most shared that they were denied employment because of the negative perception of their capability to effectively carry out roles. The stigmatisation of PLWDs at the Counties leads to reduced active participation in key decision-making activities such as public participation forums where their inputs on processes and development goals would add value. Additionally, buildings in the urban centers have not actively incorporated structures, e.g. access rumps, automatic doors that enable the physically challenged persons to access services located within these buildings. In Isiolo, the cultural perception that PLWDs cannot actively contribute to economic activities has resulted in them being viewed as charity cases. This communal attitude hampers the active participation of PLWDs in decision making SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

processes. In Kitui, PLWDs are not involved in the development of projects as they lack access to information that would help them effectively contribute to project planning and implementation. In addition, a significant number of buildings in the municipality are inaccessible by wheelchairs. Furthermore, there is communal stigma against them as they are viewed as cursed creating a barrier to their active participation in development processes.

SUED’s Incorporation of the Findings in the UEP Development Process Equal Participation: In carrying out the

Gender and Social Inclusion (GeSI) Study the Programme was able to identify how the groups were excluded. During the UEP diagnostic process, SUED incorporated excluded categories of the population in the various processes such as workshop breakout sessions to contribute to the UEP development process. The Programme additionally worked closely with the municipal and county leadership to ensure that the meetings had equal representation across the board. Furthermore, in its followon activities that required detailed one-to-one interactions, the UEP development team spoke to a variety of experts, including gender and social inclusion experts, to see how best to ensure that minority voices were included in the UEP.

Integration: While the GeSI Study was

carried out independently at the diagnostic phase of the UEP development, it was not autonomous of the objectives of the Programme and how it would help improve the UEP output. The findings of the studies were integrated during analysis to ensure that the UEPs would be inclusive.

Community Driven Development: The stakeholder engagement sessions provided a platform through which SUED was able to reach the various segments of the community and incorporate their insights and priorities in the economic development plans. As a result, public launches prior to the finalisation of the UEPs, beneficiaries were embraced by the community because they felt that the UEPs incorporated


their inputs.

Expert Capacity Building: During the

in terms of the skills required to intervene to effect change and finances to pay for trainings, sensitisation and make required changes in the social, political and physical environments to accommodate the needs of the excluded.

Knowledge Adaptation and Use:

It is worth noting that the presence of a policy is not a guarantee that it will be enacted. Both the included and the excluded persons need to understand the benefits of implementing the policies and have the technical and financial capacity and capability to implement them. Equally important is the willpower and availability of the municipality and county workers to implement these policies.

GeSI studies, SUED worked closely with the county Gender and Social Inclusion (GeSI) specialists. SUED was, therefore, able to share with these specialists, priority areas of GeSI, such as in decision making during the development and implementation in the urban economic development plans. The GeSI study was able to demonstrate the intersectionality between social inequities and urban economic processes, which led to lack of, or negative, impacts of urban economic development interventions on the lives of women, youth and PLWDs. The study helped the Programme to utilise this knowledge in the development of the UEPs in all three municipalities resulting in plans that are economically inclusive.

Best Practices to Replicate: Advocate for Participatory Planning and Governance: While supporting local governments to develop urban economic development strategies that will help build their municipalities’ economic resilience, programmes must adopt participatory planning and governance. Governing bodies should be constituted by representatives of the populace served. The Kenyan government has taken steps towards achieving this through the development of, and efforts to enact policies of inclusion such as the two-third-gender rule in composition of decision-making bodies as well as in distribution of opportunities and benefits. Programmes, therefore, must encourage participatory planning that incorporates people from diverse backgrounds, especially women, youth and people living with disabilities. This will help address any imbalances that prevent their full social and economic inclusion. This will require a concerted effort by the current leadership to re-think of innovative ways to enhance gender and social inclusion in public-participation and associated benefits. For this to be achieved, leaders in governance must be willing to support required change, they need to be supported

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

Advocate for Human Right-Based Approaches: Urban economic development programmes should encourage local institutions that they work with to use human rights-based approaches (HRBAs), which by their nature enable all round gender and social inclusion.

