Makueni County Agroecology Policy 2025

1.1 Background............................................................................................. 1

1.2 Rationale for agroecology policy for Makueni County......................... 3

1.3 Policy goals and objectives................................................................... 6

1.4 Scope of the Makueni Agroecology policy........................................... 7

1.5 Structure of the agroecology policy...................................................... 8 CHAPTERTWO: SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS................................................. 9

2.1 Assessment of key issues...................................................................... 9

2.1.1 Fragile agri-food systems..................................................................... 1O

2.1.2 Degradation of agrobiodiversity and loss of ecosystem function in agricultural and other production landscapes.................... 11

2.1.3 Inefficient food supply chains and limited access to market opportunities for the sustainable growth and development of agroecological enterprises................................................................... 12 2.1.4 Limited access and utilization of diverse, nutritious and healthy diets leading to endemic food and nutritional insecurity ..................... 13

2.1.5 Inadequate knowledge and capacity to implement agroecology practices.......................................................................... 14

2.1.6 Gender and social inequalities in the food system ............................... 15

2.1.7 Weak mainstreaming of agroecology in the existing policy and institutional frameworks ........................................................................ 15

2.2 Policy, legal and institutional Framework............................................. 16

2.2.1 International and Regional frameworks ................................................ 16

2.2.2 National frameworks............................................................................. 17

2.2.3 County level framework ........................................................................ 19 CHAPTERTHREE: POLICY STATEMENTS.................................................. 21

3.1 Transition to sustainable agri-food systems.......................................... 21

3.1.1 Policy Issue: Fragile agri-food systems................................................. 21

3.1.2 PolicyObjective..................................................................................... 21

3.1.3 PolicyStrategies...................................................................................21

3.2 Agroecosystem restoration and resilience to climate change ............. 22

3.2.1 Policy issue: Degradation of agrobiodiversity and the loss of ecosystem function in agri-food production landscapes...................... 22

3.2.2 PolicyObjective.................................................................................... 22

3.2.3 PolicyStrategies................................................................................... 22

3.3 Agroecology Enterprises and Markets................................................ 23

3.3.1 Policy Issue: Inefficient food supply chains and limited access to market opportunities for the development of agroecological enterprises............................................................................................ 23

3.3.2 PolicyObjective..................................................................................... 24

3.3.3 PolicyStrategies ................................................................................... 24

3.4 Food and nutritional security for all. ..................................................... 25

3.4.1 Policy issue: Limited access and utilization of diverse, nutritious and healthy diets impacting negatively on food and nutritional security...................................................................................................25

3.4.2 Policy Objective ..................................................................................... 25

3.4.3 PolicyStra·te·gies ....................................................................................25

3.5 Knowledge, training and capacity for agroecology transition ............. 26

3.5.1 Policy Issue: Inadequate knowledge and capacity to implement agroecology.......................................................................................... 26

3.5.2 Policyobjective......................................................................................... 26

3.5.3 PolicyStrategies........................................................................................ 26

3.6 Enabling environment for agroecology.... ................. ........... ...... .......... 27

3.6.1 Policy Issue: Weak mainstreaming of agroecology in the existing policy and institutional frameworks ...................................................... 27

3.6.2 Policy Objective ..................................................................................... 27 3.6. 3 Policy Strategies................................................................................... 27

3.7 Social equity, inclusion and governance .............................................. 28 3. 7 .1 Policy Issue: Inequitable access to resources and decision-making processes within the agri-food system................................................. 28

3.7.2 PolleyObjective.......................................................................................... 28 3.7 .3 Policy-Strategies.............................................................................................. 28 CHAPTERFOUR: IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK................................. 29

4.1 Coordination Framework and Administrative Mechanisms ................... 29

4.2 Legal and Regulatory Framework .......................................................... 32

4.3 Funding Arrangements .......................................................................... 32 CHAPTERFIVE: MONITORING AND EVALUATION................................... 34

5.1 Monitoring............................................................................................. 34

5.2 Evaluation..............................................................................................35

5.3 Reporting.............................................................................................. 36

5.4 Leaming................................................................................................ 36 CHAPTER SIX: REVIEW OF POLICY............................................................ 37 CHAPTERSEVEN: ANNEXES............................................................................ 38

7.1 Definition of Terms..................................................................................38 7 .2 References.................................................................................................... 40 Annex_Ill: Members of the Core Team on the Development of Policy............. 41 CHAPTER ONE~ INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Globally, existing food systems are not Transformation Pathway Plan which able to sustainably provide sufficient aims to make food systems healthy and nutritious food to all. In the face and nutritious; inclusive and enabling of environmental degradation, climate sustainable livelihoods for all stake- change and the burden of malnutri- holders; environmentally sustainable; tion, there is increasing recognition and resilient (UNFSS, 2021). that food systems are not meeting The National Government has also the needs of people, and their environ- developed the National Agroecology mental costs are contributing to global Strategy for Food System Transforma- climate change and biodiversity loss. tion 2024-2033 (NAS-FST). Agricul- The food security challenges are wors- ture being a devolved function, the ened by low productivity - associated NAS-FST identifies the need for with poor soil health, poor agricultural individual counties to formulate practices, deteriorating ecological agroecology frameworks, laying out status of the environment and climate how to translate global and national change, among others. goals into local actions. The recom- Food systems are made up of all mendation acknowledges that while the interconnected activities that the national and local food systems feed people, from production are interconnected, actions to achieve and processing, to packaging and transformation will vary across marketing, and their links to the regions. This is due to differences in environment. They include diets, nutritional needs, agricultural practic- cultural practices, prices and other es, ecologies, food culture, structure factors that shape the demand for of market and local environments. and consumption of food. They Makueni County is one of the 47 include any activity that produces, counties in Kenya located in the South aggregates, processes, distributes, eastern part of the Country. The consumes or dispose food. County is situated within an arid and semi-arid land (ASAL) area making it To combat these challenges, there is highly vulnerable to food insecurity an urgent need to transform food and other adverse impacts of climate systems to make them more sustain- change. The food production systems able, resilient, equitable and healthy. in the County are characterized by The recognition of food system declining productivity due to seasonal transformation as a lever of change in and erratic rainfall, water scarcity, achieving the Sustainable Develop- declining soil health, and unsustain- ment Goals (SDGs) has recently able farming practices, among others. gained increased attention. In Kenya, Makueni County has a poverty rate of the Government has developed the 44.7 percent, which is higher than the country's Food System national average of 39.8 percent (KNBS 2022). The high poverty level is attributed systems that minimize negative envi- to several factors, including low ronmental and social externalities, agricultural productivity {mainly due while actively addressing structural to water scarcity, and poor soils) and inequalities and promoting inclusive high unemployment rates. development. The approach puts To improve livelihoods and transform emphasis on participatory process- the food systems in Makueni, a robust es, combining local and scientific policy framework is required. The knowledge and focusses on the inter- County Government developed the actions between plants, animals, humans and the environment. Makueni Agroetology Policy to accel- erate and scale-up actions to strength- Agroecology gives power back to the en resilience and enhance adaptive people who grow food. It builds resil- capacity of the agri-food related sec- ience and independence, turning tors. The policy will govern, influence, farmers and communities into leaders and harmonize the much-interlinked of change. Rather than merely adjust- roles that are played by the various ing the practices of unsustainable actors in realizing the County Vision agricultural systems, agroecology "A prosperous value based county aims to transform food and agricul- with high quality of life" guided by ture by addressing root causes clarion call of "Wauni wa Kwika nesa through integrated, holistic, and na Ulungalu" interpreted as "Passion long-term solutions. This includes an to Serve with integrity".The policy has explicit focus on the social and adopted agroecology as a pathway economic dimensions of food for achieving the muchneeded trans- systems. Agroecology also places a formation. strong focus on the rights of women, Agroecology is one of the internation- youth and indig.enous peoples (HLPE, 2019). ally recognized approaches for addressing many of the challenges Agroecology is inspired by 13 agro- facing food systems in a manner that ecological principles which are orga- is eco- friendly, resilient, inclusive, nized around the three interrelated and just. Agroecological approaches organizational pillars of a sustainable favor the use of natural processes, food systems {Figure 1). improving the use of inputs available at the farm level, fostering circular lmp,:ove resource Strengthen resilience Secure social effic1en e ui / res onsibilit • Recycling • Soil health • Co-creation of knowledge • Input reduction • Animal health • Social values and diets • Biodiversity • Fairness • Synergy • Connectivity • Economic • Land and resource governance diversifieatlon • Participati0n Figure 1: Agroecological principles Souroo;HPLE2019; https:ffwww.foo.org!Rleadminluser_upfoad/hlpelhlpo_documonu/Hl.PEi_ Reports!HLPE-Report• 14_EN.pd{

