Uncategorized
International Legal Framework on Indigenous Knowledge and Environmental Management
Published
1 year agoon
By
Admin
By Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD (Leading Environmental Law Scholar, Policy Advisor, Natural Resources Lawyer and Dispute Resolution Expert from Kenya), Winner of Kenya’s ADR Practitioner of the Year 2021, ADR Publication of the Year 2021 and CIArb (Kenya) Lifetime Achievement Award 2021*
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted against a background of indigenous peoples having suffered from historic injustices as a result of, inter alia, their colonization and dispossession of their lands, territories and resources, thus preventing them from exercising, in particular, their right to development in accordance with their own needs and interests. It therefore came in to, inter alia, correct such situations through guaranteeing their right to self-determination. In addition, it reaffirms the indigenous peoples’ right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired; the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired; and States should give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such right includes their right to use their customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the indigenous peoples concerned especially in relation to their right to the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive capacity of their lands or territories and resources. States are therefore obligated to establish and implement assistance programmes for indigenous peoples for such conservation and protection, without discrimination.
The Convention on Biological Diversity recognises the role of indigenous knowledge in in-situ conservation of biological diversity and requires contracting states to respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. 38 The Convention further advocates for promotion of wider application of indigenous knowledge with the approval and involvement of the holders of such knowledge who should equitably share in the benefits which arise from the use of their knowledge. Further, under article 10(c) of the Convention, each Contracting Party shall, as far as possible and as appropriate protect and encourage customary use of biological resources in accordance with traditional cultural practices that are compatible with conservation or sustainable use requirements.
The Convention is the only international treaty that specifically acknowledges the role of traditional knowledge, innovations, and practices in biodiversity conservation and sustainable development and the need to guarantee their protection, whether through intellectual property rights or other means. In order to achieve the vision of the Convention and optimise the role of indigenous knowledge in sustainable development, there is need to ensure clarity with regards to ownership of traditional knowledge and traditionally used biological resources; a process and set of requirements governing free prior and informed consent and equitable sharing of benefits with respect to traditional knowledge and associated genetic resources.
Principle 22 of the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development acknowledges that indigenous people and their communities and other local communities have a vital role in environmental management and development because of their knowledge and traditional practices. In light of this, States should recognize and duly support their identity, culture and interests and enable their effective participation in the achievement of sustainable development. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) asserts that ‘culture is who we are and what shapes our identity. No development can be sustainable without including culture.’
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) opines that the promotion and protection of traditional and indigenous food and agricultural knowledge will require international, intercultural and interdisciplinary approaches, communication and cooperation. Coordination of indigenous and local communities’ sustainable use, conservation and management of food and agriculture within and across ecosystems, landscapes and seascapes will also require synergies that link food security, livelihood sustainability, poverty alleviation and food and agricultural productivity to rural development processes based on in and ex situ conservation of food and agricultural genetic resources. Traditional environmental knowledge from these communities thus becomes relevant in achieving the foregoing.
The 1994 Draft Declaration on Human Rights and Environment describes the procedural rights, such as the right to participation, necessary for realization of the substantive rights. Article 1 of the Aarhus Convention states that “in order to contribute to the protection of the right of every person of present and future generations to live in an environment adequate to his or her health and wellbeing, each Party should guarantee the rights of access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters in accordance with the provisions of this Convention.” Environmental procedural rights such as the access to information, public participation and access to justice may be one of the ways and means to a realistic way for attaining the sustainable development. Recognition and active utilisation of communities’ traditional environmental knowledge can create a viable channel for communities to appreciate government’s efforts in effective environmental governance through promoting sustainable use of the environment and its resources.
Agenda 21 provides that Governments at the appropriate level, with the support of the relevant international and regional organizations, should, inter alia: promote a multidisciplinary and cross-sectoral approach in training and the dissemination of knowledge to local people on a wide range of issues which include various resources management. Further, Agenda 21 states that Coastal States should promote and facilitate the organization of education and training in integrated coastal and marine management and sustainable development for scientists, technologists, managers (including community-based managers) and users, leaders, indigenous peoples, fisherfolk, women and youth, among others. Management and development, as well as environmental protection concerns and local planning issues, should be incorporated in educational curricula and public awareness campaigns, with due regard to traditional ecological knowledge and socio-cultural values. This is useful in promoting sustainable and inclusive sustainable resources management through empowering the local people to participate meaningfully in the same.
