Abstract
Keywords
Introduction
Forests are important for provision of ecosystem services which promote sustainable development. However, deforestation and degradation due to population growth related land demands and climate change are threatening the sustainable management of forests across the world. These multiple and interrelated challenges are increasingly calling for a multidimensional and integrated approach to sustainable forest resource management. This approach involves leveraging the contribution of different sectoral agencies toward common goals in an interagency collaborative framework. However, collaboration is not natural or familiar to many government institutions worldwide (Elbakidze et al., 2010; Maier & Wirth, 2018; Marks-Block & Tripp, 2021; Ray-Bennett et al., 2020). To address this challenge in the forest sector, the concept of forest adoption or adopt-a-forest is fast emerging as a special purpose vehicle for implementing inter-agency collaboration. The concept refers to a legal process in which interested forest stakeholders are granted rights and responsibilities for forest restoration and stewardship for a defined period. Forest adoption offers numerous benefits, including environmental conservation, biodiversity preservation, community engagement, sustainable resource management, and opportunities for recreation and tourism, fostering sustainable development and environmental stewardship. Case studies on forest collaboration and adoption show that shared stewardship has the greatest opportunity to shift the larger forest management paradigm within states that create new institutions specifically to support forest management (Aldworth & Schultz, 2023; Verkuijl, 2015). In order to identify and leverage on the opportunities available for collaboration, there is the need for more context-specific studies on the practical application of forest adoption.
Kenya desires to reap the benefits of inter-agency collaboration in forest management at both the national and county levels through forest adoption and has implemented a number of collaborative activities through the Kenya Forest Service (KFS), a state corporation responsible for the management of public forests. Government priorities in forest collaboration are used in key policy and legislative instruments, such as the Draft Forest Policy 2020 and the Forest Conservation and Management Act, 2016, to support the creation of partnerships or collaborative arrangements for forest restoration, management, and protection. However, there are limited studies and lessons on ways to improve inter-agency implementation of adopt-a-forest as a collaborative approach to forest restoration in the country. The study addresses this problem by pioneering and exploring Kenya’s context for forest adoption. To explore the context, one question is posed: from the perspective of sustainable forest management, what are the impacts of adopt-a-forest as an innovative multidisciplinary and integrated approach to the restoration of forests in Kenya? The study first reviewed the theoretical and empirical background of forest adoption and how it contributes to sustainable forest management and applied the findings on Kenya’s status of forest management, including the genesis of forest adoption in order to draw the key study lessons. Kenya was chosen for the study because it has a low forest cover and is seeking innovative ways to protect and conserve its forest ecosystems in view of the important role that forests play in the country. The study’s implications will help academics, politicians, and foresters efficiently build and manage inter-agency relationships for the common good.
Collaboration and Sustainable Forest management
Theoretical Analysis
Sustainable forest management is a comprehensive approach aimed at balancing environmental, social, and economic objectives to ensure the long-term health and productivity of forest ecosystems. It involves responsible stewardship practices that promote conservation, regeneration, and sustainable use of forest resources. Key principles include maintaining biodiversity, protecting water quality, mitigating climate change through carbon sequestration, and preserving ecosystem services. Sustainable forest management also considers the needs and rights of local communities and indigenous peoples, promoting equitable access to forest resources and fostering socio-economic development. By integrating ecological, social, and economic factors, sustainable forest management strives to meet current needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own.
Collaboration in forest management helps collaborating entities to achieve sustainable forest management. By collaborating, entities, including government agencies beat the competition, access new markets, and respect operational, social, and environmental constraints; increase trust and build stronger relationships; increase collaborative partner influence; decrease litigation and conflict; and increase the capacity to accomplish work. In the context of sustainable forest management, collaboration enhances costs and information sharing, optimizing activity implementation logistics (Andereck, 1997; Bardach, 1996; Gereghty, 2012; Siddiquee, 2022; World Bank Group, 2018). However, it is worth noting that each agency or entity has its objectives and typically makes planning decisions to meet collaborative objectives. Therefore, it is important to determine how agencies or entities work together to achieve sustainable forest management. In particular, it is important to identify how collaborative activities will be planned and executed, who will take leadership of the collaboration, and how benefits will be shared. From this review, collaboration is vital for sustainable forest management in Kenya, integrating ecological, social, and economic aspects. It enables government agencies, communities, and stakeholders to combine efforts, promoting responsible practices, biodiversity conservation, and ecosystem preservation. Collaboration optimizes logistics, reduces conflicts, and enhances efficiency, but clear objectives and communication are essential for success.
Empirical Analysis
Collaboration in forest management is critical for implementing global commitments and agreements toward sustainable development. For instance, the collaboration will support the realization of the 2021 Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use and the pledge of 140 countries to eliminate forest loss by 2030 by supporting the restoration and sustainable forestry. Through multilateral environmental conventions and agreements (MEAs), countries have pledged significant commitments and support for Forest and Landscape Restoration (FLR) by 2030. These include the Bonn Challenge, the New York Declaration on Forests, Aichi Target 15 of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 15 on Life on Land, which aims to achieve land degradation neutrality by 2030.
The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO, 2022) suggests that achieving global forest targets remains challenging because forest investment is still low. The FAO (2022) recommends the deployment of joint public and private initiatives to deliver efficient solutions for forest resource management and hence the growing recognition of initiatives such as adopt-a-forest as forums for actualizing collaboration in forest management. Private financing, albeit hard to quantify, is estimated to account for approximately 14% of the current funding for forestry and nature-based enterprises. The FAO (2022) estimates that the private sector invests USD 1.5 billion to 2 billion per year in forest plantations and USD 6.5 billion in wood processing in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Löfqvist and Ghazoul (2019) emphasized the importance of private funding for effective landscape restoration. While this paper lauds these efforts, the authors emphasize the need to tap all funding sources, including domestic government, private, and official development assistance, to promote collaborative forest management.
