The Nakuru County Agroecology Policy, 2025-2034

THE NAKURU COUNTY AGROECOLOGY POLICY, 2025 COUNTY GOVERNMENT OF NAKURU 2025 - 2034 COUNTY GOVERNMENT OF NAKURU THE NAKURU COUNTY AGROECOLOGY POLICY, 2025 2025 - 2034 FOREWORD The County Government of Nakuru has set out a bold vision for “inclusive growth and sustainable development” as outlined in the County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP) 2023–2027. Anchored in the devolved functions outlined in the fourth schedule to the Constitution of Kenya, this plan delineates flagship initiatives and sectoral programmes designed to transform livelihoods and reinforce adoptive and institutional resilience across the county. The County is committed to advancing sustainable agricultural practices, supporting smallholder farmers, and promoting value addition to guarantee food security and nutrition, as well as a thriving agro-based economy. Agroecology constitutes a key pillar of this vision. Through the restoration of ecological systems, the conservation of agrobiodiversity, and the promotion of sustainable smallholder agricultural practices, the County seeks to secure food and nutritional outcomes while simultaneously enhancing the participation and socio-economic empowerment of women, youth, Indigenous communities, and persons with disabilities in the governance, development, and equitable benefit- sharing of local food systems. Despite this aspiration, our County faces significant challenges. Research and training have yet to fully integrate agroecological principles, leaving extension officers underprepared, with a high farmer-to- extension ratio of 1:1500. Adoption of sustainable practices remains low, as monocropping, overreliance on chemical inputs, and aggressive tillage continue to degrade our soils. Agrobiodiversity is under threat, with over 50 local crop varieties lost in recent years, reducing resilience and dietary diversity. Weak markets, lack of certification, and low consumer awareness limit returns for agroecological farmers. Policy gaps persist, as frameworks continue to prioritize conventional farming over farmer-managed seeds and ecological approaches. Social inequalities further hinder progress, with women, youth, indigenous peoples, and persons with disabilities facing unequal access to productive resources such as land and credit. Despite the challenges, Nakuru County has immense opportunities to advance agroecology.. Research and academic institutions can anchor participatory research, farmer field schools, and digital training platforms to strengthen extension services and farmer capacity. Growing awareness of soil degradation and climate change impact is driving demand for practices such as conservation tillage, crop rotation, and cover cropping. Affordable bio-inputs, integrated pest management, and strong cooperatives provide a foundation for iii peer learning and adoption. Indigenous knowledge, community seed banks, and underutilized crops such as millet, sorghum, and indigenous vegetables offer pathways to restore biodiversity, diversify diets, and combat malnutrition. At the same time, rising consumer demand for safe and healthy foods would create new market opportunities. Investments in certification systems such as Participatory Guarantee Systems, improved storage, and stronger retail linkages will enhance profitability and reduce post-harvest losses and waste. Policy reforms aligned with national climate and food system strategies present opportunities for embedding agroecology in county legislation, including support for farmer-managed seed systems, traditional knowledge, and incentives for organic production. Equally, empowering women, youth, indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities, and marginalized groups through joint land titling, targeted credit, and inclusive value chains for indigenous produce, honey, and herbal products can make agroecology both equitable and transformative. Transforming Nakuru’s food systems into sustainable, resilient, and equitable systems both necessary and urgent.Agroecology offers an integrated and holistic approach that advances regenerative agricultural practices, thereby enhancing food and nutrition security, restoring and preserving ecological integrity, and promoting the overall well-being and socio-economic resilience of local communities.. The Nakuru County Agroecology Policy offers a framework to scale up these approaches. It recognizes that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to sustainability and emphasizes collaboration across county departments, civil society, the private sector, and local communities. This policy is anchored on the following objectives: 1. To advance evidence-based agroecological transitions through participatory, interdisciplinary, and farmer-centred research and training. 2. To enhance the adoption of agroecological practices for improved food and nutrition security, sustainable diets, and resilient livelihoods 3. To promote restoration and conservation of agrobiodiversity and associated ecosystems for resilience and sustainability 4. To promote agroecological enterprise development and improved market access through infrastructure investments, targeted incentives, and supportive business services 5. To establish an enabling environment for agroecology through the development and implementation of a harmonized and supportive legislative and institutional framework 6. To promote inclusive agroecology for vulnerable and marginalized groups and communities. By implementing this policy, Nakuru County seeks to accelerate food system transformation, strengthen resilience, and enhance adaptive capacity across communities. The County Government reaffirms its commitment to creating an enabling environment where agroecology drives sustainable development, ensuring that Nakuru lives up to its vision of being “the County of Unlimited Opportunities for All.” H.E. Susan Kihika, EGH. Governor, Nakuru County iv PREFACE The County Government of Nakuru, in advancing improved livelihoods, accords priority to food and nutrition security through the promotion of a sustainable, inclusive, and climate-resilient agricultural sector. Agriculture is the backbone of Nakuru’s economy where more than 80% of households depend directly or indirectly on farming and related enterprises. About 62% of the land in Nakuru is arable, with diverse agroecological zones suitable for crops, livestock and fisheries. The County is home to major production landscapes such as the Mau ecosystem and the Lake Naivasha basin, which supply cereals, horticultural crops, and floriculture to domestic and export markets. However, unsustainable farming practices, dependency on unreliable rain-fed agriculture, high inputs costs, pest and diseases, and the impacts of climate change continue to undermine productivity. This has not only reduced household incomes but also contributed to loss of agrobiodiversity, degraded soils, and persistent food and nutrition insecurity. Agroecology provides a potential pathway for addressing these challenges. Practices such as agroforestry, soil and water conservation, diversification, use of indigenous seeds and livestock breeds, and organic soil fertility management can restore ecosystems, and improve access to safe and nutritious food. Agroecology also positions farmers and communities as key agents of change, enabling inclusive and sustainable development. While many stakeholders are already supporting agroecological initiatives in Nakuru, their efforts have often been fragmented and uncoordinated, leading to duplication and limited impact. This Policy therefore provides a coherent framework to align County Government actions with those of farmers, private sector actors, civil society organizations, and development partners. It also ensures that women, youth, persons with disabilities and marginalized communities and groups are fully included in the transition. The Nakuru County Agroecology Policy aims to contribute to the sustainable transformation of food systems by ensuring food and nutrition security, building climate-resilient livelihoods, conserving ecosystems, and fostering social inclusion. It aligns with the County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP 2023–2027), Vision 2030, and the Sustainable Development Goals. The development of this Policy has been highly consultative, bringing together County Government departments, farmer representatives from all 11 sub- counties, the private sector, civil society organizations, research institutions, and development partners. Their contributions have enriched the Policy and anchored it in the realities of the County’s farming systems. The County Government extends its deep appreciation to all who participated in this process and reaffirms its commitment to lead implementation. We call upon all stakeholders to work together to realize the Vision of a food-secure, inclusive, and sustainable Nakuru County. Leonard Kipkoech Bor County Executive Committee Member, Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Veterinary Services v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The development of the Nakuru County Agroecology Policy began in November 2024, inspired by the vision of the Members of the County Assembly, whose commitment laid the foundation for this process. We convey our sincere and profound gratitude to them for their invaluable support and contribution. This policy has greatly benefitted from the contributions of many organizations and individuals. We sincerely thank our partners, including Hivos East Africa; Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (PELUM-Kenya); Heinrich Böll Stiftung (HBS); Biodiversity and Biosafety Association of Kenya (BIBA-Kenya); Biovision Africa Trust (BvAT); Seed Savers Network Kenya; SNV in Kenya; Slow Food Kenya; UN-TEEB AgriFood project; Ogiek People Development Programme and; Nakuru Living Lab- Egerton University; Alliance Bioversity and CIAT; Cereal Growers Association (CGA). Others are Intersectoral Forum on Agrobiodiversity and Agroecology (ISFAA); Safe Consumers Organization (SACOR) and Persons with Disabilities Network and Development (PWDND). We remain grateful for the time, knowledge, resources, and dedication they devoted to this work. We also extend our heartfelt appreciation to the Governor, Deputy Governor, and County Executive Committee Members (CECMs), Chief Officers (COs) for their leadership and for embracing collaboration across sectors. Special recognition goes to the Department of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries, and Veterinary Services for serving as the Secretariat of the Technical Working Group, guiding the process, and fostering partnerships and networks. We equally acknowledge the important contributions of other key departments and sectors, including Health; Environment; Water; Land; Natural Resources; and Climate Change. We are grateful to the members of the Technical Working Group (TWG), under the guidance of Dr. Naomi Muriuki (County Environment and Land Development Officer), Lilian Samoei (County Crops Officer), and James Kamau (County Dairy Officer). The development of this policy benefited from the dedication of a core team drawn from County Government departments, civil society organizations, the private sector, farming groups, indigenous communities, and persons with disabilities (see Annex 7.5) We are especially thankful to the people and friends of Nakuru County who actively participate in the public forums. With its implementation, we are confident that the Policy will strengthen resilience and enhance sustainable agri-food systems. Finally, we express special gratitude to the consultants who guided the technical aspects of this work— Juma Muhammed (ISFAA), Dr. Josiah Ateka (JKUAT), Dr. Forah Obebo (Kenyatta University) and Mercyline Njeri (JKUAT). Their research, expertise, and dedication were instrumental in refining this policy. Eng. Margaret W. Kinyanjui Chief Officer, Agriculture County Government of Nakuru Dr Michael K. Cheruiyot, PhD, HSC Chief Officer, Livestock, Fisheries and Veterinary Services County Government of Nakuru vi ADPs Annual Development Plans AEZ Agroecological Zone AFA Agriculture and Food Authority AFS Agroecology Food Systems ASTGS Agricultural Sector Transformation and Growth Strategy BETA Bottom-Up Economic Transformation Agenda CIDP County Integrated Development Plan COP Conference of Parties CSO Civil Society Organization DoALFVS Department of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries, and Veterinary Services FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations GDP Gross Domestic Product HPLE High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition IPs Indigenous People JKUAT Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology KALRO Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization KDHS Kenya Demographic and Health Survey KEPHIS Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service KPHC Kenya Population and Housing Census MEL Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning NDMA National Drought Management Authority NEMA National Environment Management Authority PWDs Persons with Disabilities SDG Sustainable Development Goal TWG Technical Working Group UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS vii TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .x CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 1.2 Rationale for Agroecology Policy for Nakuru County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 1.3 Policy Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 1.4 Vision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 1.5 Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 1.6 Guiding Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 1.7 Scope of the Nakuru Agroecology policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 1.7 Structure of the Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 CHAPTER TWO: SITUATION ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.1 Key Policy Issues in Agroecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 2.1.1 Inadequate knowledge, training and capacity for advancing agroecology practices . . . . . . . . . . . .8 2.1.2 Unsustainable agri-food production and consumption practises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 2.1.3. Loss of agrobiodiversity and ecosystem function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 2.1.4. Underdeveloped agroecological enterprises and limited market access for associated products 11 2.1.5. Weak policy and legislative frameworks for mainstreaming agroecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 2.1.6. Gender and social disparities in food systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 2.2 Policy, Legal and Institutional Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 2.2.1 Global and regional policy context for agroecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 2.2.2 National policy, legal and institutional frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 2.2.3 County level legislations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 viii CHAPTER THREE: POLICY STATEMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 3.1. Integrating agroecology into research, extension, and training to strengthen knowledge and . . . . . . . . institutional capacity for agroecological transition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 3.2. Enhancing adoption of agroecological practices for sustainable diets and food and nutrition . . . . security for all . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 3.3. Promoting Agrobiodiversity Conservation for Enhanced Ecosystem Benefits in Nakuru County. . . . . .25 3.4 Strengthening agroecological enterprises and markets through investments in infrastructure, incentives, and institutional Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 3.5 Mainstreaming agroecology in existing policy, legal and institutional frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 3.6 Promoting social inclusivity in decision-making and practice in agri-food systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 CHAPTER FOUR: POLICY COORDINATION AND IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK 30 4.1 Policy Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 4.2 Legal Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 4.3 Coordination and Institutional Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 4.4 Resource Mobilization for Policy Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 CHAPTER FIVE: MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 5.1 Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34 5.2 Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34 5.3 Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34 5.4 Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35 CHAPTER SIX: POLICY REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 CHAPTER SEVEN: ANNEXES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 7.1 Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 7.2 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39 7.3 Implementation Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40 7.4 Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 7.5 List of Technical Working Group Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Food systems play a central role in Kenya’s development, shaping livelihoods, nutrition, and economic development. Agriculture forms the foundation of Nakuru County’s food system, supporting over 80% of households in food supply, employment, and incomes. However, this system is under pressure from soil degradation, rising input costs, recurrent droughts, climate variability, and growing food and nutritional insecurity. These challenges undermine the sustainability food system that communities in Nakuru and beyond depend on. Despite these challenges, Nakuru County holds significant opportunities for transformation. Approximately 70% of the County’s land is agriculturally productive and suitable for diverse crops, livestock, and agroforestry. Consumer demand for safe, nutritious, and sustainably produced food is growing, creating new market opportunities, particularly in urban areas. Farmer cooperatives and producer organizations are already active and can serve as platforms for knowledge-sharing, aggregation, and market engagement. At the policy level, the County has established several policies that support agroecology in line with national and international aspirations. The County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP 2023–2027), Urban Food Agriculture Act, and nutrition policies emphasize sustainable farming, diversified diets, and local food security. The Spatial Plan, Climate Change Framework, and Waste Management Policy promote sustainable land use, climate-smart practices, and resource recovery. However, the County lacks a dedicated agroecology policy or legal framework, limiting coordination, accountability, and integration of the practices into county planning and budgeting systems. Existing laws only partially address agroecology, leaving gaps in governance and monitoring. The development of this county-specific policy would formalize agroecology, enhance implementation, and promote sustainable, inclusive, and climate-resilient food systems. The Policy identifies six major challenges facing the food systems in Nakuru County. First, there are significant gaps in knowledge and training capacity. While the County is investing in technology and innovation, both extension officers and farmers often lack practical skills in key agroecological practices such as soil regeneration, integrated pest management, and diversified cropping systems. Second, unsustainable production methods persist, including monocropping, continuous cropping, inefficient irrigation, and excessive reliance on chemical fertilizers and pesticides. These practices degrade soil health and compromise long-term productivity. Additionally, aggressive cultivation techniques like deep ploughing and heavy tillage disrupt soil structure and weaken aggregates. Third, the County is experiencing a marked decline in agrobiodiversity, with serious implications for food security, nutrition, and ecological resilience. Fourth, although consumer interest in agroecologically grown produce is rising due to growing health consciousness, overall awareness remains low. Weak marketing infrastructure—including the absence of certification systems, limited market facilities, and fragmented aggregation—restricts farmers’ access to premium markets. Fifth, existing agricultural policies remain largely conventional, emphasizing external inputs and short-term yields over ecological sustainability. Last, gender and social disparities significantly hinder the adoption of agroecological practices, limiting inclusive participation and benefit-sharing. x To address these challenges, the Policy outlines six strategic Policy Options, each supported by actionable Policy Statements designed to attain agri-food system transformation in Nakuru County. These include: (i) Advancing evidence-based agroecological transitions through participatory, interdisciplinary, and farmer- centered research and training; (ii) Enhancing the adoption of agroecological practices to improve food and nutrition security, promote sustainable diets, and build resilient livelihoods; (iii) Restoring and conserving agrobiodiversity and associated ecosystems to strengthen ecological sustainability; (iv) Fostering agroecological enterprise development and expanding market access through targeted infrastructure investments, incentives, and supportive business services; (v) Establishing an enabling environment through the development and implementation of harmonized legislative and institutional frameworks; and (vi) Promoting inclusive agroecology that prioritizes the participation of vulnerable and marginalized groups. Through these interventions, the Policy aims to deliver tangible outcomes: improved food and nutrition security, increased household incomes, enhanced farm productivity, restored ecosystems, resilient markets, and inclusive socio-economic transformation. In the long term, Nakuru County envisions itself as a hub for climate-smart, inclusive, and sustainable food systems— securing livelihoods and safeguarding the environment for the present and future generations. Successful implementation will require coordinated and collaborative effort. The County Government will provide strategic leadership, while execution will involve close partnerships with farmer groups, cooperatives, private sector actors, civil society organizations, development partners, and research institutions. Farmers and community representatives will remain central to the transition, ensuring that interventions are practical, locally relevant, and responsive to citizens’ needs. By embracing agroecology, Nakuru County will achieve a vision inclusive, equitable, sustainable, and resilient agri-food systems. xi Nakuru County holds immense potential for transformation, with 70% of its land suitable for diverse agriculture and a growing demand for safe, nutritious, and sustainably produced food. xii As the world approaches the year 2030, current trends indicate that hunger and food insecurity remain off track to meet Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Target 2.1 — which seeks to end hunger and ensure access to safe, nutritious, and sufficient food for all. Similarly, progress towards eliminating all forms of malnutrition, as outlined in SDG Target 2.2, continues to lag behind. In Kenya, food insecurity is driven by a combination of structural, environmental, and socio-economic challenges. These include the impacts of climate change, relatively low agricultural productivity, and underdeveloped infrastructure for food storage, marketing and, distribution. These systemic issues have been further worsened by external shocks — including the war in Ukraine — which disrupted global food supply chains and led to sharp increases in food prices. Food items that constitute a healthy diet are often the least affordable, particularly for low-income households. The food security situation is further compounded by declining agricultural productivity, often associated with poor soil health, unsustainable farming practices, and the deteriorating ecological condition of agricultural landscapes. Additionally, the high rural-to-urban migration is contributing to the erosion of rural labour availability, changes in land use, and a growing burden of food insecurity in urban areas. These national dynamics are clearly reflected in Nakuru County. Nakuru is one of Kenya’s 47 counties, located in the former Rift Valley Province. It covers an area of approximately 7,509.5 square kilometres and is endowed with diverse agroecological zones and relatively fertile soils, making it one of the country’s most agriculturally productive regions. Approximately 62% of the county’s land area (466,173 hectares) is arable, with over 70% of this land classified as highly suitable for agricultural production. The county contributes an estimated 4.9% to Kenya’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) through agriculture, forestry, and fisheries. Despite these natural and economic strengths, the food systems in Nakuru County faces a range of persistent challenges. Current farming systems are largely unsustainable, marked by an overreliance on excessive use of inorganic fertilizers and agrochemicals, and limited application of climate-resilient technologies. The sector is increasingly vulnerable to recurrent droughts, emerging pests and diseases, and the broader impacts of climate change. These challenges are made worse by declining soil fertility, loss of agrobiodiversity, and the rising cost of agricultural inputs. Compounding these environmental and technical challenges are significant social inequalities across the food system. Limited access to extension services, quality inputs, and affordable financing continues to undermine productivity and deepen food insecurity. 