3.1.1. Assessment of Levels of Awareness on Climate Change in Kenya
Scholars and institutions have assessed the level of awareness on climate change in Kenya over the years and noted that a lot more needs to be done because in spite of various efforts, the adaptive capacity of grassroots communities has continued to remain low [
1,
19,
20,
21,
22]. This was echoed by one key informant who said,
“Climate change is definitely an extremely serious problem…and to some extent even countries or the continent at best are in denial. At worst, it may be lack of sensitivity to realize that this is one of the biggest problems of our times … Because of lack of focus on this, we are in a situation where we are reaping the hazards of … abuse of our climate… rains are not coming when they should…it is so hot … [we have] unexpected floods … for almost five years now, we have had very unpredictable seasons … Currently the rains have taken a long time, we don’t have grass for the animals, we are having conflicts with our neighbors … leading even to deaths when we are fighting over water and pasture … So this is really a big issue!”.
The acute lack of awareness is, for the most part, not the result of unwillingness of climate change policy makers and practitioners to avail climate change information. Over the years, the government has attempted to put in place systems to communicate climate change information, as confirmed by one key informant for this study who worked for the national government in Kenya when she said that,
“At the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, climate change information, is regarded as a very important product for development … there has been a lot of effort to ensure that climate change information is accessed by the public … both general and technical information is shared”.
Second, the awareness is not low because of a shortage of the information, because Kenya, as articulated in this study, has numerous climate change governance documents that have huge amounts of information aimed at building the adaptive capacity of individuals and communities. At the same time, as outlined in the second National Climate Change Action Plan (2018–2022), several public and private institutions carry out research that continually generates climate change information [
6]. However, lack of effective knowledge sharing with grassroots communities prevents sustained implementation of recommendations thereof and impedes continuous adaptive capacity building within the country. One key informant, who has previously worked for the national government, said,
“At the Ministry level, they don’t have the structures to go up to the ground level to share the information, and the kind of information I find at the Ministry level is to do with policy, outcomes of climate change negotiations and typically I see that after any COP meeting, which is done annually, there is normally a session convened by the Ministry and all the delegates who travelled are required to come and report back … but this is mainly at policy level and high level … I mean these are things that happen at Nairobi [the Capital City of Kenya], you will not find that same information at the village … and in my view it is at the village where action takes place when it comes to application of policy”.
According to the diffusion of innovations theory, disseminating an innovation to potential adopters requires that four major elements are carefully considered—rate of adoption, time, social system, and channels [
16]. This study assessed the effectiveness of dissemination of climate change information in Kenya in view of these elements so as to identify possible shortcomings.
3.1.2. Assessment of Rate of Adoption, Time and Social System
Although the Kenya Climate Change Policy Framework and the Kenya Climate Change Act, both of 2016, require the mainstreaming of climate change into the planning process at the national and county levels of governance, according to the second National Climate Change Action Plan (2018–2022), only five out of 47 county governments (Garissa, Isiolo, Kitui, Makueni, and Wajir) have made meaningful strides by formulating some regulations and pieces of legislation or establishing county climate change funds [
4,
5,
6]. However, two other counties—Kajiado and Vihiga—were mentioned by key informants as actively developing similar documents that they are yet to finalize. One Governor, when interviewed, said,
“As a county, we … developed regulations about … how to deal with climate change … We even put aside one percent of our development budget to deal with climate change issues. We … decided that in every department climate change was to be a cross cutting issue so that as they develop any project, they have to take into account climate change … We went … to the extent of piloting climate change committees at ward level so that the citizens themselves, apart from getting education on climate change, … started operationalizing the regulations and doing activities that would ameliorate the effects of climate change so that like if they have a problem about water, deforestation, they will now begin together to do activities that would restore the environment with the reverse climate change effects … When we saw how this was effective, we … continued to get more wards, we have 30 wards, to have their own independent committees which can look into climate change issues…. We also have a Sand Authority … and this is established through legislation … We had a major problem of sand being harvested haphazardly, and as a result, the water source was being compromised … Through this legislation, we were …able to explain to the community that when this sand is preserved, it is going to be a source of water … [which] you will use … for irrigation … As a consequence, the same people who used to harvest the sand indiscriminately are now into agriculture that is very, very productive”.
