Category: Business Daily

In today’s busy world, many employees wear two hats, one as a dedicated professional at work and another as a caregiver performing unpaid care work at home. Working caregivers shoulder the greater responsibility of balancing professional duties with caring for loved ones with severe disabilities, age related needs, or health conditions.

Yet, in the workplace, they are often invisible, unrecognised, and unsupported. Among the affected groups of employees who are providing caregiving support while pursuing demanding careers are those who are caregivers of persons with severe disabilities (PWSD).

Caregiving responsibilities for PWSD are associated with a range of challenges, including long-term care that presents physical, emotional and mental health tolls on carers, who often experience stress, fatigue, anxiety, depression, sleep loss, a lack of time and a lack of control over their own time, among others.

With these challenges in place, their ability to sustain paid employment is threatened. Consequently, carers of PWSD in employment are often forced to reduce their working hours, take less demanding jobs or leave the labour market altogether.

A World Bank survey of 114 mothers of children with disabilities in Kenya and Uganda demonstrated that caregiving demands are intense, stating that 15 percent of mothers reported spending their entire day caregiving.

Additionally, these mothers were 1.9 times more likely to lose their jobs and 2.1 times more likely to quit than mothers of children without disabilities, due to inflexible work schedules, medical emergencies, and other responsibilities. These findings clearly demonstrate that employers can do much to support employees who juggle work and caregiving responsibilities for PWSD.

One of the measures employers can adopt to support working carers of PWSD is caregiver-friendly workplace policies, as an intentional employer initiative to reduce conflict between work and unpaid caring responsibilities and support carers’ lives outside of work.

To date, most workplaces continue to operate under deeply ingrained norms, including a full time, forty hour plus workweek, rigid reporting and leaving times, very limited access to paid time off or leaves of absence, and work responsibilities that employers insist can only be completed in the traditional way they are always completed. Because of these entrenched norms, many workers with caregiving responsibilities for PWSD struggle to or cannot meet their employers’ expectations.

Once adopted, it is anticipated that the caregiver friendly workplace policies will address these deeply rooted norms by introducing flexible work arrangements such as flexible work schedules, reduced working hours, part time work, job sharing, and working from home, among others. Furthermore, these policies are expected to incorporate unpaid leave provisions beyond the mandatory employer’s time frame and provide support services such as counselling, support groups, workshops and seminars on caregiving issues.

This initiative will not only safeguard the employment opportunities for working carers of PWSD from being disrupted by their caregiving responsibilities but also attract and retain young carers in organisations and harness their transferable skills for meaningful careers.

To greatly benefit from such initiatives, working carers of PWSD must embrace disclosure.

This is crucial as it serves as the initial step for conversations between the working carers, employers and colleagues in the workplace about unpaid responsibilities held outside of employment. Most importantly, it activates workplace support.

These practices provide organisations with opportunities that make caregiving a ‘talkable’ subject and supply employers and employees with a common basis for discussing caregiving responsibilities, as well as providing working carers with any additional support that they may require.

In addition, failure to support working caregivers in the workplace also has a detrimental effect on employers, including increased absenteeism, unplanned absences, increased employee turnover, decreased employee retention, and productivity loss. This clearly demonstrates that employers also stand to benefit significantly by adopting carer friendly workplace policies as part of their employment practices.

By implementing such policies, employers can use them as a foundation for integrating paid employment with unpaid caregiving to mitigate the above negative consequences. Employers must recognise that unpaid caregiving is no longer a personal and private matter in family

life, but has become a significant social and economic policy issue across the globe that requires their attention too.

The Kenya Union of Savings and Credit Co-operatives (Kuscco) was formed in 1973 as an umbrella body for saccos and expanded into a multi-billion shilling institution offering financial and other services.

A Sh13.3 billion fraud scandal plunged it into insolvency, forcing members to abandon rescue efforts and vote for liquidation last week.

The decision came after auditors told members that Kuscco could not be revived without a fresh injection of capital. Members rejected any proposal to inject more money.

The Commissioner for Co-operative Development David Obonyo gazetted the decision on Monday.

What is liquidation and what does it mean for Kuscco’s existence?

Liquidation is the formal process of winding up an organisation by selling or realising its assets, settling its debts and distributing any remaining value to those entitled to it.

For Kuscco, the process effectively marks the end of the organisation as it currently exists. The formal cancellation of Kuscco’s registration and the issuance of liquidation order means the institution will no longer operate as a going concern.

Kuscco’s remaining assets will instead be preserved and realised by the liquidators to maximise recovery for creditors and members.

Who appoints the liquidator and what powers will they have over Kuscco’s affairs?

Mr Obonyo has appointed a team of three people to oversee the liquidation.