The Bali Principles also affirm the fact that the impacts of climate change are disproportionately felt by small island states, women, youth, coastal peoples, local communities, indigenous peoples, fisherfolk, poor people and the elderly. Also noteworthy is the assertion that the local communities, affected people and indigenous peoples have been kept out of the global processes to address climate change. The Principles also acknowledge that unsustainable production and consumption practices are at the root of this and other global environmental problems. The impacts of climate change also threaten food sovereignty and the security of livelihoods of natural resource-based local economies. They can also threaten the health of communities around the world-especially those who are vulnerable and marginalized, in particular children and elderly people. More importantly, the Bali Principles acknowledge in the preamble that combating climate change must entail profound shifts from unsustainable production, consumption and lifestyles, with industrialized countries taking the lead.
African States and other stakeholders, in the Ngorongoro Declaration have acknowledged that Sustainable development can ensure that appropriate efforts are deployed to protect and conserve the cultural and natural resources of a region faced with the challenges of climate change, natural and human-made disasters, population growth, rapid urbanization, destruction of heritage, and environmental degradation for present and future generations. As such, they declared that on the one hand, African heritage is central to preserving and promoting African cultures thereby uplifting identity and dignity for present and future generations in an increasingly globalized world, and on the other hand, heritage, including World Heritage properties, is a driver of sustainable development and critical for achieving regional socio-economic benefits, environmental protection, sustainable urbanization, social cohesion and peace.
*This is article is an extract from an article by Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD, Kenya’s ADR Practitioner of the Year 2021 (Nairobi Legal Awards), ADR Publisher of the Year 2021 and Lifetime Achievement Award 2021 (CIArb Kenya): Muigua, K., Revisiting the Place of Indigenous Knowledge in the Sustainable Development Agenda, Available at: http://kmco.co.ke/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Revisiting-the-Place-of-Indigenous-Knowledge-in-the-Sustainable-Development-Agenda-Kariuki-Muigua-September-2020.pdf. Dr. Kariuki Muigua is Kenya’s foremost Environmental Law and Natural Resources Lawyer and Scholar, Sustainable Development Advocate and Conflict Management Expert. Dr. Kariuki Muigua is a Senior Lecturer of Environmental Law and Dispute resolution at the University of Nairobi School of Law and The Center for Advanced Studies in Environmental Law and Policy (CASELAP). He has published numerous books and articles on Environmental Law, Environmental Justice Conflict Management, Alternative Dispute Resolution and Sustainable Development. Dr. Muigua is also a Chartered Arbitrator, an Accredited Mediator, the Africa Trustee of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and the Managing Partner of Kariuki Muigua & Co. Advocates. Dr. Muigua is recognized as one of the leading lawyers and dispute resolution experts by the Chambers Global Guide 2021.
References
Africa Forest Law Enforcement and Governance (AFLEG), Ministerial Conference 13-16 October, 2003; Ministerial Declaration, Yaoundé, Cameroon, October 16, 2003.
Amnesty Kenya, ‘Kenya: Indigenous Peoples Targeted as Forced Evictions Continue despite Government Promises’ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/08/kenya-indigenous-peoples-targeted-as-forced-evictions-continue-despite-government-promises/ (accessed 16 July 2020).
Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, UN Doc. ECE/CEP/43.Adopted at the 4th UNECE Ministerial Conference, Aarhus, 25 June, 1998, UN Doc. ECE/CEP/43.
Berger, R., ‘Conflict over Natural Resources among Pastoralists in Northern Kenya: A Look at Recent Initiatives in Conflict Resolution’ (2003) 15 Journal of International Development 245.
Berkes, F., et. al., ‘Rediscovery of Traditional Ecological Knowledge as Adaptive Management,’ Ecological Applications, Vol. 10, No. 5., October 2000, pp. 1251-1262.
Breidlid, A., ‘Culture, Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Sustainable Development: A Critical View of Education in an African Context’ (2009) 29 International Journal of Educational Development 140.
Castro, A.P. & Ettenger, K., ‘Indigenous Knowledge and Conflict Management: Exploring Local Perspectives and Mechanisms for Dealing With Community Forestry Disputes,’ Paper Prepared for the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, Community Forestry Unit, for the Global Electronic Conference on “Addressing Natural Resource Conflicts Through Community Forestry,” (FAO, January-April 1996). Available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/ac696e/ac696e09.htm [Accessed on 14/7/2020].
Constitution of Kenya, Laws of Kenya, Government Printer, Nairobi, 2010.
County Governments Act, Laws of Kenya, Government Printer, Nairobi, 2012.
Dessein, J. et al (ed), ‘Culture in, for and as Sustainable Development: Conclusions from the COST Action IS1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability,’ (University of Jyväskylä, Finland, 2015), p. 14. Available at http://www.culturalsustainability.eu/conclusions.pdf [Accessed on 17/7/2020].
Emerton, L., ‘Mount Kenya: The Economics of Community Conservation,’ Evaluating Eden Series, Discussion Paper No.4, p. 6.
