Category: Business Daily

Over the past two years, Kenya has taken significant steps to align policy, skills, and infrastructure with the new trend that has seen modern technologies such as artificial intelligence become more integrated into daily life.

In March this year, the government, through the Ministry of ICT, launched a five-year National Artificial Intelligence Strategy to guide the country’s development into a leader in AI innovation.

Private sector actors have also been playing an integral role in advancing the use of AI by investing in the development of tools that help to streamline work across key sectors such as manufacturing, agriculture, finance, and healthcare. However, while these steps have helped the country edge closer to realising its ambition, gaps in the adoption of locally developed AI and automation solutions threaten to reverse the gains made.

‘When the government needs software for elections, for example, they often outsource, even though local companies are capable of delivering solutions that work, at three-quarters or half the price,’ says Alexander Odhiambo, the CEO of Solutech Limited, a company that develops AI and automation solutions.

Compared to the foreign software providers, Alexander says that local software providers possess a more in-depth understanding of the specific needs, preferences, and operating conditions of the local market.

As a result, they are able to develop solutions that are more relevant and effective in the local market. Their proximity to clients also allows for quicker delivery, faster adjustments, and more responsive technical support for urgent issues.

Ironically, the software developer observes that many people still believe that local technology solutions may not have the same advanced features, scalability, or integration capabilities as international ones.

In addition, because local founders are easily reachable, people tend to expect that their solutions will be cheaper than those developed by international firms, even when the quality is the same or even superior.

‘When we started marketing Solutech after our launch in 2014, one of the questions clients would ask was why they should pay as much for our products, not because of quality, but because they could put a face on our name,’ says Odhiambo.

Rayyidh Bayusuf, a software engineer, observes that since they are designed with the needs of their source markets in mind, quite often, many imported solutions do not speak to the unique needs and challenges of other markets.

For instance, real-time order or logistics management tools developed abroad do not speak to the infrastructural challenges that make it difficult for manufacturing and distribution companies to effectively plan routes and track sales teams in Kenya.

‘We had a good use case of one of the largest sweet manufacturers in Kenya, who was struggling to monitor whether their agents were selling the right products to the right people,’ says Bayusuf.

‘While there were many imported solutions available for use, there was no off-the-shelf local software tailored to the unique needs of the manufacturer, a challenge that many other manufacturing firms also faced,’ he adds.

To grow the local IT industry, Mutie Mule, a computer scientist, recommends the formation and implementation of policies that will encourage both the public and private sectors to adopt solutions developed in the country.

‘We have seen the ‘Buy Kenya Build Kenya’ campaign being amplified on products that are tangible, but we hardly hear the same for technology. A policy on ‘buy Kenya’ in the tech space would be a big boost for local IT companies,’ states Mule.

Brian Amani, a computer scientist, agrees, adding that policy incentives for organisations that adopt local digital solutions could encourage more businesses to integrate local IT solutions deployed by both the public and private sectors into their operations.

‘Two years after the electronic Tax Invoice Management System (eTIMS) was rolled out, many businesses are still reluctant to onboard because they fear the Kenya Revenue Authority will be knocking on their doors the moment they do,’ observes Amani.

If, however, companies felt that by adopting the eTIMS system, they would be able to go about their daily operations without being targeted, then they would be more than willing to onboard.

‘This will be a big boost for companies that help businesses connect their accounting, Point of Sale (POS), and Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems to eTIMS for automated, real-time tax compliance,’ says Amani.

In addition, deploying digital upskilling programmes can help to equip organisations with the foundational knowledge and technical skills required to effectively use and integrate emerging local tech solutions into their operations.

Mark Kiarie, an application programmer, says that, of importance also, would be for stakeholders such as the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner to conduct data privacy sensitisation programmes, to promote a culture of responsible data stewardship, among local tech firms.

‘There has been some effort toward that; however, many businesses still lack clarity on compliance. Conducting thorough sensitisation on the importance of proper data management can enhance compliance,’ says Kiarie.

Two State documents have provided differing amounts as the compensation offered to a consortium of French contractors who were ousted from a mega highway expansion project, with the figures diverging by Sh1.1 billion.