However, empirical reviews have also criticized the collaborative initiatives in forest management for being time-intensive and lacking in industry or contractors. Moreover, many company-community collaborative deals have not yet proved sufficient to lift people out of poverty and remain supplementary rather than central to income generation for local communities (Siddiquee, 2022). Hence, collaboration is unlikely to result in more equitable outcomes but rather serves to strengthen the position of existing powerful actors. In addition, unequal resources and power, conflicting requirements, and organizational cultures hinder collaboration, as societal actors can further hinder inter-agency relationships (Sahide et al., 2020; Siddiquee, 2022). As a result, studies on how government agencies coordinate and cooperate, what they conform, collaborate on, and how they communicate and clarify issues surrounding forest-based collaboration are needed.
Various local factors affect collaborative outcomes in forest management, including staff turnover and capacity, local leadership, and collaborative history among partnering agencies. Moreover, for collaboration to be successful, there must be leadership and commitment at the highest political and bureaucratic levels, an effective governance structure, a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches to execution, and a collaborative culture (Andereck, 1997). Other factors include communication, trust, inclusiveness, benefits, a clear mission, objectives, and a sense of belonging (Siddiquee, 2022). The key to effectiveness and success is the careful management and administration of these increasingly important organizations (Andereck, 1997; Siddiquee, 2022). Institutional capacity is necessary but not sufficient for the successful joint execution of multisector programs. Organizations tend to cooperate in multisector programs only when they are given full control over the management of their components. Any arrangement short of this will not yield the desired results (Shamsul Huda, 2004; World Bank Group, 2018). An integrated approach needs to be formalized to allow each agency to maintain its independent status while simultaneously carrying out its activities within a commonly agreed-upon framework (Shamsul Huda, 2004).
A study conducted in Canada showed that Urban forests faced threats from urbanization, biodiversity loss, and climate change. The government collaborated with NGOs to address these challenges, leveraging NGO expertise and resources. There was NGO-government collaborations in urban forest programming, analyzing their components like mandates, accountability, and power dynamics. Findings revealed that NGO-government collaborations exhibited both formal and informal relational ties and accountability mechanisms. Formality often correlates with funding, proximity to government, or NGO size. NGOs offer local governments the chance to enhance their resources and capabilities. While collaboration strength may reflect NGO size and budgets, engaging grassroots NGOs remains beneficial for fulfilling public service mandates. Understanding these governance dynamics sets a standard for practitioners involved in similar interactions, empowering them to navigate collaborative decision-making effectively (Doucet et al., 2023). Moreover, government collaborations with residents and NGOs in urban forest management aim to enhance service delivery. A study examining experiences across nine Canadian cities, revealed varying successes and challenges in NGO-government collaborations. While positive outcomes are associated with NGO addition, challenges like employee turnover and funding issues exist. Recommendations for success include fostering political relationships and ensuring equitable benefits distribution. Ongoing research is crucial for benchmarking and improving collaborative strategies (Doucet et al., 2024).
Sequential Power Analysis (SPA) is emerging as a promising analytical framework for understanding the interplay and dynamics of the highlighted factors in collaborative approaches to forest management (Sahide et al., 2020). SPA examines power among actors in three parts. First, actors are historicized into their power backgrounds. Second, the power delivery phase, in which a partnership scheme arrives, is examined. Third, how power relations are adjusted, whether challenged, reinforced, or reconfigured in forestry partnership schemes, is studied (Chang, 2012; Gajda, 2004; Sahide et al., 2020). During the SPA analysis, certain thematic procedures were followed during data collection in the earlier parts. While observing the power source, power background analysis examines the historical and sociocultural factors and the existing market-driven power, actors, and institutions. In the power delivery phase, the SPA entails understanding actors and their influences, programs and initiatives, coalitions, and agreements. In the power adjustment phase, observing the power source entails examining the negotiation process, mechanisms and actions, and practical actions toward sharing benefits and costs. The second thematic area of the SPA involves examining previous power elements that affect new relationships. There are various methods for collecting SPA data. Observations, document content analysis, and interviews were used to understand the power background, whereas observations, interviews, and policy analysis were used to examine power delivery and power adjustment (Sahide et al., 2020). The SPA framework helps organizations analyze who benefits and loses in a collaborative arrangement. As such, this study establishes a foundation upon which SPA can be conducted in Kenya’s context and fosters an understanding of forest adoption for greater impact.
Moreover, the existing literature highlights that cooperation must be framed within the principles of sound forest management to protect forests through an inter-agency approach effectively. Further, primary emphasis must be placed on ecosystem patterns and processes, individual tree species, and other forest biodiversity (Grumbine, 1991). This realization calls for the enhanced education and awareness of agency managers, ecosystem-level research, local and regional public participation, scientific oversight committees, the enactment of new legislation, and enlightened leadership. Ultimately, management policies must be reframed within the context of eco-centric values (Grumbine, 1991). From this review, collaborations for sustainable forest management play a crucial role in achieving global forest commitments. However, challenges such as time intensity and unequal resource distribution remain. Successful collaboration requires leadership, effective governance, communication, and inclusiveness. Understanding power dynamics through frameworks such as Sequential Power Analysis can enhance collaborative forest management effectiveness and promote eco-centric values.
The Status of Forest Management in Kenya
Kenya has a forest cover of 7.2% representing 4.18 million ha that can be classified into four major forest types and eight sub-types. All public forests in Kenya are managed in a participatory manner under the supervision of the KFS, established under the Forest Conservation and Management Act of 2016 with the mandate of enhancing the development, conservation, and management of Kenya’s forest resources in all public forests. Further, it provides technical support to county governments to develop and manage forest resources on community and private lands for the equitable benefit of present and future generations.