Environmental Management and Conservation Act (EMCA), No. 8 of 1999, Laws of Kenya.
Environmental Management and Co-ordination (Wetlands, River Banks, Lake Shores and Sea Shore Management) Regulation, 2009, Legal Notice No. 19, Act No. 8 of 1999.
Giorgia Magni, ‘Indigenous Knowledge and Implications for the Sustainable Development Agenda.’ (2017) 52 European Journal of Education 437, p.3, Available at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/ pf0000245623> Accessed 17 July 2020.
FAO, ‘FAO Working Paper 1’ https://www.fao.org/3/X2102E/X2102E01.htm (accessed 17 July 2020).
FAO, ‘Respecting free, prior and informed consent: Practical guidance for governments, companies, NGOs, indigenous peoples and local communities in relation to land acquisition,’ Governance of Tenure Technical Guide No. 3, Rome, 2014.
Forest Conservation and Management Act, No. 34 of 2016, Laws of Kenya.
Human Rights Watch, “They Just Want to Silence Us” (17 December 2018) https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/12/17/they-just-want-silence-us/abuses-against-environmental-activists-kenyas-coast (Accessed 17 July 2020).
Isaka Wainaina and Anor v Murito wa Indagara and others, [1922-23] 9 E.A.L.R. 102.
Jussi S Jauhiainen and Lauri Hooli, ‘Indigenous Knowledge and Developing Countries’ Innovation Systems: The Case of Namibia’ (2017) 1 International Journal of Innovation Studies 89.
Kigenyi, et al, ‘Practice Before Policy: An Analysis of Policy and Institutional Changes Enabling Community Involvement in Forest Management in Eastern and Southern Africa,’ Issue 10 of Forest and social perspectives in conservation, (IUCN, 2002), p. 9.
Klopp, J.M. and Sang, J.K., ‘Maps, Power, and the Destruction of the Mau Forest in Kenya’ (2011) 12 Georgetown Journal of International Affairs 125;
Kriegler and Waki Reports on 2007 Elections, 2009, (Government Printer, Nairobi).
Mogaka, H., ‘Economic Aspects of Community Involvement in Sustainable Forest Management in Eastern and Southern Africa,’ Issue 8 of Forest and social perspectives in conservation, IUCN, 2001. p.74.
Muigua, K., ‘Mainstreaming Traditional EcologicalKnowledge in Kenya for Sustainable Development’, 2020 Journal of cmsd Volume 4(1)< http://journalofcmsd.net/wpcontent/uploads/ 2020/03/Mainstreaming-Traditional-Ecological-Knowledge-in-Kenya-for-SustainableDevelop ment-Kariuki-Muigua-23rd-August-2019.pdf> Accessed on 17 July 2020.
Muigua, K., Harnessing Traditional Knowledge for Environmental Conflict Management in Kenya (2016)< http://kmco.co.ke/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/TRADITIONAL-KNOWLEDGE -ANDCONFLICT-MANAGEMENT-29-SEPTEMBER-2016.pdf> accessed 17 July 2020.
Ogendo, HWO, Tenants of the Crown: Evolution of Agrarian Law & Institutions in Kenya, (ACTS Press, Nairobi, 1991), p.54.
Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Act, 2016 No. 33 of 2016, Laws of Kenya.
Relief Web, ‘Families Torn Apart: Forced Eviction of Indigenous People in Embobut Forest, Kenya – Kenya’ (ReliefWeb) https://reliefweb.int/report/kenya/families-torn-apart-forced-eviction-indigenous-people-embobut-forest-kenya-0 (accessed 16 July 2020).
Report of the Judicial Commission Appointed to Inquire into Tribal Clashes in Kenya, July 31, 1999 (Akiwumi Report, p. 59).
Swiderska, K., et. al., ‘Protecting Community Rights over Traditional Knowledge: Implications of Customary Laws and Practices,’ Interim Report (2005-2006), November 2006, p. 13. Available at http://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/G01253.pdf [Accessed on 14/7/2020].
SGJN Senanayake, ‘Indigenous Knowledge as a Key to Sustainable Development’ (2006) 2 Journal of Agricultural Sciences–Sri Lanka accessed 16 July 2020. 5 Ibid. 6 United Nations General Assembly, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Resolution adopted by the
Urmilla, B., and Salomé Bronkhorst, ‘Environmental Conflicts: Key Issues and Management Implications’ (2010) 10 African Journal on Conflict Resolution.
UNFF Memorandum, available at www.iucnael.org/en/…/doc…/849-unit-3-forest-gamebackgrounder.html. > accessed 16 July 2020.