1.1 Background Despite its fertile soils and economic potential, Nakuru County’s food systems are strained by climate change, declining soil health, and persistent social inequalities. CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1 Women, youth, persons with disabilities and other marginalized groups face systemic barriers in accessing and controlling key productive resources such as land, water, and credit, due to entrenched gender norms, discriminatory inheritance practices, and socio- economic exclusion. Their participation in agricultural decision-making remains limited, both at household and institutional levels. Moreover, the weak capacity for value addition, post-harvest storage, and market access, contributes to high post-harvest losses and persistently low farm-level incomes—particularly among smallholder and vulnerable producers. Agriculture remains the primary source of livelihoods for the majority of residents. Over 80% of households depend on agriculture and related value chains for employment, income generation, and food security. The farming system is predominantly smallholder-based, with an average landholding size of 0.77 hectares (1.9 acres). However, these smallholders face heightened vulnerability: 49% of agricultural households live in poverty, and 36% of the county’s population is classified as food poor. According to the 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census, Nakuru is the third most populous county in the country, with a population of 2,162,202. Although the county’s overall poverty rate (29.1%) is below the national average of 36.1%, spatial disparities remain pronounced, particularly in areas affected by land degradation, water scarcity, and limited market access. Food and nutrition insecurity continue to affect both rural and urban households, manifesting in multiple forms: undernutrition, micronutrient deficiencies (commonly referred to as hidden hunger), and overnutrition, including overweight and obesity. These forms of malnutrition reflect structural inequalities in the food system, including poor dietary diversity, limited access to nutritious foods, and inadequate nutrition education. Compounding these challenges are important concerns related to food safety and inefficiencies within value chains. The improper use of pesticides and veterinary pharmaceuticals, alongside inadequate enforcement of food safety standards, poses considerable health risks to consumers and undermines the competitiveness of agricultural products in both local and external markets. Additionally, the livestock and fisheries sectors continue to suffer from recurrent disease outbreaks, insufficient vaccination coverage, and limited availability of quality feed and fingerlings. These factors collectively impede animal health, reduce productivity, and constrain their overall contribution to food security and economic growth. To effectively address these challenges, there is an urgent need to transform food systems into models that are sustainable, resilient and socially equitable. In response to this imperative, the Government of Kenya developed the National Agroecology Strategy for Food System Transformation (2024–2033) (NAS-FST). Recognizing that agriculture is a devolved function, the NAS-FST emphasizes the need for County Governments to formulate localized agroecology policies and frameworks. These strategies are essential for translating global and national commitments into context-specific actions. The NAS-FST further acknowledges that, although food systems across Kenya are interconnected, the pathways to transformation must reflect regional diversity — including variations in agroecological zones, nutritional needs, farming systems, food cultures, market structures, and environmental conditions. Women, youth, persons with disabilities, and other marginalized groups continue to face deep systemic barriers in accessing land, water, credit, and meaningful participation in agricultural decision- making 2 In alignment with this national direction, and in response to the specific needs of Nakuru County, there is a pressing need for a robust and coherent policy framework to guide the transition to sustainable food systems. Accordingly, the County Government of Nakuru, through the Department of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries, and Veterinary Services (DoALFVS), has developed the Nakuru County Agroecology Policy (2025). This policy aims to accelerate and scale up agroecological interventions that strengthen the resilience of agri-food systems as well as promote environmental sustainability across the county’s landscapes. 1.2 Rationale for Agroecology Policy for Nakuru County The rationale for the Nakuru County Agroecology Policy is grounded in the urgent need to address persistent food and nutrition insecurity, environmental degradation, climate vulnerability, and socio-economic inequalities affecting the County`s agri-food systems. Despite being one of Kenya’s most productive regions, Nakuru has many challenges that undermine the sustainability and resilience of its food production systems. These include declining soil fertility, unsustainable land use practices, biodiversity loss, water scarcity, and overreliance on conventional input-intensive farming systems that degrade natural resources and threaten long-term productivity. Despite its high food production, one in three residents lacks access to healthy and nutritious food. Stunting among children under five stands at 18.5%, wasting at 3%, and underweight prevalence at 9.2%. Maternal anaemia affects nearly 41% of pregnant women, and approximately one-third of households experience poor dietary diversity (Figure 1). Figure 1: Nutrition indicators for Nakuru County Children under 5 who are stunted 18.5 3 9.2 41 33 Children under 5 who are wasted Children under 5 who are underweight Pregnant women with anemia Households with poor dietary diversity Source: Nakuru County Nutrition Action Plan (CNAP) 2020/21–2024/25 https://www.nutritionintl.org/wp-content/ uploads/2021/08/Nutrition-International-KEN-06-Nakuru-CNAP-1.pdf; KIIs interviews 3 Further, a significant proportion of the County’s population continues to experience poverty and food insecurity. Smallholder farmers—who form the backbone of food production in the county—face limited access to quality inputs, extension services, climate-resilient technologies, and markets. The impacts of climate change, such as erratic rainfall, prolonged droughts, and emerging pests and diseases, are compounding these vulnerabilities. Additionally, rural-to-urban migration and changing land use patterns are disrupting traditional food systems, while increasing urban food insecurity. The current state of food systems calls for a fundamental paradigm shift — moving beyond the traditional focus on food availability and production towards systems that are resilient, inclusive, and ecologically sustainable. This transformation requires rethinking food not merely as a commodity for production and trade, but as a key component that affects the environment, people’s health, international trade and global relations (UNDP, 2022). In this context, there is an urgent need to promote and institutionalize agroecological practices that enable the sustainable production of indigenous, nutritious, and safe food. Agroecology presents a holistic and systems- based approach that integrates ecological science, local knowledge, and principles of social equity. It strengthens the capacity of communities to adapt to environmental and socio-economic shocks while enhancing biodiversity, soil health, and ecosystem services. As such, agroecology integrates ecological science with local knowledge systems and prioritizes the restoration of natural ecosystems, food sovereignty, social equity, and economic viability. Transforming food systems calls for a strong policy framework to scale up actions that build resilience and improve the ability of agri-food sectors to adapt. In response, the National Agroecology Strategy for Food System Transformation (2024–2033), calls for county-level frameworks to localize agroecological principles and actions. Nakuru County has a number of frameworks supporting the agri-food sector. However, the county does not have a specific policy or strategy on agroecology. In addition, agroecological initiatives are fragmented and not properly anchored in the existing policies. There is need to strengthen mechanisms for consultation and cooperation among county government departments, non-state agencies, private sector, farmers for better transformation of food systems. This policy provides a strategic response to these interconnected challenges. It seeks to create an enabling environment for the adoption, scaling, and institutionalization of agroecological practices and innovations across the County. 1.3 Policy Goals and Objectives This Policy aims to promote a sustainable, inclusive and climate resilient agricultural system through adoption and scaling up of agroecological practices, enhancing food and nutrition security, environmental conservation and livelihoods. Specific objectives 1. To advance evidence-based agroecological transi- tions through participatory, interdisciplinary, and farmer-centred research and training. 2. To enhance the adoption of agroecological practices for improved food and nutrition security, sustainable diets, and resilient livelihoods 3. To promote restoration and conservation of agrobiodiversity and associated ecosystems for resilience and sustainability 4. To promote agroecological enterprise development and improved market access through infrastructure investments, targeted incentives, and supportive business services 4 5. To establish an enabling environment for agroecology through the development and implementation of a harmonized and supportive legislative and institutional framework 6. To promote inclusive agroecology for vulnerable and marginalized groups and communities. 1.4 Vision A thriving, inclusive, and climate-resilient agri-food system that nourishes all residents, sustains ecosystems, and drives equitable prosperity across Nakuru County. 1.5 Mission To promote agroecology in Nakuru County as a pathway to inclusive, sustainable, and resilient agri-food systems for improved food and nutrition security, enhanced livelihoods, and equitable socio-economic development for all. 1.6 Guiding Principles This policy is anchored on the foundational principles of agroecology, which guide the transformation towards sustainable, resilient, and inclusive agri-food systems. The principles (Figure 1) promote sustainability, equity, and resilience by working with nature and valuing the cultural and socio-economic diversity of communities. In adopting these principles, the Policy seeks to build an agroecological transition that is locally rooted, environmentally sound, and socially just. This includes an explicit focus on the social and economic dimensions of food systems. Agroecology also places a strong focus on the rights of women, youth and indigenous peoples (HLPE, 2019). Improve resource efficiency • Recycling • Input reduction Strengthen resilience • Soil health • Animal health • Biodiversity • Synergy • Economic diversification Secure social equity/ responsibility • Co-creation of knowledge • Social values and diets • Fairness • Connectivity • Land and resource governance • Participation Figure 2: Agroecological principles Source: HPLE 2019; https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user upload/hlpe/hlpe documents/HLPE Reports/HLPE-Report-14 EN.pdf 5 https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/ff385e60-0693-40fe-9a6b-79bbef05202c/content https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user upload/hlpe/hlpe documents/HLPE Reports/HLPE-Report-14 EN.pdf These principles inform and shape the County’s approach to agroecological transformation by embedding ecological integrity, local knowledge, and social equity into all aspects of the policy. In addition, the policy further upholds the following core guiding principles: Innovative and creative thinking:Innovative and creative thinking: The policy promotes innovation and creativity by encouraging continuous learning, questioning conventional approaches, and fostering an environment where new ideas are welcome. The Policy values openness to feedback, experimentation, and adaptive thinking as essential to addressing emerging challenges and advancing agroecological transformation. Ecosystem based management approach: Ecosystem based management approach: An integrated ecosystem approach to conserving environmental resources will ensure that all ecosystems are managed in an integrated manner while also providing a range of benefits to the people. Systems thinking and cross-cutting integration: Systems thinking and cross-cutting integration: The policy is guided by systems thinking — recognizing the interconnected nature of agri-food systems. It promotes a cross-cutting approach that fosters collaboration across sectors and institutions to deliver coordinated, holistic, and sustainable solutions Inclusive: Inclusive: The policy is open and participatory, ensuring meaningful engagement and consultation with citizens. Central to this principle is the deliberate inclusion of women, youth, persons with disabilities (PWDs), indigenous peoples (IPs), vulnerable populations, ethnic and other minority groups, and marginalized communities. Principle of good governance:Principle of good governance: The principles of rule of law, effective institutions, transparency and acceptability, respect for human rights and the meaningful participation of civil population will be integrated in the target resources management initiatives Sustainability principle:Sustainability principle: The policy aligns with Article 69 of the Constitution of Kenya, which mandates sustainable exploitation, utilization, management, and conservation of natural resources, and equitable sharing of the resulting benefits. 6 1.7 Scope of the Nakuru Agroecology policy The Nakuru County Agroecology Policy provides a comprehensive framework to guide the transition toward sustainable, inclusive, and climate-resilient agri-food systems. It focuses on the promotion and integration of agroecological principles and practices across the entire agriculture, livestock, fisheries, and related value chains within the county. The policy applies to both rural and urban food systems and targets a broad range of stakeholders, including smallholder farmers, producer cooperatives, agri-enterprises, community-based organizations, civil society actors, research and academic institutions, and relevant county and national government departments. Implementation of the Policy will span all agroecological zones within Nakuru County, including all sub- counties and wards, ensuring localized relevance and inclusivity. It will be executed in alignment with existing development frameworks—most notably the County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP). The policy will be implemented through a coordinated, multi-sectoral approach involving the following sectors: • Agriculture, Land, Livestock and Fisheries • Health • Environment and Natural Resources • Forestry • Water • Mining • Trade and Cooperatives • Education, Science, Technical and Vocational Training • Tourism, Culture, Gender and Social Services • Finance and Economic Planning This cross-sectoral scope is intended to foster systems thinking and ensure that agroecological transformation is integrated into planning, budgeting, service delivery, capacity building, and monitoring across all relevant sectors. 1.7 Structure of the Policy The policy is structured into six key sections. It begins with an Introduction, which sets the context, outlines the problem, and presents the rationale for adopting an agroecological approach. This is followed by a Situational Analysis, offering an overview of the current status, trends, and challenges within Nakuru County’s food systems. The Policy Statements section articulates the County Government’s commitments and strategic directions to facilitate the transition toward agroecology. The Implementation Framework defines the institutional arrangements, coordination mechanisms, and roles of various stakeholders in executing the policy. The Monitoring and Evaluation section outlines how progress will be tracked, measured, and reported to ensure accountability and learning. Lastly, the Review and Revision section provides guidance on periodic policy updates, while the Annexes include supplementary information and reference materials. 7 This chapter highlights the key challenges affecting the Nakuru County’s agri-food systems. It also outlines the existing policy and legal frameworks that guide and support these systems. The challenges were identified through multi-stakeholder engagements convened by the County Government in collaboration with sector stakeholders 2.1 Key Policy Issues in Agroecology 2.1.1 Inadequate knowledge, training and capacity for advancing agroecology practices The County Government recognizes extension as a major enabler of productivity in the agricultural, livestock, and fisheries sectors (County Government of Nakuru, 2023). To this end, the County operates a hybrid extension system combining ward-based officers with digital platforms and innovative community models. Farmers access support through extension officers and through programmes such as the Nakuru Farmer Call Centre, and the AgriVuma AI platform. In 2025, more than 300 agripreneurs were trained to expand extension by profiling farmers, delivering climate-smart advice, and linking them to markets, mechanization, and finance. Complementary programs such as Plant Doctor training, National Agricultural and Rural Inclusive Growth Project (NARIGP), Agricultural Sector Development Support Programme II (ASDSP II), and the subsidized artificial insemination programme have further strengthened various value chains in the County. Despite these achievements, gaps remain in knowledge and training capacity for agroecology. While the County is investing in technology and other solutions, both extension officers and farmers often lack adequate skills in practices such as soil regeneration, integrated pest management, and diversified cropping. Moreover, the extension officer-to-farmer ratio in the County as of 2025 stands at approximately 1:1500, which is significantly above the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) recommended ratio of 1:400. As a result, many farmers are left without adequate support to transition from conventional to more sustainable and resilient farming systems. At the same time, extension services are often not responsive to women, youth, persons with disabilities, and other marginalized groups, due to social norms, limited mobility, unequal access to resources, and approaches that do not address their specific needs. At the same time, extension in Nakuru has historically been crop-focused, with limited integration of other sectors such as livestock, fisheries, and public health. Embedding these sectors into extension programming would enable a more holistic approach to food systems, ensuring that farmers receive coordinated guidance that links production with health, nutrition, and environmental sustainability. Ensuring that these services are accessible and responsive to women, youth, persons with disabilities, and other marginalized groups will further strengthen inclusivity and equitable participation in the food system. Nakuru County hosts leading training and research institutions such as Egerton University, Baraka Agricultural College, Nakuru Agricultural Training Centre, Kenya School of Agriculture, Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organisation (KALRO) and other farmer training centres. While these provide a strong institutional base, their curricula remain largely geared SITUATION ANALYSIS Chapter 2: 8 toward conventional, input-intensive farming, with limited focus on agroecology. Recent studies indicate that agricultural education and extension services in East Africa often emphasize or reinforce chemical- intensive farming practices, which has contributed to farmer reliance on agrochemical inputs, with associated environmental and health risks. The embedded emphasis on conventional inputs within agricultural curricula and advisory services suggests that education plays a substantial role in shaping these input-dependent practices (Knapp et al., 2023).Stronger partnerships between these institutions and the County Government could realign training, research, and extension toward agroecology. 