In 2022, Kenya made its epic debut in the Global Esports Games held in Istanbul, Turkey. Eight of Kenya’s finest gamers battled it out with other African nations including Ghana, Nigeria, Tunisia, Djibouti, Libya, Somalia and Namibia, and the world’s best. This was no small feat, but a shining example of the incredible potential of electronic sports — or esports as they are most commonly known — and gaming on the African continent.

The world of esports is exploding in Kenya, with an increasing number of young people achieving success in competitive gaming. Although it may not be as popular as traditional sports, esports is gaining momentum — from diverse gaming models, innovative content development and dynamic relationships with the creative economy.

At the core of Esports is competitive gaming — whether video or online. Players face off against each other in a range of games, with various tournaments and leagues offering massive prize money. Popular games in Kenya include FIFATM, FortniteTM, and League of LegendsTM, with dedicated communities of players and fans.

The growth of esports in Kenya has been fuelled by factors such as high-speed internet availability, affordable gaming hardware and opportunities to connect and compete with gamers from all over the world. This is closely linked to the creative economy, which combines art, technology and storytelling to create an entertaining experience. To succeed in esports, players must develop complex strategies, adapt to changing game environments and work together as a team. This makes esports a natural fit for the creative economy.

Step into any bustling urban centre and you’ll find a plethora of young gamers playing their hearts out on game consoles, with the highly popular football game FIFATM or the fighter game TekkenTM at the top of the list. Gaming centres open early and stay open into the wee hours of the morning, with some operating extended hours on weekends. Game arcades and college campuses are also popular spots for gaming enthusiasts.

Despite concerns about the potential risks of excessive gaming, with COVID-19 came a phenomenal surge in gaming in Kenya and throughout the world. With increased internet connectivity and mobile phone access, communal centres sprung up, providing an outlet for gamers with restricted movement and access to gaming consoles. Government authorities occasionally cracked down on these centres but did not succeed in shutting them down completely.

So, how did we get here? When did this gaming generation rise to such prominence? How have esports and gaming impacted the creative economy in Kenya?

Esports: the history

It all started back in 1952 when computer scientist Alexander Shafto Douglas was working on his doctoral thesis at Cambridge University. While studying human and computer interaction, he came up with the idea of developing the XOX computer game also known as Tic-Tac-Toe or “Three Wins”. Six years later, in 1958, physicist William Higginbotham built the first multi-player video game — Tennis for Two — that quickly became a hit.

In 1972 Atari released Pong, an arcade table-tennis game that proved to be a sensation, selling over a million units by the time the company launched the home console in 1977. This paved the way for the gaming industry that we know and love today.

Gaming in Kenya really took off in the mid-1980s when video and arcade games became available. With the opening of Sarit Centre, the first mall in Nairobi, the gaming scene really started to take shape. With the evolution of technology — computers, mobile telephony, and eventually the internet —  gaming flourished.

The development and rise of esports dates back to the 2000s in South Korea. Facing a severe financial crisis, and seeking to provide an entrepreneurial environment for its population, the state focussed on developing internet and telecoms infrastructure. This resulted in the creation of social spaces known as PC bangs that were strategically placed in restaurants and bars, as well as in gaming centres and clubs. These social spaces fostered competition and free-access live streaming services, bringing together highly skilled players and pushing esports to the fore in South Korea and the rest of the world. The Korean Esports Association (KeSPA) was formed to cater for games and was instrumental in growing esports in the world; KeSPA is now a member of the International Esports Federation.

Gaming In Kenya really took off in the mid-1980s when video and arcade games became available.

In Kenya, esports also emerged in the early 2000s as computer gaming cafés started to appear across the country. But it was with the rise of online gaming platforms like Steam and Twitch that esports truly began to take off in Kenya.

In 2007, Adventures of Nyangi, the first-ever locally developed video game, hit the Kenyan market. This was a huge milestone for the gaming industry in Kenya and marked the beginning of a new era. Gaming companies began to form and grow, with Ludique Works (formerly NexGen) and Planet Rackus leading the way, developing mobile games and video games, and working with global partners including Warner Bros. and Nokia Ovi Store.

Black Division Games released Nairobi X in 2015, the first 3D video game in Africa, and Gaming for Kenya (G4K) developed gaming events and promoted the gaming culture. With the advent of fibre optic cable and affordable internet availability, gaming has become more accessible than ever before, transforming a serious hobby into a career for many gaming enthusiasts.

Possibilities 

The PWC Africa Media and Entertainment report for 2022 dropped some major news; revenues in media and entertainment in Sub-Saharan Africa bounced back strongly from the COVID-19 pandemic, with a boom in 2021 and 2022 and niche sectors like the creator economy and gaming taking the lead. Sectors like video, mobile gaming and over-the-top (OTT) video have been growing at a rate of double digits in countries such as Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa and the video games market in Kenya is now worth over US$137 million (about KSh16.8 billion shillings). This offers so many opportunities for the budding creator economy in Kenya and the rest of Africa.

Local gaming companies had already built a thriving network of events and partnerships before the pandemic hit in 2020 and gaming had become increasingly popular among the affluent, the middle-class, and even youths from marginalized areas. One such youth is Brian Diang’a, aka The Beast, for whom gaming was a means of escape from the harsh reality of poverty in a Nairobi slum. He became a skilled player and gained recognition as an esports ambassador through Safaricom’s Blaze Youth Network.