The three liquidators are Deputy Commissioner for Co-operative Development Peter Wanjohi Kiama, Principal Co-operative Officer Habil Olembo Jesse, and Deputy Chief State Counsel Mariam Adam Abubakar.

The liquidators have been gazetted and authorised to take control of Kuscco’s affairs from its previous management and directors. Their tasks will include identifying and securing assets, collecting debts owed to Kuscco, selling assets where appropriate, settling legitimate claims and distributing the proceeds according to the order of priority.

The process will therefore stop the current scramble among individual creditors to seize Kuscco property through separate court actions.

How will Kuscco’s Sh5.4 billion assets be distributed among creditors and members?

The Sh5.4 billion represents the estimated value of assets that Kuscco expects to realise. This is substantially below its obligations amounting to about Sh17 billion, meaning there will not be enough money to repay everyone in full.

The liquidators will establish the valid claims against Kuscco and determine how available funds should be distributed to ensure equity.

Claims will be dealt with through the formal liquidation process, taking into account the legal priority of different classes of creditors.

How much can saccos realistically expect to recover?

Saccos should not expect to recover the full value of their investments. Kuscco’s liabilities exceed its estimated assets by Sh11.6 billion, even before additional liquidation costs are taken into account.

The final recovery rate will depend on how much the liquidators ultimately realise from Kuscco’s assets and how much is consumed by liquidation expenses.

Legal fees, professional fees, staff and administrative costs, taxes and the cost of preserving or selling assets could reduce the amount available for distribution.

Recovery could, however, improve if the liquidators collect more from loans owed to Kuscco, successfully sell assets at better values or recover funds from transactions linked to the fraud.

What happens to the 292 court cases seeking to attach Kuscco assets for Sh6.48 billion?

The 292 cases are expected to be dealt with within the liquidation framework. Their combined claims of Sh6.48 billion are already higher than the estimated Sh5.4 billion in assets available for distribution.

Liquidation is intended to halt the race among creditors to obtain court orders and attach Kuscco property. Instead, claims will be assessed by the liquidator and dealt with within the liquidation framework.

Existing court orders will not necessarily disappear automatically. The liquidators may have to seek directions from the courts where necessary. The key change is that recovery will move from individual enforcement actions towards a collective process.

What happens to the court cases against Kuscco, as well as the cases Kuscco has filed against its former managers and directors?

The cancellation of Kuscco’s registration ends its status as a going concern, although the society is deemed to continue in existence solely for the purpose of winding up its affairs, according to Cecil Miller, managing partner at Miller and Company Advocates, who cited Section 63 of the Co-operative Societies Act.

He says there is legal precedent showing once a co-operative society is in liquidation, it lacks the capacity to sue or be sued directly. Only the liquidators can act for it, subject to the Commissioner’s oversight.

Mr Miller explains that Section 66(1)(b) empowers the appointed liquidators to institute and defend suits and other legal proceedings on behalf of Kuscco. This means the liquidators will take over the suits that Kuscco had filed against its former managers and directors.

‘In practice, this means all pending court cases against Kuscco will continue, but the liquidators will now institute and defend suits on the society’s behalf, and any resulting judgment or settlement becomes a claim against the assets in liquidation rather than one Kuscco can settle directly outside that process,’ he said.

How long will the liquidation process take?

The liquidators have been given up to one year to complete the process, but this period could be extended depending on the complexity of the liquidationt.

No fixed timetable guarantees that Kuscco will be wound up within a particular period. The duration will depend on the complexity of its assets, debts, litigation and claims.

The process could take considerable time because the liquidators must identify and value assets, recover outstanding loans, dispose of property, resolve disputes and verify claims before making distributions.

Court cases, if any, could also delay the realisation of assets. Members are therefore likely to receive recoveries in stages.

Does this leave saccos without an umbrella body for advocacy?

No. Members authorised the establishment of a new body called the Kenya Federation of Savings and Credit Co-operatives (Kefesco) to take over functions such as advocacy, training and research.

Kefesco will be separate from Kuscco and will not inherit its debts or liabilities. This means the new organisation can represent the interests of saccos without becoming responsible for the financial problems that brought down Kuscco.

Most board strategy retreats fall short not because they lack information, but because they devote too little time to strategic thinking.

Over the next few weeks, many boards will leave their usual boardrooms for annual strategy retreats. The intention is to step away from the regular board agenda and reflect on the future. What conversation does the board need to have at the strategy retreat?

For a business midway through an approved strategy, the priority may be assessing execution and considering whether developments since its approval have changed the circumstances facing the business. For one approaching the end of its current strategy period, the opportunity is to help shape the direction of the next strategy period. Occasionally, significant changes in the operating environment may warrant reconsidering the current strategy before it expires.

These are different conversations and should not automatically have the same retreat agenda.

