Early outcomes of climate finance in Kenya: case study of seven investments funded by the County Climate Change Fund mechanism

  • By Florence Crick, Achiba Gargule and Omeno Suji
  • 04/06/2020

From herding to farming, Isiolo, Kenya, ©ECHO/Martin Karimi, CC BY-ND 2.0


Climate change poses significant challenges to the social and economic development of Kenya and its arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs). Getting climate funds to the local level is critical to support climate-resilient development and the resilience of households and communities. The County Climate Change Fund (CCCF) mechanism pilot-tested in the five counties of Isiolo, Wajir, Garissa, Makueni and Kitui aims to enable counties to create, access and use climate finance to build their resilience and reduce vulnerabilities to a changing climate. The mechanism provides a way of channelling climate finance to vulnerable communities through county governments.

This report is part of a wider study, which explores whether public investments made by government-led climate funds in Ethiopia, Kenya, Mali and Senegal are building climate resilience that responds to locally determined priorities. This paper is based on a case study of seven investments funded through the CCCF mechanism across the five pilot counties in Kenya. It investigated the early outcomes from the investments on household and community resilience by using a value-for-money framework and focusing on the four components of economy, efficiency, effectiveness and equity.

 In line with the wider study, this report addresses three broad questions:

  • How is climate resilience being defined and measured at the sub-national and national levels of the country climate funds? (The wider report addressed the international level).
  • What outputs have been achieved by decentralised and centralised approaches, and what can be learned?
  • To what extent does the level of government involved in the decision-making process affect the outputs of activities that aim to strengthen climate resilience?

This study suggests that the institutional/governance structure and decision-making processes of the CCCF are leading to some significant benefits, including a strong sense of community ownership of the investments, and the active involvement by the beneficiaries of CCCF investments in the development of project proposals, the construction works and in the day-to-day management of the investments. This strong participatory approach appears to have led to the development and implementation of investments that better reflect communities’ needs and priorities and complement existing initiatives.

Yet ensuring the long-term success and sustainability of CCCF investments remains a challenge because of the wider policy and development context within which they occur: a context of significant development deficit, continued failure by government and development partners to ensure water security, inadequate water governance arrangements and policies that undermine the resilience of pastoral systems and communities.

Download PDF


From camel to cup

From Camel to Cup' explores the importance of camels and camel milk in drought ridden regions, and the under-reported medicinal and vital health benefits of camel milk


As climate risks rise, insurance needed to protect development

Less than 5 percent of disaster losses are covered by insurance in poorer countries, versus 50 percent in rich nations

Disasters happen to real people – and it's complicated

Age, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation and many more factors must be considered if people are to become resilient to climate extremes

NGOs are shaking up climate services in Africa. Should we be worried?

A concern is around the long-term viability of hard-fought development gains

The paradox of water development in Kenya's drylands

In Kenya's Wajir county, the emphasis on water development is happening at the expense of good water governance

Latest Photos


Update cookies preferences