Safaricom, a mobile telephony company, saw the potential of reaching the youth by partnering with the gaming community and launching the BLAZE Esports tournament in 2019. This partnership has grown stronger as mobile telephony, gaming, and esports continue to attract new players and enthusiasts. Local companies have also jumped on board, ensuring continued visibility across the youth demographic. For instance, the Standard Group media house supported the Blaze Pro Series Gaming tournaments in 2019, broadcasting the games across the country through its different media outlets.

Local gaming companies in Kenya had already built a thriving network of events and partnerships before the pandemic hit in 2020.

Kenyan gamers also started making a name for themselves in international competitions such as the Fortnite World Cup, where Kenyan player K1nzell made it to the finals in 2019. Moreover, the emergence of esports teams in Kenya has created new opportunities for Kenyan artists, designers, and content creators, who provide creative services such as designing team logos, creating video content, and developing merchandise.

Although the pandemic may have put a damper on physical tournaments, it led to a surge in online fan engagement. Major IT infrastructure companies invested heavily in domestic and household internet availability, and the Kenyan government reviewed mobile data charges and asked mobile companies to offer discounted rates to the population, leading to a significant increase in Internet penetration.

Although the pandemic may have put a damper on physical tournaments, it led to a surge in online fan engagement.

What is more, organizations such as the Pan-African Gaming Union (PAGU), Pro Series Gaming (PSG), and the Tekken 254 Circuit have provided players and gaming enthusiasts with an abundance of tournaments, workshops, and online engagements. Ronny Lusigi, the CEO of Index G Esports has revealed that Kenya’s team at the 2022 Global Esports Games prepared by training virtually daily for three hours starting at 8 p.m. Another player used a local PlayStation lounge in Eastleigh where the IndexG Esports paid for his subscription.

Reopening economies 

When countries and economies around the world started reopening in 2021, everyone was hyped about gaming and esports and Kenya was no exception; even faced with challenges, gamers picked up right where they had left off.

The recession that followed in the wake of the pandemic made it really tough for gaming creators to grow their businesses. But esports has great potential to become a major money-maker in Kenya. Predictions in the gaming industry place Africa as the fastest growing market owing to the increased use of technology, the population bulge and the opportunities created by gaming with electronic, crypto and virtual currencies.

But while esports has been gaining traction around the world, crucial features and infrastructure like streaming platforms, broadcasting, and regulations are still missing. Esports is considered the fastest growing sport, with the global esports market projected to reach US$1.62 billion by 2024. And although the local gaming community is small, it is slowly but surely growing into a powerhouse that can support creators and content producers.

Take the recent Global Games in Istanbul, Turkey, for example, where Kenya was represented in three of the four categories on the table: Dota 2, e Football ™ 2023, PUBG Mobile, and Street Fighter V Champion Edition; a country known for its athletics and team sports is now venturing into the world of esports and challenging the best in the world.

In fact, Kenya is leading the charge in the growth of gaming in Eastern and Central Africa. According to a report by the Gaming Industry in Africa, the country raked in a whopping US$38 million in revenues from gaming in 2021, making it the fourth largest market in Africa after South Africa, Nigeria, and Ghana.

Elsewhere in Africa

Esports in South Africa has grown in popularity in recent years. It is considered a “mind sport”, in the same category as chess. The national governing body for esports in South Africa is Mind Sports South Africa (MSSA), which organizes national tournaments and sends teams to international competitions.

MSSA is recognized by the government as the official body for esports in the country. Several major esports events have taken place in South Africa, including the VS Gaming Festival, the rAge Expo, and the Comic Con Africa esports tournaments. These events attract thousands of participants and spectators from across the country and beyond. Popular games in the country include League of Legends, Dota 2, and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, among others. There are also several South African esports organizations, including Energy Esports, Goliath Gaming, and Bravado Gaming, which compete in national and international esports tournaments.

Kenya is leading the charge in the growth of gaming in Eastern and Central Africa.

Gaming has been an important part of the creative economy in South Africa, which includes industries that generate income through the creation, production, and distribution of cultural and artistic products and services. The creative economy is an important source of employment and economic growth in South Africa, and gaming is one of the fastest-growing sectors within this industry.

There are several game development studios in South Africa, such as Nyamakop, QCF Design, and Free Lives, that have gained international recognition for their work. These studios create games for various platforms, including PCs, consoles, and mobile devices, and often incorporate themes and elements that reflect South African culture and history.

With an estimated GDP of US$442 billion Nigeria is the largest economy in Africa. The country enjoys a robust gaming economy, with earnings of US$3 million in 2022. Gaming entrepreneurs established the African Gaming League in 2016 that runs esports competitions in different regions of the country to raise the quality of the game and the calibre of players. It also gives the community a chance to share in the spoils of esports prize money.

The creative economy is an important source of employment and economic growth in South Africa, and gaming is one of the fastest-growing sectors within this industry.

