Question: Plastic pollution has become a major global problem; what is NEMA doing to address the problem in Kenya?

Answer: Plastic bags have been a major problem for Kenya. As a country, we used to generate over a million plastic bags, most so flimsy that they could only be used once. They would then be thrown away and end up polluting the environment. Solid waste management has become a big issue in Kenya and counties are grappling with the problem.

Although waste management is a devolved function, NEMA provides technical support to county governments. We have gazetted 86 environmental inspectors to support counties to effectively enforce and monitor waste management. We have also engaged in public education through local radio stations as well as using County Directors of Environment during occasions like the World Environment Day, World Wetlands Day, etc. At the national level, as DG, I have appeared in national media and on panels of eminent persons.

We are also working with regulators such as the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) to help monitor compliance with the plastic bag ban and smuggling through the borders. We work with the regulatory agencies to control illegal border smuggling of plastic bags. NEMA has posted officers to border posts such as Malaba, Moyale and Busia. The officers work closely with regulators such as KRA in joint operations to monitor compliance.

NEMA is also relying on scientific approaches from the United Nations Environment Programme to help inform policy. Most importantly, the Authority has reported increased levels of compliance with the ban.

The public has changed its attitude towards plastic bags and their usage in relation to the environment. Moreover, there has been visible cleanliness in towns that used to be dotted with plastic carrier bags, hanging loosely on buildings and trees. We carry out continuous monitoring of the ban and I can say that [as a country] we are at 90 per cent compliance with the plastic ban. We are working on the 10 per cent. The current challenge is PET [polyethylene terephthalate] bottles, but the Ministry of Environment and Forestry is working with the Kenya Association of Manufacturers to come up with and implement Extended Producer Responsibilities (EPR) regulations to address that problem as well.

Q: Has the 2017 ban on plastic carrier bags helped in dealing with the plastic crisis?

A: The 2017 plastic ban to deal with solid waste was one of the best things to ever happen in this country. Following a decade of engagement with the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, we felt that it was the right time to ban plastic bags. Plastic bags caused a lot of problems to the environment, majorly due to the throw-away culture of Kenyans. The Authority felt the need to do something to ensure that a clean environment was safeguarded. The right to a clean and healthy environment is recognised and protected under Article 42 of the Constitution.

Kenya became one of the few countries to ban plastic bags globally, acting as a benchmark to the world and especially for our neighbours in East Africa. NEMA has taken major steps to deal with the plastic crisis, including surveillance and enforcement. It is however a challenge to enforce the ban in the informal areas. A number of manufacturers have relocated to border towns from where they sneak back the plastic bags. To counter these problems, public sensitisation, especially in the informal areas, has been enhanced through the provincial administration.

NEMA is encouraging the public to segregate waste seeing as 60 per cent of the waste from households is organic.

Q: You have talked about the plastic bags. What about the polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles?

A: From where NEMA sits, it is better to invest in recycling to help create jobs and move to a circular economy. We are working on a framework of cooperation between NEMA, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry and the Kenya Association of Manufacturers to have the industry invest in take-back schemes and EPR. We are organising recyclers into an association so that they are registered with NEMA. They will be involved in clean-up activities and awareness creation through media. They will also be engaging with us and the Ministry in managing PET bottles in the environment. We have recently seen the Takataka Solutions group installing bins for the sorting of waste in malls, supermarkets and public places. PET Recycling Company [PETCO] is organising this with recyclers.

Q: The banned carrier bags are back in the Kenyan market and are being openly dispensed by traders especially in downtown Nairobi, in markets and residential areas. What is hindering enforcement of the ban?

A: One of the challenges we have is that NEMA has very few inspectors and we are limited in capacity to carry out enforcement of the ban effectively. Once it took effect, the ban prompted the creation of “bag cartels” that smuggled illegal plastic bags from Uganda and Tanzania. However, the government is obliged to ensure that the plastic ban is a success in Kenya.

We are mitigating this challenge by bringing on board more inspectors. For example, in Nairobi we are working with the Nairobi Metropolitan Services on the enforcement of the ban. Recently, NEMA got more police officers. We now have 20 police officers at the headquarters. We wrote to the Inspector General of Police asking for police officers to support NEMA in enforcing the law. The IG wrote to Police Commanders in all the counties to have officers support NEMA.

Q: There have been reports about plans to export plastic waste to Kenya from where it can be distributed to other Africa countries. What is NEMA’s position on the issue?