1.2 Rationale for Agroecology policy for Makueni County Makueni County ·faces the triple also presented food safety challeng- burden of malnutrition and food es. insecurity reflected in coexistence of The food security challenges in the undernutrition (stunting, wasting and County are worsened by low produc- underweight), micronutrient deficien- tivity which is associated with poor cies, and over-nutrition (overweight soil health, poor agricultural practices, and obesity}. In 2022, the stunting deteriorating status of the environ- level for under five children stood at ment, and climate change. In Makue- 19.8 percent (Figure 2), which is above ni, the challenge is more severe, the national average of 17.6 percent being an ASAL region, characterized (KNBS and ICF,2023). In addition, only by water scarcity, low and erratic rain- 26.9 percent of women aged 15-49 fall, high temperatures, and fragile met the minimum dietary diversity ecosystems. (MOD) level compared to the national average of 48.5 percent. At the same The County, through the Participatory time, there have been increased cases Climate Risk Assessment (PCRA), of non-communicable and other mapped and ranked various risks and chronic diseases, some of which are hazards including drought, livestock associated with unhealthy diets, and crop pests and diseases, including cardiovascular diseases, environmental degradation, human cancer, and diabetes. diseases, pollution, and human-wild- life conflict. The assessment also iden- Unfortunately, the traditional crops which are drought tolerant and tified vulnerable groups who are most at risk, including the elderly, women, nutrient dense have largely been abandoned. In addition, the over- children, persons with disabilities, youth, single parents, orphans, use/abuse of agrochemical inputs has widows and widowers, and child-headed families. ,::,.,..,...,1..,·1t11tw ~◄ ~.... ,,... ________ .,. '"'' J'Ji! ... U •I.IO Noel,Jl'II W "'ll,lci•~11 II I t<>•- ' . ,. !II..,,.,•~ Dn'Cl"'!J ch1:iUI"'. fU'h,,....., 0 10 20 3~ so ,,,::,10 0 5 10 lS 20 15 p.,'Cl!nt Mi) P.,.,.n1(%) Figure 2: Nutritional indicators for Makueni Figure 3: Distribution of poverty rates in County (KNBS and ICF, 2023). Makueni County (KNBS, 2022) The County has an overall poverty rate a transition towards more productive, of 44.2 percent, affecting 469,000 sustainable and inclusive food persons (Figure 3), which is higher systems. This is aligned to the UN than the national average of 39.8 Sustainable Development Goals: percent (KNBS 2022). Food poverty is specifically, SDG 3 (Good health and also prevalent in the County, with 31.3 wellbeing), SDG 10 (reduced inequali- percent of households affected, ties}, SDG 12 (Responsible consump- largely due to low agricultural tion and production}, SDG 13 (climate productivity caused by unfavorable change), SDG 15 (life on land) and climatic conditions. This has led to an SDG 17 (Partnership for the Goals). over-reliance on food aid, with many The transformation of food systems households experiencing food towards sustainability requires a insecurity and some often skipping robust policy framework to accelerate meals, contributing to high rates of and scale-up actions to strengthen malnutrition. resilience and enhance adaptive In view of this, tackling malnutrition capacity in the agri-food related and food insecuri.ty through the sectors. In Kenya, the existing policy promotion and consumption of framework including Kenya Vision diverse, nutritious foods is essential 2030 and the Agricultural Policy 2021 for the well-being of the population. acknowledge the potential of agro- Doing so will not only address imme- ecology in supporting the food diate challenges but also set Makueni system transformation. County on the right path towards The Constitution of Kenya (2010) sustainable development, ensuring a recognizes sustainable development prosperous and resilient future for its as an important value and principle of communities. Delaying action risks governance and grants the right to worsening the current conditions, adequate food and a clean and makihg immediate intervention essen- healthy environment to aII citizens tial for the County's future growth and (Article 42 and 43). This policy is also stability. aligned to the Agricultural Sector Agroecology has gained significant Transformation and Growth Strategy recognition as one of the pathways for {2019-2029}, a ten-year nationwide food systems transformation. The UN sectoral do,ument that aims at Food Systems Summit (2021), the developing and transforming the United Nations Framework Conven- agricultural sector in order to achieve tion on Climate Change (UNFCCC) what is established by Article 43 of Conference of Parties (COP 28 & 29), the Constitution which states that and the Kunming-Montreal Global "Every person has the right to be free Biodiversity Framework (GBF) are from hunger, and to have adequate among the global frameworks which food of acceptable qual recognize a groecology as an approach to facilitate ity". To reach the overall goal, it establishes The County is predominantly arid and three areas of focus for the first five semi-arid, characterized by frequent years as follows: (i) increase small-scale droughts, declining agricultural farmer, pastoralist and fisher-folk productivity and degradation of key incomes; (ii)increase agricultural output ecosystems. These challenges have and value addition; and (iii)increase made it increasingly difficult to sustain household food resilience.The formula- food production and improve the tion of this policy is in line with the well-being of local communities. The NAS-FST (2024-2033). policy is framed in the context of the Makueni County has a number of food system transformation pathway plan and constitutional aspiration of frameworks supporting the agri-food sector including: Makueni County the righto to food and putting the Agriculture and Livestock Policy 2021, country on a trajectory towards sustainable development. Makueni County Co-operative Act, 2017 and Makueni County Environ- The implementation of the Agroecol- ment and Climate Change Policy ogy Policy will contribute to agri-food 2021. However, the County does not systems transformation across many have a specific policy or strategy on domains including food and nutrition, agroecology. In addition, agroecolog- health, environment and climate ical initiatives are fragmented and not change adaptation and mitigation, properly anchored in the policies economic and social cultural stated above. There is need to outcomes (Figure 4). strengthen mechanisms for consulta- tion and cooperation within County government departments, non-state agencies, private sector, value chain actors, farmers associations and groups to ensure an agroecological transformation of food systems. The Makueni Agroecology Policy presents an opportunity to holistically address food and nutrition security, while simultaneously providing bene- fits of climate adaptation, biodiversity and water conservation, ecosystem resilience, sustainable livelihoods and human rights. The County is vulnerable to food insecurity, malnutrition, and climate change. Human health • Improved tood safety will lead to lower health risksfrom pesticide exposure. as well as o. reduclion in lhe use of antibiotics and growth hormones. This. In tum, will help reduce the healthcare costs associated with treating non-<:ornn1unicablediseases ln1provements In naturalcopltol • ln'creased soil water re"tention. Improved water tables, and reduced soil erosion- together with enhanced organic maHer--con1ribu·te to greater carbon sequestration and support Increased agricullural produciivlty and enhanced agrobiodiverslty ImprovementsIn socio!capitol • Stronger social organizations at loco] level. new rules and n9rms for managing collective na_lurdlresources.and better connectedness to policy lnstllulions. ImprovementsIn human capitol I • This covers local capacity to solve problems and o higher status for womeri. Agroecotogicol Inputs and outputs creoles green /abs for the youth. Agroecalogy lowers production costs by enabling formM to produce more with fewer e.xl'ernol inputs. ' Preservallon of biodiversity • Biodiversitycon~ervotion allows for the suslainoble use of a wide range of crop and livestock varieties. By enhancing ecosystem resilience, res1oring native flora and fauna. and rnaintaining critical ecosystem services. increased diversity contributes to improved nutmion and food securi"ty.If also promotes local autonomy and sovereignly over food and seeds. empowering formers and communi1ies to shape reslrient food systems. Figure 4: Possible outcomes for agri-food systems transformation

1.3 Policy goals and objectives This Policy aims to guide the agroeco- It aligns with the Kenya's Government logical transition in Makueni County, priority of food and nutrition security facilitating the sustainable transforma- as a key pillar in the national develop- tion of the food system to ensure food ment agenda and constitutional aspi- security, improved nutrition, climate-re- rations for sustainable development silient livelihoods, and social inclusion as well as the aspiration to achieve a for all. resilient economy in Makueni County. The Policy objectives are as follows; 1 To transition to an agri-food system that embraces ecological practices for sustainable production and healthy ecosystems. 2 To restore agrobiodiversity and enhance ecosystem function for increased resilience and sustainability. 3 To promote agroecological enterprise development for improved livelihoods and inclusive socio-economic development in Makueni County. 4 To promote healthy, diverse, safe, nutritious and culturally appropriate diets for all. 5 To enhance the capacity and knowledge of extension service providers and relevant stakeholders for sustainable agroecological transition. 6 To create an enabling environment for mainstreaming and scaling up of agro- ecological practices in Makueni County. 7 To promote inclusivity and equitable access to resources for improved gover- nance of the agri-food system.

1.4 Scope of the Makueni Agroecology Policy The Policy outlines clear goals and The Policy is applicable to all the food objectives and strategies for an agro- system related sectors including; ecological transformation of the food system in Makueni County. It fosters • Agriculture, Livestock Fisheries and inter-sectoral collaboration across Cooperatives,; County departments, non-state • Health Services; agencies, the private sector, and • Land, Environment, Forestry and other public bodies to promote the Natural Resources; transition to an eco-friendly, resilient, • Water, Irrigation and Sanitation; and just food system. It emphasizes • Trade and Industry; the need to embrace ecological • Finance and Planning; principles, ensuring the regenerative • Research, Education and Training; use of natural resources, minimizing and the use of external inputs, promoting • Culture, Gender and Social Services closed cycles with minimal negative externalities, and addressing social inequalities.