Mobile phones and devices have provided the general population with access to gaming which has also become a market for software engineers and innovators to build platforms, float gaming competitions and provide appropriate sponsorships and investment. Generally, there are two types of developers in this market: hands-off developers—those who design games and allow a community/body or association to organize competitions and tournaments, examples being Microsoft and Nintendo; hands-on developers—those who design the games and organize their events, competitions, and tournaments; examples include Activision Blizzard and Riot Games. The latter have proved to be more popular and are growing faster due to the fact that they retain sole ownership of the intellectual property rights to their games.

The influx of international investment has brought about a surge in gaming revenues, but it is time for African countries to take ownership of their gaming industry. With the rise of local gaming companies, there is a growing sense of African pride and ownership in the gaming scene. From Nairobi to Lagos, African youth are showing their love for gaming, and local companies are stepping up to provide them with the infrastructure they need to take their skills to the next level. More and more locally-based companies are rising to prominence, offering exciting opportunities for African gamers to shine on the world stage.

Gaming: the downside

While esports have become a popular pastime in Kenya and in Africa, it is important to be aware of the potential health hazards associated with excessive gaming. Prolonged periods of sitting and staring at screens can lead to eye strain, headaches, and back pain. Additionally, poor posture while gaming can lead to long-term musculoskeletal problems. Mental health is also a concern, as gaming addiction can lead to isolation and lack of social interaction. It is important for gamers to take breaks, maintain good posture, and engage in physical activity to mitigate these health risks.

Gambling and gaming have a complex relationship that cannot be ignored. There is a need to understand the risks of gambling and the potential for addiction that come with it. Many games now include features that mimic gambling, such as loot boxes, which can be bought with real money, and offer random rewards. This can create a dangerous cycle where players feel the need to keep spending money to get the desired reward, leading to financial loss and emotional distress.

While esports have become a popular pastime in Kenya and in Africa, it is important to be aware of the potential health hazards associated with excessive gaming.

In Kenya, young people have been known to engage in betting and gambling, often with negative consequences. In some cases, they have lost large amounts of money, leading to debt, depression, and even suicide. On the gaming side, there have been reports of addiction and health problems associated with long hours spent playing video games. Additionally, concerns have been raised about the impact of violent and aggressive games on the behaviour of young players. Overall, it is clear that both gambling and gaming can have significant effects on individuals and society, and it is important to promote responsible behaviour and education around these issues.

It is essential for both gamers and game developers to recognize the potential harm that gambling can cause and take steps to avoid it. By promoting responsible gaming and creating games that are fun and fair, we can help ensure that gaming remains a positive and enjoyable experience for everyone involved.

Future of gaming in Kenya and the rest of Africa

The future of gaming in Kenya looks incredibly bright and promising. With the rise of mobile gaming and the growth of the creator economy, there will be an increased demand for local content and home-grown talent. This will create new opportunities for aspiring gamers, content creators, and game developers to display their skills and talents.

In 2023 alone, the international competitions lined up include, the Olympic Esports Week in Singapore in June 2023, World Esports Championships in late August 2023 and Global Esports Games in November 2023.

The tournaments will provide prize money for gamers and tournament organizers. Sports tourism will grow, with global visitors and gamers promoting their countries as ambassadors of the game. In the longer term, curriculum in higher and technical institutions will be introduced to offer courses for game developers, as noted by Ronny of Index G Esports.

As for Kenya, it is poised to become a major player in the global gaming scene, with more international tournaments and events. As technology continues to advance and access to the internet and gaming devices become more affordable, we can expect to see even more innovation and growth in the Kenyan gaming industry. The future of gaming in Kenya is indeed promising, and it will be interesting to see what the next few years will bring.

The legality, credibility and worth of a multi-million-dollar carbon trade project that forces pastoralists in Kenya to abandon age-old cultural practices, has been put to question in an assessment report that depicts it as conceptually misguided, abusive, potentially dangerous, lacking in genuine consent from the owners of the land and doomed to fail.

Based in northern Kenya, the project was however ok’d by international assessors and big-buck companies that have already bought the credits. The organization behind the project has been earning millions despite the fact that it does not own the land and has been unable to prove whether, or how, the project stores carbon in the soil. Nevertheless, this has not stopped the organization from touting it as one of the largest carbon removal projects on earth.

Painstakingly, and as if wielding the metaphorical fine-toothed comb and literary scalpel, Survival International has dissected the project in ways that expose its fundamental flaws, conceptual weaknesses and inherent inability to achieve what it loudly asserts and gets paid for. The international indigenous rights organization has inserted the analytical blade deep into the bowels of the project in its report Blood Carbon: how a carbon offset scheme makes millions from indigenous land in Northern Kenya.

As one reads through the 68-page analysis, there emerges the image of a deceptive, elaborate scheme that has little to do with what the project claims say it is all about. It is clear that the whole project has not aligned itself with the basic tenets of soil carbon retention. One gets a strong sense that the project owners have capitalized on the haplessness of the communities they purport to work with and the unquestioning eagerness of big polluters in the West to escape the blame by paying for what can literarily be described as hot air. These are polluting companies that have pumped millions to buy the carbon credits in the inexplicable belief that paying someone else in the southern hemisphere lessens the guilt associated with polluting the planet.

Unambiguously and with clarity, the exposé narrates the story of a large, well-funded non-governmental outfit that has unabashedly continued to benefit from distorting the truth while destabilizing and side-lining key traditional institutions that have managed and guided grazing practices adopted by pastoralist communities in northern Kenya over long periods of time.