Disclosures by the Treasury’s Public Private Partnership (PPP) Directorate shows that Kenya paid Sh7.315 billion to the firms that had been awarded the deal to build the 233-kilometre highway.

A separate parliamentary document indicates that Kenya paid the consortium, comprising Vinci Highways SAS, Meridian Infrastructure Africa Fund, and Vinci Concessions SAS, Sh6.2 billion in January.

This has raised questions on the veracity of the payments given that the Controller of Budget-who has legal mandate to authorise withdrawal of public funds – said she signed off Sh6.2 billion.

The compensation to the consortium was made under an emergency payment and required belated approval from Parliament amid fears the French firms would sue Kenya at the London Court of International Arbitration and block handing the deal to Chinese contractors.

‘I am not in possession of this information (Sh7.315 billion). However, I am aware of the Sh6.2 billion as it was paid from the Consolidated Fund,’ Margaret Nyakang’o, the Controller of Budget, said.

The Treasury must get approval from the Controller of Budget before withdrawing cash from the Consolidated Fund-the primary bank account for the national government.

The Director-General of the PPP Directorate, Kefa Seda, linked the differences to the exchange rate and tax equalisation while quoting another figure of Sh6.8 billion.

‘KeNHA (Kenya National Highways Agency) paid Sh6.8 billion which was inclusive of tax equalisation,’ Mr Seda told the Business Daily through a text message.

Tax equalisation is a policy where employers ensure employees working abroad pay the same taxes they would have paid in their home country.

The employer reimburses the excess payment if the tax in the overseas country is greater than what would have been paid in the home country.

It is not clear whether the French contractors had stationed staff in Kenya to cover the additional multi-million shilling tax burden.

The consortium led by France’s Vinci SA Highway had inked the Sh190 billion deal, but construction for the project had not yet begun.

Kenya’s exchange rate has also remained little changed against the dollar and Euro this year. The shilling oscillated between 129.23 units and 129.29 units to the dollar between January and June this year.

While the local currency traded at between Sh130 and Sh130 to euro in the period under review.

‘The number we have when converted to Ksh [Kenya shillings] as of the date of settlement is Sh6.8 billion,’ Mr Seda said.

A consortium of the National Social Security Fund (NSSF) and China Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC) were last week awarded the deal to build the 175-kilometre highway under PPP and will recoup its investments from toll charges over 30 years.

Kenya terminated the highway expansion deal with the French consortium, citing, among other things, high toll fees.

The highway deal was one of the projects that President William Ruto sought to close in his first visit to China as president.

The termination of the project, which was to be funded from various sources like the Vinci Group, loans from the African Development Bank (AfDB), and guarantees from the World Bank, risked exposing Kenya to litigation and a diplomatic spat with France that backed its firms for the deal.

The push to have the Chinese contractor settle the multi-billion shilling compensation bill and inherit works done by the French contractor, like the feasibility fees, was dropped during President Ruto’s April visit to China. The three French firms, which won the tender procured by KeNHA in 2018, indicated they were ready to break ground on the project, having obtained the financial backing of the AfDB and the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation (IFC).

The consortium was expected to recoup its investments in 30 years by charging toll fees on the road.

The Treasury said the proposed toll fees were a put-off in the Nairobi-Nakuru-Mau Summit road project, which was aimed at decongesting the main artery from Nairobi to western Kenya and the neighbouring countries of Uganda, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The Treasury said it pursued an out-of-court settlement to avoid a costly and protracted suit at the London Court of International Arbitration.

Kenya was also fretful that the French would block attempts to transfer the Sh190 billion expansion of the Nairobi-Nakuru-Mau Summit Toll Road to Chinese contractors and mar President Ruto’s visit to Beijing on April 24.

The NSSF consortium expects to earn an operating profit of about $2.63 billion (Sh339.8 billion) over the 30-year concession by charging motorists a minimum toll of Sh8 per kilometre to use the upgraded corridor.