Forests rank highly among the most important national assets in terms of environmental, ecological, economic, social, and cultural values. They contribute both tangible and intangible benefits in enormous proportions to Kenyan society. With an annual per capita wood consumption of 1 m3, the current demand for utility products such as timber, poles, pulp wood, and fuel stands at 40 million m3. However, the estimated sustainable wood supply is approximately 30 million m3, thus creating a deficit of approximately 10 million m3 (Kagombe et al., 2020). Forests conserve biological diversity; serve as critical water catchments; conserve soil and prevent soil erosion; mitigate climate change; support major habitats for wildlife; provide fodder, non-wood products such as resin, honey, herbs, and spices; enhance landscape beauty; and provide cultural, research, and scenic tourist attractions of immense value. While the intangible benefits have not been adequately quantified, the sector contributes more than Kshs 20 billion shillings worth of goods to the economy annually. It employs over 50,000 people directly and another 300,000 indirectly (Odwori et al., 2013). In addition, over one million households within a radius of 5 km from forest reserves depend on forests for cultivation, grazing, fishing, food, fuel, wood, honey, herbal medicine, water, and other benefits (Odwori et al., 2013). Despite the scarcity of studies on the valuation of ecosystem services, Silvestri et al. (2013) attempted to estimate the total economic value of a section of the Mau forest at approximately Kshs. 17 billion (USD 0.17 billion). Thus, there is a complicated interwoven relationship between the ecosystem services provided by forests in Kenya and their ability to support human wellbeing.
In view of the preceding, sustained policy and legislative reforms have promoted forest management dating back to the precolonial era. The first formal forest policy was prepared in 1957 and revised in 1968 as Sessional Paper 9 No. 1 of 1968. This policy instrument did not provide for the involvement and participation of a wide array of stakeholders in the management and conservation of public forests (Draft Forest Policy, 2020). However, Forests Act No. 7 (2005) was enacted owing to emergent biodiversity conservation and management challenges. The Act provided for the community and private sector participation in public forest management, as well as the participation of stakeholders in forests outside public land. The Forests Act 2005 was implemented in 2007; however, the constitutional changes of 2010 necessitated a review of the policy and legislative framework. Constitution of Kenya (2010) entrenched sustainable development, equitable sharing of benefits derived from natural resources, stakeholder engagement, and participation that the sector was obligated to internalize. It also introduced 47 devolved units (counties) as a new form of governance (Draft Forest Policy, 2020). In this study, the authors note that the most notable and recent forest sector reform in the Forests Act, 2005, now repealed by the Forest Conservation and Management Act (2016), was the introduction of participatory forest management (PFM), where different forest stakeholders are recognized in forest management decisions. Under the PFM framework, communities within 5 km of a state forest boundary are assigned various access and use rights to participate in forest management. Many studies such as Agevi et al. (2014), Ngatia and Thuita (2017), Matiku et al. (2013), Nthuku (2018), Chisika and Yeom (2020), and Kairu et al. (2021) have demonstrated the efficiency and efficacy gains in collaborative forest management and the positive livelihoods outcomes of PFM. Consequently, the PFM policy has been lauded, given its multi-objective capabilities. In contrast, some studies, such as Okumu and Muchapondwa (2017), Thygesen et al. (2016), and Chomba et al. (2015), have contested the PFM policy on account of adverse social equity outcomes, especially on the most vulnerable in society. In this study, the authors observe that these equity concerns will be addressed once the country develops a natural resource benefit-sharing policy and law currently in the advanced stages of enactment in parliament. In addition, PFM has proved to be impactful and, with time, will improve the capacity of forests to deliver ecosystem services equitably to communities once all silos are broken down.
Unfortunately, environmental threats persist and continue to threaten sustainable forest management. For instance, deforestation is currently estimated at 50,000 ha annually, with a consequent yearly loss of over US$ 19 million to the economy (MENR, 2019; UNEP, 2012). Hence, recent studies still consider Kenya a low forest cover country (MENR, 2019; UNEP, 2012). Reports indicate that forests are increasingly being degraded owing to unsustainable utilization, limited budgetary allocation to institutions managing forests, illegal logging, uncontrolled grazing, and unsustainable charcoal production. Moreover, there are institutional weaknesses in managing forests, such as a limited commitment by the government to implement participatory forest governance (especially benefit-sharing policies), the slow pace of reviewing policies that favor the sustainable use of forests, the politicization of forest resource governance, lack of accurate data on forest functions, and high poverty levels among communities, which push the demand for immediate and tangible benefits and affect long-term commitment to forest management (Draft Forest Policy, 2020). These challenges disrupt the processes, supply, and consumption of critical ecosystem services in forests. Thus, it will be interesting to explore how inter-agency collaboration could be fostered to break down the highlighted challenges and silos through the adopt-a-forest approach.
The Genesis of Forest Adoption
In 2018, the President of the Republic of Kenya made a local and global commitment that Kenya will achieve and surpass the constitutional requirement of a minimum 10% national tree cover by 2022. The urgency highlighted the need to accelerate the attainment of 10% tree cover to address the unprecedented impact of the triple environmental threats posed by climate change, biodiversity loss, and air pollution. Moreover, forests are recognized as critical in climate change mitigation and adaptation and providers of a wide range of environmental and economic social-cultural goods and services. Against this background, “the National Strategy for achieving and maintaining over 10% Tree Cover by 2022” was developed and approved by the Cabinet in August 2019 to operationalize the presidential directive. The strategy outlines a number of interventions, namely rehabilitation of degraded natural forests and mangrove ecosystems, restocking of industrial forest plantations, the establishment of private commercial forests, the establishment of bamboo, the establishment of trees on farms, tree planting in schools, rehabilitation of degraded dryland forest landscapes, and green spaces in urban areas.