Traditions influence resource use

As the narrative unfolds, it emerges that the project covers about two million hectares of one of the most remote and dry regions of Kenya. It brings on board some 13 wildlife conservancies that host more than 100,000 inhabitants, most of whom are members of the indigenous Samburu, Borana, Maasai and Rendille communities. Being pastoralists, the inhabitants rely on the naturally-occurring pastures, water, salt and other resources so vital for their extensive livestock rearing. To these communities, the health and wellbeing of cattle, sheep, goats, camels and, to some extent, donkeys is directly linked, in more ways than one, to their own survival, wealth and status. They inhabit a region with a delicate ecology which “drove” them to come up with a rational and pragmatic indigenous resource use and management system that places the elders in the driving seat, giving them the power to make decisions that bind other members of the community.  Today, the pastoralists are in dire straits due to droughts that have risen in severity and frequency owing to climate change. As a result, the region now experiences a minor drought every two to three years and a major one every ten years or so, often resulting in severe famines and the attendant deaths of thousands upon thousands of livestock.

NRT’s support from the moneyed

This is the ecological, socio-economic and cultural context upon which the Northern Rangelands Trust (NRT) based the carbon trading project. Established in 2004 by Ian Craig, a rather “unseen” conservation personality from the old colonial stock, NRT prefers to be known as a “membership organization”. The body states that it improves people’s lives, creates and sustains peace and conserves the environment. Today, the organization boasts of bringing into its fold some 43 community conservancies spread over 63,000 square kilometres in the northern and coastal parts of the country. This area is significant as it constitutes more than 10 per cent of Kenya’s total land surface.

The NRT’s conservation work has drawn in the moneyed lot in the West who have generously kept it way above water financially. The amounts it receives each year are humongous and can turn other green organizations greener with envy. USAID, for instance, has donated some US$32 million since 2004. Over the years, USAID’s support was topped up by generous contributions from the who-is-who in the European giving order. Besides the European Union, Denmark and France, the organization receives over US$25 million from 46 donors each year. It is not known exactly how much the organization receives from whom as it does not publish its annual accounts. However, the financial support the NRT receives has greatly aided in raising its visibility as a wildlife conservation outfit whose model was adopted by the EU as the latter rolled out conservation in 30 African countries under NaturAfrica banner. Corporates too have come calling with accolades and cash as the NRT gives them somewhere “to hide their guilt”. For instance, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development bestowed the “Lighthouse” Award on the NRT last year.

Expanding the NRT mandate

With such support and encouragement, the NRT has kept adding on to its initial conservation mandate. Besides taking up the maintenance of peace and security, the organization is also involved in livestock marketing. Its conservation, peace-making and security initiatives have however raised a hue and cry from many people in Kenya who question why a non-governmental body has armed units and controversially takes up what is solely mandated to the Kenya government by the country’s constitution. But the NRT feels justified in its peace-building mission, saying that this creates the right conditions necessary for its conservation programme. Those opposed, however, including many of the affected indigenous people, say that the organisation’s conservation activities are disruptive to the lives and livelihoods of local people as they require them to cede part of their communally-owned lands to create room for “core” areas that are exclusively used by investors, tourists and wildlife.

There have also been claims that well-trained and armed NRT rangers have been involved in extrajudicial killings and other forms of human rights abuses as documented by the Oakland Institute, a US-based think tank, in its report Stealth Game: “Community” Conservancies Devastate Land & Lives in Northern Kenya. The report dealt a devastating blow to the image of the organization as it exposed how the NRT and its partners, allegedly dispossessed the herder communities of their ancestral lands through corruption, violence and intimidation to create and maintain the wildlife conservancies.

There have also been claims that well-trained and armed NRT rangers have been involved in extrajudicial killings and other forms of human rights abuses.

The NRT and controversy appear to be bedfellows. According to the Survival International report, the organization rolled out the carbon project almost a decade ago when the claims made against it were starting to gain public attention. The project is ambitious, opens new ground in the global carbon trading regime and is hinged on the involvement of pastoralist communities in the region. Essentially, it leans on the thinking that were the pastoralists to move away from traditional “unplanned” grazing and embrace “planned” rotational grazing, this would give vegetation over the vast area a better chance to grow prolifically. Consequently (as the thinking goes), this would result in greater storage of carbon in the soils of the project area. The NRT estimated that as much as 750 kilos of additional carbon would be stored in each hectare every year. Cumulatively, the organization estimated that the project could generate about 1.5 million tons of extra carbon “storage” per year and thereby produce 41 million tons of carbon credits for sale over its project’s 30-year lifespan. This would, in turn, generate between US$300million and US$500 million according to Survival’s estimates. With such highly attractive end results, the NRT labelled the project a “natural climate solution” as it went into the carbon credit market.

Project ok’d by assessors

Before taking the carbon credits to potential buyers, the project was taken through the Verra System, which is touted to have a “rigorous set of rules and requirements”. Documents show that the auditors appointed to “validate” the project struggled for several years to obtain answers to some of their questions about serious problems with the project. Some were never answered but, astonishingly, the project was eventually passed and credited with generating real, credible and permanent emissions reductions; it was attributed with the ability to store additional carbon in the soil. Since it was ok’d in the Verra System, the project has so far generated some 3.2 million carbon credits which the NRT’s agents had sold out by January 2022. Although the gross income the organization received is unknown, Survival International estimates that it has generated between US$21 million and US$45 million with some of the credits being offloaded to Netflix and Meta Platforms (formerly Facebook).