1.5 Structure of the Agroe-cologyPolicy The Policy is organized into six sections, each designed to ensure clear approach to the policy's development and execution. The document begins with an Introduction to set the context, outlines the underlying causes of the problem and the rationale for the policy. This is followed by a situational analy- sis that examines the current state and challenges in the food systems in Makueni. It then presents the policy statements, which articulate what the Government has committed to do to achieve the agroecological transition. The implementation framework outlines the coordination and administration mechanisms for policy implementation, while the monitoring and evaluation section details how progress will be tracked and assessed. The last section describes the process for periodic updates and revisions, and finally, the Annexes provide additional supporting information and resources. CHAPTERTWO: SITUATIONALANALYSIS This chapter summarizes the key convened by the County Govern- issues affecting Makueni County's ment as summarized in Figure 2.1 agri-food system and how addressing and 2.2. The process involved active these would support agroecology engagement of relevant County transition. The chapter also presents departments:- Agriculture and Live- the policy, legal and institutional stock, Health, and Environment framework that supports agri-food alongside farmer representatives systems. and various development partners. The status and trend of each of the

2.1 Assessment of key issues issues is discussed. The Makueni County Agroecology Policy is anchored on seven (7) key issues identified during a participatory multi-stakeholder consultations Underlyingfood systemchallengesin Makueni Degradation of Inefficient food supply Fragile agri-food agrobrodiversity and systems chains and limited l0ssof ec0system access to market function . . P1'avolence of frequent droug"11CM um,Habl<> orid t.'<l a,enl Col.l'l!Y a ·l;a, !o,e,,l • eover ol 5.1 po,cen, and tooe ln~flcien1 laod n10r<a1>oue10 week C:OCYdnallon, fmgmented wpply cho1ns. errotlc ronfall c:ovorof 12A/ oe,cent ol'ldNiJhrronsoctlon cosiu. .. Oeclioino""' heaUhwm, ftam 200:II~ 20~:Moi.voni I.owcommordoimHonwllh nearly 60ltof form, hm(ng soil <11t1>eril!nced o ,,,,, c.l\ange cl 011!y2' psc<!l'J or Pl«Juce 1)1-ibelow l.5 ~ 11 ho 1-9.0llj n lrv<>cover beng mc,\;ele<I. WotfJl-~dV fWCJer Oodln'n9 producftvl:Y du~ IC ovo,lclohl,vo ot 1t489 m3 per pooroc:cessto~rtliod sa,_-d low produchv1ty combined doy ogaiml WO!otdomo~d ol wlfh low qvollly prod1,cl1 • ond oilier Incur, A0.79•m' P"'dOy Figure 2. 1: Issues affecting Makueni County's Agri-Food System, 2025 Underlyingfood systemchallengesIn Makuenl Limited access and lhadequote knowledge Gender and social utilization of diverse, and c<Z1pacityto Implement rnequalitie.sin the r:iutritiousand healthy ogroecology food system diets Un<lornulltrlonIn chidrnn: Cum,nl 1>Xl""'1on1y1tomhin st-unling!20'll , wa,tlng (4'.11.1 not lultylntog101ed O:sproporrianaro access 10 ond undeiweighl (9S) p,oducll"" mset,, ogoec:ol~cal p,oclice.. On1yU.1'l'ofwomon (15-•9 loc:..:of adequate dQto on yean) rnal rne rrinimvm agro,oeology adoption to ~llgh POVcny re le, CIT>Ol)Q dc,iory aivor,,ly IMDOJvs troc:kP<C'll"IIISS and guido conc:itl g10<1ps •&Sll.for •:•nvo polcy dec:WQro 7m of 1,ous.enold1In MQlcuer1I N~d 101o COClclMled Vanout form, Of a,pnrtenc<?dmodotare o,.1an&lon,yitom oc,ou marginall:otlon balod on hungur.will, 5.23': facing aubfic. pli',a!e, and gondet. OCJO.IOCS.and olhet ,.,.,...,nun;;••in 2023 commurlty -!co,cr,far. klcftr. Figure 2. 2: Issues Affecting Makueni County's Agri-Food System, 2025

2.1.1 Fragile agri-food systems Makueni County is a fragile ecosys- and with most farms having low tem, most of it being ASAL and prone organic carbon (TOC) and inadequate to frequent droughts due to unreliable nitrogen. and erratic rainfall. The delayed onset Access to affordable inputs remains a of rains and early cessation as well as key factor of declining productivity. prolonged dry spells have had a nega- For instance, in the green grams tive impact on the production value chain, certified seed require- systems, which are largely rain-fed ment for the County stands at (Government of Makueni County, 903,352 kg against a supply of 2023) . The agri-food systems are 361,341 kg (Government of Makueni characterized by declining productivi- County, 2024) . Across the value ty in crops, livestock and fisheries - chains, most farmers use poor quality associated with factors such as high seeds, which results in low yield, even costs of inputs, inadequate extension with the application of high levels of services, increased pests and disease synthetic fertilizers. The overdepen- incidence and, declining soil health dence on external inputs limits the (Government of Makueni County, use of local indigenous knowledge 2023). and innovation, and is associated with Samples analyzed from some sites in the loss of biodiversity and green- the County indicate that nearly 60 per- house gas (GHG) emissions. cent of farms have acidic soils with pH below 5.5 l.pdf accos«>d GoV()rnmentof M•kuenl County (2023) h1tps-J/maku"11Lgo.l<e/,andbOJ<l.-to/l/les/2024/11l/C1DP•lll•2023·2027- 12th June 2025 Govo,nmenl or Makueni County \20241https://mbku~ni.go.kelsondbOJ(/•itolli1o$/2024/01/AGRICULTURE -NEWS LETERER-2023-2024.pd( acce.. 0d 12til June 2025 Ecosystem degradation has also led to The County is water scarce, character- increased cases of human-wildlife ised by poor access among the conflicts. In 2023, stray elephants households; water availability in the destroyed about 1,000 hectares of County is estimated at 14,489 m3 per farmland. Rangeland ecosystem day against water demand of 40,794 restoration is key for maintaining m3 per day (Makueni County Vision human-wildlife balance. For sustain- 2025) . In addition to scarcity, water able development to be achieved, it is pollution is a major problem in the crucial to harmonize the three core County. The causes are varied and elements of economic growth, social include discharge of effluent from Inclusion, and environmental upstream sources, oil spillage, solid protection. waste, agrochemicals, poor agricul- tural practices (Makueni County In view of this, adoption of agroecolo- Environment and Climate Change gy will simultaneously promote Policy, 2021 }. This situation calls for sustainable agricultural production protection, management and and environmental protection, restoration of the existing surface and thereby increasing resilience of food ground water resources. systems.

2.1.2 Degradation of agrobio A Restoration Opportunities Assess- diversity and loss of ecosystem ment Methodology study (ROAM} function in agricultural and undertaken in 2018 identified seven other production landscapes restoration options, namely: - affor- Makueni County has a forest cover of estation and reforestation of natural 5.1 percent and tree cover of 12.5 forests; agroforestry; riparian land percent. The County's gazetted forest restoration; road buffer zone resto- covers 150.2 square kilometers, and ration; rangeland rehabilitation; plan- the non-gazetted forest covers 76 tation forests and rehabilitation of square kilometers (Makueni County natural forests. Based on this data, the Climate Risk Assessment Report largest opportunity for landscape 2023). From 2000 to 2020, Makueni restoration is in agroforestry (44%), experienced a net change of -811 ha silvi-pastoral and rangeland rehabilita- (-9.0%) in tree cover. The decline is tion (32%) and plantation forests associated with deforestation, illegal (19%) . grazing and logging, and forest deg- In view of this, agroecology promotes radation. Other activities such as ripar- restoration, conservation, protection ian encroachment, sand harvesting, and management for household and and riverine vegetation destruction community resilience. Agroecology are coritributing to forest and land emphasizes application of degradation. nature-based solutions which are effective, long-term, cost-efficient approach in tackling sustainable land and water resources management and climate change.

2.1.3 Inefficient markets and limited opportunities for the growth and development of agroecological enterprises Food markets in Makueni County are Investing in local food markets will generally inefficient, characterized by promote enhanced access to weak coordination, fragmented nutritious and diverse foods for supply chains, and high transaction consumers, while increasing and costs, which limit market access, keeping incomes within the local reduce profitability for producers, and economy and empowering communi- hinder the overall development of the ties to maintain control over their agri-food sector in the County. food systems. Additionally, strength- ening regional markets and labelling The County produces a range of agro- can help Makueni County create a ecologically produced food products stable demand for agroecologically with high potential for both domestic and export markets. These include, produced food, benefiting both cereals (millet, sorghum), pulses producers and consumers alike. (green grams, pigeon peas, beans), To improve access to markets, the fruits (mango, watermelon, banana, Government of Makueni County has and pixies), vegetables (cow peas) and made strides in supporting food animal products. However, most (82%) markets. By 2023, the County households practice subsistence farm- constructed and rehabilitated 43 ing, with only 22 percent of produce market sheds and connected 16 being marketed (Government of market sheds to solar lighting and 12 Makueni County, 2023). Low produc- to electricity to increase trading hours tivity combines with low quality (CIDP 2023-2027). products (low compliance with sanitary and phytosanitary standards), The market hygiene has been lack of product differentiation, low improved through installing 60 water agribusiness skills, and limited market tanks to 30 market sheds and public information limit market access and toilets in 24 markets. To support the penetration. agroecological transition, there is need to promote development of Moreover, a weak cooperative local markets that emphasize supply movement reduces access to credit, of agroecological products. farm inputs, collective bargaining, as well as establishment of agri-food enterprises. http.://malruenl,go,k&/sandbox/site/llle./2023/11/Makuenl-County•V1$lon·2025,pcl£ hltp,.l/moku,,ni,go,k&/sandhox/sit~/mes/2023/11/Moku~nf-County,f OlAREP,lotMt•l •1,pdf

2.1.4 Limited access and utilization of diverse, nutritious and healthy diets leading to endemic food and nutritional insecurity Makueni County faces a triple burden The County Nutrition Action Plan of malnutrition and food insecurity, (CNAP} targets the reduction of the associated with undernutrition prevalence of stunting among chil- (stunting, wasting and underweight), dren under five years by 40%, child- m icronutrient deficiencies, and hood wasting to less than 5%, child- over-nutrition (overweight and obesi- hood underweight to less than 10%, ty). and reduce malnutrition among older children and adolescent by 15%. According to the Kenya Demographic Health Survey 2014, the prevalence of The 2023 County SMART report stunting, wasting and underweight in revealed that 20% of households in Makueni County was 25.1%, 2.1 % and Makueni experienced moderate 10.2% respectively for children under hunger, with 5.23% facing severe five years. In 2022, stunting, wasting, hunger. While more than half (58.9%) underweight and overweight, in the of households consumed food from same cohort, was reported to be 20%, over five food groups in the 24 hours 4%, 9% and 3% respectively, indicat- prior to the survey, the majority of ing marginal gains in nutrition indica- consumption was from cereals (92%), tors (KOHS and ICF, 2023). pulses (60.9%), and milk products (70.8%). Positively, 62.8% of house- Among women aged 15-49 years, only holds consumed vegetables, but only 26.9 percent met the Minimum 34.9% consumed fruits, despite the Dietary Diversity (MOD) level, County's diverse fruit production. compared to the national average of 48.5 percent. The MOD indicates the The County has also seen a dietary proportion of women of reproductive shift towards processed foods, lead- age (15-49 years) who consume a ing to a decrease in the consumption variety of food groups that are critical of traditional, nutrient-rich foods like for their health and well-being, partic- sorghum, sweet potatoes, fruits and ularly during pregnancy and lactation. vegetables, which are important for In addition, only 39.9 percent children nutrition and ecosystem resilience. aged 6-23 months in County attained the MOD level with only 22.7 percent of these children consuming zero veg- etables or fruits (Government of Makueni County, 2023}.