Advocate for Institutional Collaboration: To ensure gender and social

inclusion in programme activities, programmes cannot work autonomously, but must partner with counties and municipalities to ensure that the lessons learnt on gender and social inclusion are harmonised and institutionalised as part of the best practices across the collaborating partner institutions. Success to this harmonisation and institutionalisation is only possible if the stakeholder institutions are included in planning and implementing of studies on GeSI. When conducting GeSI studies collaboratively, stakeholders are able to easily access required information for, say, secondary research easily. In addition, collaborators are able to agree on who to interview and how to interview them. The close collaboration of stakeholders ensures ease of engagement of appointed actors..

Advocate for Prominence of Inclusion: While the Programme carried

out its GeSI study and had it as a stand-alone reference document, there is need to ensure that the GeSI narrative is closely woven into the final UEP. The final UEP should contain systematic and replicable methodologies and activities that inform the economic strategies developed to


narrow the inequity gaps. Advocate for Gender and Social Inclusive Data: Programmes collect and utilise data to assess various statuses and changes in social, economic and political conditions. There is need to have data disaggregated by demographic variables such as sex, age, (dis)ability status, income quintiles, geographical location etc., as defined in the Programme’s GeSI strategy (reference document), to guide on the statistics/ parameters to use when measuring change and impact. By collecting the complimentary quantitative and qualitative data that is valid and reliable, gender and social inequities and gaps can be measured and explained, and strategies developed in the urban economic plan to narrow the identified gaps.

Demonstrate Evidence for Benefits of Gender and Social Inclusion: In

order to get buy-in from other stakeholders, the lead stakeholder needs to demonstrate to other stakeholders the benefits of GeSI. In addition to the hard to measure values such as increased human dignity, economic benefits such as changes in position in income quintiles for disabled persons, women and youth with their inclusion in employment and changes in tax incomes by inclusive governments can motivate interventions to enhance gender and social inclusion. SUED was able to attain stakeholder buy-in by demonstrating some of this evidence from national level data and some preliminary study results that demonstrated how the exclusion of various populations resulted in a lower quality of life in urban areas. .

Use Subtle Approaches when Dealing with Culturally Sensitive Issues: Experiences with past efforts to

integrate gender and social inclusivity show that the issue is accepted in varying extents among stakeholders. The matter can be rejected covertly or overtly, which makes it necessary for the team fronting it to gauge the gender and social inclusion attitude of the stakeholder at hand. Wisdom on how to introduce the GeSI agenda in the various contexts is paramount. For example, in Kenya there is a socially excluded Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) population. Putting their exclusion issues as a key agenda item can result to a cancellation of

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

the meeting and permanent hostilities from a potential collaborator. It may be more beneficial for all the stakeholders to address needs of other marginal groups types like gender, youth and PWDs that intersect with other less universally accepted identities.

Prioritise Interventions that are Most Beneficial and Determine how to Integrate them: With the completion of

the GeSI study, SUED had to determine which components of the UEP will benefit the most from GeSI. Co-integrating GeSI interventions in the UEP is likely to be more beneficial and cost effective than implementing it separately. Cost of investment in capacity of intervening actors should be factored in and added to the cost of the interventions. Enhance GeSI capacity in the Technical Teams Carrying out Assignments: While SUED has technical experts, who are tasked with ensuring that the Programme is gender and socially inclusive, enhancing GeSI capacity of technical teams working with the county and municipality teams will enable them to develop and implement key GeSI strategies. This will also ensure that gender and social inclusivity is mainstreamed in the Programme’s approach to urban economic development. Capacity development should take place in different forms such as on-the-job trainings and mentorship and at different points of the Programme to attain the highest impact. GeSI capacity needs assessment and capacity development interventions can be identified with the help of GeSI specialists at the county level.

Create Partnerships between Local Organisations and Governance Systems: When carrying out the study, SUED worked with local organisations to reach some of these excluded groups. After completing the Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with them, the Programme was able to articulate their issues to the county and municipal leadership advocating for GeSI in the UEP development process. For programmes carrying out similar assignments, there is an added benefit of conducting research in partnerships with local organisations/ special groups and the municipal/county leadership to enable them to share their insights directly


with the decision makers. This was found to enhance the quality of stakeholder engagement and ownership of recommendations for GeSI by all stakeholder categories.