Impenetrable wall of conspiracy

Usually, the true value of claims made by conservation NGOs in Kenya and elsewhere in Africa is hard to ascertain. This is because the same outfits are allowed to assess the before-and-after scenarios of the conservation projects they are involved in. In some cases, local and international assessors are contracted to undertake evaluation studies. But as external assessors visit the field, they are usually chaperoned by officials from the same NGOs they have been commissioned to scrutinize. Even where assessors demand to do “independent” reviews, their work is largely hampered by language, and geographical and cultural barriers. This has created an almost impenetrable “wall of silence and conspiracy” because what ends up constituting the findings on impact is actually more or less what the NGO wanted the assessors to know in the first place. By the end of the day, the NGO ends up with a good image and a nod from donors. It is no wonder that there is little to show for all the billions pumped into conservation. In any case, species have been disappearing and wildlife populations are dwindling while the worst effects of climate change bite hard even within the NRT carbon project.

The project is ambitious, opens new grounds in the global carbon trading regime and is hinged on the involvement of pastoralist communities in the region.

As far as the carbon trading project is concerned, the truth typically deviates, to a great extent, from what is stated by the organization and the project assessors. Survival International established an unmistakable dichotomy between what the NRT has eloquently put in the project’s documents and the reality in the project area. Most importantly, the NRT did not inform the communities properly about the project, “let alone receive their free, prior and informed consent to it”. As Survival International officials toured the area, they established that the organization had, at best, merely shared the required information with a small number of people who sat on the boards of the 13 conservancies. However, the information given was limited, was not shared in native languages, and was done “long after the project started”. The same was reported by the project’s auditors during the initial verification of the project. This is a clear violation of some of the principles that carbon trading projects are expected to adhere to.

The entire project can be seen as one that exploits and grossly interferes with the lives of tens of thousands of pastoralists. As the project unfolded, the communities have been increasingly losing control of their lands and the power to determine how to use it. As the organization went about removing what it calls “cultural barriers” to carbon retention in the soil, the unfairness of the entire approach emerged in the sense that people who have very little to do with polluting the planet were forced to alter how they have survived in order to adhere to the dictates of an organisation that used falsehoods and unproven methods to receive finances it does not deserve. This notwithstanding, the project is attempting to replace the prevailing practice in which boys herd livestock by paying cash to adults to be doing the task. This is seen as a blatant attempt to destroy the dignity of the men and women who are traditionally not involved in such an activity. This, as the report says, is likely to face “rejection and failure”.

Watch: Is the Northern Kenya Grasslands Carbon Project a Racket?

In addition, the report raises serious issues on the legality of the project. Half of the project area is on lands classified as trust lands which are subject to the provisions of the Community Lands Act 2016. The Act mandates not the NRT but the relevant county governments with “holding the land in trust” until they are formally registered as community lands. However, the registration process has taken too long, with the delays being partly attributed to what some locals say is “active obstruction” by the powerful organization. Indeed, the legality of the conservancies established by the NRT was challenged in the Environment & Lands Court in 2021. The case is still going on.

Related to the legality of the project is the question raised in Survival International’s report as to whether the NRT has the right to trade on carbon stored in the soils of lands that it does not own. The organization did not have a formal agreement with the communities in the 13 conservancies before it embarked on the project. It cobbled together the agreements in June 2021, eight-and-half years after it started the project. On this, the report says that “NRT did not have a clear contractual right to sell the carbon during this period”.

Survival International estimates that it has generated between US$21 million and US$45 million with some of the credits being offloaded to Netflix and Meta Platforms.

In its communication, the NRT has consistently claimed that it does not own the relevant lands. One then would expect that it would have let the biggest share of proceeds from the carbon trade project go to the communities. However, Survival International says that the organization not only continues to hog the lion’s share of the proceeds, but has the final say on how the proceeds are distributed. The organization claims that it dishes out 30 per cent of the total funds to the 13 conservancies “for purposes which the communities themselves determine”. But Survival International disputes this. “This largely proves not to be the case,” the report avers, going on to state that 20 per cent of the conservancies’ portion is actually spent on the “NRT’s prescribed” grazing practices while 60 per cent is distributed at the discretion of the organization. Community leaders interviewed during the investigation by Survival International said that the distribution is done “through a largely opaque process” and that the money “is used to exert control over communities and to promote NRT’s own priorities”.

Whipping communities into acceptance

The report terms the credibility of the carbon offsets as “wanting” and its impact on the pastoralist communities as “negative”. The project’s very success (or lack of it) depends on whipping communities into accepting a radical shift from the age-old traditional grazing pattern they have been practicing to what the organization believes would bring about the required carbon offsets. But for Survival International, this could “endanger [the] livelihoods and food security” of the pastoralists besides being “culturally destructive”. By establishing a project which demands that the herders confine their animals to the project area, the NRT’s desire was to align the project with one of the requirements of the relevant methodology. But the whole thinking attaches no value to what is obviously a rational and pragmatic animal husbandry practice adopted by the communities hundreds of years before the project was ever started.