UNEP, Global Environment Outlook 5: Environment for the future we want, (UNEP, 2012), pp.145-154.
United Nations, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, A/RES/70/1, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015
US Office of Legacy Management, ‘Environmental Justice’ What Is Environmental Justice? Available at http://energy.gov/lm/services/environmental-justice/what-environmental-justice[Accessed on 12/7/2020].
UN General Assembly, Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, 12 July 1993, A/CONF.157/23.
UNGA, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015 [without reference to a Main Committee (A/70/L.1)],
World Resources Institute, ‘Atlas of Forest and Landscape Restoration Opportunities,’ available at http://www.wri.org/resources/maps/atlas-forest-and-landscape-restoration-opportunities > accessed 17 July 2020.
You may like
-
Brief History of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)
-
Kenya Nominates Dr. Kariuki Muigua Member of World’s Premier Arbitral Court
-
Chambers Global 2023 Ranks Dr. Kariuki Muigua Among Band 1 Arbitrators Again
-
Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD: The Top Arbitrator in Africa
-
Review: Journal of Conflict Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 9, No. 1
-
Book Review: Exploring Conflict Management in Environmental Matters
Uncategorized
Whether to Regulate or Not to Regulate ADR in Kenya
Published
11 months agoon
July 9, 2022By
Admin
By Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD (Leading Environmental Law Scholar, Sustainable Development Policy Advisor, Natural Resources Lawyer and Dispute Resolution Expert from Kenya), The African Arbitrator of the Year 2022, Kenya’s ADR Practitioner of the Year 2021, CIArb (Kenya) Lifetime Achievement Award 2021 and ADR Publisher of the Year 2021*
Regulation of ADR is a subject wrought with contentious discourse. There are those who strongly advocate for ADR to be deregulated, while others argue for strong state regulation. On one end, the regulation of ADR carries with it the advantages of encouraging its adoption nationally; establishing standards of ADR practitioner’s competence; developing systems of compliance and complaints; addressing weaknesses of ADR such as ensuring the fairness of the procedure and building capacity and coherence of the ADR field.
Proponents of regulation have argued that regulation of ADR will increase the use and demand of services and create or enhance an ADR “market”. There are those who believe that the regulation of ADR may have its value in assuring that the parties employ qualified, neutral and skilled mediators and arbitrators in resolving a wide variety of disputes. However, this is countered by the argument that in mediation where the parties select private non-government mediators, monitoring is complimented by the fact that the parties share in the compensation of such neutrals, better assuring their freedom from bias. This assertion may be relevant to Kenya considering that private mediators are also appointed and compensated the same way. It is therefore possible to argue that the mediator may be compelled by this fact to act fairly.
Contention would, however, arise where there are allegations of corruption. It is not clear, at least in Kenya, how the parties would deal with the same. This is because, unlike in arbitration where parties may seek court’s intervention in setting aside the otherwise binding arbitral award, mediation outcome is non-binding and wholly relies on the goodwill of the parties to respect the same. Therefore, faced with the risk of corruption and the potential non-acceptance of the outcome by the parties, it is arguable that the foregoing argument of the compensation being a sufficient incentive may not be satisfactory. This may, arguably, call for better mechanisms of safeguarding the parties’ interests. In arbitration, the argument advanced is that whether of interests or rights disputes, the same process of joint selection and joint funding coupled with mutual selection of neutral from a tried and experienced cadre of professional arbitrators further assures their independence and neutrality, with protection of their integrity as their only ticket to future designations.
Again, the issue of independent practitioners would arise. For instance, in Kenya, there has been increased number of professionals taking up ADR. Professional bodies and higher institutions of learning have increased their rate of teaching ADR, as professional course and academic course respectively. The net effect of this will be increased number of ADR practitioners in the country. As part of professional development, not all of those who get the academic qualifications may enroll with the local institutions for certification as practitioners. There are also those who may obtain foreign qualifications and later seek such certification. However, there are those who are not affiliated to any institution or body. In such instances, it would only be hoped that they would conduct themselves in a professional manner, bearing in mind that any misconduct or unfair conduct may lead to setting aside of the award or even removal as an arbitrator by the High Court.
The court process obviously comes with extra costs and it would probably have been more effective to have a supervisory body or institution to report the unscrupulous practitioner for action, without necessarily involving the court. Such instances may thus justify the need for formal regulation, especially for the more formal mechanisms. Currently, there are attempts to make referral to ADR mandatory in Kenya. This is especially evidenced by the gazetted Mediation (Pilot Project) Rules, 2015, which provide that every civil action instituted in court after commencement of these Rules, must be subjected to mandatory screening by the Mediation Deputy Registrar and those found suitable and may be referred to mediation.
