In 2010, Kenya made a bold constitutional commitment: to shift from centralized governance to a devolved system that would bring power, resources, and decision-making closer to the people. Over a decade later, devolution stands asone of the most ambitious governance and development experiments in post-independence Kenya. It has redrawn the country’s political map, restructured public service delivery, and ignited new conversations about equity, accountability and the meaning of inclusive growth.
But has devolution delivered on its promise?
Devolution in Kenya was designed to address historical inequalities in development, promote participatory governance, and improve service delivery across the country’s 47 counties. It emerged from decades of centralized planning that left many regions underserved and politically marginalized.
The rationale was clear:
- Decentralize fiscal resources to stimulate spatially balanced development
- Empower local leaders to design context-specific solutions
- Enhance citizen participation in decision-making
- Create more accountable, transparent governance structures
Since implementation began in 2013, devolution has recorded tangible gains:
- Healthcare infrastructure has expanded, especially in rural areas, with new health centers and hospitals constructed under county governments.
- Counties have become increasingly active in agriculture, road construction, and early childhood education, all of which are fully devolved functions.
- The creation of County Integrated Development Plans (CIDPs) has helped institutionalize local planning and align investments with community needs.
Economically, counties are also beginning to emerge as engines of local economic development. Industrial parks in Kiambu, tourism in coastal counties like Kwale, and agribusiness value chains in Meru and Uasin Gishu demonstrate how regional economies are beginning to diversify and grow.
Yet, the transition has not been without friction. Kenya’s devolution story is a tale of both promise and persistent challenges:
- Delayed disbursements from the national government often paralyze county operations.
- Many counties face technical and human resource capacity gaps, hindering quality planning and implementation.
- Revenue generation remains low, with most counties heavily reliant on national transfers, raising questions about long-term sustainability.
- Corruption and procurement irregularities have emerged in some counties, mirroring the challenges that devolution was meant to help resolve.
Intergovernmental coordination is another sticking point—often marked by blurred mandates, political contestation, and lack of harmonization between national and county development agendas.
Despite these constraints, devolution remains a transformative opportunity—not just for service delivery, but for reimagining governance itself.
To unlock its full potential:
- Counties must build stronger technical capacity, especially in planning, budgeting, and monitoring.
- National-county fiscal relations must be restructured for predictability and efficiency.
- Greater effort is needed to boost own-source revenue through innovative, transparent models.
- Citizens must be empowered to hold county governments accountable, especially at the ward and sub-county levels.
Devolution is not a silver bullet—but it is a foundational lever for inclusive, responsive, and place-based development. Its success will depend not only on political will but also on systems thinking, civic engagement, and institutional innovation.
Kenya now stands at a crossroads: double down on devolution as a long-term investment in shared prosperity, or risk eroding public trust through weak execution. The future of development in Kenya may well be written not in Nairobi, but across its 47 counties—each a chapter in a larger national story.