For a board midway through an existing strategy, the retreat should offer more than an extended review of implementation. Persistent difficulty in delivering expected outcomes may point to a problem with the strategy rather than its execution. Equally, strong performance should not place a strategy beyond scrutiny.

When presented with a green dashboard, directors naturally spend less time on that aspect of the business and attention moves toward the red and amber indicators. That is reasonable from an oversight perspective, but from a strategic perspective, it can create blind spots.

A green indicator tells us that we achieved what we planned. It does not necessarily tell us whether the target was ambitious enough or whether we have fully captured emerging opportunities. Performance against plan and performance against opportunity are not always the same thing.

One useful question the board could ask itself is this: If management presented this strategy for the first time today, given what we now know, would we approve it?

For a board approaching the end of its current strategy period, the conversation is different. By the time directors receive a polished proposal for the next three or five years, management may already have made crucial decisions, discarded some alternatives and committed to a preferred direction.

The board should not formulate the strategy – that is management’s job. But it should engage early enough to clarify the most important challenges and opportunities the new strategy is intended to address, and to influence the questions asked, the evidence considered, and the alternatives explored. A board cannot meaningfully consider alternatives it never sees.

Where circumstances have changed materially, the calendar should not dictate the conversation. Developments in customers, competition, technology, regulation or industry economics may have altered the context in which the strategy was developed. The question here is which elements of the strategy need modification in response to the changes in the environment.

Directors also need to arrive well prepared. That requires more than reading management’s papers. Some of their understanding of developments beyond the organisation should come from independent sources. Otherwise, they are less able to bring a different perspective to the discussion. Independent judgement is strengthened by independent perspectives.

Then there is the familiar strategy pack, sometimes running to well over a hundred pages. Everyone agrees that directors have read it and presenters will focus on the few matters requiring discussion or decision.

Then the meeting starts. Before long, slides are being presented page by page and discussion time steadily disappears. Management wants to be thorough, presenters want to demonstrate command of their areas, and directors want to be well informed. This is understandable, but the aggregate result can be a session full of information and short on strategy.

The pre-read may well merit a hundred pages. But the board pack and the board conversation need not have the same architecture. The scarce resource at a strategy retreat is collective thinking time.

Explore uncertainties

Management needs to identify what genuinely requires the board’s attention, directors need to come prepared, the and the Chair needs to protect discussion time. Presenters might focus on three things: what has changed, why it matters strategically, and what they want the board to consider.

Not every conversation needs to end in a decision. Boards need room to explore uncertainties and possibilities while they still have time to respond.

Strategic thinking should not be confined to the annual retreat. Regular board meetings will necessarily monitor implementation but should also consider what has changed and what that might mean for the strategy. Most developments will require no change. Some may call for different tactics. Occasionally, a few will warrant reconsidering the strategy itself.

A successful strategy retreat therefore begins long before directors arrive at the venue. Success is not measured by how much material was covered or how many slides were presented. It is measured by whether the board leaves clearer about what should remain unchanged, what may need to change, and what now deserves greater attention.

The civil servant’s pension scheme, Public Service Superannuation Fund (PSSF), is changing its investment policy from the current 79.3 percent concentration in fixed income securities to more diverse asset classes including listed shares, private equity and off-shore investments.

The fund had Sh270.1 billion out of its Sh340.3 billion total assets invested in government bonds, Treasury bills, Eurobonds, asset-backed securities and bank fixed deposits in the year to June 2026.

It now says it is ready to take more risks in pursuit of higher returns for its members whose annual contribution hit Sh60.8 billion in the review period.

‘The new direction seeks to balance between generating inflation-beating returns while preserving members’ capital over the long term,’ said PSSF Chief Executive Officer Dr Jonah Aiyabei.

Retirement Benefits Authority (RBA) rules allow pensions to invest up to 90 percent of their assets in government debt while allocations to other categories like equities have caps.

The five-year-old PSSF held all its funds in Treasury bills and bonds three years ago but has been venturing into other assets in the last two years.

It recently participated in the Kenya Pipeline Company’s initial public offering and Talanta City Stadium’s infrastructure asset-backed bond.

Under the new policy, PSSF may allocate up to 20 percent of its assets to listed equities, giving it greater exposure to growth opportunities in the stock market. The framework also permits offshore investments of up to 15 percent, enabling the scheme to diversify geographically and reduce concentration risk within the domestic economy.

In the real estate segment, the Fund can invest as much as 20 percent in property assets, reflecting the long-term income and capital appreciation potential of the sector.

Up to 10 percent of the portfolio may be deployed into alternative investments such as private equity, infrastructure projects and private debt. The policy also permits exposure to infrastructure-linked instruments and sustainability-linked investments.