2.1.2 Unsustainable agri-food production and consumption practises Nakuru County is faced with unsustainable production practises such as monocropping and continuous cropping , which depletes certain nutrients from the field; inefficient irrigation and overreliance on chemical fertilizers and pesticides, which leads to degraded soil health and; aggressive cultivation practices like deep ploughing and heavy tillage which weaken soil aggregates and disrupt the structure of the ground. Heavy reliance and poor application of synthetic fertilizers which affect soil health and beneficial organisms through nutrient imbalances, environmental pollution, and acidifying the land leading to solid degradation. Collectively, these negatively impact food production and productivity. At the same time, pesticides residues exceeding limits have been found in Kenyan foods, particularly the vegetables such as kales and tomatoes. Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs) have high levels of acute or chronic hazards to human health and the environment. Sustainable biopesticides make up only 2% of the total pesticides volume while HHPs make up 76% of the total volume of pesticides used in Kenya (Figure 2). Based on their potential human health toxicity, considering factors such as carcinogenicity, reproductive toxicity, endocrine disruptive activity and mutagenicity, they require urgent regulatory measures. However, on the official data on national pesticides use is not publicly available. The monitoring and surveillance schemes by the relevant government authorities are not comprehensive and are irregularly carried out Source: Heinrich Böll Foundation (2023) At the same time, the county faces a triple burden of malnutrition and food insecurity, associated with undernutrition, micronutrient deficiencies, and over- nutrition. One in three residents lacks access to healthy and nutritious food. Stunting among children under five stands at 18.5%, wasting at 3%, and underweight prevalence at 9%. Maternal anaemia affects nearly 41% of pregnant women, and approximately one-third of households experience poor dietary diversity. This is data points to the fact that food and nutritional insecurity affects women and children more in the county. With increased urbanization, there is a dietary shift towards processed foods, leading to a decrease in the consumption of traditional, nutrient-rich varieties. The consumption unhealthy diets (foods rich in energy and calories, fats, added sugars or salt) and Figure 2: Share of HHPs as the total volume of pesticides used in Kenya Non-HHPs Biopesticides HHPs 22% 2% 76% 9 an inadequate intake of fruits, vegetables and dietary fibre) is contributing to the rise to non-communicable diseases (NCDs), such as cardiovascular disease, cancer and diabetes. By 2016/2017, non-communicable conditions accounted for1.4 million cases (58%) of all morbidity cases including reviews and revisits in Nakuru County (County Government of Nakuru, 2020). Thus, poor consumer choices coupled with unsafe food will continue to negatively affect nutrition and health outcomes, if unaddressed. Rising urbanization also increasing the potential for urban farming where households can profitably practice new urban production systems such as vertical and rooftop gardening. Yet, the County lacks mechanisms for regulating and advancing urban agroecology within these systems. Also, food loss and waste remain an outstanding barrier for advancing better food systems for all. This is largely poor post-harvest practises, poor waste collection and lack of infrastructure for circularity, including recycling. 2.1.3. Loss of agrobiodiversity and ecosystem function Agrobiodiversity refers to the variety of crops, livestock, and microorganisms that sustain food security, ecosystem health, and climate resilience. It supports nutrition, pollination, and soil fertility but is increasingly threatened by commercial farming, urbanization, climate change, pesticides, and the erosion of traditional knowledge. Nakuru County is facing a marked decline in agrobiodiversity, with serious implications for food security, nutrition, and ecological resilience. The shift toward conventional farming—dominated by high- yielding, often non-native crop varieties and livestock breeds—has displaced diverse traditional production systems. Although the County still possesses rich but underutilized agrobiodiversity, much of it remains untapped. A 2023 survey of 244 farmers, mostly women, revealed that while an average of 17 crops were cultivated, intra-species diversity was low, with most farmers growing only a single variety per crop. This points to an emphasis on species richness rather than genetic diversity within species, weakening farming systems. On seed systems, a 2021 report by Seed Savers Network Kenya highlighted a worrying loss of crop diversity, documenting the disappearance of more than 50 local varieties within a three-year period across several counties, including Nakuru. The study found that formerly common grains, legumes, vegetables, and tubers could no longer be traced in many farming communities. This decline is linked to the dominance of commercial seed systems, urbanization, and the weakening of traditional seed-saving knowledge, all of which have left farmers increasingly dependent on purchased seeds. The findings underscore the urgency of investing in community seed banks, participatory breeding, and agroecology training programs to safeguard remaining diversity and ensure resilient food systems (Seed Savers Network Kenya, 2021). The erosion of traditional knowledge tied to local seed varieties has accelerated the decline in crop diversity, directly affecting household dietary diversity and nutrition. In Rongai Sub-County, for example, agrobiodiversity varied between high- and low-potential agricultural zones in 2019, yet women’s diets remained poorly diversified. By 2022, 17.5% of children under five in Nakuru County were stunted, 3% wasted, and 9% underweight — alarmingly high levels given the 10 https://seedsaverskenya.org/need-for-action-local-varieties-are-being-eroded-at-a-high-rate/?utm source=chatgpt.com critical role of food diversity in preventing malnutrition (KNBS and ICF, 2023). Key factors contributing to the loss of plant genetic resources include the shift toward commercial seed varieties, limited recognition of farmer-managed seed systems, inadequate support for community seed banks, and weak coordination among government agencies. The decline in traditional seed production further reduces the availability and use of diverse seeds, making it harder to maintain resilient and sustainable farming systems. Neglected and underutilized crop species (NUS), which are not widely recognized by researchers or policymakers as major staples, have significant potential to enhance local food security and nutrition due to their high nutritional value and traditional medicinal uses (Joshi, 2023). The continued neglect of NUS has led to the decline or local disappearance of several varieties, reducing crop diversity and limiting opportunities for resilient, nutrient-rich, and agroecologically sustainable farming systems across the county. Forests in Nakuru County are vital for biodiversity, water regulation, carbon storage, and wildlife habitats. From 2001 to 2023, the county lost 32.4 thousand hectares of tree cover—a 26% decline since 2000—resulting in approximately 19 million tonnes of CO₂-equivalent emissions (Global Forest Watch, 2024). Rivers and lakes are also deteriorating due to erosion, siltation, and pollution, rendering water and fish unsafe for human consumption. These environmental challenges jeopardize both ecological health and the livelihoods of local communities. 2.1.4. Underdeveloped agroecological enterprises and limited market access for associated products In Nakuru County, a growing health consciousness among consumers is leading to increased interest in agroecologically grown produce. However, overall awareness remains low. A major challenge is weak marketing infrastructure, including the absence of certification systems, limited market facilities, and fragmented aggregation of produce, which restricts farmers’ access to consumers willing to pay premium prices (Rampa and Knaepen, 2019). Even when farmers adopt sustainable practices, consumers are not able to differentiate between sustainably produced food vs conventional food. Also, there is poor access to premium markets due to limited education and marketing, resulting in weak demand and poor market differentiation. This hinders farmers practicing agroecology from competing with conventional producers despite their environmental and health benefits. Research underscores the need for structured consumer education, certification of both agroecological inputs and products, labelling, and retailer partnerships to build trust and promote agro ecological products. Moreover, there is a need to organize supply chain systems for better aggregation and functioning of local markets as well as connect rural producers to urban centers. Limited access to affordable bio-inputs and the initial costs of transitioning to sustainable practices further challenge smallholders’ ability to meet product requirements. The bio-input production system is still nascent leading to low supply of bio-inputs. Inadequate road networks and poor storage facilities contribute to post-harvest losses and delay market delivery, affecting market access for agroecological farmers. Addressing these issues is crucial to unlocking the full potential of agroecology in Nakuru County. Unlocking the potential of agroecology in Nakuru requires strong certification, better market infrastructure, and organized supply chains that connect rural producers to growing urban demand. 11 2.1.5. Weak policy and legislative frameworks for mainstreaming agroecology Nakuru County’s agricultural policy landscape aligns with national frameworks but primarily emphasizes increasing production and productivity through strategies such as Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs), value addition, and technology adoption, as outlined in the County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP). These policies aim to boost yields, enhance food security, and promote participation of youth and women. However, they remain largely conventional, focusing on external inputs like synthetic fertilizers and hybrid seeds, and prioritizing short-term productivity over long-term ecological sustainability. Although small-scale farmers rely heavily on the informal seed sector—contributing approximately 80% of seeds—formal systems for alternative certification, such as the Quality Declared Seeds (QDS) framework, are not yet established. This limits legal support for farmer-managed seeds and access through community seed banks. Policies also lack frameworks to protect and standardize farmers’ innovations and traditional knowledge. There are gaps in explicit policy definitions, dedicated funding, and regulatory mechanisms to support a full transition to agroecology, including the gradual reduction of harmful chemical inputs. Additionally, current policies do not adequately support agroecological value chains, market infrastructure, or accessible certification systems. These policy gaps limit the adoption of agroecological practices, reducing farmers’ ability to build resilient and sustainable farming systems in Nakuru County. 2.1.6. Gender and social disparities in food systems In Nakuru County, gender and social disparities significantly hinder the adoption of agroecological practices. Women, youth, persons with disabilities (PWDs), indigenous peoples (IPs), the vulnerable, ethnic and other minority groups, and marginalized communities face unequal access to and control over critical productive resources such as land, credit, training, and technology. Although women contribute the bulk of agricultural labour, they often lack decision- making power, with men historically retaining control over farm management and income (Alliance Biodiversity International–CIAT, 2020). These inequities not only undermine inclusivity in the food system but also weaken efforts to scale up agroecological practices that rely on collective participation and equitable benefit- sharing. Unequal access to land, credit, training, and decision- making power continues to exclude women, youth, Indigenous Peoples, and persons with disabilities from fully participating in Nakuru’s food system. 12 Youth in Nakuru County face significant social and structural barriers to engaging in agroecology. Agriculture is often perceived as unprofitable and outdated, discouraging youth participation. Access to productive resources remains a major constraint, as over 80% of Kenya’s agricultural land is controlled by older generations, leaving young people with little or no land ownership (Mureithi, 2023). This is further compounded by financial exclusion, with majority of younger people unable to access any form of credit, leaving them dependent on informal financing sources like family and moneylenders. Educational gaps also persist, with agroecological principles largely absent from formal curricula; nationally, only 23% of rural youth have received any form of agricultural training (CTA, 2019). These challenges—combined with unequal decision-making power, and social norms—limit the ability of youth to adopt and scale sustainable practices in the county. The Indigenous Peoples such as the Ogiek and Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) continue to face systemic exclusion from agricultural programs and policy processes. The Community struggles with land tenure insecurity, displacement from traditional territories, and weak recognition of their ecological knowledge, despite their long history of forest stewardship and biodiversity conservation. Persons with Disabilities, on the other hand, encounter barriers such as inaccessible extension services, lack of adaptive technologies, mobility challenges, and persistent social stigma, which limit their ability to adopt agroecological practices. Closing the inequality gaps in Nakuru’s food system requires more than incremental adjustments. Extension services still carry a strong conventional bias and often overlook socio-cultural barriers, particularly around secure land tenure and decision-making power for women and youth. Bridging these gaps calls for a fundamental policy shift—one that ensures equitable access to land, credit, and other productive resources for all gender and social groups, and complements this with targeted capacity building. Importantly, the active involvement of all groups will empower communities and enable a just, inclusive transformation toward resilient agroecological food systems. 2.2 Policy, Legal and Institutional Framework Agroecology is increasingly acknowledged within global, national, and county policy frameworks as a strategic pathway toward the attainment of sustainable, equitable, and resilient food systems. Whereas global and national instruments establish the overarching policy direction and commitments, county governments, including the County Government of Nakuru, bear the primary responsibility for the domestication, implementation, and operationalization of these commitments within their respective jurisdictions. . 2.2.1 Global and regional policy context for agroecology Agroecology further underpins the implementation of the three Rio Conventions, namely: the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). The Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (COP 15) underscores, under Target 10, the sustainable management of agriculture, aquaculture, and forestry through agroecological and other nature- based approaches. Similarly, the Paris Agreement (2015) and subsequent Conferences of the Parties (COPs) have progressively prioritized the vulnerabilities and transformation of food systems in the context of climate change. While COP 28 did not expressly reference agroecology, it endorsed its underlying principles through the Emirates Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems; COP 29, however, provided an enhanced platform explicitly recognizing agroecology as a central component of climate action and food systems transformation.. 13 At the continental level, the Malabo Declaration (2014) reaffirms sustainable agriculture as a cornerstone for achieving food security, rural development, and climate resilience. The Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) advances agroecological principles to promote food sovereignty and environmental sustainability, while regional alliances such as the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) advocate for agroecology as a people- centred, biodiversity-supportive, and climate-resilient model of agricultural transformation.. For Nakuru County, these global and regional frameworks provide normative policy foundation for mainstreaming agroecology into local food system strategies. By aligning county programs and interventions with international and continental commitments, the Countyshall accelerate the transition towards a sustainable, resilient, and inclusive food system that guarantees nutrition security, safeguards biodiversity, enhances climate resilience, and empowers all segments of society, including women, youth, and marginalized populations.. 2.2.2 National policy, legal and institutional frameworks Kenya has established policies and legal frameworks that support agroecology and sustainable food systems. These guide climate-smart, biodiversity-friendly, and inclusive practices, while providing counties with a basis to adapt national objectives to local contexts. The Constitution of Kenya, 2010The Constitution of Kenya, 2010 Kenya’s 2010 Constitution guarantees the right of every person to be free from hunger and to have access to adequate food of acceptable quality, pursuant to Article 43(1)(c), and further secures the right of every child to basic nutrition, shelter, and health care in accordance with Article 53(1)(c). It also affirms the right of every person to a clean and healthy environment and obligates the State to ensure sustainable exploitation, utilization, management, and conservation of the environment and natural resources for the benefit of present and future generations, as provided under Articles 42(a) and 69(2. It also protects environmental rights, requiring conservation for current and future generations (Articles 42(a) and 69(2)), Additionally, Article 11(3)(b) mandates the State to recognize and protect the ownership of indigenous seeds and plant varieties and to promote their use by communities. The Constitution delineates the respective functions of the National and County Governments within the devolved system, emphasizing the principles of consultation and cooperation as set out under Articles 6(2) and 189. In this regard, the National Government is responsible for the formulation of agricultural policy, while County Governments are mandated to undertake crop and animal husbandry, livestock marketing, plant and animal disease control, fisheries management, and the localized implementation of environmental, trade, and related regulatory frameworks. 14 Kenya Vision 2030 and Medium-Term Plans (MTP IV 2023–2027)Kenya Vision 2030 and Medium-Term Plans (MTP IV 2023–2027) The Fourth Medium-Term Plan (MTP IV) of the Kenya Vision 2030 framework prioritizes the enhancement of agricultural productivity, improvement of market access, and advancement of nutritional outcomes as key pillars of national development. It underscores the promotion of smallholder farmers, the development of agricultural and market infrastructure, the strengthening of food systems, and the integration of nutrition education within health service delivery. MTP IV further seeks to address cross-cutting challenges, including climate change, inequality, and resource-based conflicts, in alignment with Sustainable Development Goal 2 on Zero Hunger. Complementing this policy direction, the Bottom-Up Economic Transformation Agenda (BETA) emphasizes inclusive and sustainable economic growth through strategic investments in the agricultural sector, the development and strengthening of value chains, and the reduction of post-harvest losses, thereby fostering food security, employment creation, and poverty reduction. National Agricultural Policy, 2021National Agricultural Policy, 2021 The Policy aims to transform the sector by increasing productivity and commercialization, enhancing food security, and ensuring environmental sustainability. It acknowledges agroecology as a strategic approach for addressing the adverse impacts of climate change and for promoting sustainable agricultural practices across the crop, livestock, and fisheries sub-sectors. The Policy expressly recommends the adoption and integration of agroecological and other nature-based solutions as mechanisms for enhancing the resilience, productivity, and sustainability of national food systems. In furtherance of these objectives, the Policy provides a basis for the formulation and implementation of county-level agroecology strategies aimed at operationalizing these commitments within devolved governance frameworks. Agricultural Sector Transformation and Growth Strategy (ASTGS), 2019 – 2029Agricultural Sector Transformation and Growth Strategy (ASTGS), 2019 – 2029 The Strategy recognizes the continuing loss of biodiversity and underscores the imperative of its preservation and restoration in tandem with the advancement of modern agricultural practices. In this regard, the formulation of an agroecology policy shall provide a structured framework for articulating concrete measures and interventions aimed at promoting sustainability, enhancing ecosystem integrity, and strengthening the resilience of agriculture and food systems. Agricultural soil Management Policy, 2023Agricultural soil Management Policy, 2023 The Policy provides for measures to ensure the sustainable utilization and management of natural resources, with particular emphasis on soil conservation and restoration, as a means of enhancing agricultural productivity while safeguarding environmental integrity. It further underscores the obligation of both the National and County Governments to formulate 15 and implement appropriate strategies and frameworks that promote the sustainable use, protection, and rehabilitation of agricultural soils within their respective jurisdictions. Kenya Agricultural Sector Extension Policy (KASEP), 2023Kenya Agricultural Sector Extension Policy (KASEP), 2023 New and emerging demands upon the agricultural extension system necessitate the provision of enhanced support to actors within the agricultural value chain, enabling them to effectively respond to threats arising from climate change and other emerging risks. In light of these challenges, extension service providers shall be required to adopt approaches that extend beyond the conventional dissemination of technologies, embracing comprehensive mechanisms for knowledge exchange, capacity development, and adaptive innovation. The Agroecology Policy shall operate in a complementary manner to this Policy, with the objective of strengthening the institutional framework for research, knowledge generation, and the delivery of extension services across the agricultural sector. Crops Act, Cap 318 Laws of Kenya Crops Act, Cap 318 Laws of Kenya The objective of the Act is to accelerate the growth and development of agriculture in general, enhance productivity and incomes of farmers and the rural population, improve investment climate and efficiency of agribusiness and develop agricultural crops as export crops that will augment the foreign exchange earnings of the country, through promotion of the production, processing, marketing, and distribution of crops in suitable areas of the country. Recognizing that landowners and lessees serve as custodians of agricultural land, they bear the duty to manage and utilize such land in a manner that upholds principles of sustainability and environmental stewardship. In fulfilling this obligation, they shall ensure the maintenance of economic productivity while safeguarding soil integrity, promoting biodiversity, and conserving natural resources. This mandate shall be consistent with the agroecological principles of soil health, ecological balance, and sustainable land management. Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Cultural Expressions Act, Cap 218A Laws of Kenya Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Cultural Expressions Act, Cap 218A Laws of Kenya This legislation established a comprehensive framework for the recognition, protection, and promotion of Traditional Knowledge (TK) and Traditional Cultural Expressions (TCEs). In doing so, it gave effect to the provisions of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, including— (a) Article 11, which recognizes culture as the foundation of the nation and obligates the State to promote all forms of cultural expression; (b) Article 40, which guarantees the protection of intellectual property rights; (c) Article 69(1)(a) and (c), which impose on the State the duty to ensure sustainable exploitation, utilization, management, and conservation of the environment and natural resources, and to encourage public participation in their management; and (d) Article 260, which defines “property” to include both tangible and intangible heritage. 16 Accordingly, this Policy shall promote the equitable utilization, preservation, and transmission of Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions for the benefit of present and future generations, consistent with agroecological and cultural sustainability principles. National Environmental Policy, 2013National Environmental Policy, 2013 The policy acknowledges the connection between agriculture and biodiversity and outlines measures to promote biodiversity conservation. It advocates for the adoption of integrated land use management, eco-friendly or organic farming practices, soil management policies, access and benefit-sharing frameworks, Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES), and green procurement initiatives. An agroecology policy can play a key role in facilitating the implementation of these measures. National Land Policy, 2023National Land Policy, 2023 The Policy upholds the constitutional principles of equity, inclusivity, and social justice in land ownership, access, and utilization. The Policy ensures that marginalized and vulnerable groups, including women, youth, pastoralist communities, and persons with disabilities, are accorded equitable access to, and secure tenure over, land and land-based resources. In furtherance of this objective, the Policy promotes the establishment of legal and institutional mechanisms that guarantee tenure security and enable long-term and sustainable investments in agroecological and climate-resilient agricultural practices. These measures shall be directed toward enhancing land productivity, promoting environmental stewardship, and ensuring the intergenerational sustainability of natural resources. Accordingly, the Policy shall provide the framework for the integration of equity considerations into land governance systems, thereby fostering inclusive participation, responsible land use, and the realization of the right to a clean and healthy environment as enshrined under Article 42 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010. The Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act, Cap 387 Laws of KenyaThe Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act, Cap 387 Laws of Kenya It reinforces the national commitment to the sustainable management, conservation, and utilization of natural resources in accordance with the principles of environmental integrity and intergenerational equity. The Act mandates that all activities, including those within the agricultural sector, shall be conducted in a manner that upholds ecological balance and minimizes adverse environmental impacts. In alignment with the principles of agroecology, the Act promotes the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices, including the conservation and enhancement of soil fertility, the diversification of cropping systems, and the prevention and mitigation of environmental degradation arising from agricultural production and related land-use activities. 17 Accordingly, the Act provides the statutory framework for integrating environmental sustainability considerations into agricultural planning, implementation, and monitoring processes, thereby fostering resilience, productivity, and ecological harmony within farming systems. Climate Smart Agriculture Strategy, 2017–2026Climate Smart Agriculture Strategy, 2017–2026 The Policy aims to enhance the resilience of the agricultural sector, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and sustain or increase productivity under conditions of climate variability and stress. In pursuit of these objectives, the Policy seeks to promote adaptive and mitigation- oriented measures that ensure long-term environmental sustainability and food security. In this regard, agroecology serves as a complementary framework for achieving these outcomes by fostering diversified, nature-based, and low-external-input farming systems. Such systems enhance ecosystem functions, improve soil health, promote efficient resource utilization, and strengthen the overall sustainability and climate resilience of national food systems. Accordingly, the integration of agroecological principles within climate and agricultural policies shall contribute to the realization of Kenya’s commitments under the Climate Change Act, 2016, and the National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP), as well as international obligations under the Paris Agreement. National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, 2019–2030National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, 2019–2030 The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP), provides a comprehensive framework for the conservation, sustainable use, and equitable benefit-sharing of Kenya’s biological resources. The Plan identifies critical natural ecosystems including forests, woodlands, shrub lands, grasslands, deserts, and wetlands and sets out strategic interventions aimed at halting and reversing biodiversity loss through restoration, sustainable management, and ecosystem-based approaches. The NBSAP recognizes agroecology as an integral and complementary approach for enhancing biodiversity within agricultural landscapes, promoting ecological integrity, and supporting sustainable livelihoods. However, the Plan accords limited prioritization to the agriculture, forestry, and fisheries sectors, thereby creating an institutional and policy gap in the integration of biodiversity conservation within production systems. Accordingly, the Agroecology Policy and Strategy shall complement and operationalize the objectives of the NBSAP by mainstreaming biodiversity conservation into agricultural, forestry, and fisheries practices. This will ensure the harmonization of sectoral policies, promote ecosystem resilience, and advance the sustainable management of natural resources in accordance with the principles of ecological sustainability and intergenerational equity. 18 Access to Biological Resources and Benefit Sharing (ABS) Regulations (2025) Access to Biological Resources and Benefit Sharing (ABS) Regulations (2025) The Regulations are designed to strengthen and advance agroecological practices by safeguarding biodiversity and genetic resources, formally recognizing and appropriately rewarding the knowledge and innovations of farmers and local communities, and ensuring the equitable sharing of benefits derived from the utilization of such resources. The Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) framework established under these Regulations further promotes the conservation of biological resources, supports the development of fair and transparent markets, and reinforces the core principles of agroecology, including equity, environmental sustainability, and resilience. Accordingly, the Regulations provide a statutory and operational framework for integrating community-based knowledge systems into agricultural practices, thereby enhancing ecological integrity, supporting livelihood security, and promoting intergenerational stewardship of natural resources. National Agroforestry Strategy, 2021–2030National Agroforestry Strategy, 2021–2030 The primary objective of the Strategy is to promote agroforestry as a sustainable land-use approach that contributes to job creation, enhances household and community incomes, improves food and nutrition security, conserves biodiversity, and strengthens climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts. The promotion of agroforestry aligns closely with the principles of agroecology, particularly in fostering diversified, resilient, and ecologically integrated landscapes. By integrating trees, crops, and livestock in productive systems, the Strategy supports the restoration of ecosystem functions, enhances resource-use efficiency, and reinforces sustainable livelihoods across rural communities. Accordingly, the Strategy provides a framework for harmonizing agroforestry interventions with broader agroecological objectives, ensuring that ecological, economic, and social benefits are maximized across agricultural landscapes. The Science, Technology and Innovation Act Cap 511 Laws of Kenya The Science, Technology and Innovation Act Cap 511 Laws of Kenya The Act was enacted to provide a legal and institutional framework for the promotion, coordination, and regulation of the advancement of science, technology, and innovation (ST&I) in Kenya. The Act mandates the identification and development of national research priorities, the integration of ST&I into the national production system, and the facilitation of evidence- based decision-making across all sectors of the economy. 19 In implementing these objectives, the Act aims to foster innovation-driven development, enhance knowledge generation, and strengthen the capacity of national institutions to support sustainable agricultural, industrial, and socio-economic transformation. National Food and Nutrition Security Policy, 2011,National Food and Nutrition Security Policy, 2011, The policy underscores the imperatives of ensuring both the availability and affordability of food; however, it remains inadequately harmonized with existing environmental and social protection frameworks. The policy expressly recognizes the triple burden of malnutrition and mandates the adoption of multisectoral and multidisciplinary strategies, as well as collaborative mechanisms, to effectuate the sustainable mitigation of malnutrition across all populations within the Republic of Kenya. The Consumer Protection Act, Cap 501 Laws of Kenya The Consumer Protection Act, Cap 501 Laws of Kenya The Act reinforces the principles of agroecology by providing protection to consumers against unsafe, substandard, or misleading food products, while concurrently promoting transparency, accountability, and integrity within the market. Through the imposition of requirements for accurate labelling and the assurance of food safety, the Act seeks to enhance consumer confidence in agroecological produce, which is characterized by reduced reliance on chemical inputs and adherence to ecological sustainability standards. National Agroecology Strategy for Food System Transformation (NAS-FST), 2024–2033National Agroecology Strategy for Food System Transformation (NAS-FST), 2024–2033 The policy, launched in 2024, emphasizes the limited integration of agroecological approaches in current food system interventions and mandates counties to develop context-specific strategies that reflect local priorities and challenges. The NAS-FST highlights the role of county governments in adapting policies, designing programs, and coordinating stakeholders. Counties are expected to develop agroecology policies and action plans aligned with national objectives, addressing local issues such as resource access, land tenure, socio-cultural barriers, and farmer capacity gaps. They also facilitate extension services, training, promotion of indigenous knowledge, and market linkages to support sustainable adoption. Institutional mechanisms support implementation, including the Agroecology Summit, convened with the Council of Governors (COG) to provide policy guidance, and the National Technical Committee on Agroecology, which coordinates mainstreaming and implementation across sectors and counties. Through these mechanisms, county governments are positioned as key drivers of resilient, inclusive, and sustainable food systems that enhance food security, conserve biodiversity, and respond to climate change. 20 2.2.3 County level legislations Nakuru County has developed several policies and frameworks that support agroecology, aiming to promote sustainable, resilient, and inclusive food systems. Nakuru County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP), 2023–2027Nakuru County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP), 2023–2027 The County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP) delineates the County’s development priorities, strategic objectives, and programmatic interventions for the period 2023–2027. The Plan encompasses initiatives aimed at enhancing crop production, advancing extension services, and supporting agribusiness enterprises, all of which are consistent with and promote the principles of agroecology. Nakuru County Urban Food Agriculture Act, 2021Nakuru County Urban Food Agriculture Act, 2021 The Nakuru County Urban Food Agriculture Act, 2021, establishes a legal framework to promote and facilitate urban and peri-urban agricultural activities within the County. The Act encourages the integration of food production into land use planning and urban development strategies, thereby strengthening local food systems and ensuring the availability of fresh, nutritious, and locally produced food. In alignment with the principles of agroecology, the Act supports sustainable, diversified, and locally adapted farming practices that minimize reliance on external chemical inputs, enhance ecological resilience, and maintain environmental integrity. By fostering urban food production, the Act contributes to improved food security, community nutrition, and broader environmental stewardship, while promoting inclusive participation of urban residents in sustainable agricultural practices. Nakuru County Nutrition Policy (Draft, 2025)Nakuru County Nutrition Policy (Draft, 2025) Aims to reduce malnutrition, enhance food security, and improve overall health. Strategies include promoting healthy diets, sustainable agricultural practices, and community engagement. By integrating agroecological principles, the policy emphasizes diversified, nutrient-rich crops and environmentally friendly farming methods to improve dietary outcomes. Nakuru County Nutrition Action Plan (CNAP) 2020/21 – 2024/25 Nakuru County Nutrition Action Plan (CNAP) 2020/21 – 2024/25 Focuses on improving maternal, infant, and young child nutrition through capacity building, community sensitization, and integration of nutrition objectives into county development plans. Agroecology is incorporated by promoting local, diverse, and resilient food production. 21 Nakuru County Spatial Plan, 2019–2029Nakuru County Spatial Plan, 2019–2029 The Nakuru County Spatial Plan, 2019–2029, provides guidance for spatial development within the County, with particular emphasis on sustainable land use and the prudent management of natural resources. The Plan thereby facilitates the implementation of agroecological farming systems that conserve biodiversity and uphold essential ecosystem services. Nakuru County Climate Change Policy Framework, 2021 Nakuru County Climate Change Policy Framework, 2021 It advances climate resilience, facilitates low-carbon economic growth, and mandates the integration of climate change considerations into all County planning and development processes. In this context, agroecology serves as a strategic approach by fostering diversified, low-input agricultural systems that mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, enhance environmental sustainability, and strengthen the adaptive capacity of farming communities to climate-related risks and variability. Nakuru County Waste Management Policy, 2019Nakuru County Waste Management Policy, 2019 Establishes and promotes sustainable waste management practices, encompassing recycling, resource recovery, and the environmentally sound disposal of waste. In alignment with agroecological principles, the Policy facilitates the enhancement of soil fertility through the reutilization of organic waste, while simultaneously mitigating environmental contamination and supporting the sustainability of agricultural ecosystems. Nakuru County Public Markets Policy, 2023 Nakuru County Public Markets Policy, 2023 Aims to improve access to market services, enhance service delivery, and support new market development. Agroecology is linked by promoting market access for sustainably produced, diverse, and local foods. Despite the existence of several supportive policies, Nakuru County lacks a dedicated agroecology policy or legislative framework, limiting effective governance, oversight, and implementation of sustainable practices. While some county laws touch on agroecological principles, these are not systematically integrated into the County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP), extension services, annual work plans, budgets, or monitoring systems. This gap hampers interdepartmental coordination, civic education, inclusivity, and the systematic tracking of agroecology initiatives. Establishing a county-specific policy would formalize agroecology, guide implementation, strengthen accountability, and embed these practices into planning and budgeting, ultimately supporting sustainable, climate-resilient, and inclusive food systems 22 This chapter presents the policy options to facilitate the transition to agroecological farming in the County. It focuses on the identified challenges and opportunities to address them. 3.1. Integrating agroecology into research, extension, and training to strengthen knowledge and institutional capacity for agroecological transition The successful transition to agroecological food systems in Nakuru County depends on a strong foundation of knowledge, innovation, and institutional support. However, current research agendas, extension models, and training curricula often overlook agroecological principles and practices. Mainstreaming agroecology into these domains is essential to generate locally relevant knowledge, build the capacity of farmers and institutions, and support evidence-based policy implementation. Given the diversity of agroecological zones (AEZs) in Nakuru County, many smallholder farmers operate complex farming systems that require locally validated, adaptable technologies. However, a major institutional gap persists due to weak linkages between research institutions, extension services, and farmer organizations. Agricultural extension—defined as the application of scientific research and new knowledge through farmer education—must be reoriented to bridge this divide and support agroecological innovation. Strengthening these knowledge systems is key to building institutional capacity, enhancing farmer learning, and accelerating the county’s agroecological transition. CHAPTER THREE: POLICY STATEMENTS Policy Issue:Policy Issue: Weak integration of agroecology in agricultural research, training, and extension systems Policy Objective:Policy Objective: To advance evidence-based agroecological transitions through participatory, interdisciplinary, and farmer-centered research and training Policy statements:Policy statements: The County Government will; (i) Promote the co-creation of knowledge between farmers, holders of indigenous technical knowledge, research institutions, extension agents, and other relevant stakeholders to enhance the relevance, adaptability, and uptake of agroecological practices (ii) Promote agroecological research hubs and learning networks to support farmer-led research and experimentation across diverse landscapes, ensuring responsiveness to the needs of different farmer categories, including women, youth, persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups (iii) Strengthen linkages between research institutions, extension services, and farming communities to enhance knowledge exchange for the co-creation, dissemination, and scaling of agroecological practices 23 Policy Issue: Policy Issue: Limited adoption of agroecological practices in Nakuru County limits the potential for achieving sustainable diets, food and nutrition security, and resilient farming systems. Policy Objective:Policy Objective: To enhance the adoption of agroecological practices for improved food and nutrition security, sustainable diets, and resilient livelihoods Policy Statements: Policy Statements: The County Government will; (i) Promote lower-cost crop and livestock management solutions/innovations for farmers to facilitate affordability leading to higher adoption of agroecology (ii) Strengthen local production, exchange (sharing and sale) and distribution of agroecological/ organic inputs (iv) Design and implement appropriate curriculum and training resources on agroecology for use in Agricultural Training Centers (ATCs), County Technical Training Institutes (CTTIs), and other relevant Technical and Vocational Educational Centres (TVETS), to build long-term capacity in agroecological transition (v) Integrate nutrition-sensitive agriculture approaches in agroecology into vocational, extension and farmer training curricula (vi) Strengthen public and private extension services to scale up the adoption of agroecological practices, and adopt inclusive delivery models that are responsive to the specific needs of women, youth, and persons with disabilities (vii) Establish a network of agroecology champions—comprising farmer-practitioners, religious leaders, and local administrators such as chiefs—to promote and disseminate agroecological practices at the community level, in close collaboration with public and private extension services (viii) Support the documentation, validation, and dissemination of farmers’ innovations, and leverage technology digitalization, and social media to enhance knowledge exchange and promote scalable agroecological solutions. 