A: Kenya has made great strides and it will be unfortunate if we are to be arm-twisted. NEMA will oppose this and we will ensure that we get rid of plastics in Kenya.

Q: When are the plastic packaging regulations likely to be passed and implemented?

A: NEMA has captured key issues brought out during consultative forums with the public and other stakeholders. The Attorney General also had his input and, once gazetted, there is going to be a good legal framework for implementing the plastic packaging ban.

Q: The draft plastic packaging regulations have Extended Producer Responsibilities (EPR) provisions and the draft national EPR regulations also cover plastics. Won’t this create a conflict? How can it be resolved?

A: No. The plastic packaging regulations will look at the larger framework of the ban. EPR is going to look at the implementation of the framework, having constitutional back-up in implementing Article 42 which stipulates that each and every citizen has the right to live in a clean and safe environment.

Q: The Basel Convention and Plastic Ban amendments are now in force. How is Kenya/NEMA preparing to implement/domesticate them?

A: NEMA is implementing the Basel Convention under Multilateral Environmental Agreements giving permits for the movement of hazardous waste across the borders. We give prior informed consent once our officers get requests and ensure compliance with the provisions of the Convention. For example, last year we received a number of Prior Informed Consent (PIC) on hazardous waste coming from Nordic countries and responded appropriately. Finally, the Environmental Management and Coordination Act is under review and we have received inputs from stakeholders. We are engaging members of parliament to get their sentiments.

Waste pickers play an important role in waste management in Kenya. They not only help to keep towns and cities clean, they also play a big role in the recycling process.

In 2019, the Kenya Association of Manufacturers recovered over 6,000 metric tonnes of plastic for recycling. This would not have been possible without the work of refuse handlers. There is, however, not enough data to quantify the contribution of waste picking to waste management.

With a population of five million, Nairobi is estimated to generate between 2,000 and 4,000 tonnes of waste daily. Combined, the cities of Nairobi, Mombasa, and Kisumu generate 10,000 tonnes of trash each day, with a significant portion being handled by waste pickers.

Waste pickers in Kenya fall into two main categories — those that are part of the urban formal waste management labour force and those working in the informal economy. The formal workers are either employed by county governments or consist of licenced and unlicensed private operators that serve homes and commercial facilities. The waste they collect is transported to commissioned dumpsites where sorting takes place. Formal refuse handlers work in a coordinated manner. They enjoy a regular income and other benefits, including membership in unions that agitate for their welfare. They, however, receive a minimum wage and often fall into the category of lower cadre earners in both the public and private sector. It is projected that there are close to 100,000 formal waste pickers in Kenya.

On the other hand, the existence of an informal waste picking economy is historically linked to poverty and is mostly associated with vulnerable groups such as street families and slum dwellers, many of them women and children. Because of the informal nature of their work, their exact number is unknown. These workers collect garbage from the streets, bins, markets, and from waste transfer stations as well as from dumpsites. They are rarely part of welfare groups. Where such exist, they tend to be cartels that benefit the leaders at the expense of members.

It is projected that there are close to 100,000 formal waste pickers in Kenya.

In addition, there are cases where informal waste pickers are exploited by the larger society. Such exploitation comes in the form of work without pay in places such as municipal markets. In 2019, Clean Up Kenya, a lobby group, documented cases in Kibra, Dagoretti and Otiende, all in Nairobi, where sections of the informal business community are engaged in this abuse.

A good case study of the informal waste picking economy is Langata Tegemeo, a group of about 50 youths who serve over 500 households in Kijijini slums, Southlands. The group collects waste from each household at a fee of KSh20 per week and takes it to a government-allocated waste transfer station.

They frequently receive donations in the form of protective gear and work equipment from well-wishers, including politicians. In return, they engage in voluntary street waste picking activities, not just in the slum but also in the affluent neighbourhoods of Langata.

Such groups exist in most informal settlements where government waste management services are lacking. They are not recognised by the government. There was, however, an attempt to provide some form of subsidy in 2018 when a number of manufacturers teamed up to establish a fund that was supposed to increase recycling by doubling the price of certain kinds of plastics. Regrettably, the scheme is yet to benefit the waste pickers as they lack access to the said manufacturers.

Another under-appreciated form of waste picking labour is provided by street families. According to the 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census, 20,000 people live on streets in Kenya. Some of these homeless people pick plastic bottles and scrap metal for sale to brokers, who then sell them to recyclers at a profit.