2.1.5 Inadequate knowledge and capacity to implement agroecology practices The Government of Makueni County who were involved in promoting the has been implementing the Enhanced adoption of e-extenslon services Extension Programme to accelerate through farmer profiling and training agricultural production, productivity among other operational support and profitability through coordinated services (CIDP 2023-2027). extension services, enhanced linkag- Despite some improvements, the es for input supply and structured current extension system is still way agro-marketing. Through this pro- below the FAO recommended 1:400 gramme, the proportion of farming staff to farmer ratio and has not fully households rece1v1ng extension integrated agroecological practices, services increased from 30 percent in limiting widespread adoption. Further- 2018 to 60 percent. more, the lack of adequate data on The Staff to Farmer Ratio improved agroecology adoption in Makueni from 1:1,416 in 2018 to 1: 1,357 by makes it difficult to track progress and the end of 2021. This improvement is guide food system decisions. There- partly attributed to recruitment of 32 fore, there is a need for a coordinated, agricultural field extension officers and demand-driven, and client-responsive 240 Community Extension Volunteers extension system that integrates (CEVs) public, private, and community-led services while leveraging technologies such as e-extension.

2.1.6 Gender and social inequalities in the food system Inequitable access to resources, The underlying barriers to an equita- decision-making, and disparities ble food system include dispropor- based on gender, age, and social class tionate access to productive assets, hinder marginalized groups' full high poverty rates among certain participation in food systems in groups, and vari.ous forms of margin- Makueni. Makueni women farmers alization based on gender, social undertake the majority of workload class, age, race, disability, ethnicity on the farm such as tilling, planting, and other factors. These disparities weeding and harvesting (CIAT 2025). prevent full participation and benefit Many men often work off-farm, with from the food system, hindering inclu- women bearing the brunt of daily sive and sustainable development. agricultural activities but do not make key decisions touching on the 2.1.7 Weak mainstreaming of agro utilization of the value of their toil ecology in existing policy and e.g., on the sale and use of income institutional frameworks from agricultural produce due to Makueni County has made progress in cultural and social norms. creating an enabling environment for sectoral growth. However, weak The Makueni County Gender Policy coordination among key departments identifies gender inequality and limits the effective implementation of discrimination as a major obstacle to agroecological principles. Although socio-economic and political develop- relevant policies exist, agroecology is ment of its people, and a serious not well integrated into the CIDP, impediment to development that annual work plans, budgets, or affects the whole County and thus monitoring frameworks. Strengthen- needs to be eliminated through ing interdepartmental collaboration appropriate individual and collective with clear roles and responsibilities as strategies. well as enhancing partnerships with The CIDP emphasizes the Govern- other state and non-state actors is ment of Makueni County's commit- essential for the successful and ment to equitable stakeholder sustainable transition to agroecology. engagement and the need for inclu- sion by addressing equity gaps across all sectors. The Public Participation Policy ensures that all citizens, partic- ularly marginalized groups, are active- ly involved in the design and imple- mentation of sustainable agricultural programs.

2.2 Policy, Legal and Institutional Framework

2.2.1 International and regional frameworks Globally, agroecology is increasingly Agroecology offers a unified, holistic recognized as a transformative approch that supports the goals of pathway for sustainable food system all three Rio Conventions, namely the change. International frameworks UNFCCC on climate action, the U.N. like the United Nations' Sustainable Convention on Biological Diversity, Development Goals (SDGs), particu- and the UNCCD on compating Ian larly SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG degradation. 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), and SDG 13 (Climate Target 10 of the Kunming-Montreal Action), align with agroecology's prin- Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) ciples of sustainability, resilience, and specifically focuses on ensuring areas equity. Agroecology can help reduce under agriculture, aquaculture, and poverty (SDG 1) and inequality (SDG forestry are sustainably managed 10), by contributing to decent work through agroecology and other (SDG 8) and increasing access to food nature-based solutions. Kenya is (SDG 2). In addition, SDG 12 on sus- signatory to the Nagoya Protocol on tainable production and consumption access to genetic resources and the is a major vehicle for ensuring that we fair and equitable sharing of benefits have sustainable agri-food systems. arising from their utilization. Regulating and reducing emissions The UN Climate Conference (COP 27) and promoting renewable energy held in 2022 recognized the priority of (SDG 13), conservation, promoting safeguarding food security and ending marine diversity and regulating fishing hunger, and vulnerabilities of food practices (SDG 14) and reversing production systems to the adverse man-made deforestation and desertifi- impacts (UNFCCC, 2022). While COP cation to sustain all life on earth (SDG 28 did not explicitly mention agroecol- 15) are also key goals for driving the ogy, it supported related principles agroecology agenda. Adopting agro· through the Emirates Declaration on ecology as an agricultural approach Sustainable Agriculture and Food will help Makueni County shift to a Systems. sustainable and resilient path that pro• vides enough, safe and nutritious food The COP 29 provided a more focused while respecting human rights. platform for agroecology, emphasizing its critical role in climate action and the transformation of food systems. This growing recognition underscores the need to integrate agroecology into national and global climate policy frameworks. https:Jfollloncobtovorsityciot.orglsrorios/silont·suuggle-womon--09,iculwro-bGoring•w<>19ht•every-wk Additionally, the Paris Agreement Food security exists when all people, (2015) explicitly recognize the role of at all times, have physical, social and agroecological principles and practic- economic access to sufficient, safe es in addressing climate change and and nutritious food that meets their supporting the transition to low-emis- dietary needs and food preferences sion, climate-resilient development for an active and healthy life (FAO (IPCC, 2023). 2002). At the regional level, the Malabo Every Kenyan has the right to a clean Declaration (2014), under the African and healthy environment and to have Union (AU), highlights the importance the environment protected for the of sustainable agricultural practices benefit of present and future- genera- and funding, with agroecology play- tions (Article 42a), but also have obli- ing a key role in achieving food securi- gations to protect and conserve the ty, improving rural livelihoods, and environment (Article 69(2). Parliament promoting climate resilience. is to enact legislation that recognize and protect the ownership of indige- Additionally, the Comprehensive nous seeds and plant varieties, their Africa Agriculture Development Pro- genetic and diverse characteristics gramme (CAADP) encourages the and their use by the communities of adoption of agroecological principles Kenya (Article 11(3) b. to enhance food sovereignty, while regional movements such as the The constitution recognizes that the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in National and County Governments Africa (AFSA) advocate for agroecolo- are distinct and interdependent, gy as a means to foster equitable, conducting their mutual relations climate-resilient, and biodiversi- based on consultation and coopera- ty-friendly agricultural systems. tion (Article 6(2). Agriculture and These frameworks collectively under- aspects of the environment are devolved functions. score agroecology as essential for transforming our food systems to The national goverhment is respon- meet current and future challenges. sible for agricultural policy develop-

2.2.2 National frameworks ment, while County Governments are responsible for agriculture, including The right to food is enshrined in the crop and animal husbandry, livestock Constitution of Kenya. Every person sale yards, county abattoirs, plant and has the right to be free from hunger, animal disease control, and fisheries and to have adequate food of accept- (Fourth Schedule). able quality (Article 43(1)c), while every child has the right to basic nutrition, shelter and health care (Article 53(1)c). htrps:/lmp(n.kl!bsotke/down/oadlagrocu/wra/,policy•2021/ hr:rpsi/llci/1mo.go.ke,wp-contenr/uplCUJds/20Z4/l T/Nationaf-Ag10ecology-Str•tl!l1Y-for-food-Sysrem•Tronsformbtlon-20242033. Protection of the environment and The strategy also encourages counties natural resources is a national func- to develop county level policies tion, while implementation of specific tailored to their specific contexts. national government policies on Developing county specific agroecol- natural resources and environmental ogy policies will ensure that each conservation, including soil and water county adapts the agroecological conservation, and forestry are transition to local needs, priorities, devolved to the counties. Trade devel- and challenges. opment and regulation, including To support implementation of the markets, trade licenses, fair trading NAS-FST, several institutional mecha- practices, local tourisn,, and coopera- nisms have been established. These tive societies are devolved functions. include the Agroecology Summit to The Agricultural Policy 2021 recogniz- provide overall policy guidance on es agroecology as one of the agroecology implementation in approaches to dealing with climate c:ollaboration with the Council of change and seeks to promote Governors (COG). It's made up of agroecology farming practices for Principal Secretaries (PSs} of relevant crops, livestock and fisheries. The line Ministries, National Treasury, policy explicitly recommends the representatives of development promotion of agroecology among partners, National Farmers' Associa- other nature-based solutions as way tion, and the lntersectoral Forum on of achieving sustainability and Agrobiodiversity and Agroecology resilience of food systems. (ISFAA) - the secretariat of the Summit. This justifies the development of an agroecology strategy as way of The National Technical Committee on realizing these aspirations. To opera- Agroecology has the responsibility of tionalize the Agriculture Policy, the coordinating the mainstreaming and National Agroecology Strategy for implementation of agroecology Food System Transformation policies and practices across all (2024-2033) was developed and sectors and counties. officially launched in November 2024. The Strategy notes that there is limited integration of agroecological approaches in the design of food system interventions.