Ensure Feedback Sessions are AllInclusive: The best practice of evidence

gathering entails carrying out data collection in sub-sets such as by; gender, age and disability to ensure that they feel that they have a “safe space” where they can openly share their challenges and experiences. There is merit in having a feedback session that entails the sharing of the sub-sets’ experiences with the included population. These feedback sessions provide a platform for those who are usually included to learn the challenges of the excluded and see how best to support them to engage more in key-decision making processes. When SUED team was carrying out its breakout sessions for gender and social inclusion, care was given to ensure that the feedback from the FGDs was not only given to the sub-sets of groups, but to the wider workshop participants’ plenary discussions helping to bring to the table discussion on how best to support the active participation of women and other excluded groups in the UEP development process.

Disaggregate data collection, aggregate analysis conclusions and recommendations: Data collection for gender analysis should be disaggregated by gender because women tend not to speak in the presence of men and those who speak do so in support of communal discourses in fear of repudiation. Both men and women should be interviewed separately. For other socially excluded groups, interviews for the specific groups, e.g. PWLDs should also be disaggregated by gender. This is because gender intersects with almost all social categories. During analysis, gaps among the categories can be determined and recommendations for including men and women in the various categories made.

only on gender or youth, but it incorporated a differentiated approach towards the various demographics that intersect with gender, physical ability and age. Assessors should also consider factors such as economic and geographical factors and who is more marginalised within those contexts. Interventions proposed should consider the opportunity intersectionality provides. . Incorporate GeSI Analysis to Provide Context: SUED GeSI analysis was context specific. In each context, in this case the municipality, there were specific nuances unique to municipalities. For example, only one municipality had an organised Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) community that was not well received. In another community, polygamy was the norm, other communities were almost homogenous in religion whereas others were not. All these nuances affect GeSI differently because they may affect different barriers to inclusion. Understanding the context enables development of relevant interventions rather than imposing blueprints that do not work. SUED has a GeSI strategy and technical support personnel as additional and available capacity support for teams involved in various aspects of the urban economic development processes greatly influencing the prominence that GeSI has in the Programme.

Consider Intersectionality when Analysing for GeSI: While SUED carried its GeSI study, the focus was not

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020



SUED’s COVID-19 Response

Implementing an urban economic development programme within the C-19 context SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020


At beginning of March, Kenya reported its first confirmed case of COVID-19 (C19), resulting in immediate restriction of in person meetings and movement across particular county borders. As the programme was planning the public launch of the Kitui UEP, the programme had to halt all of its public facing activities. However, the programme pivoted its approach to respond to the C-19 context by enhancing its relationships with its stakeholders demonstrating its adaptability within the pandemic. The programme utilised the below ways to ensure that it was able to continue providing support to the municipalities while adhering to the Government’s directives: Virtual Meetings: With the Government imposing travel and movement restrictions on some counties including Nairobi where SUED is headquartered, the programme could not attend in-person meeting or hold the needed workshops. As the programme prides its self in its rich stakeholder engagement that has helped ensure ownership by the municipalities of the process that it supports there as need to change its approach. SUED took advantage of the virtual platforms available and worked closely with the municipalities to ensure that they were familiar with the platforms and had access to them to ensure that the rich discussions and valued inputs from the municipalities were not lost. In this virtual meeting the programme worked closely with Kathwana, Kisii and Iten to continue the development of their UEPs. Additionally, the programme was able to kick start its investment attraction phase in Malindi, Kitui and Isiolo. In Mandera, Kerugoya, Eldoret and Lamu, SUED was able to carryout its post-assessment meeting and start off the capacity needs assessment. Governors Meetings: To ensure the programme continued to build on the good political will it has in supported municipalities, SUED held meetings with Governors. The meetings provided a platform through which the programme shared how it would continue to work with the municipalities to implement its activities. In addition, the programme sought insights from the municipalities on how they would like to be engaged. These meetings helped reassure the municipalities of SUED commitment to work with them to achieve their urban economic development goals.