A project summary shows the consortium) projects total revenues of $4.88 billion (Sh630.3 billion) against total costs of $2.25 billion (Sh290.5 billion), yielding a project-level surplus before financing expenses and tax of roughly Sh11.3 billion a year.

The totals cover both the 175-kilometre Nairobi-Nakuru-Mau Summit (A8) section and the 56-kilometre Nairobi-Mai Mahiu-Naivasha (A8 South) link.

Kenya’s private sector is expanding its workforce again, but in the rush to hire, it risks letting a costly and preventable threat slip through the cracks.

As businesses prepare for year-end demand and competition for talent intensifies, many firms may unwittingly recruit the very people who will defraud them.

The solution is not to slow hiring but to raise the bar: to pair urgency with vigilance, and ambition with accountability. Companies that fail to do so may find that their biggest threat this quarter does not come from the market, but from within.

Recent data show that business activity is rebounding. The Stanbic Bank Purchasing Managers’ Index rose to 51.9 in September, its first expansion since April, signalling renewed optimism and the fastest job creation since May 2023.

Across Kenya, companies are staffing up for the busy final quarter. Yet optimism should not breed complacency. When firms expand rapidly, background checks loosen, oversight thins, and controls are stretched. That is when insider fraud thrives.

Globally, occupational fraud is not an anomaly; it is a structural weakness. The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners estimates that organisations lose about five percent of annual revenue to fraud each year. The median loss per case is roughly $145,000, and many schemes persist undetected for months before discovery.

Contrary to popular belief, most frauds are not exposed by data analytics or forensic audits but by people-whistleblowers account for 43 per cent of detections.

The pattern is depressingly familiar: weak processes, unchecked access, and misplaced trust. More than half of all reported cases stem from poor or absent internal controls.

The most common form of occupational fraud is asset misappropriation-ghost workers, inflated claims, doctored expense reports, and fictitious suppliers. Though often smaller in scale than cooked books or procurement collusion, these acts collectively cost billions.

Procurement fraud remains one of the three most disruptive economic crimes globally, behind only cybercrime and corruption.

In Africa, the impact is particularly heavy, eroding productivity, distorting markets, and undermining investor confidence. Kenya is no stranger to this problem. Government audits continue to unearth ‘ghost workers’ and irregular payrolls-red flags that should alarm any private-sector leader.

The Public Service ministry recently concluded a national payroll audit, identifying rogue employees whose names may soon be made public. Meanwhile, the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission is pursuing asset recovery cases worth an estimated Sh49.5 billion, with billions more tied up in civil suits.

These figures are not abstract. They reflect a culture of internal manipulation that costs the economy jobs, investment, and credibility.

Kenya’s score of 32 out of 100 on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, ranking 121st globally, reinforces the scale of the challenge.

Regionally, the African Union estimates that corruption drains about $148 billion from the continent each year-roughly one quarter of Africa’s total gross domestic product growth potential.

At the same time, the cyber-security agency KE-CIRT continues to list phishing and social engineering among the top forms of attack in Kenya. Many such breaches originate inside organisations, where trusted employees exploit system weaknesses or override safeguards.

Yet even in this landscape, the solution is within reach. Kenyan firms have successfully embedded ‘Know Your Customer’ protocols into their dealings with clients and suppliers.

The next step is to apply the same discipline internally through ‘Know Your Employee’ principles.

In practice, this means treating every new hire, transfer, and promotion as both a talent opportunity and a risk decision. Proper screening must become non-negotiable. Verification of identification documents, academic and professional qualifications, and previous employment history should be standard practice. For sensitive roles, lawful criminal and credit checks are essential.

As Kenya rolls out its Maisha Namba digital identity system, employers have a chance to streamline these checks, provided they adhere to data protection rules and ethical standards. Identity assurance should be viewed as a core business function, not an administrative burden. Beyond hiring, companies must design out opportunities for fraud.

Duties around procurement, payroll, and payments should be separated so that no one individual controls an entire process. Changes to supplier bank details or new vendor approvals should require dual authorisation. Staff in high-risk departments should be rotated periodically, and access rights limited to the bare minimum.