The strategy requires the production and planting of 2 billion tree seedlings in addition to the protection and conservation of the existing 4.18 million ha. The total estimated cost for implementing the strategy is Kshs 48.7 billion. The Ministry of Environment and Forestry coordinates its agencies and departments to implement the plan. These include the KFS, Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI), National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), Kenya Water Towers Agency (KWTA), National Environment Complaints Committee (NECC), National Environment Trust Fund (NETFUND), and Kenya Meteorological Department (KMD). The KFS, as the lead agency in forest conservation, protection, and management, established under the Forest Conservation Management Act of 2016, has undertaken several interventions toward implementing the strategy. Forest restoration through adopt-a-forest and building and nurturing strategic partnerships and linkages for forest land reclamation, protection, and security were among the key interventions.
In the Kenyan context, adopt-a-forest is an innovative concept of enhancing the planting and growing of trees across the country. It entails the adoption of a portion of the forest by partners for rehabilitation, protection, and management for 3 to 5 years (Forester Magazine, 2021). The concept was developed by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry and KFS to ensure that all partners’ tree-planting initiatives in public forests are sustainable (Forester Magazine, 2021). KFS has also partially employed the adopt-a-forest initiative to bridge the funding gap (Forester Magazine, 2021). Moreover, the initiative has documented that KFS has built strategic partnerships that have complemented forest restoration and rehabilitation efforts (Forester Magazine, 2021). As of 2019, the KFS identified a total of 480,000 ha of forest landscapes that needed rehabilitation and came up with the adopt-a-forest initiative as an innovative way to quickly track the restoration process by pulling in partners to complement the service in tree growth. Through this model, the service entered into partnerships with over 50 agencies that comprise the public and private sectors and individual environment champions (Kenya Forest Service Facebook Account, 2022). It will thus be interesting to explore these findings to generate the policy implications of advancing inter-agency collaboration through the adopt-a-forest initiative.
Hopefully, the initiative will help Kenya actualize its forest sector development aspirations espoused in recent sector development plans and policies. For example, forest adoption will be key in implementing the Kenya Forest and Landscape Restoration Implementation Plan 2021-2026 (FOLAREP), an initiative by the FAO GEF 6 restoration initiative project intending to restore 2.55 million ha of deforested and degraded landscapes by 2026. The plan, which was informed by the prevailing national and local circumstances, will focus on all landscapes. The five-year ambitious plan to accelerate actions to restore deforested and degraded landscapes in Kenya will focus on strengthening policy, institutional, and governance, research, monitoring instruments, and resource mobilization, and improving communities’ livelihoods. The initiative will enhance the attainment of a number of constitutional obligations. Article 42 requires the state to provide a clean and healthy environment for every person, and Article 43 (1) (d) states that every person has the right to clean and safe water in adequate quantities. It is further to Article 69, which requires the state to ensure sustainable management of the environment and natural resources and achieve and maintain a minimum national tree cover of 10%. The initiative also conforms to international conventions and obligations, including SDGs, Africa Forest Restoration Initiative (AFR100), the Bonn Challenge, the Paris Climate Change Agreement, and Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN) by 2030; thereby drawing closer to the attainment of the constitutional target of 30% national tree cover by 2032, mitigating of climate change effects, and enhancing the achievement of the Bottom Up Economic Transformation Agenda (BETA).
Methods and Analysis
Research Design
The case study research design was used to explore the Kenyan landscape on breaking down silos in sustainable forest management and fostering interagency collaboration through the “adopt a forest” initiative in Kenya. The design entailed examining collaboration instances, analyzing implementation processes, and evaluating outcomes to understand its effectiveness and implications for sustainable forest management.
Study Area: The Territory of the Republic of Kenya
Kenya is a unitary, multiparty democracy located in the horn of Africa. The country is located between latitude 0.0236°S and longitude 37.9062°E, with an estimated land area of 580,367 km2. Kenya has two levels of government, the national government and 47 county governments, with defined mandates and functions. In this administrative configuration, Nairobi, Kisumu, and Mombasa retained their status as counties. The national government is responsible for formulating policies that ensure that the country achieves and maintains a 10% tree cover and establishing programs for delivering its international obligations and agreements. According to the 2019 census report, Kenya has 47 million people, and the population is projected to reach 60 million by 2030 (Kenya’s NDC, 2020). Kenya’s HDI value for 2019 was 0.601; this medium-level human development category places Kenya at position 143 out of 189 countries and territories. In 1990, Kenya’s HDI was 0.482. Between 1990 and 2019, Kenya’s life expectancy at birth increased by 9.3 years, mean years of schooling increased by 2.8 years, and expected years of education increased by 2.3 years. Kenya’s GNI per capita increased by approximately 37.1% between 1990 and 2019.
Kenya’s economy is dependent on climate-sensitive sectors, including rain-fed agriculture, tourism, wildlife, and water, whose vulnerability is exacerbated by climate change. The country has favorable climatic conditions for agricultural production and forestry. Arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) account for 89% of Kenya’s landmass and one-third of its population. ASALs have significantly diverse production systems and economic opportunities. However, due to the long history of political marginalization, pastoral livelihood culture, and low population density, many operational challenges have led to a low concentration of economic activities. Drought and floods are the main climatic hazards that negatively affect human lives and livelihoods. In 2011, drought caused more than the US $11 billion in damage. In 2018, floods displaced more than 230,000 people, including 150,000 children, closed over 700 schools, drowned over 20,000 heads, destroyed over 8,500 ha of crops, and wiped out key infrastructure. Between 2014 and 2018, 23 counties were affected by drought, 3.4 million people were starved, and over 500,000 people lacked access to water (Kenya’s NDC, 2020).