Another waste picking initiative worth mentioning is Flipflopi, which describes itself as “a movement for change with a mission to end single-use plastic and lead a plastic-reuse revolution”. In 2017, Flipflopi made a boat from ten tonnes of plastic picked by volunteers from the beaches. The boat sailed along the East African coast in 2019 to raise awareness of the global plastics problem, earning Kenya international praise.

Some of these homeless people pick plastic bottles and scrap metal for sale to brokers, who then sell them to recyclers at a profit.

Thousands of clean-ups are conducted every year in Kenya, recovering hundreds of tonnes of refuse from streets, rivers, and communities. While many are grassroots initiatives, Clean Up Kenya is among organisations that recruit nationally for clean-ups.

Lastly, we have waste pickers who work on dumpsites. There is at least one commissioned dumpsite in each of the 47 counties, the largest being the Dandora dumpsite in Nairobi.

The landfill was commissioned in the late seventies and is still operational despite being declared full in 2001. Located in a poor neighbourhood, the Dandora dumpsite receives almost all of the city’s household, commercial and municipal waste.

Discussions on the proposed decommissioning the dump have been ongoing for the last twenty years with little success. Despite the dumpsite being an environmental and health hazard, it is estimated that between 3,000 and 6,000 waste pickers and their families depend on it for a livelihood. Many work without protective gear, thus exposing themselves to dangerous chemicals which have a negative impact on their health. According to a study commissioned by the United Nations Environment Programme, high concentrations of heavy metals such as lead and mercury were found in children living near the dumpsite.

Stanley Didi, a coordinator at Shepherd CBO, and a former street boy, says: “We believe the government has committed a crime against the waste picking community and the people of Dandora.”

The dumpsite is easily accessible to anyone, including children. Vicious gangs and cartels control operations at the dumpsite. They dictate who is to pick what, where and when. Sometimes riots and fights erupt whenever trucks bring in “lucrative” garbage.

While, there is no data available on the amount of recyclable waste salvaged from the dumpsite, it is assumed that a sizeable part of the 6,000 tonnes of plastic recovered in 2019 came from Dandora.

Some dumps are however better coordinated. A good example is the Ngong dumpsite in Kajiado County, which has since been closed due to environmental concerns. At its peak, it used to receive 50 to 100 tonnes of waste daily.

“We believe the government has committed a crime against the waste picking community and the people of Dandora.”

Pickers had divided themselves into groups, with each group allowed onto the dumpsite based on a daily roster, with women-only days also foreseen. This coordination helped reduce conflicts among the pickers. The workers had a welfare group that supported about 200 members. There was a playground for children who accompanied their mothers to work, and they were not allowed on the dumpsite.

Kenya is yet to fully appreciate the important role waste picking contributes to waste management. The existing waste management laws do not acknowledge the role of waste pickers despite the fact that a large percentage of the close to 10 million tonnes of waste produced annually are processed by waste pickers.

Most of these workers live in extreme poverty, many without accommodation. There is need to incorporate them into national and county waste management plans and also involve them in decision making which could include supporting efforts to establish a national waste picking movement to advance the rights of this essential labour force.

President William Ruto’s government should not dismiss snake farming outright; it could be an important contributor to the economy. And a life-saver.

The reaction of Kenyans to the Roots Party’s proposal to adopt snake farming in order to contribute to the economy was not surprising. Most people are squeamish about snakes, perhaps because of religious beliefs, or because of trauma from having been bitten by one, or because of knowing someone who did not survive a snakebite. Others simply suffer from ophidiophobia,  an extreme fear of snakes. Then there are those on the extreme end of the spectrum; those who eat snakes, like communities in Central and West Africa, Southeast Asia and China. There are the more adventurous ones who sustain a thriving, international trade in exotic snakes that are kept as pets. But regardless of our feelings towards snakes, they are important to the ecosystem as they manage rodent populations and are a food source for raptors, species of small mammals like mongoose and honey badgers, and other reptiles.

I do not hold fort for the Roots Party of Kenya, but embracing snake farming is not a farfetched idea, and I will tell you why. First, snakebite envenoming is a global health crisis, and secondly snake venom is important in pharmaceutical research; proteins found in snake venom are used in immunosuppressants and other medicines such Captopril, Aggrastat, and Eptifibatide which are used to treat diseases like arthritis, hypertension, heart failure and the effects of diabetes on the kidneys.