When the Governor was asked how he learnt about the national climate change policies and laws and subsequently mainstreamed them through development of his county’s climate change legislations and effective community education programmes, he explained that,
“I had worked in the Ministry of Environment at a national level as a Minister and was a president of the Climate Change Convention so I had some knowledge of … real problems that are facing the world in terms of this particular area, and again even internationally, when one is alive to the debate, one will appreciate that this is something that can annul any development progress that you think you have … and particularly when you come from these arid and semi-arid areas… it is even more potent … so that is why for us it became an important area to address”.
His experience, garnered from working in the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, exposed him to the technical aspects of dealing with climate change. The other counties making progress in mainstreaming climate change exhibited similar exposure of their governors in terms of academic expertise or work experience. For instance, when another Governor was interviewed about the state of climate change awareness in his county, he said,
“For me, who is an expert in this area, I keep on talking to the people about this … We have (local) FM radio so any time I get a chance to get to the radio, I don’t miss to tell them about climate change, and also, I spend a lot of time talking on how we have to change our agricultural practices … We can no longer practice agriculture the way we have done traditionally”.
As such, two of the seven governors who had visible adoption of innovation confirmed that they had varying degrees of technical expertise in climate change related fields. The seven governors are in the innovators and early adopters categories of diffusion of innovations, and they confirm that, as Rodgers said, innovators are required to have complex technical knowledge. Rodgers also postulates that early adopters are usually leaders in their societies, which quality these governors undoubtedly have [
16].
However, although some mainstreaming of climate change issues is happening between the two layers of government in Kenya, out of 47 counties, only a handful of senior policy makers (five governors; 11%) have been sensitized enough to adopt climate change regulation and another two (4%) are giving it commendable priority. This is definitely a low rate of adoption since it means that 85% of the counties are yet to embrace the climate change innovations in the country. This adoption rate of 15 percent (11% + 4% = 15%) compares favorably with Rodgers’ categorization of adopters (innovators {2.5%} plus early adopters {13.5%} equals 16%) [
16].This means that, if the policy makers are not triggered enough to precipitate action, a lot less action is expected to happen among the citizenry.
Section 5 of the Climate Change Act establishes the National Climate Change Council, which is chaired by the President of Kenya. Some of the functions of the Council include “to ensure the mainstreaming of the climate change function by the national and county governments; approve and oversee implementation of the National Climate Change Action Plan; advise the national and county governments on legislative, policy and other measures necessary for climate change response; provide policy direction on research and training on climate change including on the collation and dissemination of information relating to climate change to the national and county governments, the public and other stakeholders; and administer the Climate Change Fund established under the Act” [
4]. However, the National Climate Change Council is yet to be operationalized in spite of the members having been nominated in accordance with the requirements of the Climate Change Act. This negligence at the national level, may partly explain why 85% of County governments are yet to make any visible progress in implementing articulations of the Act. One Key informant, who was a climate change practitioner leading a national wide climate change non-governmental organization, when asked about of access of the information contained in the Climate Change Act said,
“Unfortunately, we are only like 20 percent in terms of implementation of the Climate Change Act, and one of the achievements is coming up with the Climate Change Directorate which is now responsible about climate change in the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. But again, it came up with National Climate Change Council, which is chaired by the President. Unfortunately, this has never taken off, there is so much politics about it and it has never sat. So, this is a bottleneck to the permeation of this document to the public because even the second National Climate Change Action Plan is awaiting signing off by the Council which has never sat. The Climate Change Fund is to be administered by the Climate Change Council, which has never sat”.
When innovative climate governance instruments are not utilized or their legal provisions not implemented, diffusion of climate change information cannot spread fast enough to reach the critical mass and trigger positive responses. The Second National Climate Change Action Plan, for instance, is a five year plan (2018–2022), and whereas 2020 should be its third year of operationalizing the National Climate Change Response Strategy, it has not yet been activated because the anchor institution, the National Climate Change Council, has yet to begin its sittings. Consequently, the diffusion of relevant climate change information through the five stages of adoption [
16] is happening only slowly due to such bottlenecks at the national level.