3.2. Enhancing adoption of agroecological practices for sustainable diets and food and nutrition security for all Despite its rich agricultural potential, Nakuru County continues to face persistent food and nutrition insecurity, particularly among vulnerable populations. Diets remain largely energy-dense but nutrient- poor, contributing to undernutrition, micronutrient deficiencies, and rising cases of overweight and obesity. This situation is further compounded by unsustainable farming practices that degrade soil health, reduce agrobiodiversity, increase vulnerability to climate change, and raise food safety concerns—particularly due to the increased use of highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs). Promoting agroecological practices offers a transformative pathway to address these interconnected challenges by fostering diversified and sustainable food systems. However, uptake of these practices remains limited among stakeholders due to gaps in knowledge, institutional support, and market access. 24 (iii) Promote on-farm crop and livestock diversification—prioritizing locally adapted and climate- resilient crop varieties and livestock breeds—to enhance climate resilience, improve soil health, and strengthen food and nutrition security (iv) Promote the establishment and growth of nature-based enterprises—such as apiculture, bioconversion (e.g. vermicomposting, black soldier fly and anaerobic digestion), mushroom cultivation, ecotourism, and growing of medicinal and aromatic plants—as alternative and complementary livelihood options (v) Strengthen food safety systems to eliminate harmful and unsafe foods from the market through enhanced regulation, surveillance, enforcement, and public awareness along the entire food supply chain (vi) Support consumer education, awareness and behavior change on benefits of agroecological products proactively as an investment into primary healthcare and environmental conservation (vii) Promote the consumption of diverse, safe, and healthy diets at the household level, and across public and private institutions (viii) Support nutrition sensitive programming that sustainably caters for the nutritional needs of different groups including women, youth and persons with disabilities Policy Issue: Policy Issue: Declining agrobiodiversity and ecosystem in agri-food production landscapes undermines productivity, sustainability, and resilience of food systems Policy Objective: Policy Objective: To promote restoration and conservation of agrobiodiversity and associated ecosystems for resilience and sustainability. Policy StatementsPolicy Statements The County Government will; (i) Facilitate participatory mapping and documentation of agrobiodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation across agri-food landscapes in Nakuru County, as a basis for informed restoration and sustainable management interventions 3.3. Promoting Agrobiodiversity Conservation for Enhanced Ecosystem Benefits in Nakuru County. Biodiversity and agriculture have an inseparable relationship, with interdependent interactions between their constituent components. Agrobiodiversity is essential to enhancing ecosystem resilience to the negative effects of climate change, such as changing weather patterns, a greater incidence of extreme events, and the emergence of pests and diseases (Agnoletti and Santoro, 2022; Ravera et al., 2019). It also contributes to soil health and carbon sequestration. Agrobiodiversity is the basis of the existence of food production processes and provides and secures many essential aspects of modern living. Improving agricultural biodiversity management requires close coordination among farmers, officials, conservation experts, and policymakers. The formulation of policies that encourage investment in programs promote agroecological practices in diverse crops and livestock enterprises, and enhance community engagement in agrobiodiversity conservation would ensure sustainable food systems. 25 3.4 Strengthening agroecological enterprises and markets through investments in infrastructure, incentives, and institutional Support The early stages of development in local markets for agroecological products, would present both distinctive challenges and opportunities. The value of agroecological food is found in its characteristics as organic, healthy, natural and safe food that is free from agrochemicals. The growing health consciousness in consumers would lead to increased demand for agro ecologically grown produce. Market channels become agroecological through the specific rules, networks and including material objects such as physical markets, labels and posters. Agroecology promotes value creation and fosters opportunities for innovative business models and decentralised solutions. (ii) Support the establishment of agrobiodiversity conservation parks and field sites to facilitate research, education, and in-situ conservation of crop and livestock genetic resources (iii) Collaborate with the Genetic Resources Research Institute (GeRRI) and other relevant stakeholders, in the establishment of community seed banks, field gene-banks (for vegetatively propagated materials), and the introduction of county-level gene banks. (iv) Promote the utilization, multiplication and exchange of indigenous seeds and climate-resilient crop varieties to enhance agrobiodiversity and strengthen local seed sovereignty (v) Promote sustainable agricultural and food production practices—including the phase-out of highly hazardous pesticides (HHPs) and the responsible use of veterinary pharmaceuticals—to reduce water pollution and restore ecosystem integrity (vi) Promote landscape restoration and conservation of degraded ecosystems such as lakes, soils, riparian lands and forests in partnership with community-based groups and associations (vii) Identify, map, and guide agricultural zones based on resource types, ecological and climatic conditions, and farming systems—while discouraging land fragmentation through integrated County spatial planning and biodiversity risk assessments (viii) Develop provisions for sustainable urban and peri-urban agriculture within county spatial and development plans to improve food security and livelihoods for vulnerable urban populations— including women, youth, and persons with disabilities—by promoting innovative practices such as rooftop gardening, vertical gardening, small livestock and composting (ix) Support the documentation and application of indigenous technical knowledge and cultural expressions that contribute to restoration of agrobiodiversity and the resilience of food production ecosystems. Policy Issue: Policy Issue: Limited development of agro ecological enterprises and insufficient market access for their products within Nakuru County Policy Objective: Policy Objective: To promote agroecological enterprise development and improved market access through infrastructure investments, targeted incentives, and supportive business services 26 Policy Statements Policy Statements The County Government will; (i) Facilitate mapping and development of agroecological enterprises for targeted incentives and other supportive programs (ii) Implement targeted tax incentives and accessible financing mechanisms for agroecological input value chain actors including producers, processors, and distributors. (iii) Develop incentives for young entrepreneurs, women, persons with disabilities and community- led enterprises engaged in agroecology, recognizing and addressing their specific constraints and needs (iv) Develop dedicated agroecology input hubs—especially in rural areas, —to support the production, distribution, and use of locally made organic inputs to reduce dependency on hazardous agro-chemicals and external inputs (v) Establish and operationalize designated markets specifically tailored for agroecological inputs and products with appropriate infrastructure, visibility, and supportive regulations (vi) Strengthen market linkages and information systems for agroecological products by leveraging social media and digital technologies to enhance visibility, ensure fair pricing, and improve market access (vii) Establish inclusive incubation and Business Development Services (BDS) for agroecological enterprises and support value addition through training, technology, and provision of processing infrastructure. (viii) Facilitate certification, standardization traceability and eco-labeling of agroecological inputs and products to ensure quality assurance, consumer trust, and market differentiation (ix) Conduct annual assessments to track the growth and performance of the agroecology input and product markets. 3.5 Mainstreaming agroecology in existing policy, legal and institutional frameworks The County Government will provide a legal and institutional framework that facilitates the promotion, uptake, and integration of agroecological practices in agricultural development and environmental management. The County acknowledges agroecology as a transformative and holistic approach to agriculture that blends ecological science with indigenous knowledge systems, biodiversity conservation, and local innovation. By aligning agricultural practices with ecological principles and socio-economic realities, agroecology contributes to long-term food security, climate adaptation, restoration of degraded ecosystems, and the empowerment of smallholder farmers and local communities. 27 Policy Issue:Policy Issue: Inadequate policy and Legislative Frameworks to support Agroecology. Policy Objective: Policy Objective: To establish an enabling environment for agroecology through the development and implementation of a harmonized and supportive legislative and institutional framework Policy Statements:Policy Statements: The County Government will; (i) Mainstream agroecology in the relevant County policies, laws, regulations and plans (County Integrated Development Plans (CIDPs), Annual Development Plans (ADPs) and Strategic Plans (ii) Review, identify, and reform existing policies and regulations that hinder the agroecological transition, in order to establish a harmonized legislative and institutional framework that supports the adoption and scaling of agroecology (iii) Establish a county-specific legal instrument—The Nakuru County Agroecology Act—to institutionalize agroecological governance, coordination mechanisms, and dedicated funding allocation (iv) Establish good governance and multi-sectoral coordination mechanisms to support the development, implementation, management, and oversight of agroecology in the county (v) Mainstream agroecology into county sectoral plans and budgetary allocations to ensure coordinated and sustained support for agroecological transition (vi) Support gender-transformative and disability-inclusive land policies and legal frameworks that mainstream agroecology and recognize and protect individual and collective land rights— especially for persons with disabilities, Indigenous Peoples women and youth. (vii) Facilitate civic education, inclusivity, and monitoring and evaluation. 3.6 Promoting social inclusivity in decision-making and practice in agri- food systems A just agroecological transition in Nakuru County requires the active involvement of all segments of society—especially those traditionally excluded from agricultural decision-making and resource allocation. Women, youth, persons with disabilities (PWDs), and Indigenous Peoples play vital roles in food production, processing, marketing, and consumption, yet they often face systemic barriers to full participation and benefit- sharing within food systems. The policy promotes social inclusivity in decision-making and practice across the food system by ensuring the meaningful participation of women, youth, persons with disabilities, and other marginalized groups. It seeks to address structural barriers, enhance equity in access to resources and opportunities, and foster inclusive governance mechanisms that enable all voices to shape the development, implementation, and outcomes of food system transformation in Nakuru County 28 Policy Issue:Policy Issue: Systemic social and gender disparities in access to, control over, and participation in decision- making around productive resources for food and agriculture Policy Objective: Policy Objective: To promote inclusive agroecology for vulnerable and marginalized groups and communities Policy Statements:Policy Statements: The County Government will; (i) Facilitate effective participation of women, youth, persons with disabilities and marginalized groups in the decision-making process. (ii) Partner with relevant stakeholders to develop and deliver agroecology training and mentorship programs specifically designed for youth, women, and persons with disabilities (iii) Facilitate inclusive access to finance and agroecological inputs by strengthening credit and grant mechanisms that prioritize the needs of underrepresented and marginalized groups (iv) Collaborate with civil society and advocacy groups to amplify the voices of marginalized communities. (v) Promote and preserve intergenerational knowledge exchange and indigenous agroecological practices. 29 4.1 Policy Implementation The implementation of the Nakuru Agroecology Policy will require collaboration from the state and the non- state partners. Key actors in the implementation process will include national and county government agencies, development partners, civil society organizations, and private sector entities. While the County Department of Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries, and Veterinary Services (DoALFVS) will serve at the lead coordinating agency, each stakeholder will operate within clearly defined roles, supported by appropriate laws and strategic plans. The policy will be implemented over a ten-year period, with regular monitoring and evaluation to track progress and guide decision-making. Annex 7.3 provides a detailed implementation framework that provides targets and indicators to be tracked. This will be guided by relevant legislation and strategic frameworks as describe in the legal and coordination framework below. 4.2 Legal Framework A strong legal foundation is important for translating this agroecology policy into action. The County Government, working closely with stakeholders, will review and align existing laws in agriculture, livestock, fisheries, irrigation, and environmental management to reflect agroecological principles and constitutional mandates. This harmonization will eliminate policy fragmentation and create a coherent framework for implementation. Several existing policies and statutes already make provision for a supportive backdrop, including: The Nakuru County Agricultural Policy (2021), The County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP III) 2023–2027, The Water and Sanitation Services Act (2021) and the National Agroecology Strategy (2024–2033), which guide cross-sectoral coordination and adaptation. To operationalize these commitments, the Nakuru County agroecology Act will be established to institutionalize agroecological governance, coordination mechanisms, and funding allocations. Through this Act, the County Government will allocate at least 10% of the DoALFVS’ annual budget toward implementing the agroecology policy. In addition, formal partnerships and memoranda of understanding with relevant organizations will be put in place to support policy execution. A County Agroecology Committee will be formed to oversee and coordinate these activities. 4.3 Coordination and Institutional Framework At the National level, the National Agroecology Strategy for Food System Transformation 2024-2033 established the National Agroecology Technical Committee. the committee is mandated to coordinate the mainstreaming and implementation of agroecology policies and practices across all sectors (Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries, Health, ASALs, Education, Trade, Cooperatives, Water and Environment) in Kenya. This committee also links the National and county levels through a CASSCOM agroecology Technical working Group (TWG). At the County level, The County Agroecology Committee will function as the summit body for agroecology at the county level, providing overall leadership ensuring that agroecology priorities are integrated into County Cabinet deliberations and decisions. The key functions will be’ CHAPTER FOUR: POLICY COORDINATION AND IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK 30 At the County level, the County Agroecology Policy Implementation Committee (CAPIC) shall serve as the apex governance organ on matters of agroecology, responsible for providing strategic oversight and direction, and ensuring the effective coordination and implementation of agroecology initiatives within the County; Chaired by the County Executive Committee Member (CECM) responsible for Agriculture, the Committee will ensure that agroecology priorities are embedded in County Cabinet deliberations and decisions, influencing county policies, plans, and budgets. Key functions of the CAPIC will be to: 1. Integrate the County Agroecology Policy into the County Integrated Development Plans (CIDPs) and provide oversight in the preparation of annual agroecology work plans. 2. Formulate and guide the implementation of priority actions outlined in the County Agroecology Action Plan. 3. Strengthen partnerships and collaboration with public institutions, private sector actors, and civil society to enhance the delivery of agroecology programs and services. 4. Promote coordination and alignment with other county-level and inter-county initiatives to ensure coherence and synergy in advancing agroecology 5. Act as the interface between county and national governance structures, ensuring that county initiatives are harmonized with national agroecology strategies, agricultural policies, and climate action commitments. The composition of CAPIC will include the following representatives 1. County Executive Committee Member (CECM) responsible for Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries as Chairperson 2. Chief Officers responsible for; Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries. Forestry, Water, Environment; Energy, Natural resources, Trade, Gender and Social services and, Finance and Economic Planning. 3. Senior Representatives of National Government agencies at the County level such as AFA, KEPHIS, NEMA, KALRO, NDMA, etc. 4. Country Directors of development partners organizations and civil society organizations as may be nominated by the committee 5. Any other representative or organization as may be nominated by the committee At the technical level, the policy will be supported by the County Technical Agroecology Committee (CTAC) which will provide technical expertise and coordination during implementation. Key functions of the CTAC will be to: 1. Provide technical input to ensure effective integration of the County Agroecology Policy into the County Integrated Development Plans (CIDPs) and annual work plans. 2. Develop and review technical aspects of the County Agroecology Action Plan and monitor its implementation. 3. Coordinate and harmonize technical collaboration with government, private sector, develop partners, research and academia, civil society and households in advancing agroecology. 4. Facilitate knowledge sharing and learning across intra-county and inter-county agroecology initiatives. 5. Support linkages between county-level technical work and national agroecology strategies, policies, and climate action commitments. 31 Figure 3: Nakuru County Coordination Structure The committee will also mobilize resources and involve relevant partners in funding and executing the policy. The CTAC will be chaired by the Chief Officer responsible for Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries. The other members will consist directors and officers including; 1. Department responsible for agriculture, livestock and fisheries 2. Department responsible for health services 3. Department responsible for water, environment, energy, natural resources and climate change 4. Department responsible for trade and cooperatives 5. Department responsible for education and technical training. 6. Department responsible for gender and social services 7. Department responsible for economic planning 8. Technical Representatives of National Government agencies at the County level such as AFA, KEPHIS, NEMA, KALRO, NDMA, etc. 9. Representative of the Intersectoral Forum on Agrobiodiversity and Agroecology (ISFAA) 10. Representatives of the farmer groups promoting agroecology 11. Representatives of universities, academic institutions, and research organizations 12. Representatives of the development partners operating within the County. 13. Representatives of the Civil society Organizations (CSOs) 14. Representatives of the financial institutions 15. Representatives of other stakeholder groups that will be nominated by the committee. 4.4 Resource Mobilization for Policy Implementation To ensure the successful implementation of Nakuru County’s agroecology policy, a diversified and inclusive resource mobilization strategy will be adopted.Amend to the enactment of legislation mandating the allocation of not less than ten percent (10%) of the annual budget of the Department responsible for Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries to agroecology programmes is envisaged. This allocation will not only demonstrate the County Government’s leadership and commitment but also serve as a strategic lever to attract co-financing from other actors. Development partners will be engaged to County Agroecology Policy Implementation Committee (CAPIC) (CECM - Agriculture), Relevant Chief Officers and Partner Representatives) County Technical Agroecology Committee (CTAC) Multisectoral Partners (MSPs) CASSCOM, Other County Directors Non-State Partners (CSOs, Private Sector Reps, Development Partners) Research Institutions Farmers Groups and Value Chain Actors Agroecology Secretariat 32 provide additional support through grants, technical assistance, and programmatic investments that align with the policy’s goals. At the same time, the County will foster a conducive environment for private sector participation by streamlining regulations, facilitating market access, and promoting innovation—thereby encouraging agribusinesses, cooperatives, and financial institutions to invest in agroecological value chains. To ensure that these efforts are well understood and embraced by communities, the Department of Agriculture will lead targeted dissemination campaigns using barazas, media platforms, and stakeholder forums, with a focus on reaching youth, women, and marginalized groups. This integrated approach will ensure that agroecology is not only well-funded but also widely supported and locally owned. 33 The transition toward sustainable and resilient food systems requires a strategic, coordinated, and evidence-based approach to agroecology. A participatory Monitoring, Evaluation, Reporting, and Learning (MERL) framework will be developed to measure progress and outcomes. Anchored in participatory, interdisciplinary, and farmer-centered principles, the framework provides a structured mechanism to assess the effectiveness of interventions, support adaptive learning, and strengthen accountability. Indicators will be aligned to policy objectives, covering institutional strengthening, farmer adoption of agroecological practices, market development, biodiversity conservation, and enabling policy integration. The MERL framework will guide monitoring and evaluation, reporting, and dissemination of lessons learned. 