Data Collection
This study explored Kenya’s adopt-a-forest initiative to document its impact on sustainable forest management. Secondary qualitative and quantitative data gathered through a literature review were used to respond to the research aims. The data acquisition process involved visiting official websites and reviewing documents sourced from the office of the KFS headquarters. In particular, the progress report on implementing the presidential directive on 10% tree cover provided most of the quantitative data used in this study. Some of the key policies and legal documents that were consulted are highlighted in Table 1.
Key Documents Consulted.
Data Analysis
The results were later exported to an Excel spreadsheet, and the impact was analyzed based on the three dimensions of sustainable forest management: environmental, social, and economic. Based on these dimensions, quantitative data in Annexes 1 to 3 were analyzed using Microsoft Excel to generate the descriptive statistics and visualizations used in this study. Later, the results were evaluated against the backdrop of the reviewed literature to draw the policy implications of this study.
Results
Impact of the Adopt-a-Forest Initiative
Results indicate that adopt-a-forest through Inter-Agency collaboration impacts sustainable forest management and disrupts silos of forest management in Kenya. According to the literature reviewed, KFS partially employed the adopt-a-forest initiative to partially bridge the funding gap in operations in the country. This initiative complements the ongoing forest restoration and rehabilitation efforts. A progress account from the report on the implementation of the presidential directive on 10% tree cover by 2022 shows there are 49 agencies from MDAs, NGOs, and private sector organizations participating in forest restoration through adopt-a-forest across counties and regional forest conservation areas in the country, as shown in Table 2.
Summary of Forest Restoration Through the “Adopt-a-Forest” Initiative Between 2019 and 2021.
Distribution of Forest Restoration Activities Through Adopt-a-Forest by Government Ministries, Departments, and Agencies in the Financial Year 2019 to 2021
The results indicated that MDAs implemented and distributed forest adoption activities in 18 (38%) counties across the country. In the financial year (FY) 2019/2020, Nyeri and Kiambu counties had the highest number of MDAs participating in forest adoption, while Elgeyo Marakwet, Kericho, Kisumu, Kwale, Murang’a, Turkana, Uasin Gishu, Nakuru, Vihiga, Meru, Kajiado, and Nairobi counties had one MDA participating in the implementation of forest adoption (Figure 1). In FY 2020/2021, Nairobi County had the highest number (5) of MDAs participating in forest restoration and rehabilitation, followed by Kajiado (3), Meru (2), and Mombasa (2). Five counties, namely Bomet, Laikipia, Nandi, Nakuru, and Vihiga, had one MDA each participating in forest rehabilitation (Figure 1).
Number of MDA agencies participating in forest adoption.
Figure 2 shows the distribution of the adopted forest areas in the counties. In FY 2019/2020, up to 446.7 ha of public forest land was adopted by 18 MDAs across the country. Meru County had the highest area of forestland under adoption (120 ha), whereas Nandi County had the lowest adopted forestland (1 ha). In FY 2020/2021, 1,757.8 ha of public forest land was adopted by 20 MDAs. Nyeri County (957.5 ha), Kisumu (412.3 ha), and Kericho (120.0 ha) represent counties with the highest adopted areas in the country. Kwale, Murang’a, Uasin Gishu, Kajiado, Vihiga, Nairobi, and Meru counties had the lowest forest area under adoption, with 1 ha of forestland being adopted in each of these counties (Figure 2).
Forest area adopted by MDAs.
Forest restoration and rehabilitation through tree planting were the predominant forest management activities in FY 2019/2020. A total of 373,825 seedlings were planted by MDAs in 10 counties across the country. Meru County recorded the highest level of planting, with 123,450 seedlings having been planted. Nandi County had the lowest tree planting achievement (1,100 seedlings). In FY 2020/2021, 18 counties with adopted forest sites did not conduct tree-planting activities (Figure 3).
Seedlings planted by MDAs.
Inter-Agency collaboration in forest management through adopt-a-forest enables the government to access direct financial contributions from various MDAs. In FY 2019/2020, five counties (Nandi, Nairobi, Kajiado, Laikipia, and Meru) received up to Kshs. 10,392,389. Meru (Kshs. 5,541,800) had the highest direct financial contributions, whereas Nandi County (Kshs. 301,297) had the lowest. In FY 2020/2021, Kshs. 1,890,343 was channeled into six counties (Nairobi, Meru, Kiambu, Murang’a, Nyeri, and Vihiga). Nyeri (Kshs. 632,400) had the highest direct financial contributions, whereas Murang’a and Vihiga had Kshs. 162,195 represents the lowest contributions (Figure 4).
Direct financial contribution by MDAs.
Forest Restoration by NGOs and Private Sector Organizations
The Draft Forest Policy, 2020, and other key documents reviewed indicate that NGOs and private sector agencies significantly promote sustainable forest management. Results from this study indicate that in FY 2019/2020, 20 non-state agencies participated in forest restoration through the adopt-a-forest initiative. Nairobi City County had the highest number (5), while seven counties had one agency. In FY 2020 and 2021, 12 non-state agencies participated in forest adoption, with Kiambu County having the highest number (2), as shown in Figure 5.
NGO and private sector agencies participating in forest adoption.
The results indicate that in FY 2019/2020, non-state actors adopted a total of 364.6 ha. Bomet had the highest non-sector forest adoption with 160 ha, while Kilifi, Nakuru, and Kisumu had the least adopted area at 1 ha each. In FY 2020/2021, a total of 18,762.0 ha was adopted by non-state actors. Meru (5,100 ha) and Narok (5,000 ha) represent the counties with the highest adoption rates. Kajiado County had the lowest adoption rate, with 3 ha (Figure 6).