2.2.3 County level frameworks. A number of frameworks support the agri-food related sectors (Agriculture, Livestock, Environment, Water, Forestry, Trade) in the County. The main legal frameworks that are linked to agroecology are listed in Table 2. Table 2: County policy framework linked to agroecology Framework Description Makueni County The County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP) aligns Integrated with agroecology by enhancing extension services Development Plan through private sector and NGO involvement, promot- (CIDP) ing sustainable agricultural practices to improve food 2023-2027 security and reduce poverty. Its focus on water manage- ment, including the construction of dams for irrigation, supports climate-resilient farming. Furthermore, the CIDP's commitment to decentralization and inclusive planning ensures that agroecological principles are inte- grated at the community level, empowering farmers with locally adapted, sustainable solutions. Makueni County The strategy recognizes the declining biodiversity and Agriculture and the need to balance the protection of biodiversity as Livestock Policy agricultural systems modernize. The strategy puts 2021 emphasis on commercial, large scale, and modern agri- culture with a view to securing sustainable food security and mitigating against climate change impacts. The development of an agroecology policy would provide specific actions to achieving sustainability in agriculture and food systems. Makueni Environ- Provides a holistic framework to guide the management ment and Climate of the environment, natural resources and address issues Change Policy faced by Makueni County due to a changing climate. It {ECCP), 2021 further ensures that the linkage between the environ- ment and poverty reduction is integrated in all county government processes and institutions in order to facili- tate and realize sustainable development at all levels. Framework Description Makueni County Recognizes the need to strengthen cooperatives The Co-operative Act Makueni County Co-operative and provides mecha- 2017 nisms to guide the development and sustainability of the Makueni County cooperative sector to optimally contribute towards social and economic development. The Act provides for establishment of a Co-operative Development Fund at 2% of the total county develop- ment budget. Makueni County The Makueni County Climate Change Act provides a Climate Change comprehensive framework and mechanisms for mobiliz- Act2022 ing and facilitating collaboration among the county gov- ernh1ent, communities, and various stakeholders to effectively respond to climate change. It focuses on implementing appropriate adaptation and mitigation measures, ensuring that local communities are equipped to address the challenges posed by climate change. Makueni County The MCCAP is a 5-year Action Plan that provides mecha- Climate Change nisms for mainstreaming climate change into all sectors Action Plan and the County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP). 2023-2027 The action plan is developed in line with the National County Climate Chang.e Action Plan. Makueni County The Policy aims at the establishment and strengthening Disaster Manage- of disaster management institutions, creating and also ment and Special recognizing the partnerships that subsist in this endeav- Programmes Policy or, networking and mainstreaming disaster risk reduction {2021) in the development process of the County in order to strengthen the resilience of vulnerable groups to cope with potential disasters. Overall, while relevant policies exist, agroecology remains insufficiently reflected in the CIDP, County Spatial Plans, education and extension systems, annual work plans, budgets, and monitoring frameworks. This underscores the need for a dedicated agroecology policy to institutionalize its principles, enhance interdepartmental coordination, and ensure effective integration into county planning and ih1plementation. CHAPTERTHREE:POLICYSTATEMENTS This chapter presents the policy 3.1.2 PolicyObjective options for facilitating agroecological To transition to an agri-food system transition in Makueni County. The that embraces ecological practices for policy direction arises from the sustainable production and healthy challenges highlighted and the ecosystems. opportunities for addressing them.

3.1 Transitionto sustainableagri- 3.1.3 Policy Strategies food systems The County Government will; Makueni County faces challenges 1. Promote integrated soil health and including erratic rainfall, soil degrada- fertility management to reduce tion, and overreliance on synthetic dependency on synthetic fertilizers agrochemicals to manage pests and in the County. diseases. The excessive use of 2. Support practices that enhance fertilizers has also been associated on-farm diversification through with nutrient pollution of water crop, livestock, trees, and fisheries bodies. Studies on soil fertility have combination for healthy food, shown low soil organic carbon income, and ecosystem resto- leading to fragile soils with reduced ration. water holding capacity and increased vulnerability to erosion. 3. Promote conservation of indige- nous crop and animal genetic Access to affordable inputs remains a resources for resilience. key driver of declining productivity. Overdependence on external inputs 4. Promote the conservation and utili- also limits use of local indigenous zation of indigenous seeds among knowledge and innovation. thus, stakeholders and linkages with the adoption of agroecology can simulta- National and County Agricultural neously promote sustainable agricul- Research Systems including estab- tural production and environmental lishment and support to farm- protection, thereby increasing er-managed community seed resilience of our food systems. banks.

3.1.1 Policy Issue:Fragile agri-food 5. Create awareness, build capacity, systems and behavior change by enhancing and incentivizing the adoption of The County agri-food system is frag- agroecological practices such as ile owing to various factors including use of biopesticides and biofertiliz- poor agricultural practices, water ers by farmers and other food scarcity, largely ASAL landscapes, system actors, including through climate change, human-animal con- subsidy programs. flict, and unsustainable exploitation of natural resources. 6. Strengthen mechanisms for pro- Adoption of agroecology will duction, distribution and use of promote resilience through resto- locally produced agroecolocal/or- ration, conservation, protection and ganic inputs to reduce dependency management of natural resources. on external inputs and agro-chemi- 3.2.1 Policy issue: Degradation of - cals. agrobiodiversity and the loss 7. Enhance monitoring systems, of ecosystem function in agri- embrace use of early warning food production landscapes signals, and rapid response strate- The degradation of agrobiodiversity gies for pests and disease manage- and the loss of ecosystem services in ment including invasive and alien agricultural landscapes undermine . species. resilience therefore comprom1s1ng food security and long-term sustain- 8. Promote natural and community- ability. based conflict management strate- gies to protect farms from wildlife 3.2.2 Policy Objective encroachment. To restore agrobiodiversity and

3.2 Agroecosystem restoration and enhance ecosystem function for resilience to climate change increased resilience and sustainability Makueni County is largely an ASAL, 3.2.3 Policy Strategies facing low forest and tree over. In the The CoL1ntyGovernment will; period, 2000 to 2020, the County experienced a net change of - 811 ha 1. Facilitate adoption of technologies, (-9.0%) in tree cover. This change was innovations and management associated with deforestation, illegal practices, that enhance water grazing and logging and, forest harvesting, storage and water use degradation. At the same time, the efficiency in agricultural, livestock County is affected by a number of and fishery systems hazards namely drought, flash floods 2. Integrate local and indigenous and strong winds, which are knowledge and practices in partici- associated with climate risks. This in patory innovation for landscape turn increases the vulnerability of rehabilitation and restoration commun1t1es and weakens their capacity to manage such shocks. 3. Promote partnerships and initiatives to support carbon Water availability remains a challenge sequestration and development of as the County has a deficit of 25,000 carbon credit market for the benefit m3 /day. In addition, average distance of all stakeholders in the agri-food to nearest water source is SKm, indi- system cating poor access to water as well as potential for increased water conflicts. 4. Promote establishment of nature- based enterprises such as apicultu- re, silkworm, black soldier fly, azolla production, vermicomposting and . conservancies 5. Facilitate landscape restoration key hindrance to effective food and conservation by rehabilitation access and distribution.According to of degraded ecosystems such as the Kenya Organic Data Survey rangelands, riverine ecosystems, (2024), there is a significant demand and forests through communi- for various organic products that ty-based groups such as Water currently surpasses the available Resources Users Associations supply, presenting an opportunity for (WRUAS) and Community Forest organic farmers and producers to Associations (CFAs). expand their operations and meet the growing market needs. 6. Promote risk management strate- gies (transfer, reduction, resto- Despite the growing demand for ration and reserves) including crop agroecological products, challenges and livestock insurance and, with certification costs, market and strengthening climate early warn- distribution and supply chain ing systems management exist. To promote e quitable access to nutritious and 7. Support climate actions that are diverse foods, there is need to invest responsive to the needs of youth, in local food systems where markets women, elderly and persons with provide farmers and consumers with disability. better access to food, ensuring com- 8. Establish buffer zones of vegeta- munities have control over their food. tion along water bodies to filter Agroecology puts the aspirations and runoff and help prevent pollution needs of those who produce, and eutrophication of water distribute and consume food at the bodies. heart of food systems.