3.1.3. Assessment of Dissemination Channels
The diffusion of innovations theory identifies mass and interpersonal media as key in communication of an innovation from the source to the receiver. In Africa, some of the most commonly used media in communicating climate change information to susceptible communities are radio, television, phones, newspapers, public meetings,
barazas, opinion leadership, and social media [
7,
23]. According to Rodgers, interpersonal media are better at enhancing diffusion because they are more effective at creating or breaking strongly held personal attitudes. Interpersonal communication is more effective if it involves persons who not only have several points of commonality but also have some points of differentiation [
16].
Additionally, Rodgers advances that choice of media is influenced by the five stages of diffusion of innovations and in this regard, mass media channels are more effective if used at the knowledge stage, whereas interpersonal channels are more useful at the persuasion stage of diffusion [
16]. In Kenya, multiple channels are used to disseminate climate change information to the public. The suitability of the channels may vary depending on audience characteristics and type of climate change information being shared among other factors. It is therefore important to assess the suitability of some of the channels currently being used in the country.
Kenya’s Climate Change Act establishes the Climate Change Directorate in the Ministry of Environment and Forestry to guide the nation on matters climate change and to centrally manage climate change information [
4,
24]. To perform the second role, the Directorate established the National Climate Change Resource Centre as the national depository for climate information. It currently has a special public library in Nairobi that is equipped with hard and soft information materials, including an online portal [
25,
26]. These resources are supposed to be accessed and used by Kenyans so as to enhance climate change awareness levels. However, the Resource Centre generally has only a few visitors owing to the fact that many Kenyans living in rural villages have little to no access to technological infrastructure such as computers, tablets or smart phones with data bundles to access the online portal. Furthermore, all the information on the portal is not only packaged in English, which is only spoken by the educated, but often involves technical terminologies as well. In fact, when asked to describe the state of availability of climate change information in Kenya, one key informant said that,
“Sadly, I consider the availability of climate information to the public to be very weak. It is a weak state because where that information sits is not accessible to everybody. For example, Kenya has got the Climate Change Information Hub on the Internet, which is described as a one stop shop for all matters climate change, but how many people particularly those that should access that information have access to the Internet? There is also a library facility at the Kenya Meteorological Service and the National Climate Change Resource Centre …and the facility has been stocked with books on climate change, but I visited it last month and I found very few readers. Why? Many people do not know that it is there … Yes, there has been effort to make sure that climate change information is availed but the physical location is in Nairobi. We have 47 counties; what happens to those other counties?”
Another key informant when evaluating success of the Kenya Climate Change Knowledge Portal added,
“When it comes to people getting access to what is in the portal, then I think the communities might not be able to get access to the Internet and eventually to the portal and that is why different packaging of information is needed for people who are illiterate and that is what we are doing with the Kenya Meteorological Service using RANET [community radio] using local languages …”.
Therefore, the Resource Centre and Portal can be deemed as designed for the elite and urban Kenyans, who are hardly directly affected by climate change and who generally have a higher adaptive capacity. Kenya therefore needs to evaluate the effectiveness of the channels it uses for dissemination of climate change information against actual impact. It should embrace use of diverse channels because as one key informant further said,
“But when a book has been published … for example, the National Climate Change Response Strategy … we try to ensure that we send them out to counties so that various the counties could have that information and I have seen that it has triggered action by some of these counties like Makueni, Isiolo, having their own downscaled, tailor-made, localized, climate change laws, policies, and so on”.
Indeed, the need for channel assessment even in terms of its infrastructural support for access is vital as Kenya Climate Change Working Group found out when they investigated how people living in arid and semi-arid areas of Kenya accessed climate change information [
21]. To further illustrate this, when a pastoralist was interviewed and asked his source of adaptive climate change information, he said,
“As for me, I just struggle to get information myself, although the other day I heard on the television that climate change is here with us and that one ought to drill a borehole and do things like irrigation … they talk on TV … they say we should change our pastoralist habits…we drill boreholes…that information is good … I would like to know more about farming … good information indeed … if they would employ some members of the local community to educate the rest, because not everyone has a TV, or maybe there is no electricity … so … many are not aware … local public forums can also be good avenues to pass information”.