‘With an average member age of 39 years and approximately 99.5 percent of our members more than a decade from retirement, the PSSF can tolerate short-term market volatility in pursuit of higher long-term gains,’ said Dr Aiyabei.

The scheme has Sh18.3 billion invested in Linzi Bonds whose proceeds were used by the government to build the Talanta Stadium and affordable houses for military officers while offering annual returns of up to 15.04 percent. It also holds Sh239.8 billion in Treasury bills and bonds, Sh11.5 billion in Eurobonds and fixed deposits of Sh569.3 million.

This means the fund has invested 79.1 percent of its fund in fixed income securities while holding Sh2.3 billion in cash and fixed deposit underlining low risk appetite.

Currently it has invested Sh47.8 billion in listed equities, or 14 percent of its assets against RBA’s cap of 70 percent.

It invested Sh12.3 billion in the Kenya Pipeline Company’s Sh106.3 billion IPO, making it the fourth largest shareholder in the firm while helping boost the success of the offer which had failed to attract corporate investors.

Members of PSSF make a 7.5 percent contribution from their salary which the government tops up with a 15 percent contribution.

The fund has a membership of 529,635, the bulk of whom are teachers at 332,950, disciplined forces (120,084), civil servants (60,322) and 16,279 from county governments.

Prior to PSSF’s launch in 2021, public servants were covered by the defined contributions scheme managed by the National Treasury. Contribution to the fund was mandatory to public servants who were below the age of 45 when it came to be but voluntary for the older ones while every new employee since is automatically enrolled.

The management of PSSF disclosed they are likely to declare returns of between 13 and 15 percent to their 529,635 members this year which will be a drop from the 17.98 percent posted last year when interest rates were high.

PSSF reported a 15.3 percent increase in annual contributions to Sh60.8 billion in the review period from Sh52.7 billion the year before on the back of higher membership.

This means the fund is collecting averagely Sh5 billion monthly which solidifies its position as the second largest fund after the National Social Security Fund whose monthly collections average Sh8 billion.

Pension funds in the country had allocated 46.35 percent of their Sh3.16 trillion assets in government securities as at June this year with equities taking 14.3 percent, guarantee funds (19.3 percent) and immovable property (7.97 percent), marking the preferred investment classes.

Safaricom has started paying shareholders its final Sh46.08 billion dividend ahead of the official September 4 payment date, giving investors early access to the telecoms giant’s record payout.

The company approved a final dividend of Sh1.15 per share at its July 31 annual general meeting for shareholders on the register by the August 4 book closure date. Together with the Sh0.85 interim dividend paid in March, the full-year dividend totals Sh2 per share.

The overall distribution of Sh80.13 billion is 66.7 percent higher than the Sh48.08 billion paid for the previous financial year, making it the largest dividend payout in Safaricom’s history.

The bumper payout follows a 37.2 percent jump in net profit to Sh95.6 billion for the year ended March 2026, driven by stronger M-Pesa earnings and significantly lower losses from Safaricom Ethiopia.

The final dividend alone amounts to Sh46.08 billion, compared with Sh26.04 billion a year earlier.

Safaricom has previously paid dividends ahead of schedule, including in 2024, as it shifted from cheque payments to electronic transfers through bank accounts, Real-Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) and M-Pesa.

The payout also marks the end of a three-year period during which the telco kept its dividend unchanged as heavy investment in Ethiopia and the depreciation of the Ethiopian birr weighed on group earnings.

Safaricom Ethiopia, which launched commercial operations in 2022, has narrowed its losses and is expected to break even in the financial year ending March 2027, easing one of the biggest drags on group profitability. Kenya remains Safaricom’s main earnings engine, with M-Pesa, mobile data and fixed connectivity continuing to drive growth as voice and SMS revenues mature.

M-Pesa generated Sh182.7 billion in revenue during the year to March 2026 and processed transactions worth Sh41.68 trillion, underscoring its growing contribution to group earnings.

The government has set a target to borrow Sh38.74 billion against the Sports Fund to complete the construction of 33 new and existing stadiums across the country.

The new facility will mark the second securitisation under the Sports, Arts and Social Development Fund (SASDF), after the Sh44.8 billion Talanta bond whose proceeds are in use in the construction of the 60,000-seater Raila Odinga Stadium in Nairobi.

The Sports Fund is already recruiting a transaction advisor and lead arranger to structure the new loan, which is expected to match the Talanta bond’s 15-year tenor.

‘The fund is in the process of implementing a financing programme aimed at mobilising resources through a loan facility to finance the construction and completion of 33 new and ongoing stadia and related infrastructure across the country,’ the Sports Fund said in a disclosure.