Studies by the ACFE show that strong internal controls not only reduce losses but also speed up detection.

By contrast, frauds that exploit control overrides or loopholes tend to inflict the greatest financial damage. Continuous monitoring is another critical line of defence. Payroll and vendor records should be analysed regularly to flag suspicious activity-duplicate bank accounts, round-number invoices, weekend approvals, or newly created vendors receiving instant payments.

Procurement, both in the public and private sectors, remains the single largest avenue of leakage, and it demands constant oversight rather than occasional audits. Whistleblower systems also deserve greater investment. Nearly half of all fraud cases are exposed through employee tips, yet many organisations still lack anonymous reporting channels or clear protection for those who speak up.

Building a culture of openness-where staff are encouraged to report anomalies without fear-can be a company’s most powerful safeguard.

Finally, firms must anticipate where regulation is heading. Kenya’s data protection and cybercrime laws are tightening, and authorities are ramping up enforcement. Insider lapses that once attracted mild sanctions now carry real financial and reputational costs.

Boards should view compliance not as a checklist but as a strategic pillar of corporate resilience. Kenya’s fourth quarter will bring thousands of new faces into workplaces nationwide.

Most will be genuine contributors; a few will test the seams. Businesses that pair fast hiring with rigorous verification, that balance trust with control, and that invest in integrity as seriously as they invest in growth will emerge stronger. Those that do not risk learning, once again, that the costliest fraud is not the one that happened-but the one they hired.

Two State documents have provided differing amounts as the compensation offered to a consortium of French contractors who were ousted from a mega highway expansion project, with the figures diverging by Sh1.1 billion.

Disclosures by the Treasury’s Public Private Partnership (PPP) Directorate shows that Kenya paid Sh7.315 billion to the firms that had been awarded the deal to build the 233-kilometre highway.

A separate parliamentary document indicates that Kenya paid the consortium, comprising Vinci Highways SAS, Meridian Infrastructure Africa Fund, and Vinci Concessions SAS, Sh6.2 billion in January.

This has raised questions on the veracity of the payments given that the Controller of Budget-who has legal mandate to authorise withdrawal of public funds – said she signed off Sh6.2 billion.

The compensation to the consortium was made under an emergency payment and required belated approval from Parliament amid fears the French firms would sue Kenya at the London Court of International Arbitration and block handing the deal to Chinese contractors.

‘I am not in possession of this information (Sh7.315 billion). However, I am aware of the Sh6.2 billion as it was paid from the Consolidated Fund,’ Margaret Nyakang’o, the Controller of Budget, said.

The Treasury must get approval from the Controller of Budget before withdrawing cash from the Consolidated Fund-the primary bank account for the national government.

The Director-General of the PPP Directorate, Kefa Seda, linked the differences to the exchange rate and tax equalisation while quoting another figure of Sh6.8 billion.

‘KeNHA (Kenya National Highways Agency) paid Sh6.8 billion which was inclusive of tax equalisation,’ Mr Seda told the Business Daily through a text message.

Tax equalisation is a policy where employers ensure employees working abroad pay the same taxes they would have paid in their home country.

The employer reimburses the excess payment if the tax in the overseas country is greater than what would have been paid in the home country.

It is not clear whether the French contractors had stationed staff in Kenya to cover the additional multi-million shilling tax burden.

The consortium led by France’s Vinci SA Highway had inked the Sh190 billion deal, but construction for the project had not yet begun.

Kenya’s exchange rate has also remained little changed against the dollar and Euro this year. The shilling oscillated between 129.23 units and 129.29 units to the dollar between January and June this year.

While the local currency traded at between Sh130 and Sh130 to euro in the period under review.

‘The number we have when converted to Ksh [Kenya shillings] as of the date of settlement is Sh6.8 billion,’ Mr Seda said.

A consortium of the National Social Security Fund (NSSF) and China Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC) were last week awarded the deal to build the 175-kilometre highway under PPP and will recoup its investments from toll charges over 30 years.

Kenya terminated the highway expansion deal with the French consortium, citing, among other things, high toll fees.