municipalities could request for humanitarian support to address C-19 specific challenges. Municipalities were able to share their needs with the programme which were shared with the programme donor to address. C-19 Free market: C-19 impact has not only been on the health systems in the country but majorly on livelihoods, businesses and municipal revenues in urban areas. The informal sector is one of the worst hit economically due to the limited ways in which they can ensure safety and protection of customers. Markets continue to be extremely vulnerable as a potential C-19 transmission area. To reduce this risk, county governments closed their informal markets leaving many individuals without a source of income. Working with Kisii municipality SUED is seeing how best it can help the municipality to re-plan, redesign and manage one of its, largest informal markets. With the programme’s support the municipality will determine its exact needs for the market after which SUED will help to rapidly construct a pilot pandemic proofed section of the market to show how the concepts works with the aim of having other municipalities replicate the best practice. Technical Assistance at SDHUD: With the programmes technical assistance through the IPDU, SUED has helped develop the C-19 economic recovery programme in consultation with key stakeholders in the urban and housing sector. Furthermore, the programme helped inform the development of mobile testing center units and decongest housing units in response to c-19.

Linking Counties with DFID for Humanitarian Support: The programme was a channel through which SUED supported

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020


Isiolo’s Municipal Manager Mr. Halake Dadacha shares insights during a virtual meeting with the programme

SUED’s programme team has a meeting with Kisii’s Governor H.E. James Ongwae on the C-19 free markets

SUED’s programme team has a meeting with Isiolo’s Governor H.E. Mohamed Kuti on the IA process in the municipality

Uasin Gishu’s Governor H.E. Jackson Mandago learns from the programme on how SUED will work with Eldoret within the C-19 context

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020



SUED’S first year in pictures

The then UK’s Secretary of State for International Development Rory Stewart announces publicly that SUED has received an additional £10 million in its funding to support two more municipalities (Bungoma and Wote//) rasing the programmes fund from £60 million to 70 million. SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020


SUED has re-energised my colleagues and I, it has helped us set a vision as a county that we can work towards. I’m excited for the future of Isiolo County ” _ Executive Committee Member for Water, Sanitation, Energy, Environment ,Natural Resources and Climate Change Hon. Josephine Eregae


24th September: SUED kick-starts its inception phase on its programme delivery, the SUED team is constituted

16th – 23rd November: SUED holds municipalitybased info-session to share its programmatic approach and the funding opportunity. The programme uses the sessions to share the programme’s unique offerings and how the municipalities will benefit generating interest at the local level for SUED

10th December: Application deadline of the CfP from municipalities, out of a possible 59 municipalities, the programme received 53 submissions

SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020

7th November: The programme is officially launched with it the Call for Proposal that invites municipalities in Kenya to respond to DFID’s funding opportunity. The launch was attended by two cabinet secretaries, the BHC and five governors

3rd December: Technical Review Conference – The programme utilised this session to meet with the technical team from all municipalities and explain to them the intricacies of the application process to ensure that all municipalities has equal access to the bidding information


2019 March-April: SUED carries out political economy analysis and rapid readiness assessment in supported municipality to better understand the political and economic context of the municipalities

February: SUED announces the successful municipalities initially selecting 10 municipalities

3rd April: SUED hold its first Programme Steering Committee meeting. The PSC help provide technical direction to the programme

23rd April: Malindi Celebration Ceremony and signing of a MOU between the County and DFID. Malindi was the first municipality to publicise its support from the programme

April: SUED’s commences its urban economic planning in Malindi, Kitui and Isiolo

28th June: SUED hold its first consultative forum. The forum brings together the county and municipal leadership for a knowledge sharing session

11th July: The then Secretary of State for International Development announces an increase in SUED’s funding from £60-70 million during Lamu’s celebration ceremony. As a result, SUED increases its support from 10 to 12 municipalities including Bungoma and Wote.

23rd July: Isiolo Celebration Ceremony and signing of a MOU between the county and dFID

July-August: Signing of participation agreements with the programme

September: Completion of the developed UEPs for Kitui, Isiolo and Malindi

November: SUED’s Consultative forum held SUED | Newsletter 2019 - 2020


Technical leads go through the application form during the county-based information sessions. SUED carried out these sessions to provide clarity to municipalities on how they could better their proposals and be successful

Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.