It is apparent that channel effectiveness should be evaluated in view of variables such as characteristics of the target audience, socio-cultural and economic contexts as well as message type because these are the factors that influence social behavior change [
23]. This is especially so in Kenya, where, according to the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics survey, 36.1% of Kenyans in 2015/16 lived below the poverty line [
27]. Such persons cannot afford data charges to access the Internet. Also, although there is mobile phone adoption rate of 91% (46.9 million people) and internet connectivity penetration rate of 84% (43.3 million people) in Kenya, Google only identifies 13 million active internet users in the country [
28]. Undoubtedly, the majority of these are in urban areas. Further, according to a World Bank report (2018), 25% percent of Kenyans do not have access to electricity [
29]. Therefore, passing innovative climate change information through the Internet and TV to rural people who cannot afford internet connectivity or have no access to electricity is ineffective. Information given via such media can only be useful to climate change practitioners and policy makers but not to grassroots communities, where the real action is expected.
The Communications Authority annual report rates radio as the channel with the highest penetration in Kenya and the media that is affordable to most rural folks; therefore, more climate change information should be disseminated through this means. However, out of the over one hundred FM radio stations, there are no dedicated stations or programs dealing with climate change issues except for the five community radios owned by the Kenya Meteorological Department, known as RANET: Nganyi in Vihiga, Suswa in Narok, Budalangi in Busia, Kangema in Muranga, and Kwale in Kwale County [
24]. Also, access to radio among rural folks is influenced by income levels because, as a study that involved pastoralists in northern Kenya revealed, as much as radio is the popular access media for receiving weather updates, only a few pastoralists own one [
23,
30].
Further, communicating the technical jargon of climate change would be more effective through the use of interpersonal media, especially face-to-face opinion leadership. This is because this method ensures personalized and close communication, and adaptive climate change information is best communicated in comprehensible and reachable ways to end users [
21,
22,
31,
32,
33]. Renowned Kenyans, especially celebrities in media, music, arts, and sports, can make excellent opinion leaders and should therefore be enlisted in the dissemination of climate change messages to their numerous followers, who ascribe a lot of loyalty to them [
19]. They can, for instance, easily reach out to and persuade the youth who comprise majority of their fans through their social media sites, word of mouth, or composing songs/plays about pertinent matters of climate change.
More importantly, comprehensive partnerships are required to increase understandability and adoption of messages by end users [
6]. Key informants confirmed usefulness of using partnerships, multiplicity of channels and the richness of interpersonal communication methods in attaining persuasion. One said,
“We pass the information through the radio, through our administration, county administration … through the Climate Change Committees … because of the people wondering why certain things are happening which never used to happen, and then being explained that this is because of climate change … [and through] repetition by our workers from the department and our administrators, with the help of the National Drought Management Authority … and … the meteorological department so that through partnership there is information from the national level which comes to us … and in turn, we make it our business to get it to the grassroots”.
Another said, “We are using extension officers,” and when asked to explain why he opted to use agricultural extension officers to disseminate climate change information, he said,
“Because extension officers are with the farmers on a daily basis … In my case every ward has about two or three extension officers. They reside in the wards. They talk to the farmers on a daily basis. They have what we call contact farmers…who they use to illustrate best practices of farming…. When the chiefs have barazas [local public forums] they go there and tell people about agronomical practices that people need to do. During matangas [funerals], they go because there is always a guarantee that people are in matangas … and talk to them … Once in a while, they produce fliers, but normally, we produce fliers when there is outbreak of diseases”.
Indeed, to achieve both depth and breath, it is recommended that one uses diverse channels to disseminate climate change information e.g., giving audiences at face-to-face events the short videos to share with their social networks or combining face-to-face engagements in smaller groups with digital outreach via larger television or radio broadcasts [
34].
Therefore, effective dissemination is deeper than just passing information to end users because what is important is not just passing of information but rather sharing it in ways that the recipients can understand, resonate with and make use of. This makes the question of accessibility of disseminated information very critical and hence the second objective of this study.