Snakebite envenoming results from the injection of highly toxic secretions from the bite of a venomous snake or from the spray of venom into the eyes or broken skin. Snakebite envenoming was declared a neglected tropical disease by the World Health Organization (WHO) in June 2017. Globally, the statistics indicate that over 5 million people are bitten by snakes, 138,000 of whom die from envenoming annually, while at least 400,000 are permanently disabled, or suffer lifelong effects. Of those who die, 30,000 are from Africa. It is a disease of poverty as it mainly affects the rural poor, who work in farms or whose dwellings do not provide adequate protection from crawling critters, who cannot afford proper footwear, and who will resort to traditional healers when bitten by a snake because the cost of healthcare is  not within their reach; in many cases, healthcare is literally far away.

Snakebite envenoming was declared a neglected tropical disease by the World Health Organization in June 2017.

In Kenya, data on snakebite envenoming is not accurate and is often difficult to obtain. In the preface to a report by  the Ministry of Health titled Guidelines for Prevention Diagnosis and Management of Snakebite Envenoming in Kenya, the Director of Medical Services, Dr Jackson Kioko, puts incidences of snakebite in Kenya at 15,000 annually. It is important to note that throughout the document, this is the only reference to any data on snakebite incidences. The estimate from media reports and from organizations such as Wildlife Direct is that at least 1,000 people die from snakebite envenoming every year, and thousands of others are left with permanent injuries, both physical and mental.

Mutha Ward in Kitui South is about 67 kilometers from the county capital, Kitui, and 280 kilometers from Nairobi. It has a population of about 34,000 people, most of whom are small-scale farmers and traders. Like much of Kitui, the landscape of Mutha is arid and semi- arid scrubland. The main economic activity is small-scale agriculture and bee keeping. There is also an abundance of snakes in the region (particularly puff adders, black mambas and cobras) and as a result, incidences of snakebite and snakebite envenoming are frequent. According to one resident, there are at least two snakebite victims every week, mostly from puff adders. That is at least 104 victims a year.

The nearest referral hospital is in Kitui town, which is almost 70 kilometres away. Mutha Health Centre and Ndakani, Kiati, Kalambani and Kaatene dispensaries are the health facilities in the area; they do not stock snakebite antivenom. Further, as Justina Wamae told us, the cost of antivenom is exorbitant, retailing at between KSh10,000 to KSh14,000 (approximately US$100 to US$140) per vial. On average, at least five vials are required for a single treatment. Mutha is representative of the situation in Kitui. The same is true in Baringo, Samburu, Kajiado, the Coast, Northern and Western Kenya.

Access to snakebite antivenom is confined to referral hospitals which are at a considerable distance from the health centres where it would be closer to the victims and where it is much needed. Even then, the supply is not enough to meet the demand. Kenya does not manufacture antivenom and relies on imports from South Africa and India. We do not import enough antivenom from South Africa, which is the most effective as venomous snakes found in that country are the same ones to be found in Kenya, and nor do are referral hospitals adequately stocked. Indian antivenom is ineffective because the venomous snakes found in India are not the same as those in Kenya; for example, antivenom for a Russel’s viper, one of India’s most deadly snakes, is ineffective against puff adder venom, even though they are both vipers. The Kenya Snakebite Research and Interventions Centre is working to produce East Africa’s first antivenom, and trials are ongoing. This is progress, although it will take a while before Kenya can adequately stock its hospitals and health facilities with a homegrown solution.

Kenya does not manufacture antivenom and relies on imports from South Africa and India.

The County Government of Kitui has built the Mutomo Reptile Park and Snake Venom Research Centre in Mutomo, about 30 kilometres northwest of Mutha and, in April 2021, invited bids from private investors to run the facility. As far as I have been able to establish, there were no bidders. The most logical partner, in my view, would have been KEMRI, but given how much our national budget is averse to medical research, it comes as no surprise that KEMRI was not a contender. The potential contribution of the newly-opened research centre to the economy of Kitui, the impact it would have had on medical research this side of the world, can only be imagined. There are snake venom research centres in Guinea, Nigeria, Benin, the Democratic Republic of Congo and South Africa. However, in the entire African continent, only South Africa commercially produces snakebite antivenom, and given the snakebite statistics, supply does not adequately meet demand.

The Kenyan government should, therefore, consider snake venom research for the manufacture of antivenom and other important medical interventions as a critical agenda. It will save lives.