Thus, there is no choice as to whether one may submit the matters voluntarily or otherwise. While this may promote the use of mediation where the parties are generally satisfied with the outcome, the opposite may also be true. Caution ought to be exercised in balancing the need for facilitating expeditious access to justice through ADR and retaining the positive aspects of the processes. For instance, in other jurisdictions where there is provision for mandatory promotion of ADR processes, the use of those processes has not necessarily become common. Among the reasons given for this reluctance towards the adoption of ADR include lack of education and training in the field, lack of court-connected programs, whether voluntary or mandated and insufficient legislation.
The argument is thus made that when introducing ADR for the first time, there may be a need for some element of compulsion or legislative control, as this can support its growth. This is the path that the Kenyan Judiciary has taken. The Judiciary mediation programme is on a trial basis and the outcome will inform future framework or direction. The pilot program (having been rolled out to other stations outside Nairobi in May 2018) will define how the practitioners as well as the general public perceive court-annexed mediation and ADR in general. It is therefore important that the concerned drivers of this project use the opportunity to promote educational programming, with the efforts including workshops and seminars among the local practicing lawyers to enhance their understanding of ADR and the services provided by the pilot project. This, it is argued, may enable them to assist their clients in making informed decisions about whether or not to use ADR.
On the other end, it has been argued that legislative regulation, no matter how well meaning, inevitably limits and restrains. The regulation of ADR is feared to hamper its advantages. The developing country’s experience with court-annexed ADR indicates that when a judge imposes a conciliator or mediator on the parties, it does not provide the proper incentive for the parties to be candid about the case. ADR advantages such as low cost, procedural flexibility, enhanced access for marginalized groups and a predictable forum for conflict management tend to disappear when there is discretionary power with court personnel, procedural formalities within the ADR process or an artificial limit to competition within the ADR market.
Court mandated mediation has been argued to negate the fundamental aspects of voluntariness and party control that distinguish it from litigation, the very aspects attributed to its success in a vast number of cases. In addition, the “one size fits all” approach taken by legislation that encourages or requires all to use ADR, without regard to needs in various contexts and to the distinctions among the various processes, is another reason why ADR legislation should be undertaken with caution. For instance, in the Kenyan situation, while the Mediation (Pilot Project) Rules, 2015 require screening of civil matters for possible submission for mediation, it is possible for the Registrar to realise that some of the cases may be appropriate for arbitration instead of mediation. The programme only takes care of mediation process with no reference to arbitration or any other process, well, apart from litigation.
The question that would, therefore, arise is whether the Registrar has powers to force parties into arbitration as well. Further, if they have such powers, the next question would be who would pay for the process, bearing in mind that it is potentially cost-effective but may be expensive as well. On the other hand, if the Registrar lacks such powers, it is also a question worth addressing what the Court would do if it ordered the parties to resort to arbitration but both parties fail to do so due to such factors as costs. It is, therefore, worth considering whether the Mediation Accreditation Committee, established under the Civil Procedure Act, should have its mandate expanded to deal with all processes, or whether there should be set up another body to deal with the other processes.
*This article is an extract from published article “Regulating Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Practice in Kenya: Looking into the Future,” by Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD, the African Arbitrator of the Year 2022, Kenya’s ADR Practitioner of the Year 2021 (Nairobi Legal Awards), CIArb (Kenya) ADR Lifetime Achievement Award 2021 and ADR Publisher of the Year 2021. Dr. Kariuki Muigua is a Foremost Dispute Resolution Expert in Africa ranked among Top 6 Arbitrators in Kenya by Chambers and Partners, Leading Environmental Law and Natural Resources Lawyer and Scholar, Sustainable Development Advocate and Conflict Management Expert. Dr. Kariuki Muigua is a Senior Lecturer of Environmental Law and Dispute resolution at the University of Nairobi School of Law and The Center for Advanced Studies in Environmental Law and Policy (CASELAP). He has published numerous books and articles on Environmental Law, Environmental Justice Conflict Management, Alternative Dispute Resolution and Sustainable Development. Dr. Muigua is also a Chartered Arbitrator, an Accredited Mediator, the Africa Trustee of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and the Managing Partner of Kariuki Muigua & Co. Advocates. Dr. Muigua is recognized as one of the leading lawyers and dispute resolution experts by the Chambers Global Guide 2022 and is ranked among the Top 5 Arbitrators in Kenya in 2022 by The Lawyer Africa.
References
Muigua, K., “Regulating Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Practice in Kenya: Looking into the Future,” Available at: http://kmco.co.ke/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Regulating-ADR-Practice-in-Kenya-Kariuki-Muigua-June-2018.pdf (accessed 09 July 2022).