‘The estimated amount to be sourced is the cumulated project contract price amounting to Sh38.74 billion (exclusive of the facility fee), for a proposed repayment period of 15 years. The proposal should aim at providing the facility in the shortest time period, preferably not exceeding 60 days upon award.’

The advisors will be required to identify funding sources, negotiate financing terms with the lenders or investors, structure financial models, and ensure sustainability throughout the life of the stadium projects.

The State has launched a series of stadium construction and expansion projects across the country, including in Mombasa, Kisumu, Nakuru and Eldoret, and more than 20 other counties.

It is also upgrading the Kasarani and Nyayo National Stadiums in Nairobi in readiness for the June 2027 Africa Cup of Nations tournament, which is being co-hosted by Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda.

Under the securitisation plan, the fund’s collections are used to pay interest and principal to lenders in the bond issuances, effectively allowing the government to borrow against future taxes.

The fund is mainly financed through taxes and levies raised from the betting industry, with Sh2.07 billion targeted per month.

In the year to June 2026, taxes on betting services rose 24.9 percent to Sh16.5 billion, against a target of Sh14.26 billion.

The overall funding for the SASDF in the 2026/2027 budget was set at Sh25.2 billion, part of a wider budgetary allocation of Sh45 billion to the Sports and Tourism Ministry. The Tourism Fund was allocated Sh14.3 billion.

The State has turned to securitisation of these future taxes and levies to finance large and costly public projects, including roads, as its room to borrow continues to shrink due to a ballooning of public debt to Sh13 trillion.

It is part of alternative financing plans that include public-private partnerships (PPPs) across the energy, transport, water, housing, health, and digital infrastructure sectors. In the current year, the government is targeting at least Sh70 billion in PPP investments.

Last year, the Treasury securitised Sh7 out of the Sh25 per litre collected under the Road Maintenance Levy Fund (RMLF) to service loans of Sh175 billion contracted to pay pending bills to road contractors.

The government is planning to leverage a further Sh5 per litre from the levy to secure another Sh125 billion in a new roads bond. The government increased the levy from Sh18 to Sh25 per litre in July 2024.

The Tourism ministry is meanwhile dipping into the Sh5 billion per year Tourism Levy to partly repay private investors in hotels and commercial facilities for the ongoing Sh31 billion development of the Bomas International Convention Complex (BICC).

The Tourism Levy is set at a rate of two percent of the gross receipts derived from the monthly sale of food, drinks, accommodation and other services in all regulated hotels, restaurants and other tourism activities.

Kenya is also planning to take up to 90 percent of the annual revenues from the Railway Development Levy (RDL) to secure funding for the extension of the standard gauge railway (SGR) from Naivasha to Malaba.

On the sports fund, the government is looking to utilise the headroom left after servicing the Talanta bond to load on more debt.

In the current year, the fund will spend Sh6.5 billion on the Talanta bond repayments, with a disbursement of Sh3.25 billion having been made on July 7, and the second one of a similar amount to come on January 7, 2027.

The 15-year Talanta bond was issued in July 2025 by Liaison Group, through a special vehicle known as Linzi FinCo 003 Trust.

The bond has a 15.04 percent rate of return, which will earn investors Sh57.6 billion in interest over the life of the debt. This interest income is exempt from withholding tax, giving the bond the same status as government-issued infrastructure bonds.

The paper is amortised, meaning that its principal will be paid down in equal instalments of about Sh2.98 billion annually, and therefore reducing the interest expense over time.

As the cost of living continues to influence household budgets, investors need to look beyond the headline return on their savings and ask a more important question: is my money growing fast enough to preserve and build my purchasing power over time?

Kenya’s annual inflation rate edged up to 6.5 per cent in July 2026 from 6.4 per cent in June, according to Liberty Life’s latest investment market review. While inflation remained within the Central Bank of Kenya’s target range of 2.5 to 7.5 per cent, continued pressure from food and fuel prices means that consumers cannot afford to overlook the impact of rising prices on their long-term financial plans.

For an investor, this highlights an important distinction between earning a return and growing wealth in real terms. An investment can generate a positive return, but the more meaningful question is whether that return is sufficient to preserve purchasing power after accounting for inflation and applicable investment costs.

The latest performance figures demonstrate why investors should understand the strategy behind their investments rather than focus solely on a single headline number.

Liberty Life’s Boresha Maisha Umbrella Fund recorded a 13.87 per cent gross year-to-date return in its aggressive portfolio to July, compared with 12.53 per cent for the Balanced portfolio and 9.64 per cent for the conservative portfolio. Its cash portfolio recorded a 5.24 per cent gross year-to-date return.

These differences do not necessarily indicate that one portfolio is universally better than another. They demonstrate the relationship between investment strategy, risk and potential return.