Forest area adopted by NGOs and private sector agencies.
In FY 2019/2020, 368,410 seedlings were planted by non-state agencies. Bomet County had the highest level of planting, with 150,000 seedlings planted, while Kilifi County had the lowest planting success at 1,000 seedlings. No seedlings were reported to be planted by non-state actors under the forest adoption initiative (Figure 7).
Seedlings planted by NGOs and private sector agencies.
In FY 2019/2020, non-state actors contributed a total of Kshs. 23,663,427 to forest adoption activities across the country. Laikipia County received the highest financial contribution (Kshs. 12,000,000), while Kisumu County received the lowest (Ksh. 102,641). In FY 2020/2021, only Kajiado County received Kshs. 671,071 (Figure 8).
Direct financial contribution by NGOs and private sector agencies.
Restoration Achievements Awaiting Regularization
The results also show that forest adoption is still awaiting regularization by parties. Kajiado County had the highest allocated adoption area, as shown in Table 3, with adoption activities spanning planting to maintaining a fence at the adopted site (Annex 1).
Forest Adoption Yet to be Regularized.
Improved Inter-agency Collaboration
Appreciating the urgency to attain 10% tree cover by 2022 and further recognizing that it can only be achieved through individual actions and collaborative efforts, the government, through KFS, has invested in engaging partners and developing strategic linkages with state and non-state organizations. Some partners include but are not limited to those shown in Table 4.
Strategic Partners in Forest Restoration.
However, the forest adoption framework currently lacks a monitoring and evaluation protocol to highlight the social, economic, and environmental variables that should be monitored in the course of implementation.
Discussion
Forests are important for provision of many ecosystem services needed for sustainable development (Draft Forest Policy, 2020; Kagombe et al., 2020; Odwori et al., 2013). Collaborations for forest management through forest adoption have multiple benefits and can address the multiple interrelated challenges affecting sustainable forest management (Aldworth & Schultz, 2023; Verkuijl, 2015). Forest adoption initiatives represent a multifaceted approach to environmental stewardship with far-reaching benefits. By embracing forest adoption, communities and individuals contribute to vital environmental conservation efforts, safeguarding precious ecosystems and promoting biodiversity preservation. Moreover, these initiatives foster community engagement, empowering local residents to take ownership of their natural surroundings and instilling a sense of environmental responsibility. Through sustainable resource management practices, forest adoption programs not only ensure the longevity of natural resources but also provide opportunities for recreation and tourism, enriching both the local economy and individuals’ well-being. Ultimately, forest adoption serves as a cornerstone of sustainable development, nurturing a harmonious relationship between humanity and the environment while paving the way for a more resilient and ecologically balanced future (Siddiquee, 2022; Verkuijl, 2015; World Bank Group, 2018). Collaboration and partnerships could also foster the achievement of many global forest development targets, including; MEAs, SDGs, commitments under the CBD, FLR and the 2021 Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use and the pledge of 140 countries to eliminate forest loss by 2030. FAO (2022) and Löfqvist and Ghazoul (2019) have also emphasized the need for global partnerships to deliver efficient solutions for forest resource management. However, collaborative efforts have not always yielded positive outcomes across the world (Siddiquee, 2022), outcomes are affected by a myriad of contextual factors (Doucet et al., 2023, 2024; Shamsul Huda, 2004).
Kenya has also joined the community of nations in embracing collaborations for enhanced forest management. The sustained policy and legislative reforms have promoted forest management dating back to the precolonial era (Draft Forest Policy, 2020). However, it is the Forest Conservation and Management Act (2016), which revolutionized forest management with the introduction of participatory forest management (PFM), where different forest stakeholders are recognized in forest management decisions. Many studies on PFM such as Agevi et al. (2014), Ngatia and Thuita (2017), Matiku et al. (2013), Nthuku (2018), Chisika and Yeom (2020), and Kairu et al. (2021) have reported many positive benefits from this collaborative forest management approach. Despite a few studies which have condemned the approach such as Okumu and Muchapondwa (2017), Thygesen et al. (2016), and Chomba et al. (2015) on the account of weak equity outcomes, in general the PFM policy has been lauded, given its multi-objective capabilities. However, as the Kenyan society evolves over times new challenges are emerging which require a thorough re-evaluation of policies and initiatives which has brought to the fore the need to explore other collaborative options such as forest adoption (Forester Magazine, 2021; Kenya Forest Service Facebook Account, 2022).
When the conceptual framework of sustainable forest management was applied on Kenya’s case for forest adoption, the results indicate that adopt-a-forest has established a multidimensional and integrated approach that has improved forest management in Kenya. The inter-agency collaborative framework breaks down forest management silos by fostering interagency collaboration, which yields multiple positive social, economic, and environmental impacts on Kenyan society. Results show that up to 49 MDAs, NGOs, and private sector agencies participated in the implementation of the adopt-a-forest initiative that began in 2018 following a presidential directive on the need to address the triple environmental threats being experienced in the country (Table 2; Annexes 1–3). Up to 55% of the agencies comprised government ministries, departments, and agencies that adopted 12% of the entire forest area adopted in the country between 2019 and 2021. Approximately 50% of the total seedlings were planted by MDAs, which channeled up to 33.9% of the direct financial contribution to forest restoration between 2019 and 2021. This investment and support in forest conservation and management will continue to improve the ecological integrity of the country’s forest infrastructure. Forests in Kenya are constantly threatened by deforestation and degradation due to growing human needs. For instance, in 2019, Kenya’s population was 47 million and is expected to grow to 60 million by 2030 (Draft Forest Policy, 2020; Kenya’s NDC, 2020). Therefore, these results demonstrate that collaborative initiatives, such as forest adoption, which promote investment in forest conservation and management, are part of the solution to address the triple environmental threats currently facing many countries across the globe. Further, these initiatives need to be scaled up. Countries that have pledged significant commitments and support for forest and landscape restoration (FLR) by 2030 through the Bonn Challenge, the New York Declaration on Forests, the Aichi Target 15 of the CBD, and SDGs—particularly SDG 15 on Life on Land that aims to achieve land degradation neutrality by 2030—have a good chance of achieving their targets by learning from Kenya’s experience with forest adoption.