Uncategorized
Safeguarding Pollinators for Sustainable Development in Kenya
Published
1 year agoon
March 13, 2022By
Admin
By Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD (Leading Environmental Law Scholar, Policy Advisor, Natural Resources Lawyer and Dispute Resolution Expert from Kenya), Winner of Kenya’s ADR Practitioner of the Year 2021, ADR Publisher of the Year 2021 and CIArb (Kenya) Lifetime Achievement Award 2021*
The prevailing debate on sustainable development the world over mainly revolves around minimizing adverse human impact on the environment as part of maximizing accruing Ecosystem Services. However, one area of biological diversity conservation that has received little or no attention, especially under the current Kenyan environment and natural resources laws, is the plant pollinators’ community that plays an indispensable role in natural resources and environmental regeneration for ecosystem Services. Globally, biodiversity loss has been attributed to various factors, including, habitat loss, pest invasion, pollution, over-harvesting and disease. Pollination services are provided both by wild, free-living organisms and by commercially managed bee species. Bees are considered the predominant and most economically important group of pollinators in most geographical regions.
Past reports carried in the Kenyan local dailies have highlighted the problem, asserting that Kenyan farmers are driving bees, wasps, butterflies and other pollinators to extinction, consequently threatening food supply. Despite this, there is arguably inadequate evidence demonstrating Kenya’s commitment to protect these important organisms as part of biodiversity conservation, and ultimately, achieving the right to food security for all, as guaranteed under the Constitution of Kenya 2010. The inadequacy or lack of legal responses to pollinators’ protection in the Kenyan environmental and natural resources laws has had adverse effect on the pollinators, and arguably, their protection is currently based on a general approach to environmental conservation for provision of ecosystem services. Pollinators are part of the biodiversity and, if any measures geared towards biodiversity conservation are to succeed, they must include pollinators.
Pollinators are important for the provision of ecosystem services. Pollination is vital to the ecosystems and to human societies and the health and wellbeing of pollinating insects is considered as crucial to life, be it in sustaining natural habitats or contributing to local and global economies. Biotic pollination is meant to be a symbiotic process in which both the animal pollinators and the plants benefit in terms of food for the former and pollination process for the latter. This discourse is thus meant to address the factors and practices that adversely affect this mutual relationship between the two groups. Considering that ‘plants serve as air and water filters, are an indispensible part of the water cycle, prevent erosion of valuable soil re-sources, and give us numerous foods, fibers, and medicines, pollinators are considered as critical to biodiversity, ecosystem services, agricultural productivity, world economies, and human quality of life’. Any threats to these animal pollinators therefore threaten the whole chain of natural provision of ecosystem services.
Protection of Pollinators: The Legal, Institutional and Policy Framework
Internationally, the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity was adopted during the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, with the objective of conservation of biological diversity. While the Convention does not specifically mention pollinators, it accords “Biological diversity” a broad definition to mean ‘the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part: this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems’. Pollinators are thus covered under these broad definitions as part of the biodiversity to be protected and conserved under the Convention. The Convention outlines under Article 6 thereof state obligations on the general measures for conservation and sustainable use of the biological diversity within their territories.
The Agenda 21 also contains provisions under section 15 thereof on the conservation of biological diversity. Agenda 21 specifically acknowledges that our planet’s essential goods and services depend on the variety and variability of genes, species, populations and ecosystems. The Aichi Biodiversity Target seeks to ensure that, by 2020, areas under agriculture, aquaculture and forestry are managed sustainably, ensuring conservation of biodiversity. The Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act 1999 (EMCA) calls for conservation of ‘biological diversity’. Notably, EMCA provides for conservation of biological resources in situ and ex-situ. Other provisions in EMCA that are germane to protection of pollinators relate to standards of pesticides and toxic substances. EMCA further provides for the registration of the pesticide or toxic substance, before importing, manufacturing, processing or reprocessing of pesticides or toxic substance.
Kenya’s National Environment Policy 2012 rightly points out that ‘the main human activities contributing to environmental degradation in Kenya include unsustainable agricultural land use, poor soil and water management practices, deforestation, overgrazing, and pollution’. ‘These activities contribute a great deal to degradation of the country’s natural resources such as land, fresh and marine waters, forests and biodiversity threatens the livelihoods of many people. They undermine the sink function of the environment which operates through such processes as nutrient recycling, decomposition and the natural purification and filtering of air and water.’ All the foregoing national laws and policy instruments have some issues that may affect pollinators in their implementation, but notably, most of them hardly mention pollinators. There is no dedicated law that is meant to protect the pollinators and currently, their protection can only be done within the framework of all the above laws.