An investor with a long-term horizon and greater tolerance for market fluctuations may be better positioned to consider a growth-oriented strategy, while someone approaching a financial goal may place greater emphasis on stability and capital preservation. The appropriate approach ultimately depends on an individual’s objectives, investment horizon and risk tolerance.

Market conditions also reinforce the importance of diversification. The equities market performed strongly in July, with the NASI gaining 6.1 per cent and the NSE 20 gaining 9.0 per cent, taking their year-to-date gains to 27.5 per cent and 30.3 per cent respectively. This positive equity performance supported returns in aggressive and balanced portfolios.

At the same time, the fixed-income market remained relatively stable, although yields on government securities edged higher amid inflationary pressures and continued government borrowing. The 91-day and 364-day government securities increased to 8.8 per cent and 9.1 per cent, respectively, during the month.

For investors, the lesson is not to move money every time one asset class performs strongly. Markets move in cycles, and different asset classes can play different roles within a well-considered investment strategy.

Instead, investors should regularly ask three questions.

First, what am I investing for? A short-term financial objective requires a different approach from a retirement goal that may be decades away.

Second, how much risk can I comfortably accommodate? Higher potential returns can come with greater fluctuations, while more conservative strategies may prioritise stability.

Third, is my investment strategy still aligned to my circumstances? Changes in income, family responsibilities, financial goals or proximity to retirement may require an investor to reassess their approach.

The current market environment therefore presents an opportunity for Kenyans to shift the conversation from simply asking, ‘What return did I earn?’ to asking, ‘Is my investment strategy helping me achieve my financial goals?’

Investment performance should always be considered in context, including the underlying investment strategy, prevailing market conditions, investment horizon, inflation and applicable fees. Liberty Life’s reported investment returns are gross of product-related fees, with net income credited to clients’ accounts after applicable fees.

Ultimately, successful investing is less about chasing the highest return at any particular point in time and more about having a disciplined strategy that is appropriate for one’s goals, maintaining a sufficiently long-term perspective and reviewing that strategy as circumstances change.

The goal is not simply to make money. It is to ensure that your money continues to work towards the life you want to build.

The past two weeks in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, have brought climate, land and biodiversity issues close to the business agenda, as governments, investors and companies gathered for the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) COP17.

The meeting, which ran from August 17 to 28, also provided a glimpse of what the 2026 ‘triple COP’ year could mean for companies as environmental negotiations move from land to biodiversity and finally climate.

Kenya participated in discussions on drought resilience, land restoration and financing. For Kenya, the issues negotiated in Ulaanbaatar touched agriculture, livestock, tourism, water, infrastructure and finance.

The UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) estimates that land degradation, desertification and drought cost the global economy $878 billion annually. Up to 40 percent of the world’s land is degraded.

For businesses, the biggest shift is the growing importance of environmental data. A bank financing agriculture needs to know how drought could affect a farmer’s ability to settle a loan. An insurer needs information on exposure to floods and drought.

Kenya is putting some of this infrastructure in place. In April 2025, the CBK issued the Kenya Green Finance Taxonomy and Climate Risk Disclosure Framework for banking. The taxonomy is designed to help financial institutions assess whether economic activities support climate objectives, while the disclosure framework seeks to make climate-related information more consistent and comparable for investors and other users.

That means the data discussed in Ulaanbaatar is increasingly becoming relevant to decisions being made in Kenyan boardrooms and banks. The quality of information on drought, water stress, land degradation and climate exposure will increasingly influence how capital is allocated and how financial risks are assessed.

That was visible at COP17, where the UNCCD’s Business4Land platform pushed for better information on land and soil health to help companies and investors make decisions.

The financing gap is also important. UNCCD says about $355 billion is needed annually between 2025 and 2030 to meet global land-restoration and drought-resilience targets. The current investment is about $77 billion a year.

That gap represents a problem for governments but also an opportunity for businesses. A drought does not stop at the farm gate. It can reduce livestock and crop production, increase food prices, weaken family incomes and affect manufacturers, retailers, banks, transporters and insurers.

As the triple COP year moves from Mongolia to Armenia and Trkiye, the companies that understand their dependence on land, water, climate and biodiversity and have the data to measure those risks, may be better placed to protect their supply chains, attract capital and compete in the economy that is emerging.

The same applies to degraded soils and disappearing ecosystems. Rangelands cover 54 percent of the Earth’s terrestrial surface, support the livelihoods of about 500 million pastoralists and contribute to the food and value chains on which billions more people depend.

For Kenya, where agriculture and livestock remain major economic activities, this makes investment in resilience increasingly a business decision rather than simply an environmental one.

There is also a growing market around the response. Agroforestry can improve farm productivity while restoring degraded land. Better water management can reduce exposure to scarcity. Sustainable livestock systems can strengthen value chains while protecting rangelands. Restoration projects can create new investment opportunities where credible data, financing mechanisms and markets exist.