The NRT did not inform the communities properly about the project, “let alone receive their free, prior and informed consent to it”.

More poignantly, the NRT’s demands for a change in grazing patterns appears insensitive to the problems pastoralists have been experiencing with the worsening changes in the climate. This is also a typical example of the predicament presented to communities in Africa whenever they are forced to engage in activities that hardly cater for their own survival and interests. To many “woke” Kenyans today, although the NRT was formed in Kenya, its very philosophy and operations are “alien and transplanted” from Europe. Many deem it to be a body that has boldly and with single-minded determination rekindled the colonial scenario in which white people see nothing wrong with using force and money to put in place changes that do not benefit African communities but instead are extremely disruptive to their lives.

Does the NRT deserve the millions?

The NRT cannot escape the accusation of carbon colonialism and nor can the polluting companies that find nothing wrong with dealing with a “broker” and everyone else to the exclusion of the owners of the land upon which the carbon trading project is based. This notwithstanding, the question arises as to whether the organization deserves the millions of dollars paid to it by Netflix and other companies. For one, the project does not provide believable evidence that traditional grazing has led to the degradation of soils and hence the loss of soil carbon. “It is based on a presumption that the traditional forms of grazing were causing degradation of soils and that only the carbon project could remedy this,” the report says. It adds that the NRT does not support “with any empirical evidence” the assertion that degradation there happens due to “unplanned grazing.”

Although the NRT was formed in Kenya, its very philosophy and operations are “alien and transplanted” from Europe.

At the same time, the project’s core activity of “planned rotational grazing” does not seem to be taking place. “The limited information provided by the project purporting to show a decline in vegetation quality prior to the project does not in fact show this at all,” the report says. In any case, evidence presented by the NRT indicates that the quality of vegetation “has declined since the project started”. The report concludes that “this would suggest that soil carbon in much of the area is in fact also declining.”

Brick by brick

Survival International dismantles, brick by brick, most of the project’s foundational claims. Besides painting the carbon storage assessment method as “unsuitable”, the report disputes the credibility of the periodic reports on grazing activities submitted by the 13 conservancies, terming them “entirely worthless”. The report says that they cannot be relied upon to ascertain whether the rotational grazing has been implemented let alone its outcomes. Added to this is the fact that the NRT used an error-laden method to measure the amount of carbon retained in the soil. This was the use of remote sensing to establish vegetation cover rather than direct measurement of soil carbon. Apparently, the NRT is aware of the weaknesses of this approach and actually admits that it contains very large margins of error and inaccuracy—Survival International terms it “demonstrably faulty”. Further, it is highly doubtful that any additional carbon stored (which is unlikely) can last long in the project area. In this regard, Survival International asserts that the worsening changes in climate in most parts of the project area as well as the entire northern Kenya region “will result in declines in vegetation and soil carbon storage”.

The NRT purports that it was able to count the number of days livestock spend away from the project area. This information is essential in knowing whether the extra carbon supposedly stored in the project area’s soils might come at a cost of carbon simply being lost somewhere else through grazing, thus invalidating the project. But the monthly grazing reports used to monitor livestock movements are inadequate for such a purpose; they lack credible information on where animals are at any given time, and are based on maps that are vague and border on guesswork. Besides this, the project area is largely remote, inaccessible and this makes it almost impossible to monitor what happens in the highly porous boundaries of the project. Although the NRT says that it has the mechanism to detect and monitor livestock movement off the project area, it does not comply with the methodology under which the project was developed in the first place. This can be translated to mean that the organisation has little or no idea of the amount of carbon “leakage”.

An informed lie?

From a layman’s assessment of the report, it is clear that the project has “adhered” to the long tradition in which many conservation NGOs in Kenya misrepresent facts for the purpose of securing funding from those ready to open their purses in the West. One cannot explain how the NRT was able to secure the nod of assessors and huge amounts of money from big-buck companies. The explanation lies elsewhere; the success with which such NGOs manage to get millions in funding has to do with whether they are able to include white people, either as founders, as members of their boards or as staffers in the top echelons of their establishments. For some reason, NGOs that recruit white people in Kenya stand a far better chance of securing financial support from Europe or America. In this regard, the NRT is associated with the Craig family who have lived in Kenya since the early 1900s. This is a family that has more than a casual relationship with the British royal family. For instance, not only did Prince William have an intimate friendship with Jessica Craig, the daughter of the founder of the NRT, Ian Craig, before he married Kate Middleton, but he also proposed to Kate at Craig’s former family home in Lewa Wildlife Conservancy. A casual observer might not see the connection, but many organizations formed by white people in Kenya are able to easily get away with unjustifiable untruths and half-truths. Those who fund them appear to have no desire to commission independent assessments that would shed light on the truth value of such organizations in solving the problems they purport to address.

The NRT carbon project is no different. It clearly misrepresents facts while its truth value and worth are questionable. One is unable to decide whether the entire project is based on a carefully crafted lie arrived at through the use of a complicated algorithm, or that it is simply a sham.