Moreover, the results show fewer private sector and NGO agencies participated in forest restoration between 2019 and 2021. Even though the reasons for this decline could better be addressed through other study approaches such as interviews, this study postulates that the decline in private sector and NGO participation in forest restoration between 2019 and 2021 could stem from various factors such as shifts in funding priorities, changes in organizational strategies, or disruptions caused by external events like economic downturns or political instability, impacting their ability to engage in such initiatives.
However, these agencies adopted the most forest area (88% of the entire site) and had the highest direct financial contribution of 66% of the total contributions by agencies between 2019 and 2021. Such support and investment arising from adopt-a-forest have boosted overall forest management efforts in the country. These findings agree with studies by FAO (2022) and Löfqvist and Ghazoul (2019), which concur that private financing in forest management is important and is increasing in various regions of the world. As such, this study calls for improving the working relationships between the government and the private sector in pursuing adopt-a-forest. The Kenyan government is desirous of enhancing these relationships and has developed the collaboration framework highlighted in Table 1, which provides a legally binding framework for adopt-a-forest in the country. The framework outlines the rights, roles, and responsibilities of the parties engaged in forest adoption. The range of activities to implement the existing forest adoption includes collaboration and coordination of multi-agency forest security operations geared toward protecting the forest boundary integrity, especially through forest reclamations; tree planting; rehabilitation of degraded forest areas; infrastructural development support; tree seedling production; joint restoration of arboreta and green spaces; forest fence installation; forest fire response; and community scout support among other activities (Table 3; Annexes 1–3; Forester, 2021). However, tree planting appears to be the most dominant activity monitored and implemented in forest adoption collaboration. It is also interesting to note that private sector agencies and NGOs are actively involved in landscape restoration to support community scouts (Table 3). These actions contribute directly and indirectly toward enhanced forest security, protection and livelihood improvement, and socio-economic development of Kenya in line with the development aspirations enshrined in key policy documents aimed at achieving and maintaining 10% tree cover in the country (Table 1). These collaborative impacts, albeit not holistically quantified, are in agreement with findings from the reviewed literature that show that collaboration in forest management enhances costs and information sharing, thereby providing the opportunity to optimize the logistics of activity implementation (Andereck, 1997; Bardach, 1996; Gereghty, 2012; Siddiquee, 2022; World Bank Group, 2018). It is worth noting that under forest adoption, the choice of activities largely depends on government policy and priorities, the nature of the forest, the needs of the collaborative agency or party, and the adjacent forest communities, among other factors. The KFS provides the technical guidance required to actualize the collaboration by establishing a joint technical and management committee with representation from both parties.
The results also indicate that in FY 2019/2020 and 2020/2021, MDAs, NGOs, and private sector agencies implemented and distributed forest adoption activities across various counties and regions in the country (Figures 1–8; Table 2). Overall, Nairobi and Kiambu counties had the highest number of MDAs (each with 6) participating in forest adoption. In contrast, ten counties in Elgeyo Marakwet, Kericho, Kisumu, Kwale, Murang’a, Turkana, and Uasin Gishu had one MDA participating in the implementation of forest adoption. Nairobi (6), Kiambu (5), and Kajiado had the highest participation of the private sector and NGOs in forest adoption. In contrast, Embu, Kisumu, Elgeyo Marakwet, Meru, and Lamu had one non-state agency implementing forest adoption activities. Nyeri County had the highest total adopted forest area by MDAs in the two financial years (957.5 ha), and Nandi, Uasin Gishu, Murang’a, and Kwale had the lowest area adopted with 1 ha each in the two financial years. In the non-state category, Meru and Narok have the highest adopted areas, measuring over 5,000 ha. Meru County had the highest tree-seedling planting and the highest level of MDA financing for forest adoption. During the two financial years, Laikipia County had the highest non-state agency funding for forest adoption activities. These observations indicate the potential for forest adoption to address forest management challenges by breaking down silos and expanding the livelihood options for Kenyan society. It is evident from these findings that interagency collaboration helps the government respect operational, social, and environmental constraints, as alluded to by Siddiquee (2022).
Various factors may likely have contributed to the success of forest adoption in Kenya. However, the enabling environment provided by key policy documents; the need to join the global community in addressing the triple existential planetary crisis posed by climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution; the presidential directive of 2018 where all government agencies were required to set aside 10% of their corporate social responsibility budget for forest conservation and management; the availability of research evidence on good partnerships from participatory forest management; as well as the deliberate involvement of stakeholders in forest management by the KFS leadership in the country appear to be the core factors behind the growth of forest adoption. However, more studies are required to document the driving motive behind the growing number of forest adoption activities by individuals, MDAs, NGOs, and private sector agencies. There is speculation that some agencies could be positioning and selling themselves globally as “green prophets” or scouting for opportunities to access green climate funds, among other opportunities. Moreover, given that the country has already implemented participatory forest management where adjacent forest communities are already partnering with the KFS to conserve and manage forest resources, and that there is no formal natural resource benefit-sharing law, it will be interesting to evaluate the community’s perception of forest adoption by public and private agencies since this initiative introduces a third partner to the already existing KFS-community partnership. Such a study will help build synergy among collaborating parties for greater forest protection, conservation, and management.