Safeguarding the Future: Addressing the Challenges Affecting Pollinators
It has rightly been pointed out that insect pollinators of crops and wild plants are under threat globally and their decline or loss could have profound economic and environmental consequences. Specifically, insect pollinators are believed to face growing pressure from the effects of intensified land use, climate change, alien species, and the spread of pests and pathogens; and this has serious implications for human food security and health, and ecosystem function. There is need to avert the danger facing pollinators, and this can be achieved through various ways. While some require radical change in management approaches, others require all stakeholders to work closely and also include other relevant but often ignored groups in implementing decisions.
*This article is an extract from the Article: Securing Our Destiny through Effective Management of the Environment, (2020) Journal of Conflict Management and Sustainable Development Volume 4(3), p. 1. by Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD, Kenya’s ADR Practitioner of the Year 2021 (Nairobi Legal Awards), ADR Publisher of the Year 2021 and ADR Lifetime Achievement Award 2021 (CIArb Kenya). Dr. Kariuki Muigua is a foremost Environmental Law and Natural Resources Lawyer and Scholar, Sustainable Development Advocate and Conflict Management Expert in Kenya. Dr. Kariuki Muigua is a Senior Lecturer of Environmental Law and Dispute resolution at the University of Nairobi School of Law and The Center for Advanced Studies in Environmental Law and Policy (CASELAP). He has published numerous books and articles on Environmental Law, Environmental Justice Conflict Management, Alternative Dispute Resolution and Sustainable Development. Dr. Muigua is also a Chartered Arbitrator, an Accredited Mediator, the Africa Trustee of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and the Managing Partner of Kariuki Muigua & Co. Advocates. Dr. Muigua is recognized among the top 5 leading lawyers and dispute resolution experts in Kenya by the Chambers Global Guide 2022.
References
Muigua, K., “Securing Our Destiny through Effective Management of the Environment,” (2020) Journal of Conflict Management and Sustainable Development Volume 4(3), p. 1.
Uncategorized
Regulating the Extractives Industry in Kenya: Challenges and Prospects
Published
1 year agoon
March 9, 2022By
Admin
By Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD (Leading Environmental Law Scholar, Policy Advisor, Natural Resources Lawyer and Dispute Resolution Expert from Kenya), Winner of Kenya’s ADR Practitioner of the Year 2021, ADR Publisher of the Year 2021 and CIArb (Kenya) Lifetime Achievement Award 2021*
It is estimated that Africa hosts 30% of the earth’s mineral reserves, including 40% of gold, 60% of cobalt, and 70% of platinum deposits, and produce about 30% of the world’s gold, 70% of the world’s platinum, 28% of the world’s palladium, and 16% of the world’s bauxite. In addition, Africa also produces (yearly, in thousand metric tons) 205,056 of hard coal, 67,308 of nickel bearing ores, and 29,174 of iron bearing ores, as well as 595,507 kg of gold bearing ores. The extractive or mining industries generally have long been touted as key to anchor ‘development’ or ‘economic growth’ to alleviate poverty in developing countries. Despite this, African countries have largely exhibited low levels of development and poor standards of living. This has been attributed to various factors including exploitative multinational corporations, lack of expertise and corruption, and African countries negotiating unfavourable mining development agreements, with the result that the Continent has received inadequate returns for its mineral wealth.
At the continental level, the Africa Mining Vision is expected to address most of these challenges if not all. But despite this Vision document, most of the African countries still struggle with making the mineral resources work for them, in uplifting the lives of their people. Kenya is no exception as it has a number of mineral deposits albeit in smaller amounts, which, as already pointed out, have not contributed much to the country’s GDP as would be expected. The communities are also yet to boast of any significant benefits from the mining activities going on within their regions. Notably, GDP from Mining in Kenya is estimated to have increased to 12527 KES Million in the fourth quarter of 2018 from 12313 KES Million in the third quarter of 2018. GDP from Mining in Kenya averaged 8963.05 KES Million from 2009 until 2018, reaching an all-time high of 12906 KES Million in the first quarter of 2018 and a record low of 4195 KES Million in the first quarter of 2009.
According to the Mining and Minerals Policy, Sessional Paper No. 7 of 2016, as at 2016, the sector was contributing 0.8 percent to gross domestic product (GDP) per annum. The contribution to GDP was expected to increase to three (3) percent by 2017 and ten (10) percent by 2030 according to the Medium Term Plan (MTP) II (2013-2017). While these statistics paint a hopeful picture with the figures increasing over the last ten years, there is still a lot of room for not only growth in these figures but also positive contribution of the mining sector to the lives of the ordinary citizens especially those to be found within the localities where such mining takes place. Indeed, the discovery of such minerals as the titanium deposits products in the Coastal region gives hope to the expectation of a brighter future for the sector and country at large. Reserves for Titanium and Niobium, both found in the Coast region, are projected to be worth Sh9 trillion, and Sh3.8 trillion for the estimated 750 million barrels, according to Tullow Oil’s 2017 projections.