On February 25, Nigerians once again took to the polls with a determination that their votes could change the fate of a country in deep despair. For the seventh time since a civilian dispensation began in 1999, Nigerians hoped that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) would conduct a free, fair, and credible election. This hope was reinvigorated by the emergence of technology that would ensure, purportedly, a transparent process. Yet, once again, voters had their dreams crushed with an election marred by violence, ballot box snatching, forged results and, of course, voter intimidation and buying. In the days that followed, despite mounting evidence of irregularities and international outcry, INEC declared Bola Ahmed Tinubu, of the All Progressives Congress (APC), the winner of the presidential poll. The continuation of a gerontocratic oligarchy was solidified.

Although media attention focused on a young class of voters and the uniqueness of this historical moment, a deeper analysis is necessary. If nothing else, this election provided an opportunity to examine the shifting landscape of Nigeria’s elite electoral politics, and the increasingly complex voting patterns of citizens, while understanding these voters are increasingly a minority—less than 30 percent of the registered voters (about one-tenth of the population) cast their vote.

The dizzying rise of Peter Obi as a “third force” candidate over the last nine months was largely due to a movement of emergent and middle-class youth, the so-called “Obidients,” who used technology to galvanize a youthful base to push forward their candidate. That the Obidient movement was formed, ironically, off the back of the EndSARS movement, is in many ways a direct contradiction. The generation that was “leaderless” now suddenly had a leader. The rate at which young people chose this candidate still gives me whiplash. But there was no shaking their convictions. Obi was their candidate, and no one could shake their belief that a new Nigeria would be formed under his presidency, despite the evidence that he was directly endorsed by the same ruling class that has led to the country’s demise.

Obi is not a revolutionary, a social welfarist, nor even pro labor, but he became the savior many youth were looking for to “rescue” Nigeria. Ironically, the millions of youth that fought the EndSARS battle, and named themselves the leaderless soro soke (“speak up” in Yoruba) generation, did not seek elective office themselves. Rather, many put their eggs in Obi’s basket in supporting an older, veteran politician whose clean cut and soft demeanor led to his near deification. Other EndSARS activists, including Omoyele Sowore, were mocked for running in the election and were seen as not experienced enough for the job. In the end Sowore  performed abysmally at the polls, despite his demonstrated commitment to Nigerian youth and human rights record and involvement in the EndSARS protests (Sowore’s African Action Congress polled only 14,608 votes, faring worse than in the 2019 election).

This absolute faith in Obi was demonstrated when his followers patiently waited for five days after the election to hear from him. Instead of sending them into the streets, he advised them to wait for him to challenge the electoral irregularities in the courts. Why did a leaderless generation need a hero?

The contradictions in the EndSARS ideology and the Obidient campaign will be tested in the years ahead. After the Lekki massacre on October 20, 2020 brought the massive street protests of the EndSARS movement to an abrupt halt, many of the sites of protests shut down completely and groups that were loosely organized dismantled into relative silence for almost two years. In fact, there was little indication that EndSARS would evolve into a mass political movement until Peter Obi emerged on the scene in May 2022. The first- and second anniversaries of the Lekki massacre were marked by smaller protests in Lagos and a few other cities, which paled in comparison to the numbers at the 2020  protests. Still, efforts to free many of the prisoners arrested during EndSARS are proving difficult, with some protesters and victims still in jail today. There was no direction, no cohesiveness, and no willingness to move forward at that point. But in May 2022, seemingly out of nowhere, things began to shift. A candidate emerged that many EndSARS protesters seemed to think would be the savior.

Understanding the youth divide

While often lumped into a sum, the category of “youth” is not a single class of people. When Obi was said to carry the youth vote he actually only carried the vote of a particular category of young people, an emergent middle and professional class, who were also some of the most vocal in the EndSARS movement. However, if we are to use the discredited election geography as a proxy for representation, it is clear that this demographic is both well defined and narrow. Major urban areas like Lagos and Abuja pulled towards Obi, as did a few Eastern states. The North Central states including Plateau and Benue asserted their own identity by aligning with Obi, perhaps in a rejection of the Northern Muslim tickets of the Peoples Democratic Party (with whom Atiku Abubaker ran) and the APC.

The 2023 election also forces us to re-examine the dynamics of class, ethnic and religious divides and the deepening malaise of the poor and their disengagement with politics. What is clear from this election, like many before, is that Nigeria has yet to come of age as a democracy; indeed, the conditions for democracy simply do not exist. It is also quite evident that the Nigerian elite are adept at changing the political game to suit the mood of the Nigerian people. Electoral malpractices have shifted over time in response to the increasing pressure of civil society for accountable elections. Strong civil society advocacy from organizations focused on accountability and transparency in government have pushed against electoral practices. While these practices continue, there are significant shifts from previous elections where vote buying was brazen. However, it begs the historical questions: has Nigeria ever had a truly free and fair election, and is the process with which democracy is regenerated through the ballot the path for emancipatory politics? These questions become more relevant as the numbers of voters continue to dwindle, with the 2023 election having the lowest turnout in Nigeria’s electoral history, despite the social media propaganda around the youth vote and the turning tide of discontent that was predicted to shape the election.