5.1 Monitoring Monitoring will be a continuous process aimed at assessing the extent to which planned activities and outputs are being delivered within the specified timelines and budgets. It will involve systematic collection and analysis of data on key indicators such as farmer adoption of agroecological practices, conservation of biodiversity, development of markets, and strengthening of institutions. This real-time tracking will allow the County Agroecology Committee and implementing agencies to detect potential challenges early and introduce corrective measures where necessary (see Annex 7.4). 5.2 Evaluation Evaluation will provide an in-depth analysis of the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability of the policy. A mid-term evaluation will be conducted in the fifth year to assess progress and inform any adjustments needed to keep the policy on course, while a final evaluation in the tenth year will determine the overall achievement of objectives and outcomes. Independent experts, in collaboration with stakeholders, will be engaged to ensure objectivity and inclusivity in the evaluation process. The results will inform both future programming and potential policy revisions. 5.3 Reporting Reporting will form an essential aspect of monitoring and evaluation. Implementing institutions will be required to prepare periodic reports, which will be consolidated by the Secretariat of the County Agroecology Committee. These reports will highlight achievements, challenges, lessons learned, and recommendations for action. To ensure transparency and public ownership, the findings will be shared widely through community barazas, county websites, social media platforms, and stakeholder forums, allowing communities, development partners, and private actors to remain engaged in the process. CHAPTER FIVE: MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING 34 Lessons derived from monitoring and evaluation will be documented and translated into practical recommendations. The County will institutionalize annual Agroecology Learning Forums where farmers, civil society, researchers, development partners, and government representatives will exchange knowledge, share innovations, and showcase best practices. In addition, policy briefs, case studies, and research papers will be developed and disseminated to enrich decision- making and promote evidence-based advocacy. The MERL system will ensure that the voices of communities and stakeholders are heard and acted upon. A Multistakeholder Platform (MSP) will be established to receive feedback and concerns from farmers at the ward and sub-county levels, while digital tools will be used to facilitate real-time engagement. This inclusive approach will guarantee that the policy remains responsive to local needs, adaptable to emerging challenges, and consistent with national and international commitments on sustainable food systems transformation. 5.4 Learning 35 The Nakuru County Agroecology Policy is designed as an adaptive framework that will evolve in response to the emerging challenges and opportunities in the food system. To ensure its continued relevance and effectiveness, the policy will be subject to a structured review process. The primary objective of the review will be to assess the progress made, identify gaps, and realign the policy with county, national, and international priorities on sustainable agriculture and climate resilience. The review will be undertaken at two levels. First, a comprehensive review will be conducted after ten years of implementation to evaluate the overall performance and long-term impacts of the policy. Second, interim reviews may be initiated earlier where circumstances demand, such as the introduction of new national food system framework, constitutional changes, or major socio-economic or climate-related shifts that affect agriculture in the county. The review will focus on several key aspects; • • Relevance:Relevance: assess whether the Policy objectives and strategies remain aligned with county needs, national development priorities, • • Effectiveness:Effectiveness: assess the extent to which the strategies and interventions have achieved the intended results, particularly in enhancing farmer adoption of agroecological practices, improving market access, and conserving biodiversity. • • Efficiency:Efficiency: evaluate how financial, human, and institutional resources were utilized and whether coordination mechanisms minimized duplication and maximized value for money. • • Impact: Impact: identify both the intended and unintended outcomes of the policy on food and nutrition security, farmer livelihoods, ecosystem health, and resilience to climate change. • • Sustainability:Sustainability: examine whether the achievements of the policy are likely to be maintained and scaled up in the long term, and whether agroecology has been effectively integrated into county planning, budgeting, and legal frameworks. • • Equity and inclusion:Equity and inclusion: assess how well the policy has addressed the needs of women, youth, persons with disabilities (PWDs), and marginalized groups, and the extent to which participatory governance has been practiced. In addition, the review will assess the performance of the institutional and legal frameworks, including the functionality of the County Agroecology Committee, the effectiveness of coordination mechanisms, and the operationalization of the Nakuru County Agroecology Act. The review process will be participatory, involving County departments, national agencies, development partners, farmer organizations, civil society, and research institutions. Data and evidence generated through the MERL system will form the basis of the review, complemented by stakeholder consultations, independent evaluations, and case studies. The findings and recommendations of the review will be consolidated into a report that will be presented by the County Agroecology Committee to the County Executive Committee and the County Assembly for consideration and action. CHAPTER SIX: POLICY REVIEW 36 The Nakuru County Agroecology Policy is designed as an adaptive framework that will evolve in response to the emerging challenges and opportunities in the food system. 37 Agroecology Agroecology Agroecology is an integrated approach that simultaneously applies ecological and social concepts and principles to the design and management of sustainable food and farming systems, emphasizing diversity, resilience, and social equity. 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 Food System It encompasses the entire range of actors and their interlinked value-adding activities involved in the production, 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 Security Food Security A situation in which all people, at all times, have physical, social, and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs for an active and healthy life. Food Sovereignty Food Sovereignty The right of people and communities to define their own food systems, prioritizing local, culturally appropriate, and ecologically sound food production over external or industrial models. Conventional Agriculture Conventional Agriculture A system of farming based on intensive use of external inputs such as synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and mechanization, often focused on maximizing yields with less emphasis on environmental sustainability. Vulnerable groups Vulnerable groups Vulnerable groups in society are those segments of the population that are more likely to suffer from disadvantages, marginalization, or discrimination due to various socioeconomic, 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. Social Inclusivity Social Inclusivity The practice of ensuring that all people, particularly marginalized groups, have equal opportunities to participate in and benefit from development initiatives. Policy Issue Policy Issue A problem or challenge that requires intervention through government action, laws, or programs. Policy Statement Policy Statement An official declaration of intent or direction by government or institutions, outlining priorities and guiding principles for addressing policy issues. Agroecological Practices Agroecological Practices Farming and land management methods based on ecological principles, including crop diversification, organic soil fertility management, agroforestry, water conservation, and integrated pest management. Multisectoral Coordination Multisectoral Coordination The collaboration and harmonization of efforts across different sectors and institutions to achieve shared policy objectives. County Agroecology CommitteeCounty Agroecology Committee A multi-stakeholder body established to oversee and coordinate the implementation of the Nakuru County Agroecology Policy. CHAPTER SEVEN: ANNEXES 7.1 Definition of Terms 38 Agnoletti, M., & Santoro, A. (2022). Agricultural heritage systems and agrobiodiversity. Biodiversity and Conservation, 31(8), 2031–2049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-022- 02460-3 Alliance of Bioversity International & CIAT. (2020). Gender Equality | Alliance Bioversity International – CIAT. Gender, Rural households, Food production. Retrieved from https:// alliancebioversityciat.org/stories/making-gender-equality- integral-global-agricultural-research County Government of Nakuru (2020) Nakuru County Nutrition Action Plan (Cnap) 2020/21 – 2024/25 https:// www.nutritionintl.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Nutrition- International-KEN-06-Nakuru-CNAP-1.pdf County Government of Nakuru (2023) County Integrated Development Plan 2023 – 2027 https://maarifa.cog.go.ke/sites/ default/files/2024-06/NAKURU%20CIDP%202023-2027.pdf CTA (2019). The Digitalisation of African Agriculture Report 2018–2019. Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation ACP-EU (CTA), Wageningen, The Netherlands. FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, & WHO. (2024). The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2024: Financing to end hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition in all its forms. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https:// doi.org/10.4060/cd1254en Global Forest Watch. (2024). Nakuru, Kenya Deforestation Rates & Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.globalforestwatch.org/ dashboards/country/KEN/31 HLPE. (2019). Agroecological and other innovative approaches for sustainable agriculture and food systems that enhance food security and nutrition (HLPE Report No. 14). FAO. Rome. at https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user upload/hlpe/ hlpe documents/HLPE Reports/HLPE-Report-14 EN.pdf Joshi, T., Mainali, R. P., Bhandari, S., Acharya, P., & Ghimire, K. H. (2023). Neglected and Underutilized Crop Species of Nepal: Smart Foods for Uncertain Future. Journal of Agriculture and Environment, 24(01), 187–196. https://doi.org/10.3126/ aej.v24i01.58189 KNBS and ICF (2023). Kenya Demographic and Health Survey 2022. Key Indicators Report. Nairobi, Kenya and Rockville, Maryland, USA: KNBS and ICF Knapp, M., Paul, B. K., Paliwal, A., & Khan, Z. R. (2023). Are agricultural extension systems ready to scale up ecological intensification in East Africa? A literature review with particular attention to the Push–Pull Technology (PPT). Food Security, 15(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-023- 01387-z National Information Platform on Food and Nutrition (NIPFN). (2024). Special paper No. 11: Status of food and nutrition security in Kenya—An implementation of the framework for harmonizing nutrition indicators. Nakuru County Government. (n.d.). Agriculture, food security and cooperative development. https://nakuru.go.ke/agriculture- food-security-and-cooperative-development Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development. (2024). National agroecology strategy for food system transformation 2024–2033 Mureithi, A. M. (2023). Sustainable Agricultural Practices among Rural Youth in Kenya: A Study of Attitudes and Behaviours. Journal of Agriculture & Environmental Sciences, 7(1), 45–55. https://doi. org/10.53819/81018102t2165 Rampa Francesco and Hanne Knaepen (2019) Sustainable food systems through diversification and indigenous vegetables: An Analysis of the Southern Nakuru County. Sustainable Agrifood Systems Strategies https://ecdpm.org/application/files/1016/5546/8680/SASS- report-I Sustainable-food-systems-through-diversification- and-indigenous-vegetables.pdf Ravera, F., Reyes-García, V., Pascual, U., Drucker, A. G., Tarrasón, D., & Bellon, M. R. (2019). Gendered agrobiodiversity management and adaptation to climate change: Differentiated strategies in two marginal rural areas of India. Agriculture and Human Values, 36, 455–474. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10460-018-09907-wUnited Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2022). Towards food security and sovereignty in Africa. Regional Bureau for Africa, Strategy, Analysis and Research Team. 7.2 References 39 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-022-02460-3 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-022-02460-3 https://alliancebioversityciat.org/stories/making-gender-equality-integral-global-agricultural-research?utm source=chatgpt.com https://alliancebioversityciat.org/stories/making-gender-equality-integral-global-agricultural-research?utm source=chatgpt.com https://alliancebioversityciat.org/stories/making-gender-equality-integral-global-agricultural-research?utm source=chatgpt.com https://www.nutritionintl.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Nutrition-International-KEN-06-Nakuru-CNAP-1.pdf https://www.nutritionintl.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Nutrition-International-KEN-06-Nakuru-CNAP-1.pdf https://www.nutritionintl.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Nutrition-International-KEN-06-Nakuru-CNAP-1.pdf https://maarifa.cog.go.ke/sites/default/files/2024-06/NAKURU%20CIDP%202023-2027.pdf https://maarifa.cog.go.ke/sites/default/files/2024-06/NAKURU%20CIDP%202023-2027.pdf https://doi.org/10.4060/cd1254en https://doi.org/10.4060/cd1254en https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/KEN/31 https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/KEN/31 https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user upload/hlpe/hlpe documents/HLPE Reports/HLPE-Report-14 EN.pdf?utm source=chatgpt.com https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user upload/hlpe/hlpe documents/HLPE Reports/HLPE-Report-14 EN.pdf?utm source=chatgpt.com https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-023-01387-z https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-023-01387-z https://nakuru.go.ke/agriculture-food-security-and-cooperative-development https://nakuru.go.ke/agriculture-food-security-and-cooperative-development https://doi.org/10.53819/81018102t2165 https://doi.org/10.53819/81018102t2165 https://ecdpm.org/application/files/1016/5546/8680/SASS-report-I Sustainable-food-systems-through-diversification-and-indigenous-vegetables.pdf https://ecdpm.org/application/files/1016/5546/8680/SASS-report-I Sustainable-food-systems-through-diversification-and-indigenous-vegetables.pdf https://ecdpm.org/application/files/1016/5546/8680/SASS-report-I Sustainable-food-systems-through-diversification-and-indigenous-vegetables.pdf https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-018-09907-w https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-018-09907-w 7. 3 Im pl em en ta tio n M at rix N o; St ra te gi es Ex pe ct ed O ut pu t KP I Ti m ef ra m e Re sp on si bi lit y Le ad Su pp or t TH EM E 1 Po lic y G oa l/O bj ec tiv e. T o ad va nc e ev id en ce -b as ed a gr oe co lo gi ca l t ra ns iti on s th ro ug h pa rt ic ip at or y, in te rd is ci pl in ar y, an d fa rm er -c en te re d re se ar ch a nd tr ai ni ng O ut co m e 1: A dv an ce d ev id en ce -b as ed a gr oe co lo gi ca l t ra ns iti on s th ro ug h pa rt ic ip at or y, in te rd is ci pl in ar y, an d fa rm er -c en te re d re se ar ch a nd tr ai ni ng . St at em en t # 1: M ai ns tre am in g ag ro ec ol og y in re se ar ch , e xt en si on s er vi ce c ur ric ul um d ev el op m en t a nd tr ai ni ng St ra te gy 1 Pr om ot e co -c re at io n of kn ow le dg e w ith fa rm er s an d In di ge no us k no w le dg e ho ld er s co lla bo ra tiv e kn ow le dg e pr od uc t de ve lo pe d N o. o f a gr oe co lo gy k no w le dg e pr od uc ts (m an ua ls , b rie fs , to ol ki ts ) p ro du ce d an d di ss em in at ed 20 26 -2 03 5 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O St ra te gy 2 Es ta bl is h ag ro ec ol og ic al re se ar ch h ub s ac ro ss d iv er se ec ol og ic al z on es Ag ro ec ol og ic al re se ar ch h ub s es ta bl is he d N o. o f f un ct io na l a gr oe co lo gi ca l re se ar ch h ub s es ta bl is he d an d op er at io na l. 20 26 -2 03 5 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O St ra te gy 3 su pp or t ( bu dg et a llo ca tio n, re gu la tio ns a nd g ui de lin es ,) pa rt ic ip at or y re se ar ch Bu dg et a llo ca te d % o f i ns tit ut io na l R &D b ud ge t al lo ca te d to a gr oe co lo gi ca l re se ar ch 20 26 -2 02 7 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O St ra te gy 4 Su pp or t d oc um en ta tio n of fa rm er s’ in no va tio ns Fa rm er s in no va tio n do cu m en te d N o. o f j oi nt re se ar ch e xt en si on pl at fo rm s an d fo ru m s he ld 20 26 -2 02 7 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N o. o f j oi nt e xt en si on m at er ia ls de ve lo pe d. St ra te gy 5 In te gr at e ag ro ec ol og y in to vo ca tio na l, ex te ns io n an d fa rm er tr ai ni ng c ur ric ul a Ag ro ec ol og y in te gr at ed in to vo ca tio na l, ex te ns io n an d fa rm er tr ai ni ng cu rr ic ul a N o. o f c ur ric ul a re vi se d to in cl ud e ag ro ec ol og y- 20 26 -2 02 7 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N o. o f i ns tit ut io ns a do pt in g re vi se d cu rr ic ul a. St ra te gy 6 St re ng th en c oo rd in at io n be tw ee n lin ka ge s re se ar ch in st itu tio ns , a nd e xt en si on pe rs on ne l f or s ea m le ss kn ow le dg e flo w St re ng th en ed co or di na tio n lin ka ge s be tw ee n re se ar ch in st itu tio ns , a nd ex te ns io n pe rs on ne l fo r s ea m le ss kn ow le dg e flo w N o. o f j oi nt re se ar ch e xt en si on pl at fo rm s an d fo ru m s he ld 20 26 -2 03 5 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N o. o f j oi nt e xt en si on m at er ia ls de ve lo pe d. 40 N o; St ra te gi es Ex pe ct ed O ut pu t KP I Ti m ef ra m e Re sp on si bi lit y Le ad Su pp or t T H EM E 2 Po lic y G oa l/O bj ec tiv e. T o pr om ot e th e ad op tio n of a gr oe co lo gi ca l p ra ct ic es b y de ve lo pi ng s im pl e, a ff or da bl e, a nd u se r-f rie nd ly te ch no lo gi es , a nd s tre ng th en in g th e ca pa ci ty o f e xt en si on s er vi ce s an d fa rm er s th ro ug h ta rg et ed tr ai ni ng a nd k no w le dg e tra ns fe r. O ut co m e 2: E nh an ce d ad op tio n of a gr oe co lo gi ca l p ra ct ic es a m on gs t t he fa rm in g co m m un ity St at em en t # 1: E nh an ce a do pt io n of a gr oe co lo gi ca l p ra ct ic es a m on gs t t he fa rm in g co m m un ity in N ak ur u Co un ty St ra te gy 1 P ro m ot e te ch no lo gi es th ro ug h fa rm er –f ar m er p ee r l ea rn in g th ro ug h pe er le ar ni ng p ro gr am s an d fa rm er tr ai ni ng in iti at iv es Te ch no lo gi es ad op te d N um be r o f a gr oe co lo gi ca l te ch no lo gi es a do pt ed b y fa rm er s. Pe rc en ta ge o f t ar ge t f ar m er s ap pl yi ng a t l ea st o ne ag ro ec ol og ic al te ch no lo gy 20 26 -2 03 5 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O Pe rc en ta ge o f t ar ge t f ar m er s ap pl yi ng a t l ea st o ne ag ro ec ol og ic al te ch no lo gy St ra te gy 2 Ad vo ca te s fo r g ov er nm en t- ba ck ed in ce nt iv es th at e nc ou ra ge d ig ita l tra ns fo rm at io n in a gr ic ul tu re In ce nt iv es es ta bl is he d N um be r o f i nc en tiv es in tro du ce d (e .g ., su bs id ie s, c er tifi ca tio n pr og ra m s, a cc es s to m ar ke ts ) 20 26 -2 03 5 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f f ar m er s be ne fit in g fr om a gr oe co lo gy -re la te d in ce nt iv es St ra te gy 3 D ev el op in no va tiv e si m pl e to us e te ch no lo gi es In no va tio ns de ve lo pe d N um be r o f a gr oe co lo gi ca l in no va tio ns c o- cr ea te d w ith fa rm er s an d re se ar ch er s. 20 26 -2 03 5 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f i nn ov at io ns p ilo te d an d sc al ed St ra te gy 4 P ro m ot e lo w er -c os t c ro p an d liv es to ck m an ag em en t so lu tio ns fo r f ar m er s. Lo w c ro p co st a nd liv es to ck s ol ut io ns ad op te d N um be r o f f ar m er s us in g lo w - co st c ro p/ liv es to ck m an ag em en t pr ac tic es . 20 26 -2 03 5 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O Pe rc en ta ge re du ct io n in pr od uc tio n co st d ue to u se o f ag ro ec ol og ic al p ra ct ic es 41 N o; St ra te gi es Ex pe ct ed O ut pu t KP I Ti m ef ra m e Re sp on si bi lit y Le ad Su pp or t St ra te gy 5 St re ng th en e xt en si on a nd fa rm er s ca pa ci ty b ui ld in g pr og ra m s ca pa ci ty b ui ld in g pr og ra m m es fo r e xt en si on an d fa rm er s st re ng th en ed . N um be r o f e xt en si on a ge nt s an d fa rm er s tra in ed in a gr oe co lo gy . 20 26 -2 03 5 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f t ra in ed in di vi du al s ap pl yi ng a cq ui re d kn ow le dg e T H EM E 3 Po lic y G oa l/O bj ec tiv e. T o pr om ot e ag ro ec ol og ic al e nt er pr is es a nd m ar ke ts a cc es s th ro ug h in fr as tr uc tu re d ev el op m en t a nd in ce nt iv es O ut co m e 3: P ro m ot ed a gr oe co lo gi ca l e nt er pr is es a nd m ar ke ts a cc es s th ro ug h in fr as tr uc tu re d ev el op m en t a nd in ce nt iv es St at em en t # 1: In fra st ru ct ur e de ve lo pm en t f or a gr o ec ol og ic al e nt er pr is es a nd m ar ke ts St ra te gy 1 E st ab lis h w el l-e qu ip pe d an d de si gn at ed a gr ic ul tu ra l m ar ke ts ta ilo re d fo r ag ro ec ol og ic al p ro du ct s. w el l-e qu ip pe d an d de si gn at ed ec ol og ic al ag ric ul tu ra l m ar ke ts es ta bl is he d. N um be r o f a gr oe co lo gi ca l m ar ke ts e st ab lis he d an d de si gn at ed . 20 26 -2 02 8 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O % o f m ar ke t i nf ra st ru ct ur e up gr ad ed to s up po rt ag ro ec ol og ic al p ro du ce e .g re si du e te st in g st at io ns Vo lu m e/ va lu e of a gr oe co lo gi ca l pr od uc e so ld th ro ug h de si gn at ed m ar ke ts St ra te gy 2 De ve lo p de di ca te d ag ro ec ol og y in pu t h ub s, e sp ec ia lly in ru ra l ar ea s, to e ns ur e ac ce ss ib ili ty an d av ai la bi lit y. De di ca te d ag ro ec ol og y in pu t hu bs , d ev el op ed N um be r o f c er tifi ed a gr oe co lo gy in pu t h ub s es ta bl is he d 20 26 -2 02 7 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O % in cr ea se in fa rm er a cc es s to ag ro ec ol og y in pu ts Vo lu m e of in pu ts d is tr ib ut ed th ro ug h hu bs . St ra te gy 3 S up po rt v al ue -a dd iti on o f ag ro ec ol og ic al p ro du ct s. Va lu e- ad di tio n of ag ro ec ol og ic al pr od uc ts s up po rt ed . N um be r o f n ew a gr o- en te rp ris es es ta bl is he d 20 26 -2 03 5 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f a gr o- en te rp ris es st re ng th en ed . Pe rc en ta ge o f e xi st in g en te rp ris es le d by w om en /y ou th . Ty pe s of v al ue -a dd ed p ro du ct s de ve lo pe d ac ro ss a ll va lu e ch ai ns . 