The highway deal was one of the projects that President William Ruto sought to close in his first visit to China as president.

The termination of the project, which was to be funded from various sources like the Vinci Group, loans from the African Development Bank (AfDB), and guarantees from the World Bank, risked exposing Kenya to litigation and a diplomatic spat with France that backed its firms for the deal.

The push to have the Chinese contractor settle the multi-billion shilling compensation bill and inherit works done by the French contractor, like the feasibility fees, was dropped during President Ruto’s April visit to China. The three French firms, which won the tender procured by KeNHA in 2018, indicated they were ready to break ground on the project, having obtained the financial backing of the AfDB and the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation (IFC).

The consortium was expected to recoup its investments in 30 years by charging toll fees on the road.

The Treasury said the proposed toll fees were a put-off in the Nairobi-Nakuru-Mau Summit road project, which was aimed at decongesting the main artery from Nairobi to western Kenya and the neighbouring countries of Uganda, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The Treasury said it pursued an out-of-court settlement to avoid a costly and protracted suit at the London Court of International Arbitration.

Kenya was also fretful that the French would block attempts to transfer the Sh190 billion expansion of the Nairobi-Nakuru-Mau Summit Toll Road to Chinese contractors and mar President Ruto’s visit to Beijing on April 24.

The NSSF consortium expects to earn an operating profit of about $2.63 billion (Sh339.8 billion) over the 30-year concession by charging motorists a minimum toll of Sh8 per kilometre to use the upgraded corridor.

A project summary shows the consortium) projects total revenues of $4.88 billion (Sh630.3 billion) against total costs of $2.25 billion (Sh290.5 billion), yielding a project-level surplus before financing expenses and tax of roughly Sh11.3 billion a year.

The totals cover both the 175-kilometre Nairobi-Nakuru-Mau Summit (A8) section and the 56-kilometre Nairobi-Mai Mahiu-Naivasha (A8 South) link.

The Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA)’s vigorous pursuit of tax dues has put it at odds with Members of Parliament (MPs), who want the agency to soften its approach despite pressure to raise more revenue.

The aggressive stance saw MPs deny the taxman a request to change its name from the KRA to Kenya Revenue Service (KRS) as part of a planned rebrand, according to its board chairman, Ndiritu Muriithi.

The freeze on the name change is intended to give the taxman time to improve its relationship with taxpayers. The Tax Procedures Act, strengthened in recent years, empowers the KRA to pursue taxpayers aggressively, including by serving demand notices and freezing bank accounts.

‘There was a proposal (to change the name of KRA), but when the proposal went to Parliament, it was not passed,’ said Mr Muriithi.

‘In the debate, Members of Parliament said that it was not about the change of name but that a change in the culture of the organisation was needed to make KRA a service. I think that this is fair.’

Walking the talk

KRA first mulled a name change in 2021 as part of a rebranding strategy that would see the word ‘Authority’ dropped due to its connotations with command.

Former KRA chairman Francis Muthaura noted that KRA works for the people, hence the need for a rebrand that would align the role of the taxman with service delivery.

‘The term ‘Authority’ sometimes has connotations of command. Commanding is not the real role of KRA. We are the servants of the people, who are the taxpayers,’ he said.

Read: Why KRA is mulling name change in its rebrand plan

According to the general provisions relating to administrative penalties and offences, when a person commits an act or omission liable under a tax law, the KRA Commissioner is expected to either demand the penalty or prosecute the offence.

The KRA Commissioner notifies individuals in writing about the penalty demand, setting out the amount and the payment deadline.

The taxman says it is now making improvements to better its relationship with taxpayers as part of efforts to become a service even as it eyes a new attempt at the name change.

‘It’s about being customer-centric and actually walking the talk, the language of our letters, the way we communicate with our customers, and how we resolve problems,’ added Mr Muriithi.

‘Change is happening as we speak, and we are taking stock of where our culture is.’

Revenue targets

KRA remains under pressure to raise higher revenues from taxes by sealing loopholes that have allowed for tax evasion and avoidance, and expanding the tax base to hard-to-tax sectors such as agriculture and the digital economy.