3.3.1 Policy Issue: Inefficient markets 9. Identify, map and regulate zones and opportunities for the for agricultural practices in terms of development of agroecological type of resource, systems, climatic enterprises and ecological diversities while minimizing subdivision of land as Inefficient food supply chains such as part of County Spatial Planning high transaction costs and weak linkages constrain effective food 10. Enforce regulations and promote distribution and access. Additionally, sustainable practices to reduce limited access to market opportuni- water pollution and protect ties impedes the sustainable growth resources. and scaling of agroecological

3.3 Agroecology Enterprises enterprises, restricting their ability to and Markets thrive and contribute to equitable Inefficiencies in food supply chains, socio-economic development in including high transaction costs and Makueni County. weak linkages, remain a

3.3.2 Policy Objective To promote agroecological enterprise 7. Develop incentives for young development for improved livelihoods entrepreneurs, women, persons and inclusive socio-economic devel- with disabilities and community-led opment in Makueni County. enterprises that capture and retain value locally, recognizing and

3.3.3 Policy Strategies addressing their specific constraints The County Government will; and needs 1. Strengthen farmer cooperatives 8. Promote branding, certification and and support market infrastructure standardization of local agroecolo- for marketing, distribution, storage gy products to enhance product and value addition for agroecologi- differentiation and access to cal products markets 2. Allocate market outlets for 9. Link (AEES) to financial opportuni- agroecological Inputs and products ties in green growth, insurance and including in local markets, special Business Development Services economic zones and industrial (BDS} to facilitate access to green parks. financing by actors. 3. Strengthen farmer-led Agro-Eco- 3.4 Food and nutritional security logical Enterprises {AEEs), for all cooperatives and valued added processing initiatives to increase Achieving food and nutrition security uptake and adoption of agroeco- while at the same time reversing and logical products. minimizing damage to the natural environment is critical for sustainable 4. Strengthen market linkages and development. Makueni County faces information systems on agroeco- a high burden of malnutrition and logical products for fair pricing and food insecurity reflected in coexis- marketing tence of undernutrition {stunting, 5. Promote public-private partner- wasting and underweight), micronutri- ships for increased access to ent deficiencies, and over-nutrition domestic, regional and internation- (overweight and obesity). al markets for agro ecological In 2022, the under five children stunt- products and services ing level stood at 19.8 percent which 6. Promote public procurement of is above the national average of 17.6 agroecological products such as in percent (KNBS and ICF,2023). In addi- hospitals, schools, and public tion, only 26.9 percent of women offices, including aged 15-49 met the minimum diversi- ty level compared to the national average of 48.5 percent (KNBS and ICF, 2023).

3.4.3 Policy Strategies At the same time, there has been increased cases of non-communicable The County Government will; and other chronic diseases, some of 1. Promote One Health Approach to which have been associated with strengthen food safety, enhance unhealthy diets. resilience and minimize incidence of diseases Unfortunately, the traditional crops which are drought tolerant and nutri- 2. Strengthen food safety systems to ent dense have largely been aban- eliminate harmful and unsafe foods doned. This calls for mechanisms for from the market through enhanced increasing access to healthy, diverse regulation, surveillance, enforce- and safe diets, while at the same time ment, and public awareness along minimizing damage to our ecosys- the entire food supply chain tems. 3. Stimulate consumption of diverse

3.4.1 Policy issue: Limited access safe and healthy diets in communi- and utilization of diverse, safe, ties, public and private institutions nutritious and healthy diets impacting negatively on food 4. Support nutrition sensitive pro- and nutritional security gramming that sustainably caters for the nutritional needs of different Makueni County faces food and nutri- groups including women, youth tional security reflected poor health and persons with disabilities indicators, some worse than the national averages. 5. Promote production and consump- This is in part due to limited access to tion of underutilized foods for resil- diverse, nutritious, safe, and healthy ient, stable local food systems diets despite the County producing variety of fruits, vegetables and other 6. Stimulate the integration of local underutilized products. and indigenous knowledge and practices in the production and

3.4.2 Policy Objective consumption of food To promote healthy, diverse, safe, 7. Support consumer education, nutritious and culturally appropriate awareness and behavior change on diets for all benefits of agroecologicaf products proactively as an investment into primary healthcare and environ- mental conservation 8. Enhance mechanisms and invest- ments for food waste management (reduce, recycle, reuse) at house- hold and farm levels and municipal markets.

3.5.1 Policy Issue: Inadequate knowledge and capacity to 9. Mainstream zoning in municipali- implement agroecology ties that supports waste water recy- The Makueni extension program cling and spaces for waste segrega- including the training centres are yet tion and processing to incorporate agroecology leading 10. Promote utilization of green energy to knowledge gaps across the public, sources such as, solar, biogas, wind private and community-led extension . power etc. at Institutional and service. household levels

3.5.2 Policy Objective

3.5 Knowledge, training and To enhance the capacity and knowl- capacity strengthening for the edg~ of extension service providers agroecology transition and relevant stakeholders for sustain- Agricultural extension is an avenue for able agroecological transition. sharing knowledge, technologies,

3.5.3 Policy Strategies management practices among farm- ers and other actors. Makueni County The County Government will; has been implementing the Enhanced 1. Entrench agroecology into the Extension Programme to accelerate County agricultural extension agricultural production, productivity services for continuous support and profitability through c0ordinated and guidance on agroecological extension services, enhanced linkages transition. for input supply and structured agro- marketing. Despite the improve- 2. Facilitate partnerships with ment, the current extensive service research institutions, TVETs, and has knowledge gaps, limited visibility, local innovators to co-create agro- inadequate funding and a top-down ecological solutions contextualized approach which hinders widespread to the agro-ecological conditions uptake. in the County. Therefore, there is need have a coor- 3. Strengthen the public and private dinated extension service across extension services to scale-up the public and private and community adoption of agroecological practic- providers while ensuring that the es. services are demand driven and lever- aging on technology. 4. Develop a coordinated multi- stakeholder approach for knowl- edge sharing and collaborative learning in agroecology from the county, sub-county, and ward levels.

3.6.1 Policy Issue: 5. Provide incentives, technical Weak mainstreaming of agroe- support and organize practical cology in existing policy and demonstrations to encourage institutional frameworks farmers and other actors to imple- The Policy and institutional framework ment agroecological innovations. for implementing agroecology 6. Design and implement a standard- practices in Makueni County is weak ized curriculum and models on characterized by poor interconnect- agroecology for use in schools (4k edness of the relevant departments, clubs), Agricultural Training silo im.plementation and reporting Centers (ATCs), County Technical structures. Training Institutes (CTTls), and 3.6.2 Policy Objective other relevant educational institu- tions to build long-term capacity in To create an enabling environment for agroecological transition. mainstreaming and scaling up

3.6 Enabling environment for agroecological practices in Makueni agroecology County The transition to sustainable agri-food 3.6.3 Policy Strategies systems is supported by a range of The County Government will; international, national and county frameworks. Particularly, the NAS - 1. Mainstream agroecology in the County policies, laws, regulations FST (2024- 2033), which supports the and plans across relevant sectors mainstreaming of agroecology into and departments to ensure existing national and county plans and alignment, coherence and synergy strategies to enable their adoption. with the national and county To this end, counties are required to agroecology priorities. domesticate the key provision of the 2. Establish multisectoral and Strategy. While Makueni County has a inter-departmental coordination number of frameworks supporting the mechanisms for designing, imple- agri-food sector, agroecological mentation and, monitoring and initiatives are not properly anchored evaluation of agroecology-related in these frameworks. policies, plans and financing. At the same time, there is need to strengthen mechanisms for consulta- 3. Promote horizontal integration of tion and cooperation among the agroecology across departments national and county governments and to ensure coherence in deci- non-state agencies to ensure the sion-making, consistency in policy agroecological transformation of food actions, equitable distribution of systems. resources, and collective account- ability in agroecological transitions. c:::.==.::------===============--------:~~------------ 4 • Strengthen resource mobilization persons including women, youth, and funding for agroecology elderly and persons with disabilities. through increased government

3.7.1 Policy Issue: Inequitable access funding and Public Private Partner- to resources and decision- ships (PPPs), while addressing making processes within the needs of all actors including agri-food system women, youth, the elderly, children and persons with disabilities. 3.7.2 Policy Objective S. Promote market and non-market To promote inclusivity and equitable incentives to support agroecologi- access to resources for improved cal transition, including technical governance of the agri-food system assistance, participatory guarantee systems, subsidy programs, 3. 7 .3 Policy Strategies collective action, certification and payment for ecosystem services. The County Government will; 1. Foster change in power dynamics

3.7 Social Equity, Inclusion and by encouraging greater participa- Governance tion of vulnerable and marginalized Makueni County faces persistent groups in decision-making on challenges such as high poverty, access, control, share and unequal accessto resources and op- utilization of productive resources. portunities, socio-economic dispari- ties, and exclusion of marginalized 2. Promote awareness and a strong groups. Structural barriers including focus on the rights of women, inequitable distribution of public children, youth, persons with services, limited participation of disabilities and indigenous people vulnerable groups in decision-mak- to ensure productive capability. ing, and entrenched socio-cultural 3. Promote an enabling environment biases have contributed to gover- for job opportunities by fostering nance gaps that undermine efforts investment in youth and wom- toward social justice. en-led green enterprises and Weak enforcement of progressive initiatives. policies, administrative inefficien- 4. Foster socially inclusive financial cies, and limited public accountabil- systems for scaling-up green and ity mechanisms further exacerbate inclusive economy. inequalities, making it difficult to achieve meaningful inclusion. 5. Strengthen public participation forums through community-action Agroecology seeks to address planning to co-create agroecologi- power imbalances, promote social cal initiatives and programs that justice, nurture identity and culture, reflect local needs and knowledge. and enhance resilience of all CHAPTER FOUR: IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK Makueni Agroecology Policy imple- The Summit will serve as a high-level mentation will involve State and convening platform bringing together non-state actors at the National and the County Secretary (chairperson), County levels. The actors will play a County Executive Committee Mem- key role in the implementation of the bers (CECMs), and Country Directors Policy options outlined in Chapter of development partners, to provide Three, or coordination of the actors strategic guidance, assess progress, and collective actions in the Policy. and reinforce political commitment The Policy will also require technical to agroecological transformation. and financial support from the public and private sector actors. The Policy The Agroecology Policy Implemen- will be implemented through the legal tation Committee (APIC) will lead and institutional framework described policy implementation. Chaired by below. Thematic strategies will be the CECM responsible for the agricul- developed to address specific sub-sec- ture function, APIC will comprise of tor requirements and for better imple- the Chief Officers from key depart- mentation of this policy. ments; Agriculture, Livestock, Health, Environment, Climate Change, For-