42 N o; St ra te gi es Ex pe ct ed O ut pu t KP I Ti m ef ra m e Re sp on si bi lit y Le ad Su pp or t St ra te gy 4 E nh an ce m ar ke t co m pe tit iv en es s of ag ro ec ol og ic al p ro du ct s. co m pe tit iv en es s of a gr o- ec ol og ic al pr od uc ts e nh an ce d. N um be r o f a gr oe co lo gi ca l pr od uc ts p ro ce ss ed a nd pa ck ag ed lo ca lly . 20 27 -2 02 8 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O % in cr ea se in in co m e fr om pr oc es se d/ di ve rs ifi ed p ro du ct s. N um be r o f n ew m ar ke t lin ka ge s/ co nt ra ct s se cu re d fo r ag ro ec ol og ic al p ro du ct s St ra te gy 5 Fa ci lit at e ce rt ifi ca tio n an d st an da rd iz at io n of ag ro ec ol og ic al in pu ts a nd pr od uc ts Ce rt ifi ca tio n an d st an da rd iz at io n of a gr oe co lo gi ca l in pu ts a nd p ro du ct s fa ci lit at ed 20 28 -2 03 0 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O St ra te gy 6 E st ab lis h in cu ba tio n pr og ra m s fo r a gr ic ul tu ra l b us in es se s In cu ba tio n pr og ra m s fo r a gr ic ul tu ra l bu si ne ss es es ta bl is he d 20 26 -2 02 7 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O St ra te gy 7 De ve lo p ta x be ne fit s an d lo w -in te re st lo an s fo r ag ro ec ol og ic al in pu t v al ue ch ai n ac to rs . Ta x be ne fit s an d lo w -in te re st lo an s fo r a gr oe co lo gi ca l in pu ts d ev el op ed . 20 26 -2 02 8 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O St ra te gy 8 C on du ct a nn ua l a ss es sm en ts to tr ac k th e gr ow th a nd pe rf or m an ce o f t he ag ro ec ol og y in pu t a nd p ro du ct m ar ke t. As se ss m en t co nd uc te d 20 26 -2 03 5 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O St ra te gy 9 M ap pi ng o f A gr oe co lo gi ca l En te rp ris es Ag ro ec ol og ic al En te rp ris es m ap pe d. 20 26 -2 02 7 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O TH EM E 4 Po lic y G oa l/O bj ec tiv e. T o pr om ot e th e re st or at io n an d co ns er va tio n of a gr ob io di ve rs ity In N ak ur u Co un ty O ut co m e 4: A gr ob io di ve rs ity c on se rv at io n fo r e nh an ce d ec os ys te m b en efi ts p ro m ot ed St at em en t # 1: P ro m ot io n of a gr ob io di ve rs ity c on se rv at io n fo r e nh an ce d ec os ys te m b en efi ts in N ak ur u Co un ty 43 N o; St ra te gi es Ex pe ct ed O ut pu t KP I Ti m ef ra m e Re sp on si bi lit y Le ad Su pp or t St ra te gy 1 Su pp or t e st ab lis hm en t o f co m m un ity s ee d ba nk s, fi el d ge ne -b an ks (v eg et at iv el y pr op ag at ed m at er ia ls ) a nd in tro du ce c ou nt y ge ne b an ks . Co m m un ity s ee d ba nk s, fi el d ge ne ba nk s (v eg et at iv el y pr op ag at ed m at er ia ls ) a nd co un ty g en e ba nk s es ta bl is he d. N um be r o f s ee d/ ge ne b an ks es ta bl is he d 20 26 -2 02 8 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f c ro p va rie tie s an d ve ge ta tiv el y pr op ag at ed m at er ia ls c on se rv ed . % o f f ar m er s ac ce ss in g lo ca l se ed b an ks . St ra te gy 2 Su pp or t r eg en er at io n an d re - in tro du ct io n of lo st , N eg le ct ed an d Un de ru til iz ed (N US ) c ro p an d liv es to ck s pe ci es . Re ge ne ra tio n an d re -in tro du ct io n of lo st , N eg le ct ed a nd Un de ru til iz ed (N US ) cr op a nd li ve st oc k sp ec ie s Su pp or te d N um be r o f N US s pe ci es re in tro du ce d. 20 26 -2 02 8 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f f ar m er s cu lti va tin g or ra is in g N US s pe ci es Ar ea (h a) u nd er N US c ro ps o r he rd s of re in tro du ce d liv es to ck St ra te gy 3 Su pp or t e st ab lis hm en t o f ag ro bi od iv er si ty c on se rv at io n pa rk s/ si te s fo r r es ea rc h ag ro bi od iv er si ty co ns er va tio n pa rk s/ si te s fo r r es ea rc h es ta bl is he d N um be r o f c on se rv at io n pa rk s/ si te s es ta bl is he d. 20 26 -2 02 8 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f s pe ci es c on se rv ed a t ea ch s ite . N um be r o f s tu de nt s/ re se ar ch er s us in g th e si te s an nu al ly. St ra te gy 4 Su pp or t d oc um en ta tio n of tra di tio na l k no w le dg e an d as so ci at ed c ul tu ra l e xp re ss io n. Tr ad iti on al kn ow le dg e an d as so ci at ed cu ltu ra l e xp re ss io n do cu m en te d. N um be r o f t ra di tio na l ag ro ec ol og ic al p ra ct ic es do cu m en te d. 20 26 -2 02 7 DO A LF V CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f c ul tu ra l e ve nt s/ ex hi bi ts s up po rt ed . N um be r o f c om m un iti es en ga ge d in th e do cu m en ta tio n pr oc es s. 44 N o; St ra te gi es Ex pe ct ed O ut pu t KP I Ti m ef ra m e Re sp on si bi lit y Le ad Su pp or t T H EM E 5 Po lic y G oa l/O bj ec tiv e. T o cr ea te a n en ab lin g en vi ro nm en t b y im pl em en tin g th e po lic y an d en ac tm en t o f a h ar m on iz ed L eg is la tiv e fr am ew or k fo r a gr oe co lo gi ca l tra ns iti on in g. O ut co m e 5: E na bl ed P ol ic y an d Le ga l F ra m ew or ks fo r A gr o Ec ol og y De ve lo pm en t St at em en t # 1: E na bl in g Po lic y an d Le ga l F ra m ew or ks fo r A gr o Ec ol og y De ve lo pm en t St ra te gy 1 M ai ns tre am a gr oe co lo gy in th e re le va nt C ou nt y po lic ie s, la w s, re gu la tio ns a nd p la ns (C ou nt y In te gr at ed D ev el op m en t P la ns (C ID Ps ), An nu al D ev el op m en t Pl an s (A DP s) a nd S tra te gi c Pl an s) . Co un ty p ol ic ie s, la w s, re gu la tio ns a nd p la ns (C ou nt y In te gr at ed De ve lo pm en t P la ns (C ID Ps ), An nu al De ve lo pm en t P la ns (A DP s) a nd S tra te gi c Pl an s) m ai ns tre am ed N um be r o f c ou nt y pl an s in te gr at in g ag ro ec ol og y. 20 26 -2 03 5 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O % o f a gr oe co lo gi ca l p rio rit ie s re fle ct ed in C ID Ps /A DP s. St ra te gy 2 Es ta bl is h go od g ov er na nc e st ru ct ur es fo r a gr oe co lo gy de ve lo pm en t, m an ag em en t an d ov er si gh t. G oo d go ve rn an ce st ru ct ur es fo r ag ro ec ol og y de ve lo pm en t, m an ag em en t a nd ov er si gh t e st ab lis he d N um be r o f f un ct io na l ag ro ec ol og y w or ki ng g ro up s. 20 26 -2 02 8 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O % o f c ou nt ie s w ith o ve rs ig ht st ru ct ur es in p la ce . St ra te gy 3 Fa ci lit at e ci vi c ed uc at io n, in cl us iv ity , a nd m on ito rin g an d ev al ua tio n. Ci vi c ed uc at io n, in cl us iv ity , a nd m on ito rin g an d ev al ua tio n un de rt ak en N um be r o f c iv ic e du ca tio n fo ru m s co nd uc te d. 20 26 -2 03 5 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O % o f p ar tic ip an ts fr om m ar gi na liz ed g ro up s- % o f c ou nt ie s w ith o ve rs ig ht st ru ct ur es in p la ce Fu nc tio na l M &E fr am ew or ks de ve lo pe d fo r a gr oe co lo gy St ra te gy 4 De ve lo p a ha rm on iz ed le gi sl at iv e fr am ew or k, in cl ud in g la w s an d re gu la tio ns o n ag ro ec ol og y Le gi sl at iv e fr am ew or k, in cl ud in g la w s an d re gu la tio ns on a gr oe co lo gy ha rm on iz ed N um be r o f a gr oe co lo gy -re le va nt la w s/ re gu la tio ns re vi ew ed a nd ha rm on iz ed 20 26 -2 02 8 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f p ol ic y br ie fs de ve lo pe d an d di ss em in at ed . 45 N o; St ra te gi es Ex pe ct ed O ut pu t KP I Ti m ef ra m e Re sp on si bi lit y Le ad Su pp or t St ra te gy 5 Es ta bl is h m ul ti- se ct or al co or di na tio n m ec ha ni sm s fo r ag ro ec ol og y. M ul ti- se ct or al co or di na tio n m ec ha ni sm s fo r a gr oe co lo gy es ta bl is he d N um be r o f c ou nt ie s w ith fu nc tio na l m ul ti- se ct or al pl at fo rm s. 20 26 -2 02 7 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f j oi nt a gr oe co lo gy in iti at iv es a cr os s se ct or s St ra te gy 6 Pr om ot e th e sy ne rg y ac ro ss re le va nt s ec to rs fo r M ai ns tre am in g ag ro ec ol og y pr in ci pl es . sy ne rg y ac ro ss re le va nt s ec to rs fo r M ai ns tre am in g ag ro ec ol og y pr in ci pl es st re ng th en ed N um be r o f i nt er se ct or al co lla bo ra tio ns (a gr ic ul tu re , he al th , e du ca tio n, e nv iro nm en t, et c. ) 20 26 -2 03 5 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O Jo in t p ol ic ie s or p ro gr am s im pl em en te d. St ra te gy 7 pr ov id in g fin an ci al a nd n on - fin an ci al in ce nt iv es fo r t he ad op tio n of a gr oe co lo gy Fi na nc ia l a nd n on - fin an ci al in ce nt iv es fo r t he a do pt io n of a gr oe co lo gy pr ov id ed N um be r o f c ou nt ie s pr ov id in g in ce nt iv es (g ra nt s, ta x re lie f, in pu ts , m ar ke t a cc es s. 20 26 -2 03 5 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f b en efi ci ar ie s re ac he d (d is ag gr eg at ed b y ge nd er , a ge , ab ili ty ). St ra te gy 8 Id en tif y an d As se ss c ur re nt po lic ie s an d a re as t ha t h in de r th e tra ns iti on to a gr oe co lo gy . Cu rr en t p ol ic ie s th at hi nd er th e tra ns iti on to a gr oe co lo gy su bs id ie s id en tifi ed an d as se ss ed . N um be r o f o bs tr uc tiv e po lic ie s id en tifi ed a nd a na ly ze d 20 26 -2 02 7 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f a dv oc ac y ac tio ns ta ke n to re fo rm s uc h po lic ie s. St ra te gy 9 In co rp or at e ge nd er -s en si tiv e an d di sa bi lit y- in cl us iv e la nd p ol ic ie s in c ou nt y la nd m an ag em en t s ys te m s. ge nd er -s en si tiv e an d di sa bi lit y- in cl us iv e la nd po lic ie s in c ou nt y la nd m an ag em en t sy st em s in co rp or at ed N um be r o f c ou nt ie s w ith in cl us iv e la nd p ol ic ie s- 20 26 -2 03 5 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O % o f l an d te nu re p ro ce ss es in co rp or at in g ge nd er /d is ab ili ty pe rs pe ct iv es . St ra te gy 10 Su pp or t l eg al fr am ew or ks th at re co gn iz e an d pr ot ec t co lle ct iv e la nd ri gh ts , e sp ec ia lly fo r I nd ig en ou s Pe op le (I Ps ). le ga l f ra m ew or ks th at re co gn iz e an d pr ot ec t c ol le ct iv e la nd ri gh ts , e sp ec ia lly fo r I nd ig en ou s Pe op le (I Ps ) su pp or te d. N um be r o f c ou nt ie s w ith le ga l re co gn iti on o f c ol le ct iv e la nd rig ht s 20 26 -2 02 8 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f I nd ig en ou s or lo ca l co m m un iti es b en efi tin g fr om le ga l s up po rt . 46 N o; St ra te gi es Ex pe ct ed O ut pu t KP I Ti m ef ra m e Re sp on si bi lit y Le ad Su pp or t T H EM E 6 Po lic y G oa l/O bj ec tiv e. T o pr om ot e in cl us iv e ag ro ec ol og y fo r V ul ne ra bl e an d m ar gi na liz ed c om m un iti es . O ut co m e 6: P ro m ot ed s oc ia l a nd g en de r i nc lu si vi ty in d ec is io n- m ak in g pr oc es se s re la te d to e qu ita bl e ac ce ss to p ro du ct iv e re so ur ce s. St at em en t # 1: P ro m ot in g so ci al a nd g en de r i nc lu si vi ty in d ec is io n- m ak in g pr oc es se s re la te d to e qu ita bl e ac ce ss to p ro du ct iv e re so ur ce s. St ra te gy 1 Fa ci lit at e ef fe ct iv e pa rt ic ip at io n of w om en , y ou th , P W D a nd m ar gi na liz ed g ro up s in th e de ci si on -m ak in g pr oc es s. Pa rt ic ip at io n of w om en , y ou th , P W D an d m ar gi na liz ed gr ou ps in th e de ci si on -m ak in g pr oc es s fa ci lit at ed . % re pr es en ta tio n of w om en , yo ut h, a nd P W Ds in a gr oe co lo gy co m m itt ee s/ w or ki ng g ro up s. 20 26 -2 03 5 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f p ol ic y di al og ue s in cl ud in g m ar gi na liz ed v oi ce s. St ra te gy 2 Pa rt ne r w ith re le va nt st ak eh ol de rs to d ev el op a nd de liv er a gr oe co lo gy tr ai ni ng an d m en to rs hi p pr og ra m s sp ec ifi ca lly d es ig ne d fo r y ou th , w om en , a nd P er so ns w ith Di sa bi lit ie s (P W Ds ). A gr oe co lo gy tr ai ni ng an d m en to rs hi p pr og ra m s sp ec ifi ca lly de si gn ed fo r y ou th , w om en , a nd P er so ns w ith D is ab ili tie s (P W Ds ) d ev el op ed . N um be r o f i nc lu si ve tr ai ni ng pr og ra m s de ve lo pe d an d im pl em en te d. 20 26 -2 03 5 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f t ra in ee s di sa gg re ga te d by g en de r, ag e, di sa bi lit y. St ra te gy 3 Es ta bl is h in cl us iv e co m m un ity - ba se d ag ro ec ol og y de m on st ra tio n si te s. In cl us iv e co m m un ity - ba se d ag ro ec ol og y de m on st ra tio n si te s es ta bl is he d. N um be r o f d em on st ra tio n si te s de si gn ed w ith a cc es si bi lit y an d in cl us io n fe at ur es . 20 26 -2 02 7 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O % o f P W D- fr ie nd ly in fr as tr uc tu re ad op te d St ra te gy 4 P ro m ot e in cl us iv e ac ce ss to fin an ce a nd a gr ic ul tu ra l i np ut s by s up po rt in g cr ed it sc he m es an d gr an t o pp or tu ni tie s ta ilo re d fo r u nd er re pr es en te d gr ou ps . In cl us iv e ac ce ss to fi na nc e an d ag ric ul tu ra l i np ut s pr om ot ed . N um be r o f m ar gi na liz ed fa rm er s (w om en , y ou th , P W Ds ) ac ce ss in g cr ed it or in pu ts . 20 26 -2 03 5 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f t ar ge te d fin an ci al pr od uc ts o r i np ut p ac ka ge s de ve lo pe d. St ra te gy 5 Co nd uc t p ub lic a w ar en es s ca m pa ig ns o n th e im po rt an ce of in cl us iv ity in a gr oe co lo gy . P ub lic a w ar en es s ca m pa ig ns o n th e im po rt an ce of in cl us iv ity in a gr oe co lo gy co nd uc te d. N um be r o f c am pa ig ns co nd uc te d. 20 26 -2 02 8 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O % in cr ea se in p ub lic k no w le dg e of in cl us iv e ag ro ec ol og y. 47 N o; St ra te gi es Ex pe ct ed O ut pu t KP I Ti m ef ra m e Re sp on si bi lit y Le ad Su pp or t St ra te gy 6 Co lla bo ra te w ith c iv il so ci et y an d ad vo ca cy g ro up s to a m pl ify th e vo ic es o f m ar gi na liz ed c om m un iti es . Vo ic es o f m ar gi na liz ed co m m un iti es am pl ifi ed . N um be r o f s to ry te lli ng , m ed ia or p ol ic y pl at fo rm s th at h ig hl ig ht m ar gi na liz ed v oi ce . 20 26 -2 03 5 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f p ol ic y br ie fs or c om m un ity s ta te m en ts pr es en te d St ra te gy 7 Pr om ot e an d pr es er ve in te rg en er at io na l k no w le dg e ex ch an ge a nd in di ge no us ag ro ec ol og ic al p ra ct ic es . In te rg en er at io na l kn ow le dg e ex ch an ge an d in di ge no us ag ro ec ol og ic al pr ac tic es p ro m ot ed . N um be r o f k no w le dg e- sh ar in g ev en ts h el d. 20 26 -2 03 5 DO AL FV CS O s/ N G O s/ Do no rs / Pr iv at e/ KA LR O N um be r o f t ra di tio na l p ra ct ic es do cu m en te d/ re vi ve d. N um be r o f e ld er s/ yo ut hs en ga ge d in e xc ha ng es . 7. 4 M on ito rin g, E va lu at io n, a nd L ea rn in g (M EL ) f ra m ew or k O ut co m e/ O ut pu t In di ca to r( s) Ta rg et (s ) So ur ce o f d at a Fr eq ue nc y Ba se lin e M id T er m En d te rm Po lic y G oa l/O bj ec tiv e: In te gr at e ag ro ec ol og y in to re se ar ch , e xt en si on a nd tr ai ni ng to s tre ng th en k no w le dg e an d in st itu tio na l c ap ac ity fo r a gr oe co lo gi ca l t ra ns iti on . O ut co m e 1: A dv an ce d ev id en ce -b as ed a gr oe co lo gi ca l t ra ns iti on s th ro ug h pa rt ic ip at or y, in te rd is ci pl in ar y, an d fa rm er -c en tre d re se ar ch a nd tr ai ni ng . O ut pu t Kn ow le dg e pr od uc t de ve lo pe d N o. o f a gr oe co lo gy k no w le dg e pr od uc ts (m an ua ls , b rie fs , t oo lk its ) p ro du ce d an d di ss em in at ed 2 3 10 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch in st itu tio n re co rd s Pr oj ec t r ep or ts , p ub lic at io n re co rd s Q ua rt er ly Ag ro ec ol og ic al re se ar ch hu bs e st ab lis he d. N o. o f f un ct io na l a gr oe co lo gi ca l r es ea rc h hu bs e st ab lis he d an d op er at io na l. 0 4 11 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch in st itu tio n re co rd s M oU s, h ub o pe ra tio na l r ep or ts Q ua rt er ly Bu dg et a llo ca te d % o f i ns tit ut io na l r es ea rc h an d de ve lo pm en t b ud ge t a llo ca te d to ag ro ec ol og ic al re se ar ch 0 1 2 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, In st itu tio na l b ud ge ts , fin an ci al re po rt s An nu al ly 48 O ut co m e/ O ut pu t In di ca to r( s) Ta rg et (s ) So ur ce o f d at a Fr eq ue nc y Ba se lin e M id T er m En d te rm Fa rm er s in no va tio n do cu m en te d N o. o f f ar m er -le d ag ro ec ol og ic al in no va tio ns id en tifi ed a nd d oc um en te d. 5 15 20 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s Fi el d do cu m en ta tio n, fa rm er in te rv ie w s, ca se s tu di es TV ET in st itu tio ns Q ua rt er ly Ag ro ec ol og y In te gr at ed in to vo ca tio na l, ex te ns io n an d fa rm er tr ai ni ng c ur ric ul a N o. o f c ur ric ul a re vi se d to in cl ud e ag ro ec ol og y. 2 2 4 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch in st itu tio n re co rd s, Cu rr ic ul um re vi ew re po rt s Tr ai ni ng in st itu tio n re co rd s An nu al ly N o. o f i ns tit ut io ns a do pt in g re vi se d cu rr ic ul a. 2 2 4 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch in st itu tio n re co rd s, Cu rr ic ul um re vi ew re po rt s Tr ai ni ng in st itu tio n re co rd s Q ua rt er ly St re ng th en ed c oo rd in at io n lin ka ge s be tw ee n re se ar ch in st itu tio ns , a nd e xt en si on pe rs on ne l f or s ea m le ss kn ow le dg e flo w N o. o f j oi nt re se ar ch e xt en si on p la tf or m s an d fo ru m s he ld . 0 2 4 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch in st itu tio n re co rd s M ee tin g m in ut es Bi -A nn ua lly N o. o f j oi nt e xt en si on m at er ia ls d ev el op ed . 0 2 4 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch & tra in in g in st itu tio n re co rd s Ex te ns io n m at er ia l r ep os ito rie s An nu al ly ca pa ci ty b ui ld in g pr og ra m m es fo r e xt en si on an d fa rm er s st re ng th en ed . % o f e xt en si on a ge nt s tra in ed in ag ro ec ol og y. 10 30 60 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch / t ra in in g in st itu tio n re co rd s ce rt ifi ca tio n bo di es Pa rt ne rs Q ua rt er ly N um be r o f f ar m er s tra in ed in a gr oe co lo gy 50 0 60 00 15 00 0 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch / t ra in in g in st itu tio n re co rd s ce rt ifi ca tio n bo di es Pa rt ne rs Q ua rt er ly % o f t ra in ed in di vi du al s ap pl yi ng a cq ui re d kn ow le dg e 10 30 70 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch / t ra in in g in st itu tio n re co rd s ce rt ifi ca tio n bo di es Pa rt ne rs Q ua rt er ly 49 O ut co m e/ O ut pu t In di ca to r( s) Ta rg et (s ) So ur ce o f d at a Fr eq ue nc y Ba se lin e M id T er m En d te rm Po lic y G oa l/O bj ec tiv e: T o en ha nc e th e a do pt io n of a gr oe co lo gi ca l p ra ct ic es fo r i m pr ov ed fo od a nd n ut rit io n se cu rit y, su st ai na bl e di et s an d re si lie nt li ve lih oo ds . O ut co m e 2: E nh an ce d ad op tio n of a gr oe co lo gi ca l p ra ct ic es fo r s us ta in ab le d ie ts a nd fo od a nd n ut rit io n se cu rit y fo r a ll. St re ng th en fo od s af et y sy st em s to e lim in at e ha rm fu l a nd u ns af e fo od s fr om th e m ar ke t % re du ct io n of u ns af e/ co nt am in at ed fo od s de te ct ed in m ar ke ts - 30 70 Fo od s af et y in sp ec tio n re po rt s; P ub lic h ea lth su rv ei lla nc e Se m i- an nu al % o f c on su m er s ac ce ss in g sa fe a nd he al th y fo od s/ ag ro ec ol og ic al p ro du ct s – 40 70 Co ns um er s ur ve ys ; M ar ke t s ur ve ill an ce re po rt s An nu al Su pp or t c on su m er ed uc at io n, a w ar en es s, an d be ha vi or c ha ng e on be ne fit s of a gr oe co lo gi ca l pr od uc ts % o f c on su m er s aw ar e of b en efi ts o f ag ro ec ol og ic al p ro du ct s – 40 70 Co ns um er s ur ve ys ; M ed ia /I EC re po rt s; C SO re po rt s An nu al N um be r o f c on su m er a w ar en es s ca m pa ig ns c on du ct ed a nn ua lly 0 10 30 Ca m pa ig n re po rt s; IE C m at er ia ls ; M ed ia m on ito rin g An nu al % o f c on su m er s re gu la rly p ur ch as in g ag ro ec ol og ic al p ro du ct s – 25 60 M ar ke t s ur ve ys ; R et ai l s al es d at a; C on su m er pa ne ls An nu al P ro m ot e th e co ns um pt io n of d iv er se , s af e an d he al th y di et s % o f h ou se ho ld s m ee tin g m in im um d ie ta ry di ve rs ity (M DD -W p ro xy ) 25 50 75 H ou se ho ld d ie ta ry s ur ve ys ; N ut rit io n m on ito rin g re po rt s An nu al % o f h ou se ho ld s co ns um in g ag ro ec ol og ic al pr od uc ts a t l ea st 3 ti m es p er w ee k – 30 60 H ou se ho ld fo od c on su m pt io n su rv ey s An nu al % re du ct io n in m al nu tr iti on (s tu nt in g, w as tin g, a na em ia ) 28 15 30 Co un ty h ea lth /n ut rit io n su rv ey s Bi -a nn ua l N um be r o f s ch oo ls , h os pi ta ls , a nd in st itu tio ns p ro cu rin g ag ro ec ol og ic al fo od s 0 10 30 Pr oc ur em en t r ec or ds ; D ep t. of E du ca tio n/ H ea lth re po rt s An nu al % o f h ou se ho ld s m ee tin g m in im um d ie ta ry di ve rs ity (M DD -W p ro xy ) 25 50 75 H ou se ho ld d ie ta ry s ur ve ys ; N ut rit io n m on ito rin g re po rt s An nu al Pr om ot e na tu re -b as ed en te rp ris es (a pi cu ltu re , ve rm ic om po st in g, ec ot ou ris m , N TF Ps ) % o f f ar m er s en ga ge d in a pi cu ltu re , ve rm ic om po st in g, e co to ur is m , N TF Ps – 20 50 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s; F ar m er o rg . r ec or ds ; CS O re po rt s Q ua rt er ly N um be r o f n ew a gr oe co lo gi ca l e nt er pr is es es ta bl is he d 0 30 10 0 Co un ty b us in es s re gi st ra tio n da ta ; F ar m er o rg . re po rt s An nu al % in cr ea se in h ou se ho ld in co m e fr om na tu re -b as ed e nt er pr is es – 20 50 H ou se ho ld in co m e su rv ey s; F ar m er o rg . r ec or ds Bi -a nn ua l % o f p ro du ct s fr om a pi cu ltu re , c om po st in g, N TF Ps m ar ke te d an nu al ly - 20 60 M ar ke t s ur ve ys ; C oo pe ra tiv e re co rd s An nu al % o f y ou th a nd w om en e ng ag ed in n at ur e- ba se d en te rp ris es – 30 60 Fa rm er o rg . r ep or ts ; G en de r/ yo ut h su rv ey s An nu al 50 O ut co m e/ O ut pu t In di ca to r( s) Ta rg et (s ) So ur ce o f d at a Fr eq ue nc y Ba se lin e M id T er m En d te rm Lo w c ro p co st a nd li ve st oc k so lu tio ns a do pt ed % o f f ar m er s us in g lo w -c os t c ro p/ liv es to ck m an ag em en t p ra ct ic es . 