The remaining two COPs this year will widen the conversation. The Convention on Biological Diversity COP17 in Armenia in October will focus on implementation of the global biodiversity framework, while the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change COP31 in Trkiye in November will take forward discussions on climate finance, adaptation and other issues directly relevant to investment.

For Kenyan companies, the lesson from Ulaanbaatar is therefore not simply that another environmental COP has taken place; it is that land, climate and biodiversity risks are increasingly financial risks.

Companies will need better information about their exposure to drought, floods, water stress and degraded ecosystems, while investors will need clearer evidence about which businesses are building resilience and which remain exposed.

As the triple COP year moves from Mongolia to Armenia and Trkiye, the companies that understand their dependence on land, water, climate and biodiversity, and have the data to measure those risks, may be better placed to protect their supply chains, attract capital and compete in the economy that is emerging.

A coffee cherry leaves a farm in Nyeri for a few shillings a kilo. Months later it returns as a branded bag on a Nairobi shelf or a flat white in a London cafe at many times the price. Almost none of the difference stayed in Kenya. The roasting, the grading, the branding, the packaging, the financing, the market relationship. All of it was captured somewhere else.

That gap is the whole story.

Kenya is often described as an agricultural success. Underneath, it is a raw material exporter. We sell cherry, not coffee. We sell leaf, not tea. We sell nut, not the finished product. The country grows some of the best commodities in the world and lets others earn the expensive part of the chain.

The numbers are not marginal. The few who navigate direct export can earn a premium of around 38 percent over the auction. That margin is simply the value of the steps Kenya lets others take.

For years, saying so felt like a contrarian point. It is not any more. Value addition is now official policy. In June President William Ruto launched a coffee revival programme and said Kenya would move from exporting raw coffee to local processing, packaging and branding. The ambition is to nearly triple output and pay farmers more.

On the diagnosis, the government is right. The problem is that a diagnosis is not a cure. Once everyone agrees value should stay home, the interesting questions are the ones the slogan skips. Why does the value keep leaking? And why do the fixes so often underdeliver?

Start with the fixes because Kenya is running a live experiment. The Coffee Act signed this year creates a new Coffee Board and brings the whole chain onto a formal register. The Direct Settlement System now promises farmers payment within five days and at least 80 percent of the proceeds paid directly. This is real progress on an old disgrace. Farmers waited months and lost a fortune to middlemen and opaque deductions.

But paying a farmer faster for raw coffee is not the same as keeping the roasting margin at home. Payment reform fixes who gets the low price sooner. Value capture is about earning the high price at all. The two are easy to confuse. The country should not. Then there is the temptation to mandate value addition by decree. Kenya has tried it. Macadamia shows how it fails. To force local processing, the country restricted raw nut exports. The result was not more value at home. Farm-gate prices collapsed to as little as Sh50 a kilo, nuts sat in stores at risk of spoiling, trading firms closed and growers are now begging for the ban to be lifted. The lesson is blunt. You cannot order value capture into existence when the processing capacity, the markets and the finance are not there to receive it. Value addition is a system, not an instruction.

Which brings us to the part that is missing. Finance and governance are the binding constraints. A cooperative that could roast, grade and brand cannot fund the working capital to do it. So it sells raw and takes the low price season after season. Local banks price agricultural risk at a premium because the entities are opaque. International capital stays away because the governance is left unmodelled.

This is a market, not a charity case. Export-ready agribusiness generates real cash flows against real orders. A growing set of specialist funds now treats African trade finance as an asset class. They raise capital to finance the processing and shipping that traditional banks will not. Yet the money rarely reaches the cooperative, because there is nothing on the other side it can safely lend against.

Governance is the root of the finance problem. Global capital will not fund a cooperative that is governed like a political club. It requires an investable structure like a ring-fenced SPV to absorb the working capital needed for roasting and branding. Investors demand independent boards, transparent reporting and clear legal frameworks. When decision-making is opaque and financials are mingled, international investment committees walk away.

The coffee reforms have exposed this tension. The push for direct digital payment is colliding with the cooperative movement that farmers have trusted for a century. Both instincts are right. Transparency matters. So do the institutions people actually believe in. The reform that lasts will respect both while forcing cooperatives to adopt the fiduciary standards that global capital demands.

None of this is fate. Every raw container that leaves the port is value the country decided not to keep. The decision can be made differently. It requires finance that funds processing, institutions that earn trust and markets reached directly rather than through a chain of intermediaries who add cost and not value.

Kenya is not a poor country exporting cheap goods. It is a rich country giving away the expensive part. The coffee is ours. It is time the margin was too.