4.1 Coordination Framework and estry, Education, Trade, Industry, Administrative Mechanisms Cooperatives, Water, Sanitation, and Irrigation. The Government of Makueni County will be responsible for policy formula- It will also include representatives from tion, resource mobilization, and national government agencies operat- implementation oversight. ing at the County level (e.g., AFA, KEPHIS,NDMA, NEMA, and Meteoro- The County will mainstream policies, logical Department) and non-state strategies and plans arising from this actors such as development partners, Policy horizontally across relevant CSOs, farmer associations, and coop- sectors and vertically at sub-county, eratives. The Chief Officer for Agricul- ward, and village levels as well as in ture will serve as the Secretary to the County institutions. The departments APIC. responsible for Agriculture, Environ- ment, Health, Trade/Cooperatives, and Education will be responsible for assigned roles in relation to agroecol- ogy. The governance of the Agroecol- ogy Policy is anchored in a participa- tory, multi-stakeholder framework, with the Agroecology Summit at its apex (Figure 4.1). To support the implementation, the Agroecology Secretariat, composed of technical directors, representatives from CASSCOM, and multi-sectoral partners will serve as the coordination hub, linking policy decisions with county-level execution. A County Technical Committee on Agroecology, made up of departmental directors and development partners, will provide technical input, planning support, and evidence-based recommendations. At the grassroots, Agroecology Value Chain Actors and Associations will ensure community-level participation and feedback, while similar APIC structures at Sub-County and Ward levels will be in place to promote localized coordination. AGROECOLOGY SU/MIil {CECMf.Covnty se<:retary, Counl!Y Oirecion ot Oeve!o;>menlPorlnersl Agroecology Policy lmplemenlotion Corrm61ee (APICI (CECM,COs,Partner Represenlollves) Mvlfi!ecl0o'olPor1neis CASSCOM.Counly {MSPs) Olradors Non-StolePcr1nersfCSOs. PrivoleSector Reps. ~---ot Covnly rechnlcol Committee on Al,oecology Development Portnen) Agro.ecologyVo!ue Cham ASSOCloflons Agroecology Value Chain Aclcws Figure 4.1: Coordination Structure for Policy Implementation (Makueni County Multistakeholder platform members during the final I ~ validation meeting to discuss the final draft of the Makueni agroecology policy document). The APIC will report to the County The Agroecology Policy Implementa- CEC and the Governor, and will tion Committee (APIC) will comprise collaborate with national mechanisms key players in the Makueni agri-food including, JASSCOM, and the Council system including but not limited to of Governors (CoG) to ensure the following institutions and actors; coherence and synergy between 1. Departments for Agriculture, county and national agroecology Livestock and Fisheries, Health, efforts. Members of the APIC will be Education, Trade, ahd Environment co-opted in the CASSCOM which will have a standing Technical Working Representatives of National Gov- 2 Group on Agroecology. CASSCOMs • ernment agencies at the County are anchored on Legal Notice (No. 2 level such as AFA, KEPHIS, NEMA, of 2012) on Establishment of Joint KALRO, NOMA, etc. Committees in Agriculture Sector 3. Representative of the Inter-Sectoral under the Intergovernmental Rela- Forum on Agrobiodiversity and tions Act. 2012. Agroecology (ISFAA) which is the The mandate of the APIC will be to: secretariat for implementation of 1. Mainstream the Makueni the NAS-FST Agroecology Policy in County Inte- 4. Representatives of Farmer organiza- grated Development Plans (CIDPs) tions promoting agroecology and coordinate the development of annual work plans. 5. Representative of the Kenya Associ- ation of Manufacturers (KAM) 2. Develop and supervise the imple- 6. Representatives of the Organic mentation of the elements of the Fertilizer and Input Manufacturers County Action Plan linked to the Association (OFIMAK) Agroecology Policy 7. Representative of civil society orga- 3. Foster collaborations and linkages nizations working on agroecology with public and private institutions at the regional level in the management and delivery of agroecology programs and 8. Representative of development . partners working within the County services. 9. Representative of food transport- 4. Promote sector-wide linkages with ers/logistics organizations working intra and cross County initiatives on within the county Agroecology 10. Represehtatives of universities, academic institutions, and research organizations in the county 11. Representatives of other stakehold- er groups that may be nominated by the committee

4.2 Legal and Regulatory 4.3 Funding Arrangements Framework To implement this Agroecology Policy, Laws and regulations are integral to the Government of Makueni County effective policy implementation and will allocate funds to the Department operationalization. The legal frame- of Agriculture, Livestock Fisheries and work for crops, livestock, fisheries and Cooperative Development. Part of this irrigation is based on a body of laws funding will be through the proposed that require review and development Agroecology Fund at 10 percent to conform to and implement the of the County's agriculture budget. Constitution and further support However, efforts will be made to mobi- implementation of this Policy. lize additional financial support from The County Government in consulta- development partners to realize the tion with stakeholders will review and objectives of the Policy. harmonize the agricultural and related Green finance initiatives such as sector laws to ensure compliance with carbon credit programs linked to the Constitution and support the agroecological practices such as implementation of this Policy. Some agroforestry and soil health interven- of the existing policies and legal tions will also be promoted to ensure frameworks that provide guidance on adequate funding for the policy the implementation of the policy implementatjon. Direct financing and include the Agricultural Policy (2021), investments by the private sector The Makueni County Agriculture and through Public Private Partnerships Livestock Policy (2021), The Makueni (PPPs)will be critical to the successful County Integrated Development Plan implementation of the Makueni (CIDP) Ill (2023-2027), Makueni Agroecology Policy. County Environment and Climate Change Policy (2021), Makueni Mechanisms will be put in place to County Education & Training Policy strengthen the rural credit institutions (2021), and Makueni County Disaster to support farmers' investments Management and Special Pro- in agroecological innovations and grammes Policy (2021). production, sc1vingsand risk manage- ment; introduction of simple proce- A Makueni Agroecology Act and dures in providing loan facilities for Regulations will be developed to agricultural activities and agro-based entrench the institutional framework start-ups and industries; ensuring described above and to address the availability of credit to farmers and specific sector needs and aid in the other agroecological value chain agroecology transition within the actors at concessionary interest rates County. The Act will also create an and introduction of appropriate agri- Agroecology Fund and establish vari- cultural insurance schemes to protect ous fiscal and non-fiscal incentives to farmers from risks associated with promote and catalyze an agroecology natural cc1lamitiesand climate change transformation in Makueni County. shocks. The involvement of NGOs and civil society in resource mobilization, capacity development and general oversight over governance, trade issues and other policy interventions will be essential. Commercialization of products such as production and sale of organic fertilizers from the Mango processing plant and municipal waste will also be considered. The Government of Makueni County will be required to create a conducive regulatory environment to facilitate the participation of the private sector in agroecological transition. CHAPTER FIVE: MONITORING AND EVALUATION For successful implementation, the The M&E framework is expected to Policy will be integrated into the CIDP also align with the National Integrat- and Annual Plans, and an M&E ed Monitoring and Evaluation framework developed as an integral Systems (NIMES) and have clear terms component to ensure the policy of reference for relevant stakeholders objectives are achieved in a cost in data collection and reporting at all effective, coordinated and harmo- levels. nized manner. The County Integrated Development

5.1 Monitoring Plans (CIDPs)which will have integrat- ed the Agroecology Policy will serve The County Department of Agricul- as the foundation for agricultural ture will collaborate with the National M&E, supported by County Agricul- Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock tural Sector M&E Units and County Development {MoALD), County Performance Management Frame- Departments and Agencies, private works {CPMFs) that track agricultural sector and other stakeholders to projects, extension services, and develop an M&E framework aligned resource utilization. Key performance to the National M&E Framework for indicators (KPI) linked to the Policy the National Agroecology Strategy Focus areas will be developed and for Food System Transformation (2024 tracked for evaluation and reporting - 2033) within six months of the purposes. A digital dashboard of the adoption of the Policy. M&E framework will also be devel- oped and linked to the National Agroecology Strategy's M&E Framework. Table 5.1 M&E Framework for Agroecology Policy Agro ecology Farmers adopting Reid surveys, Oua11erly County Dept. of adoption agroecologfcal practices e)(tension officer Agnculture, N_GOs, (organic farming, agroforestry. reports Farmer Groups fntercro in ) (%) Sorl health and Soll fertility improvement S011testing reporis, Annually Research lnstitutfoiis, land use (orgar,ic matter content, erosion GIS mapping CASSCOM control) Clin1ate Wafer conservation practices Farm-fevel data, Bi-annually County W~ter and res11ienceand (rainwater harvesting, irrigation melllOrologlcal Environment Dept., adaptation efficiency) repo11s Agroecol09y Technical Working Grou Componant Indicators OataSoun:e ~u•ncy IRHpc,rulble Monitoring Food and Increase 1nhousehold food Household surveys. Annually Public He;ilth Dept. nutrition production and dive,sity (%) nutrition studies Depl of Agriculture, SeC\lrity Development Partners, CASSCOM Market access Increase fn Income from' Market Quarterly Trade and and economic agroecological products (%) assessments. Cooperatives Dept. Impact cooperatives' reoorts Knowledge and Number of fam,ers trained in Training Monthly Agriculture &te<1sron capacity agroecologlcal practices attend,ince Servlca!., Development building records, work:.hoos oartners Polley and level of multi-stakeholder Policy reviews Annually CASSCOM, governance c-0ordinat1on,n implementation reports, Agroecology Technical efficiency sta~eholder Worldrg Group eiigagemenr meet1nos

5.2 Evaluation The Monitoring and evaluation External audits from agroecology framework will provide clear bench- experts and research institutions will marks for performance evaluation be engaged to determine whether the using measurable metrics that reflect County is taking the right direction in the progress and success of the agroecological transition, and identify strategy. The KPls will serve as a the gaps which could be worked on to tool to monitor outcomes, identify improve the transition. The policy will challenges, and ensure continuous im- be reviewed periodically to address provement throughout the implemen- the sector challenges and emerging .issues. tation process. Comprehensive data collection tools will be designed and implemented, with clear indicators to address data needs and requirements. There will be quarterly progress reports by the Chief Officer/ APIC Secretary presented to the Cabinet and other stakeholders. Regular farmer and stakeholder feedback surveys will be carried out to rate the extent of agroecological transition against the set targets, and the data disseminated to the relevant stakeholders.