5 30 70 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, Tr ai ni ng in st itu tio ns Q ua rt er ly % re du ct io n in p ro du ct io n co st d ue to u se of a gr oe co lo gi ca l p ra ct ic es 10 40 70 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, Tr ai ni ng in st itu tio ns Q ua rt er ly Su pp or t n ut rit io n se ns iti ve pr og ra m m in g N um be r o f n ut rit io n- se ns iti ve a gr oe co lo gy pr oj ec ts in te gr at ed in to c ou nt y de ve lo pm en t p la ns 0 2 5 Co un ty d ev el op m en t p la ns ; P la nn in g re po rt s Ev er y 5 yr s % o f c ou nt y ag ric ul tu re p ro je ct s w ith ex pl ic it nu tr iti on o bj ec tiv es – 25 60 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re w or kp la ns ; P ro je ct re po rt s An nu al % o f h ou se ho ld s re po rt in g im pr ov ed d ie ta ry qu al ity li nk ed to a gr oe co lo gy in te rv en tio ns – 30 70 H ou se ho ld n ut rit io n su rv ey s; P ro je ct e va lu at io ns Bi -a nn ua l N um be r o f e xt en si on o ffi ce rs tr ai ne d on nu tr iti on -s en si tiv e ag ro ec ol og y 0 50 15 0 Tr ai ni ng re co rd s; D ep t. of A gr ic ul tu re re po rt s An nu al Po lic y O bj ec tiv e: T o pr om ot e ag ro ec ol og ic al e nt er pr is es a nd in su ffi ci en t m ar ke t a cc es s th ro ug h in fr as tr uc tu re in ve st m en t, ta rg et ed in ce nt iv es a nd s up po rt iv e bu si ne ss se rv ic es . O ut co m e 3: S tre ng th en ed a gr oe co lo gi ca l e nt er pr is es a nd m ar ke ts th ro ug h in ve st m en t i n in fra st ru ct ur e, in ce nt iv es a nd in st itu tio na l s up po rt . W el l-e qu ip pe d an d de si gn at ed a gr oe co lo gi ca l ag ric ul tu ra l m ar ke ts es ta bl is he d N um be r o f a gr oe co lo gi ca l m ar ke ts es ta bl is he d an d de si gn at ed . 1 4 11 Co un ty tr ad e de pa rt m en t r ep or ts Pa rt ne rs e- m ar ke tin g pl at fo rm s Q ua rt er ly % o f m ar ke t i nf ra st ru ct ur e up gr ad ed to su pp or t a gr oe co lo gi ca l p ro du ce e .g re si du e te st in g st at io ns 1 10 80 Co un ty tr ad e de pa rt m en t r ep or ts Pa rt ne rs (A FA ) Q ua rt er ly Te ch no lo gi es a do pt ed % o f a gr oe co lo gi ca l t ec hn ol og ie s ad op te d by fa rm er s. 5 30 60 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch in st itu tio n re co rd s Bi -A nn ua lly % o f t ar ge t f ar m er s ap pl yi ng a t l ea st o ne ag ro ec ol og ic al te ch no lo gy 5 25 70 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch in st itu tio n re co rd s Bi -A nn ua lly In ce nt iv es e st ab lis he d N um be r o f i nc en tiv es in tro du ce d (e .g ., su bs id ie s, c er tifi ca tio n pr og ra m s, a cc es s to m ar ke ts ) 3 5 10 Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, re se ar ch / t ra in in g in st itu tio n re co rd s ce rt ifi ca tio n bo di es Pa rt ne rs Pr oj ec t m on ito rin g re po rt s Q ua rt er ly 51 O ut co m e/ O ut pu t In di ca to r( s) Ta rg et (s ) So ur ce o f d at a Fr eq ue nc y Ba se lin e M id T er m En d te rm In no va tio ns d ev el op ed % o f a gr oe co lo gi ca l i nn ov at io ns c o- cr ea te d w ith fa rm er s an d re se ar ch er s. 0 10 30 Re se ar ch a nd in no va tio n re po rt s Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, Tr ai ni ng in st itu tio ns An nu al ly % o f t he fa rm er s ad op te d th e de ve lo pe d in no va tio ns 0 20 60 Re se ar ch a nd in no va tio n re po rt s Co un ty a gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, Tr ai ni ng in st itu tio ns An nu al ly De di ca te d or ga ni c in pu t hu bs d ev el op ed N um be r o f c er tifi ed o rg an ic in pu t h ub s es ta bl is he d 1 4 11 Co un ty tr ad e de pa rt m en t r ep or ts Pa rt ne rs e- m ar ke tin g pl at fo rm s Q ua rt er ly % in cr ea se in fa rm er a cc es s to o rg an ic in pu ts 10 50 70 Co un ty tr ad e, A gr ic ul tu re d ep ar tm en t r ep or ts Pa rt ne rs e- m ar ke tin g pl at fo rm s Q ua rt er ly Va lu e- ad de d ag ro - en te rp ris es fo cu se d on ag ro ec ol og ic al p ro du ct s de ve lo pe d N um be r o f n ew a gr oe co lo gi ca l e nt er pr is es es ta bl is he d 1 5 11 Co un ty tr ad e, A gr ic ul tu re d ep ar tm en t r ep or ts Pa rt ne rs e- m ar ke tin g pl at fo rm s Q ua rt er ly % o f a gr oe co lo gi ca l e nt er pr is es st re ng th en ed . 10 50 70 Co un ty tr ad e, A gr ic ul tu re d ep ar tm en t r ep or ts Pa rt ne rs e- m ar ke tin g pl at fo rm s Q ua rt er ly % o f e xi st in g ag ro ec ol og ic al e nt er pr is es le d by w om en /y ou th . 10 40 70 Co un ty tr ad e, A gr ic ul tu re d ep ar tm en t r ep or ts Pa rt ne rs e- m ar ke tin g pl at fo rm s Q ua rt er ly % o f v al ue -a dd ed p ro du ct s de ve lo pe d ac ro ss a ll va lu e ch ai ns . 10 35 65 Co un ty tr ad e, A gr ic ul tu re d ep ar tm en t r ep or ts Pa rt ne rs e- m ar ke tin g pl at fo rm s Q ua rt er ly Pr om ot e lo ca l p ro ce ss in g, pa ck ag in g, a nd di ve rs ifi ca tio n of p ro du ct s to in cr ea se m ar ke t co m pe tit iv en es s % o f a gr oe co lo gi ca l p ro du ct s pr oc es se d an d pa ck ag ed lo ca lly . 10 50 80 Co un ty tr ad e, A gr ic ul tu re d ep ar tm en t r ep or ts Pa rt ne rs , e- m ar ke tin g pl at fo rm s Q ua rt er ly % in cr ea se in in co m e fr om p ro ce ss ed / di ve rs ifi ed p ro du ct s. 0 45 70 Co un ty tr ad e, A gr ic ul tu re d ep ar tm en t r ep or ts , Pa rt ne rs re po rt s e- m ar ke tin g pl at fo rm s Q ua rt er ly 52 O ut co m e/ O ut pu t In di ca to r( s) Ta rg et (s ) So ur ce o f d at a Fr eq ue nc y Ba se lin e M id T er m En d te rm N um be r o f n ew m ar ke t l in ka ge s/ co nt ra ct s se cu re d fo r a gr oe co lo gi ca l p ro du ct s 0 15 50 Co un ty tr ad e & Ag ric ul tu re d ep ar tm en ta l r ep or ts Pa rt ne rs re po rt s e- m ar ke tin g pl at fo rm s Q ua rt er ly Fa ci lit at e ce rt ifi ca tio n an d st an da rd iz at io n of ag ro ec ol og ic al in pu ts a nd pr od uc ts N um be r o f c er tifi ed p ro du ct s 0 10 20 Ce rt ifi ca tio n bo dy re po rt s Tr ai ni ng a tte nd an ce N at io na l s ta nd ar ds d oc um en ts N um be r o f p ro du ce rs /p ro ce ss or s tra in ed on s ta nd ar ds 0 10 20 At te nd an ce li st Q ua rt er ly N um be r o f s ta nd ar d gu id el in es d ev el op ed 0 1 2 De pa rt m en ta l r ep or ts Q ua rt er ly Es ta bl is h in cu ba tio n pr og ra m s fo r ag ro ec ol og ic al b us in es se s N um be r o f i nc ub at io n ce nt re s es ta bl is he d 0 1 2 In cu ba tio n ce nt er re po rt s Bu si ne ss re gi st ra tio n da ta Se m i- An nu al ly N um be r o f b us in es se s su pp or te d/ in cu ba te d 0 2 3 In cu ba tio n re po rt s Se m i- an nu al ly % o f i nc ub at ed b us in es se s st ill o pe ra tio na l af te r 2 y ea rs 0 10 30 De pa rt m en ta l r ep or ts An nu al ly De ve lo p ta x be ne fit s an d lo w -in te re st lo an s fo r ag ro ec ol og ic al v al ue c ha in ac to rs % o f a ct or s ac ce ss in g fin an ci al in ce nt iv es 0 15 40 Fi na nc ia l i ns tit ut io n re po rt s G ov er nm en t t ax re co rd s An nu al ly Va lu e of lo an s di sb ur se d 0 3M 15 M Fi na nc ia l r ep or ts An nu al ly Co nd uc t a nn ua l as se ss m en ts o n or ga ni c in pu t a nd p ro du ct m ar ke t pe rf or m an ce N um be r o f m ar ke t a ss es sm en ts c on du ct ed 0 3 5 An nu al m ar ke t a ss es sm en t r ep or ts Sa le s an d pr od uc tio n da ta Tr ad er /c on su m er s ur ve ys An nu al ly % g ro w th in v ol um e an d va lu e of o rg an ic / ag ro ec ol og ic al p ro du ct s 0 10 30 De pa rt m en ta l r ep or ts An nu al ly Em er gi ng tr en ds d oc um en te d 0 2 4 De pa rt m en ta l p ro gr es s re po rt s An nu al ly 53 O ut co m e/ O ut pu t In di ca to r( s) Ta rg et (s ) So ur ce o f d at a Fr eq ue nc y Ba se lin e M id T er m En d te rm Po lic y G oa l/O bj ec tiv e: T o pr om ot e th e re st or at io n an d co ns er va tio n of a gr ob io di ve rs ity a nd a ss oc ia te d ec os ys te m s fo r r es ili en ce a nd s us ta in ab ili ty O ut co m e 4: A gr ob io di ve rs ity c on se rv at io n fo r e nh an ce d ec os ys te m b en efi ts p ro m ot ed M ap pi ng a nd d oc um en ta - tio n of a gr ob io di ve rs ity lo ss an d ec os ys te m d eg ra da tio n in a gr i-f oo d la nd sc ap es N um be r o f m ap pi ng re po rt s pr od uc ed 0 1 3 Co un ty A gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, G IS m ap s An nu al Es ta bl is h ag ro bi od iv er si ty co ns er va tio n pa rk s an d fie ld s ite s N um be r o f c on se rv at io n pa rk s/ fie ld s ite s es ta bl is he d 0 2 5 Co un ty A gr ic ul tu re re po rt s, S ite in sp ec tio n re po rt s An nu al Co m m un ity s ee d ba nk s, fi el d ge ne b an ks (v eg et at iv el y pr op ag at ed m at er ia ls ), an d co un ty g en e ba nk s es ta bl is he d. N um be r o f s ee d/ ge ne b an ks e st ab lis he d 1 2 4 Co un ty A gr ic ul tu re d ep ar tm en ta l r ep or ts Q ua rt er ly % o f f ar m er s ac ce ss in g lo ca l s ee d ba nk s. 5 15 30 -C ou nt y Ag ric ul tu re d ep ar tm en ta l r ep or ts - S ee d ba nk in ve nt or y lo gs - P ro je ct p ro gr es s re po rt s - F ar m er s ee d ac ce ss s ur ve ys Q ua rt er ly Re ge ne ra tio n an d re - in tro du ct io n of lo st , N eg le ct ed a nd U nd er ut ili ze d cr op a nd li ve st oc k sp ec ie s su pp or te d. N um be r o f N US s pe ci es re in tro du ce d. 1 5 10 Co un ty A gr ic ul tu re d ep ar tm en ta l r ep or ts , fi el d m on ito rin g, F ar m er in te rv ie w s Q ua rt er ly % o f f ar m er s cu lti va tin g or ra is in g N US sp ec ie s 0 20 50 Co un ty A gr ic ul tu re d ep ar tm en ta l r ep or ts , fi el d m on ito rin g, Q ua rt er ly Pr om ot e ut ili za tio n, m ul tip lic at io n an d ex ch an ge o f i nd ig en ou s se ed s an d cl im at e- re si lie nt cr op v ar ie tie s % o f f ar m er s en ga ge d in s ee d m ul tip lic at io n/ ex ch an ge 0 20 50 Fa rm er s ur ve ys , C SO re po rt s An nu al Tr ad iti on al k no w le dg e an d as so ci at ed c ul tu ra l ex pr es si on s do cu m en te d. N um be r o f t ra di tio na l a gr oe co lo gi ca l pr ac tic es d oc um en te d. - 5 10 - E th no gr ap hi c do cu m en ta tio n - A ud io -v is ua l a rc hi ve s - R ep or ts fr om c ul tu ra l f ac ili ta to rs Q ua rt er ly N um be r o f c om m un iti es e ng ag ed in th e do cu m en ta tio n pr oc es s. - 1 3 Co un ty A gr ic ul tu re d ep ar tm en ta l r ep or ts Q ua rt er ly Ph as e ou t o f H ig hl y H az ar d- ou s Pe st ic id es (H PP s) a nd re sp on si bl e us e of v et er i- na ry p ha rm ac eu tic al s % re du ct io n in H H P im po rt s/ us ag e - 30 70 Pe st ic id e sa le s/ im po rt d at a, N EM A/ KE PH IS re po rt s An nu al 54 O ut co m e/ O ut pu t In di ca to r( s) Ta rg et (s ) So ur ce o f d at a Fr eq ue nc y Ba se lin e M id T er m En d te rm Pr om ot e la nd sc ap e re st or at io n an d co ns er va tio n of d eg ra de d ec os ys te m s H ec ta re s of d eg ra de d la nd re st or ed 0 2, 00 0 ha 5, 00 0 ha Fi el d m on ito rin g, S at el lit e im ag er y An nu al Id en tif y, m ap a nd re gu la te ag ric ul tu ra l z on es b as ed o n re so ur ce s ty pe , e co lo gi ca l an d cl im at ic c on di tio ns a nd fa rm in g sy st em s. N um be r o f r eg ul at ed a gr oe co lo gi ca l z on es de si gn at ed 0 2 5 Co un ty s pa tia l p la n, Z on in g re gu la tio ns Ev er y 5 yr s De ve lo p pr ov is io ns fo r su st ai na bl e ur ba n an d pe ri- ur ba n ag ric ul tu re w ith in th e co un ty s pa tia l a nd de ve lo pm en t p la ns N um be r o f u rb an /p er i-u rb an a gr ic ul tu re pr oj ec ts in te gr at ed 0 3 10 Co un ty s pa tia l/d ev el op m en t p la ns Ev er y 5 yr s Po lic y G oa l/O bj ec tiv e: T o es ta bl is h an e na bl in g en vi ro nm en t f or a gr oe co lo gy th ro ug h th e de ve lo pm en t a nd im pl em en ta tio n of a h ar m on iz ed a nd s up po rt iv e le gi sl at iv e an d in st itu tio na l f ra m ew or k O ut co m e 5: M ai ns tre am ed a gr oe co lo gy in th e ex is tin g po lic y, le ga l a nd in st itu tio na l f ra m ew or ks . Co un ty p ol ic ie s, la w s, re gu la tio ns a nd p la ns (C ID Ps , A DP s, S tra te gi c Pl an s) m ai ns tre am ed N um be r o f c ou nt y pl an s in te gr at in g ag ro ec ol og y. - 2 3 Co un ty g ov er nm en t p la nn in g do cu m en ts Po lic y re vi ew re po rt s Q ua rt er ly % o f a gr oe co lo gi ca l p rio rit ie s re fle ct ed in CI DP s/ AD Ps . 1 5 10 Co un ty g ov er nm en t p la nn in g do cu m en ts Po lic y re vi ew re po rt s Q ua rt er ly G oo d go ve rn an ce st ru ct ur es fo r a gr oe co lo gy de ve lo pm en t, m an ag em en t an d ov er si gh t e st ab lis he d N um be r o f f un ct io na l a gr oe co lo gy w or ki ng gr ou ps . 2 6 11 Co un ty g ov er na nc e re po rt s Co m m itt ee /w or ki ng g ro up m in ut es Q ua rt er ly % o f c ou nt ie s w ith o ve rs ig ht s tr uc tu re s in pl ac e. 4 10 20 Co un ty g ov er na nc e re po rt s Co m m itt ee /w or ki ng g ro up m in ut es Q ua rt er ly Ci vi c ed uc at io n, in cl us iv ity , an d M &E u nd er ta ke n. N um be r o f c iv ic e du ca tio n fo ru m s co nd uc te d. 0 2 4 Fo ru m re po rt s Pa rt ic ip an t d is ag gr eg at ed d at a M &E fr am ew or k do cu m en ts Q ua rt er ly % o f p ar tic ip an ts fr om m ar gi na liz ed gr ou ps - 0 10 30 Co un ty g ov er na nc e re po rt s Q ua rt er ly % o f c ou nt ie s w ith o ve rs ig ht s tr uc tu re s in pl ac e 0 2 4 Co un ty g ov er na nc e re po rt s Q ua rt er ly 55 O ut co m e/ O ut pu t In di ca to r( s) Ta rg et (s ) So ur ce o f d at a Fr eq ue nc y Ba se lin e M id T er m En d te rm Le gi sl at iv e fr am ew or k on ag ro ec ol og y ha rm on iz ed Fu nc tio na l M &E fr am ew or ks d ev el op ed fo r ag ro ec ol og y 0 2 5 Co un ty g ov er na nc e re po rt s M &E fr am ew or k do cu m en ts Q ua rt er ly N um be r o f a gr oe co lo gy -re le va nt la w s/ re gu la tio ns re vi ew ed a nd h ar m on iz ed 0 1 1 Po lic y an d le ga l r ev ie w re po rt s Le gi sl at iv e re co rd s Q ua rt er ly % o f p ol ic y br ie fs d ev el op ed a nd di ss em in at ed . 0 1 2 Po lic y an d le ga l r ev ie w re po rt s Le gi sl at iv e re co rd s Q ua rt er ly M ul ti- se ct or al c oo rd in at io n m ec ha ni sm s fo r ag ro ec ol og y es ta bl is he d N um be r o f j oi nt a gr oe co lo gy in iti at iv es ac ro ss s ec to rs 0 2 4 Co un ty in te r-s ec to ria l r ep or ts Q ua rt er ly Sy ne rg y ac ro ss re le va nt se ct or s fo r m ai ns tre am in g ag ro ec ol og y st re ng th en ed N um be r o f i nt er se ct or al c ol la bo ra tio ns (a gr ic ul tu re , h ea lth , e du ca tio n, e nv iro nm en t, et c. ) 0 1 2 Se ct or al re po rt s Jo in t p ol ic y do cu m en ts Q ua rt er ly % o f J oi nt p ol ic ie s or p ro gr am s im pl em en te d. 0 1 4 Se ct or al re po rt s Jo in t p ol ic y do cu m en ts Q ua rt er ly Fi na nc ia l a nd n on -fi na nc ia l in ce nt iv es fo r a gr oe co lo gy ad op tio n pr ov id ed % o f b en efi ci ar ie s re ac he d (d is ag gr eg at ed by g en de r, ag e, a bi lit y) . 0 4 0% W , 25 % Y, 10 % P W D 50 % W , 35 % Y, 15 % P W D Co un ty in ce nt iv e pr og ra m re po rt s Be ne fic ia ry d at ab as es Q ua rt er ly Cu rr en t p ol ic ie s th at hi nd er th e tra ns iti on to ag ro ec ol og y id en tifi ed a nd as se ss ed % o f o bs tr uc tiv e po lic ie s id en tifi ed a nd an al yz ed 0 3 6 Po lic y as se ss m en t r ep or ts Ad vo ca cy a ct io n lo gs Q ua rt er ly % o f a dv oc ac y ac tio ns ta ke n to re fo rm su ch p ol ic ie s. 0 1 2 Po lic y as se ss m en t r ep or ts Ad vo ca cy a ct io n lo gs Q ua rt er ly G en de r-s en si tiv e an d di sa bi lit y- in cl us iv e la nd po lic ie s in c ou nt y la nd sy st em s in co rp or at ed % o f l an d te nu re p ro ce ss es in co rp or at in g ge nd er /d is ab ili ty p er sp ec tiv es . 0 2 4 La nd p ol ic y do cu m en ts La nd b oa rd a nd re gi st ry re co rd s Q ua rt er ly Le ga l f ra m ew or ks re co gn iz in g an d pr ot ec tin g co lle ct iv e la nd ri gh ts (e sp ec ia lly fo r I nd ig en ou s Pe op le s) s up po rt ed % o f I nd ig en ou s or lo ca l c om m un iti es be ne fit in g fr om le ga l s up po rt . 0 1 2 La nd a nd le ga l r ef or m re co rd s Co m m un ity le ga l s up po rt re po rt s Q ua rt er ly 56 O ut co m e/ O ut pu t In di ca to r( s) Ta rg et (s ) So ur ce o f d at a Fr eq ue nc y Ba se lin e M id T er m En d te rm Po lic y G oa l/O bj ec tiv e: T o pr om ot e in cl us iv e ag ro ec ol og y fo r V ul ne ra bl e an d m ar gi na liz ed g ro up s an d co m m un iti es . O ut co m e 6: P ro m ot ed s oc ia l a nd g en de r i nc lu si vi ty in d ec is io n- m ak in g an d pr ac tic e in a gr i-f oo d sy st em s. Pa rt ic ip at io n of w om en , yo ut h, P W Ds , a nd m ar gi na liz ed g ro up s in de ci si on -m ak in g fa ci lit at ed . % re pr es en ta tio n of w om en , y ou th , a nd PW Ds in a gr oe co lo gy c om m itt ee s/ w or ki ng gr ou ps . - 30 50 M ee tin g m in ut es Pa rt ic ip an t r eg is te rs Di sa gg re ga te d at te nd an ce li st s Q ua rt er ly N um be r o f p ol ic y di al og ue s in cl ud in g m ar gi na liz ed v oi ce s. - 15 30 M ee tin g m in ut es Pa rt ic ip an t r eg is te rs Q ua rt er ly Ag ro ec ol og y tra in in g an d m en to rs hi p pr og ra m s fo r yo ut h, w om en , a nd P W Ds de ve lo pe d. N um be r o f i nc lu si ve tr ai ni ng p ro gr am s de ve lo pe d an d im pl em en te d. 0 20 50 Tr ai ni ng a tte nd an ce s he et s Cu rr ic ul um d oc um en ts M en to rs hi p lo gs Bi an nu al ly N um be r o f t ra in ee s di sa gg re ga te d by ge nd er , a ge , d is ab ili ty . - 2, 00 0 5, 00 0 Tr ai ni ng a tte nd an ce s he et s Bi an nu al ly In cl us iv e co m m un ity -b as ed ag ro ec ol og y de m on st ra tio n si te s es ta bl is he d. N um be r o f d em on st ra tio n si te s de si gn ed w ith a cc es si bi lit y an d in cl us io n fe at ur es . - 15 30 Si te in sp ec tio n re po rt s In fr as tr uc tu re a ss es sm en ts Co m m un ity fe ed ba ck . Se m i- An nu al ly % o f P W D- fr ie nd ly in fr as tr uc tu re a do pt ed . - 10 20 Si te in sp ec tio n re po rt s In fr as tr uc tu re a ss es sm en ts Co m m un ity fe ed ba ck . Se m i- An nu al ly In cl us iv e ac ce ss to fi na nc e an d ag ric ul tu ra l i np ut s pr om ot ed . N um be r o f m ar gi na liz ed fa rm er s (w om en , yo ut h, P W Ds ) a cc es si ng c re di t o r i np ut s. - 2, 00 0 5, 00 0 M ic ro fin an ce a nd s ub si dy p ro gr am re po rt s. Fa rm er re co rd s An nu al ly N um be r o f t ar ge te d fin an ci al p ro du ct s or in pu t p ac ka ge s de ve lo pe d. - 5 10 M ic ro fin an ce a nd s ub si dy p ro gr am re po rt s. Fa rm er re co rd s An nu al ly Pu bl ic a w ar en es s ca m pa ig ns o n in cl us iv ity in ag ro ec ol og y co nd uc te d N um be r o f c am pa ig ns c on du ct ed . - 20 50 M ed ia c ov er ag e Po st -c am pa ig n su rv ey s Co m m un ic at io n lo gs Q ua rt er ly % in cr ea se in p ub lic k no w le dg e of in cl us iv e ag ro ec ol og y. - 20 50 M ed ia c ov er ag e Po st -c am pa ig n su rv ey s Co m m un ic at io n lo gs Q ua rt er ly 57 O ut co m e/ O ut pu t In di ca to r( s) Ta rg et (s ) So ur ce o f d at a Fr eq ue nc y Ba se lin e M id T er m En d te rm Vo ic es o f m ar gi na liz ed co m m un iti es a m pl ifi ed . N um be r o f s to ry te lli ng , m ed ia o r p ol ic y pl at fo rm s th at h ig hl ig ht m ar gi na liz ed v oi ce . - 30 50 Si te in sp ec tio n re po rt s In fr as tr uc tu re a ss es sm en ts Co m m un ity fe ed ba ck Se m i- An nu al ly N um be r o f p ol ic y br ie fs o r c om m un ity st at em en ts p re se nt ed - 1 1 Si te in sp ec tio n re po rt s In fr as tr uc tu re a ss es sm en ts Co m m un ity fe ed ba ck Se m i- An nu al ly In te rg en er at io na l kn ow le dg e ex ch an ge a nd in di ge no us a gr oe co lo gi ca l pr ac tic es p ro m ot ed . N um be r o f k no w le dg e- sh ar in g ev en ts h el d. - 2 4 Ev en t r ep or ts Do cu m en ta tio n of p ra ct ic es Vi de o/ au di o ar ch iv es . Q ua rt er ly N um be r o f t ra di tio na l p ra ct ic es do cu m en te d/ re vi ve d. - 15 30 Ev en t r ep or ts Do cu m en ta tio n of p ra ct ic es Vi de o/ au di o ar ch iv es . Q ua rt er ly N um be r o f e ld er s/ yo ut hs e ng ag ed in ex ch an ge s. - 60 0 2, 50 0 Ev en t r ep or ts Do cu m en ta tio n of p ra ct ic es Vi de o/ au di o ar ch iv es . Q ua rt er ly 58 7.5 List of Technical Working Group Members S.NO NAME DESIGNATION/ORGANIZATION 1. Dr. Naomi Muriuki DoALFVS -Agriculture 2. Raymond Mwangata DoALFVS -Director Fisheries 3. Lynnette Echessa DoALFVS -Director Agriculture 4. Virginiah Ngunjiri DoALFVS -Director Livestock Production 5. James Kamau DoALFVS -Livestock Production 6. Nelson Mativa DoALFVS -Fisheries 7. Lilian Samoei DOALF-Agriculture 8. Jacqueline Wanjala DoALFVS -Agriculture 9. Mercy Kihugu DoALFVS -Communication 10. James Kaliba Farmer Representative 11. Mary Ndung’o Farmer Representative 12. Timothy Kuria DOALF-Veterinary 13. Selina Nkatha Director - Gender and inclusivity, Nakuru County 14. Samuel Matika DOALF-Crop protection 15. Chebet Chirchir Hivos East Africa 16. Geoffrey Rono SNV in Kenya 17. Maryanne Kamau Safe Consumers Organization 18. Mary Irungu Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (PELUM) 19. Samson Luari Ogiek People Development Project 20. Peter Oswata Cereal Growers Association (CGA) 21. Percy Njeri Percmacks Co. Ltd 22. Juster Kendi Biodiversity and Biosafety Association of Kenya (BIBA) 23. Glory Nkatha Sustainable Agriculture Foundation Africa (SAF-A) 24. Samson Kiiru Slow Food Kenya 25. John Kariuki Slow Food Kenya 26. Julia Kamau Seed Savers Network Kenya 27. Stephen Muthui Route to Food Initiative 28. Mr. Fredrick Ochieng Biovision Trust Africa 29. Jackson Kiok UN-TEEB AgriFood project, Strathmore Hub for Natural Capital 30. Juma Muhammed Intersectoral Forum on Agroecology and Agrobiodiversity (ISFAA) 31. Kennedy Kirwa Department of Environment 32. Stephen Ogutu Persons With Disability Network and Development 33. George Mwangi Medical Services and public health, Nakuru County 34. Dr. Harun Warui Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung (HBS) 35. Isaac Soita National Environment Trust Fund (NETFUND) 36. Victoria Machakaire Seed Change 37. Dr Moses Okinyi Seed Change 38. Dr. Josiah Ateka Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT) 39. Dr. Forah Obebo Kenyatta University (KU) 40. Mercyline Njeri Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT) 41. Tom Owino Nakuru Living lab Egerton University 59 COUNTY GOVERNMENT OF NAKURU THE NAKURU COUNTY AGROECOLOGY POLICY, 2025 2025 - 2034 FOREWORD PREFACE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background 1.2 Rationale for Agroecology Policy for Nakuru County 1.3 Policy Goals and Objectives 1.4 Vision 1.5 Mission 1.6 Guiding Principles 1.7 Scope of the Nakuru Agroecology policy 1.7 Structure of the Policy 2.1 Key Policy Issues in Agroecology 2.1.1 Inadequate knowledge, training and capacity for advancing agroecology practices 3.1. Integrating agroecology into research, extension, and training to strengthen knowledge and institutional capacity for agroecological transition 2.2 Policy, Legal and Institutional Framework 2.2.1 Global and regional policy context for agroecology 2.2.2 National policy, legal and institutional frameworks 2.2.3 County level legislations 2.1.2 Unsustainable agri-food production and consumption practises 2.1.3. Loss of agrobiodiversity and ecosystem function 2.1.4. Underdeveloped agroecological enterprises and limited market access for associated products 2.1.5. Weak policy and legislative frameworks for mainstreaming agroecology 2.1.6. Gender and social disparities in food systems 4.3 Coordination and Institutional Framework 4.2 Legal Framework 4.1 Policy Implementation 1.1 3.6 Promoting social inclusivity in decision-making and practice in agri-food systems 3.5 Mainstreaming agroecology in existing policy, legal and institutional frameworks 3.4 Strengthening agroecological enterprises and markets through investments in infrastructure, incentives, and institutional Support 3.3. Promoting Agrobiodiversity Conservation for Enhanced Ecosystem Benefits in Nakuru County. 3.2. Enhancing adoption of agroecological practices for sustainable diets and food and nutrition security for all 5.3 Reporting 5.2 Evaluation 5.1 Monitoring 4.4 Resource Mobilization for Policy Implementation 5.4 Learning POLICY REVIEW 7.1 Definition of Terms 7.3 Implementation Matrix 7.2 References