The results also show that interagency collaboration in forest adoption is unequally distributed across counties and regions. They show that some counties have as many as six agencies implementing forest adoption, while the majority of the counties have none. If the status quo remains, forest adoption is likely to exacerbate unbalanced regional development, with far-reaching negative equity outcomes, despite the good intentions of forest adoption. Thus, studies need to evaluate the impact of collaboration in detail by applying newer analytical tools such as the SPA. Such an analysis examines collaboration in three phases to determine whether interagency collaboration is increasing mutual trust and stronger relationships among collaborating agencies, enhancing balanced regional development and enhancing social equity through sharing benefits, costs, and information, thereby providing the opportunity to optimize the logistics of forest management in Kenya. This study is important because the reviewed literature has shown that Kenya has not had a good history of stakeholder collaboration and involvement in forest management (Draft Forest Policy, 2020). Therefore, the country needs to implement a robust mechanism for monitoring and evaluation where the achievements of key interventions pursued by parties are evaluated, and precise indicators developed. Such monitoring of activities for sustainability will demand the need for joint planning of programs, data acquisition on benefits and losses of forest restoration programs on parties, sustainable financing of activities, evaluation of innovations and technologies being deployed by parties, and evaluation of challenges.
Furthermore, the disaggregated evaluation of socio-economic impacts of forest adoption on forest adjacent communities is also needed, for instance, the impact of adoption on community employment opportunities, livelihood enterprises, opportunities for training, and other dimensions of social sustainability. Monitoring and evaluation strengthen the understanding of the many multi-layered factors underlying interagency collaboration by systematically tracking implementation and outputs and measuring the effectiveness of programs. Monitoring helps to determine exactly when a program is on track and when changes could be needed, hence, the basis for modification of interventions and assessment of the quality of activities being conducted. Monitoring and evaluation help managers, planners, implementers, policymakers, and donors acquire the information and understanding they need to make informed decisions about program operations, in addition to providing the necessary data to guide strategic planning to design and implement programs and projects and to allocate and reallocate resources in better ways.
Nevertheless, the Adopt a Forest Initiative in Kenya stands as a cornerstone in the nation’s environmental agenda, notably propelled by the government’s vision to achieve 30% tree cover by 2032. This initiative drives significant progress in several key areas. Firstly, it expands tree cover by encouraging individuals, communities, and organizations to adopt and nurture specific forest areas, serving as vital green lungs that absorb carbon dioxide and combat climate change. Secondly, the initiative fosters biodiversity conservation, safeguarding Kenya’s diverse ecosystems and promoting ecological balance. Additionally, it creates sustainable livelihoods by generating employment opportunities in tree planting, forest management, and eco-tourism, thereby alleviating poverty and enhancing community well-being. Moreover, adopted forests contribute to climate resilience, regulating local climates, preventing soil erosion, and sustaining water sources. Finally, Kenya’s commitment aligns with global forest agreements like the Paris Agreement, showcasing its dedication to combat deforestation and foster sustainable development.
Conclusion and Recommendations
Results from Kenya have shown that adopt-a-forest is a multidimensional and integrated approach to improving forest management in the country. The initiative is helping Kenya break down forest management silos and challenges by fostering interagency collaboration, yielding multiple positive social, economic, and environmental impacts on Kenyan society. MDAs, the private sector, and NGOs pooled resources to support forest conservation and management between 2019 and 2021. Approximately 50% of the total seedlings were planted by MDAs, which channeled up to 33.9% of the direct financial contribution to forest restoration between 2019 and 2021. Even though fewer private sector and NGO agencies participated in forest restoration between 2019 and 2021, these agencies adopted the largest forest area (88% of the entire area). They had the highest direct financial contribution of 66% of the total contributions by agencies between 2019 and 2021. This support has boosted the overall forest management in the country. However, the resultant interagency collaboration in forest adoption was unequally distributed across the counties. The results show that some counties have as many as six agencies implementing forest adoption, while most have none. Unequal distribution of stakeholders can be caused by many factors. Forest stakeholders may be unevenly distributed across a country due to factors such as varying levels of forest resources, differing socio-economic conditions, historical land-use patterns, government policies, and infrastructure development. Geographic, cultural, and institutional differences also contribute to disparities in stakeholder presence and engagement in forest-related activities. Nevertheless, forest adoption is likely to exacerbate unbalanced regional development if the status quo remains, with far-reaching negative equity outcomes despite good intentions. Thus, there is a need for studies that evaluate the impact of this collaboration in detail by applying newer analytical tools such as the SPA to determine whether interagency collaboration is increasing mutual trust and stronger relationships among collaborating agencies, enhancing balanced regional development, and strengthening social equity through sharing of benefits, costs, and information, thereby providing the opportunity to optimize the logistics of forest management in Kenya. Moreover, in addition to the need for a robust monitoring and evaluation framework with clear indicators, more studies are required to document the driving motive behind the growing forest adoption by individuals, MDAs, NGOs, and private sector agencies. There is speculation that some agencies could be positioning and selling themselves globally as “green prophets” or scouting for opportunities to access green climate funds, among other opportunities. The limitation of this study is that it solely relied on review of secondary data sources. Relying solely on secondary data sources limits the study due to potential biases, incomplete information, and lack of adequate context. To mitigate these limitations, future research should integrate primary data collection methods like surveys, interviews, and observations, enhancing depth, accuracy, and contextual understanding of initiatives like the “Adopt a Forest” Initiative in Kenya.
Footnotes
Annexes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
Funding
Ethics Statement
ORCID iDs