Regulations were made by the Cabinet Secretary seeking to ensure that the mining activities do not only go on smoothly but also that they benefit the local communities even as they contribute to the national development agenda. These Regulations are meant to streamline the mining sector in the country by ensuring that some of the main provisions in the Mining Act 2016 are fully and efficiently implemented. Notably, some of these Regulations such as the Mining (Use of Local Goods and Services) Regulations, 2017; Mining (Employment and Training) Regulations, 2017 are meant to directly empower the local communities by promoting job creation and market for locally produced goods. However, while these Regulations mean well for the local communities and local industries, a lot still needs to be done to ensure that the environment favours the implementation of such Regulations.
For instance, the Regulations on use of local goods and services require that the holder of a licence, its contractors and sub-contractors shall, to the maximum extent possible, when purchasing goods and procuring services required with respect to operations or any activity to be conducted under a licence, give first priority to- materials and goods made in Kenya; and services provided by citizens of Kenya or entities incorporated and operating in Kenya or owned and controlled by Kenyans: provided that such goods and services are equal in quality, quantity and price to, or better than, goods and services obtainable outside of Kenya. This proviso stands to defeat the purpose of these Regulations.
As it may be proved through statistics, there are many factors of production that may, and have indeed, been making locally produced goods more expensive when compared to imported ones. Thus, as long as investors can prove that they can source such goods and/or services at more competitive prices or those with better quality, they will easily bypass the requirements of these Regulations. The manufacturing sector and other factors affecting the local production of goods and services may thus need to be fixed before these Regulations can effectively be implemented. Unless capacity is built across all stages of mineral extraction right from minerals agreements’ negotiations all the way to the actual extraction of these resources, then Africa, including Kenya, will continue to lag behind in development despite its rich deposits in minerals.
*This article is an extract from the Article: Securing Our Destiny through Effective Management of the Environment, (2020) Journal of Conflict Management and Sustainable Development Volume 4(3), p. 1. by Dr. Kariuki Muigua, PhD, Kenya’s ADR Practitioner of the Year 2021 (Nairobi Legal Awards), ADR Publisher of the Year 2021 and ADR Lifetime Achievement Award 2021 (CIArb Kenya). Dr. Kariuki Muigua is a foremost Environmental Law and Natural Resources Lawyer and Scholar, Sustainable Development Advocate and Conflict Management Expert in Kenya. Dr. Kariuki Muigua is a Senior Lecturer of Environmental Law and Dispute resolution at the University of Nairobi School of Law and The Center for Advanced Studies in Environmental Law and Policy (CASELAP). He has published numerous books and articles on Environmental Law, Environmental Justice Conflict Management, Alternative Dispute Resolution and Sustainable Development. Dr. Muigua is also a Chartered Arbitrator, an Accredited Mediator, the Africa Trustee of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and the Managing Partner of Kariuki Muigua & Co. Advocates. Dr. Muigua is recognized among the top 5 leading lawyers and dispute resolution experts in Kenya by the Chambers Global Guide 2022.
Reference
Muigua, K., “Securing Our Destiny through Effective Management of the Environment,” (2020) Journal of Conflict Management and Sustainable Development Volume 4(3), p. 1.

Brief History of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA)

Kenya Nominates Dr. Kariuki Muigua Member of World’s Premier Arbitral Court

Legal 500 Recognizes Dominic Indokhomi as Leading Individual in Banking and Finance

Chambers Global 2023 Ranks Dr. Kariuki Muigua Among Band 1 Arbitrators Again

Former KCB Company Secretary Sues Over Unlawful Dismissal

CR Advocates LLP is the Kenyan Law Firm to Watch in 2023 after Epic 2022
Trending
-
News & Analysis1 year ago
The Role of NEMA in Pollution Control in Kenya
-
News & Analysis11 months ago
THE TOP 200 ARBITRATORS IN KENYA 2022
-
News & Analysis1 year ago
The Definition and Scope of Biodiversity
-
News & Analysis1 year ago
The Definition, Aspects and Theories of Development
-
Law Firms2 years ago
Nyaanga & Mugisha Advocates: A Full-Service Boutique Law Firm on the Rise
-
Law Firms1 year ago
TEMPLARS Advised Lagos Free Zone Company (LFZC) on Development of Integrated Gas Network
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Integrating ESG reporting with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
News & Analysis11 months ago
The List of the Top 30 Practicing Arbitrators in Kenya