Kenya imported a consignment of jet fuel outside the Government-to-Government (G-2-G) supply contract between Kenya and three Gulf oil majors, to avert a shortage of the commodity that would have hit the country’s two major airports from last week.

Confidential official correspondence seen by the Business Daily revealed that Kenya received 30,000 tonnes of jet fuel on August 20, outside the G-to-G deal that the country signed with Saudi Aramco, Emirates National Oil Company (Enoc) and Abu Dhabi’s Adnoc, to supply petroleum products since March 2023.

The special shipment, through Gulf Energy, was diverted from a larger jet fuel shipment headed for Europe to help cover rising demand for the commodity, which peaked in July at the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) and Moi International Airport in Mombasa (MIA).

JKIA has become busier in the past few months after it became an unexpected transit and refueling hub because the Middle East conflict forced the closure of regional airspaces and main aviation hubs.

Oil marketers raised concerns on diminishing stocks of jet fuel early last month, prompting meetings with the Energy and Petroleum ministry on August 6 and August 11 on ways of averting the crisis.

Kello Harsama, the Principal Secretary for Petroleum, said in correspondence seen by Business Daily that the special shipment of Jet A-1 was meant to bridge an anticipated gap in supply for August.

‘Following the industry meetings held on August 6 and August 11, to deliberate on the emerging Jet A-1 supply concerns, which included increased uplift by airlines in the month of July 2026, leading to an anticipated supply gap in the month of August,’ Mr Harsama says in a letter dated August 18.

‘The Ministry of Energy and Petroleum, in conjunction with the G-to-G Jet A-1 nominated oil marketing company, urgently engaged the International Oil Company for an interim solution to bridge the supply gap and guarantee security of supply and business continuity,’ he added in the letter sent to CEOs of local oil firms.

Kenya currently imports fuel under a G-to-G deal with three Gulf oil majors but was forced to ship an emergency cargo outside this arrangement amid increased demand mainly from international airlines at the two airports.

Sources privy to the matter say that the next cargo of jet fuel under the G-to-G deal is due to arrive at the port of Mombasa between September 1-3, 2026, leaving the country exposed had the emergency cargo not been shipped.

The increased uptake has mainly been attributed to the wide-body commercial jets of airlines such as Lufthansa, British Airways, Emirates and Qatar Airways at JKIA. Widebody aircraft, mostly used by leading airlines globally, consume more fuel compared to smaller aircraft.

Sources added that Abu Dhabi’s Adnoc Global Trading Ltd, through its local nominee Gulf Energy, supplied the cargo that was sourced from a ship destined for Europe.

The emergency cargo was priced at $185 (Sh23,948.25) per tonne, which was more than double the G-to-G premiums of $97 (Sh11,262.15) for the same quantity. This is the second time this year that the government has been forced to ship extra fuel shipments to avert a crisis.

The first time was in April this year when the country’s National Security Council, cleared the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum to import petrol outside the G-to-G framework to avert a shortage over the Easter festivities.

But the shipment was later declared illegal, overpriced and sub-standard and would later trigger the resignation of three top State officials in the energy sector.

Mr Wandayi says his ministry met with the oil marketers supplying jet fuel early in July, when it became clear that the current stocks would not meet the high demand at JKIA and MIA. They agreed to source a stop-gap cargo to avert the outage of jet fuel.

The ministry then engaged Gulf Energy and Adnoc Global Trading Ltd to bring forward the cargo that was due to arrive at the port of Mombasa under the G-to-G deal in the first week of September.

But Adnoc Global Trading Ltd said that it was unable to bring the cargo forward due to the logistical nightmare caused by the Middle East conflict. The Ministry of Petroleum then directly engaged Adnoc Global Trading Ltd in efforts to secure an immediate cargo.

Adnoc then offered Marlin Le Havre, a vessel destined to deliver jet fuel in Europe and which was due to arrive at the port of Mombasa around August 20, 2026.

Planning for jet fuel is done eight to 12 weeks in advance under the G-to-G, but the high demand in the past two months has now forced the State to allow a shipment outside the G-to-G.

Mr Wandayi added that the next jet-fuel cargo, planned to arrive in the first two weeks of September, has since been revised upwards to 80,000 tonnes from the original 60,000 tonnes, to ensure enough stocks of the fuel.

Since April 2023, Kenya has been importing fuel in a G-to-G deal with Adnoc Global Trading Ltd, Saudi Aramco Trading Fujairah and Emirates National Oil Company, supplying the fuel on a credit period of 180 days.

The three Gulf oil majors hand-picked Gulf Energy, One Petroleum, Galana, Be Energy and Oryx Energies to supply the fuel in the Kenyan market.

The deal was earlier set to lapse last year but has since been extended to end in December 2027 and March 2028 for diesel and petrol, respectively. The deal for jet fuel will expire in February 2028.