5.3 Reporting Regular and consistent reporting, essential for keeping stakeholders informed about the policy's progress will be undertaken at the various levels of implementation. Reporting will provide both quantitative and qualitative data of the Makueni Agroecology Policy implementation, highlighting achievements, challenges, and areas where adjustments will be need to be made. Reporting structures outlining formats and frequencies for providing updates on the policy implementation progress with clear outputs and outcomes results/indicators and associated means of verification will be established. Table 5.3 Reporting Formart 'I' , •I• •• ~ 11' - • '" • I • eI I ~ • Quarterly progress Implementation updates. APIC/Chief Officer Quarterly reports successstories,challenges Annual performance 111,poct assessmenl,policy CASSCOM,Research Annually Review adjustments Institutions Stakeholderlearning Bestpractices sharing, FannerGroups. NGOs. Bi-0nnually workshops Innovation adoption ResearchInstitutions

5.4 Learning Stakeholders with specified informatioh needs will be identified and reports tailored to address different information needs. The M&E reports will be structured to ensure findings from monitoring and evaluation activities can be used to continuously improve policy implementation and inform the future programming on agroecology. The experiences and learnings from the implementation of the agroecology programmes and initiatives will act as a guide to the development of new policies and strategies that will enhance the transition. CHAPTERSIX: REVIEWOF POLICY The Makueni Agroecology Policy will be reviewed every ten (10) years after its initial implementation to assess its effectiveness, relevance, and alignment with the County's evolving agricultural, environmental, and socio-economic needs. However, an earlier review can be initiated in the event of the following circumstances; Constitutional changes~ If there are significant amendments or changes to the Constitution of Kenya that affect agricultural or environmental gov- er-nance, the policy should be reviewed to ensure alignment. Calamities or emergencies: In the event of major environmental, climate-re- lated disasters, or public health crises that impact the food system, a review may be warranted to adjust the policy to address the new challenges. Alignment with regional or international frame-works: When there are updates to regional or international agreements, such as the African Union's Agenda 2063, the UN's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), or other frameworks, the policy may need to be reviewed to ensure alignment. Emergihg issues or challenges: If new issues arise, such as technological advancements, shifts in market dynamics, or changes in land use patterns, a review may be necessary to ensure the policy continues to address contem- porary needs effectively The Government of Makueni through the County Department of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Cooperative Development, in collaboration with County Agroecology Summit and Secretariat should take the lead in initiating the policy review process, as they are the primary agencies involved in implementation of agroecology. The review process should utilize evidence and lessons from previous performance evaluation, benefiting from M&E processes. This includes data collection, consultations, impact evaluation, and benchmark- ing to assess socio-economic and environmental impacts, stakeholder feedback, and compare outcomes with best practices for informed policy adjustments CHAPTERSEVEN:ANNEXES

7.1 Definition of Terms Agroecology: Agroecology is an integrated approach that simultaneously applies ecological and social concepts and principles to the design and management of food and agricultural systems. Agroecological approaches use natural processes to opti- mize the interactions between plants, animals, humans and the environment while taking into consideration local and scientific knowledge and the social aspects that advocate for a sustainable and fair food system. Agroecology covers all ecosystems inch-1ding agroecosystems, aquatic ecosystem {freshwater and marine), silviculture, terrestrial (forest ecosystem, savannah/grassland ecosystem), desert and tundra ecosystems. It incorporates a set of practices including organic agriculture, regenerative agriculture, permaculture, ecological agriculture, soil and water conservation and management, agroforestry and, integrated pest management Food System: It encompasses the entire range of actors and their interlinked value-adding activities involved in the produc- tion, aggregation, processing, distribution, consumption and disposal of food products that originate from agriculture, forestry or fisheries, and parts of the broader economic, societal and natural environments in which they are embedded. Food System Food system transformation refers to the comprehensive Transformation: reorganization of food production, distribution, and consumption to ensure food and nutrition security and environmental sustainability through agroecological approaches. Healthy and This is a diet that consists of adequate intake of fruits, safe diet: vegetables, legumes and tlean drinking water; reduced intake of free sugars and fats; and food that is not contaminated with potentially harmful bacteria, parasites, viruses, toxins and chemicals. Vulnerable Vulnerable groups in society are those segments of the groups: population that are more likely to suffer from disadvantages, marginalization, or discrimination due to various socioeco- nomic, physical, or psychological factors. Vulnerable groups within society, including women, older members of society, persons with disabilities, children, youth, members of minority or marginalized communities, and members of particular ethnic, religious or cultural communities. Producers: Actors responsible for planting, cultivating and harvesting of crops and trees or rearing livestock and fisheries to produce food and other non-food products. Productive These are the factors of production used to produce goods resources: and services and includes in natural resources, labour, capital and entrepreneurship. Value chaih These are food system actors involved in producing, actors: processing, distributing, marketing, retailing, and consuming food. They include input suppliers, producers, processors, distributors/wholesalers, retailers and consumers.

7.2 References HLPE (2019). Agroecological and other innovative approaches for sustainable agriculture and food systems that enhance food security and nutrition. A report by the High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security, Rome. https:/ /www.intechopen.com/ chapters/80648 KNBS (2022) The Kenya Poverty Report https://www.knbs.or.ke/wp-con- tent/uploads/2024/1 O/The-Kenya-Poverty-Report-2022.pdf KNBS and ICF (2023). Kenya Demographic and Health Survey 2022. Key Indicators Report. Nairobi, Kenya and Rockville, Maryland, USA: KNBS and ICF Government of Makueni County (2023) Makueni County Integrated Smart Survey Report https://makueni.go.ke/sandbox/site/files/2024/08/ Makueni-SMART-Survey-2023-Report-final_final.pdf UNFSS (2021). Kenya's pathway to sustainable food systems: Kenya National Food Systems Dialogue Series. https://www.unfoodsystemshub.org/docs/ u nfoodsystemslibraries/national-pathways/kenya/2021-09- 27 -en-kenya-fss-di- alogue-series-final-report-.pdf?sfvrsn= 109d50c_ 1 AnnexIll: Membersof the CoreTeamon the Developmentof MakueniAgroecologyPolicy SINO NAME ORGANISATION I JoyceMutua ln1mediate fomer - CECM Department of Agriculture, Livestock,Fisheries and Cooperative Develop1nent 2 Dr. Victoria K Kyallo Chief officer Agriculture 3 Japheth Kiminza Chief Officer Livestock,Fisheries and Cooperative Development 4 Mary Mureri Director Agriculture 5 Esther Kivindyo Director Adm.inistration,DALFCD 6 Dr. Josepbat Mbai Director Veterinary Services 7 David Musyoki Director Livestockand Fisheries Developn1ent 8 Munene Mwiindi Director Cooperatives 9 Ma1tin M. Munyao ValueChain Developn1entSpecialist, DALFCD to Njeru Runji Legal Officer II AnneMaina Biodiversityaud BiosafetyAssociation- Kenya (BIBA-K) 12 Janet Ndiki Biodiversityand BiosaferyAssociation- Kenya (BIBA-K) 13 Mary lrungu Participatory EcologicalLand Use Managen1ent (PELUM)Kenya 14 Sarah Wambui Participatory Ecological Land Use Managen1ent (PELUM) Kenya 15 Anne Njuglu1a Solidaridad r6 Valentine Maina Volunteer Services Overseas (VSO) 17 Juma Mohan1med lntersectoral Foru1non Agro biodiversityand Agro ecology (ISFAA) 18 Shadrack Kasonzo Cereal Gro\versAssociation (CGA) 19 Roberr Muli Makueni Development1'rust (MADEi) 20 Sellah Turnbo ActionAid 21 ViJ1nyBhan VEDAOrganics 22 Christine Mutisya ENVIU 23 Joseph Munyao Depu.tyDirector, Enviro.nn1ent 24 Ruth Kaloki Health Services, Nuttition Coordinator 25 Chris R,vanda Biovisio.nAfrica Tn1st (Bv-AT) 26 Joseph Mbithi BiovisionAfricaTn1st (BvAT) 27 Elijah Maithya Cereal GrowersAssociation (CGA) 28 Dr. Josiah Ateka Jo,no Kenyatta Universityof Agriculture and Technology (TKUAT) 29 Pro£ Daniel Sila Jomo Kenyatta Universityof Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT) Dr. Forah Obebo Kenyatta University Dr. Martin Oulu lncer-SecroralForum on Agroeco1ogyand Agrob.iodiversicy(ISFAA) 32 Wanjiru Kan1au Inter-Sectoral Forum on Agroecologyand Agrobiodiversicy(ISFAA) 33 Mercyline Njeri Jo1noKenyattaUniversityof Agriculture and Technology (JKU.~T) Contacts Makueni County Government P.O BOX 78- 90300 Wote- Makueni, Kenya Email: info@makueni.go.ke