Lessons from history

The fact that young people were surprised by the events on February 25 may be indicative of youthful exuberance or a startling lack of knowledge of history. The idea that a ruling class, who had brought the EndSARS struggle to a bloody end, would somehow deliver a free and fair election, needs more critical scrutiny. For those that remember the history of the June 12, 1993 elections—annulled after the popular rise of MKO Abiola—the election is no surprise. But for young people deprived of history education, which has been removed from Nigeria’s curriculum for the past 30 years, the knowledge may be limited. When a young person says they have never seen an election like this, they also cannot be faulted, as many young voters were voting for the first time. Given that many youth seem to underestimate the long history of elections and electoral fraud, the question of intergenerational knowledge and of a public history that seems to be absent from electoral discourse cannot be ignored. It is also hard to fault young voters, in a  land where there is no hope, and whatever hope is sought after can be found in the marketplace.

Many of the young organizers were adept at reading their constituencies and mobilizing their bases, but some of the elephants in the room were ignored. One of these elephants, of course, was the deep geographic and ethno-religious and class divisions between the North and the South. This is evident in the voting patterns in the North West and North East where Obi’s campaign did not make a dent. Though Obi ran with a vice president from the North, the majority of votes in Northern zones were divided between PDP, APC and New Nigeria People’s Party while two of the North Central states, Plateau and Nasarawa, went to Obi’s Labor party. Kano, the largest voting population in the country went to Rabiu Kwankwaso’s NNPP, an outlier who was ignored to the peril of opposition parties (Kwankwaso was the former governor of Kano).

Obi’s campaign also focused on the emergent middle class youth, as well as appealing to religious sentiments through churches on a Christian ticket and ethnic sentiments appealing to his Ibo base in the South East, where he swept states with more than 90 percent of the vote. The North is largely made up of the rural poor with poverty rates as high as 87 percent and literacy rates among young women in Zamfara state as low as 16 percent. Tracking Obi’s victories, most of the states where he won had lower poverty rates and higher literacy rates; states like Delta and Lagos have the lowest poverty counts in the country. While Obi used poverty statistics to bolster his campaign, his proposed austerity measures and cuts in government spending do not align with the massive government investments that would be needed to lift Nigerians out of poverty. While the jury is still out on the reasons for low voter turnout, deepening poverty and the limited access to cash invariably impacted poor voters.

Historically, Nigeria’s presidency has swung between the North and the South, between Muslims and Christians, and this delicate balance was disrupted on all sides. In 2013, an alliance between the Southern Action Congress (AC), the Northern All Nigeria’s People’s Party (ANPP), and Congressive People’s Alliance (CPC) to produce the Action People’s Congress (APC) was able to remove the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) who had dominated the political scene. Another important historical note is that of the legacy of Biafra that lives on, as an Igbo man has never taken the helm of the Presidency since the Civil War. While Obi ran on the promise of a united youth vote, the lingering ethnic and religious sentiments demonstrate the need for his campaign to have created a stronger alliance with the North and the rural and urban poor.

The failure of the youth vote is also a failure of the left

The other factor that we must examine is the failure of the left to articulate and bring into public critique the neoliberal model that all the candidates fully endorsed. Many young Nigerians believe if Nigeria works, it will work for everyone, and that “good governance” is the answer to the myriad problems the country faces. The politics of disorder and the intentionality of chaos are often overlooked in favor of the “corrupt leader” indictment. The left was divided between the Labor Party, whose presidential flag bearer ran on a neoliberal rather than pro worker or socialist platform, and the African Action Congress, who ran on a socialist manifesto, but failed to capture the imaginations of young people or win them over to socialist politics and ideology. In seeking to disrupt the two party power block, young Nigerians took less notice of the lack of difference between the three front running parties, and chose to select the lesser of three evils, based on credentials and the idea that Obi was “the best man for the job.” In fact, the Nigerian youth on the campaign trail emphasized experience in government as a criteria for a good candidate, over and above fresh ideas.

The left also failed to garner the EndSARS movement and channel it into a political force. The emergent youth middle class, not the workers and the working poor, continued to carry the message of liberal rather than revolutionary politics. Unfortunately, just as the gunning down of Nigerian protesters caught young people off guard in October 2020, so too the massive rigging of this election. However, there is no cohesive movement to fight the fraud of this election. The partisan protests and separate court cases by the Labor Party and PDP, demonstrate that the disgruntled candidates are fighting for themselves, rather than as a single voice to call out electoral fraud and the rerun of the election. The fact that there is acceptance of the National Assembly election outcomes and not the presidential election, points to the seeking of selective justice, which may eventually result in the complete disenfranchisement of the Nigerian people.

At this time we must seek answers to our current dilemma within history, the history that we so often want to jettison for the euphoria or overwhelming devastation of the moment. The question for the youth will now be, which way forward? Will we continue to rely on the old guard, the gerontocratic oligarchy that has terrorized Nigerians under the guise of different political parties for the past 24 years? Or will we drop all expectations and pursue the revolution that is sorely needed? Will young people once again rise to be a revolutionary vanguard that works with millions of working poor to form a truly pro-people, pro-poor party that has ordinary Nigerians as actual participants in a virbrant democracy from the local to the federal levels, not just during election time but every day?  Will the middle class Nigerian youth be willing to commit class suicide to fight alongside the poor to smash the existing oligarchy and gerontocracy and snatch our collective destiny back?

It is a time for truth telling, for examining our own shortcomings. As young people, as the left, and as civil society, we have relied too long on the oppressors for our own liberation.

–

This post is from a partnership between Africa Is a Country and The Elephant. We will be publishing a series of posts from their site once a week.