KRA collected Sh2.42 trillion from taxes in the fiscal year ended June 2025, representing a growth rate of 5.7 percent from Sh2.2 trillion previously, as per data from the National Treasury.

The collections were, however, Sh76 billion below target as several tax heads underperformed estimates, including income tax, excise duty, and investment revenue.

KRA is expected to ramp up its collection to at least Sh2.75 trillion in the fiscal year to June 2026 and Sh2.99 trillion in the 2026/27 period.

The taxman’s citizens’ service delivery charter dictates that it treats customers with courtesy and respect, while proactively in responding to their problems.

October in Kenya is awash in pink. Companies sponsor walks, social media lights up with survivor stories, and “awareness” becomes the buzzword. But sitting across the table from women in my clinic, I see a slightly different reality. They’re not just grappling with cancer, sometimes they’re being rushed through life-changing decisions without adequate support and context.

Let’s be honest: we’ve mastered the marketing of breast cancer awareness, but we’re stumbling at the actual care. According to GLOBOCAN 2022, approximately 7,243 new breast cancer cases are diagnosed in Kenya annually. This comprises 16 percent of all new cancers diagnosed.

Yet, for all our pink ribbons and awareness campaigns, access to comprehensive care and surgical options remains very limited.

Time and again, women will share with me how they were given just days to make massive decisions about their bodies. Remove part, or all of their breasts? Immediate reconstruction or wait? Implants or using their own tissue? These aren’t just medical choices; they touch the core of a woman’s identity, her sense of self, her intimate relationships.

I’ve also held hands with countless women who broke down not because of their diagnosis, but because they felt pressured to make snap decisions without fully understanding their options. I’ve watched them choose mastectomies when they didn’t need to, simply because no one took the time to explain alternatives.

Some of my patients only learned about reconstruction possibilities after their surgery.

Here’s where the system gets it wrong: breast cancer surgery is classified as urgent, not emergent. International guidelines recommend initial treatments or surgery within 4-6 weeks of diagnosis. This window exists for good reason. It’s not just about emotional readiness.

A breast cancer diagnosis usually prompts additional tests and imaging that need to be performed and a multidisciplinary team discussion that is needed to develop a personalised treatment plan.

Once surgery is deemed to be the initial option, additional time might be needed to control for other conditions that the patient might have. This may involve correcting raised blood pressure, stopping blood thinners safely, controlling diabetes to ensure the best possible surgical outcomes and minimise surgical complications.

Breast cancer surgery is elective, meaning it is planned. We can, and should therefore, take time to get it right. However, women have been scheduled for theatre within 48 hours of hearing they have cancer. The shock hasn’t settled. They haven’t processed what’s happening. They’re making permanent decisions about their bodies while still in crisis mode.

The irony? This rushed approach often creates more problems than it solves. I’ve counselled women experiencing severe psychological fallout after surgery because they didn’t have time to fully process their decision-making.

What’s missing from the conversation? Here’s something you might not see or appreciate in pink ribbon campaigns: breast cancer isn’t one disease. Each type is unique, requiring different approaches and treatments – just as Panadol and Brufen both treat pain but work completely differently.

Every case deserves review by a full team of specialists before any surgery or therapy happens. This isn’t fancy extra care but basic best practice.

Women should know all their choices: Breast-conserving surgery can be just as effective as full removal, reconstruction can happen during the initial surgery or later, there are techniques to save skin and nipples, and various reconstruction options exist using their own tissue or implants. These aren’t merely cosmetic details, as they may help to enhance long-term wellbeing and body image perception post-surgery.

The real scandal isn’t really about awareness, but more about access. Sometimes medical factors limit some surgical options or make them unsafe. However, many times, the real issue is the patient’s ability to pay and insurance coverage. Unfortunately, breast reconstruction is often considered cosmetic, and patients frequently have to pay out of pocket to cover the costs.

In my practice, we do recognize that women need time to process. They may need repeat conversations, psychological support, the need to involve their families and additional information in order to arrive at a shared decision.

If we’re serious about improving breast cancer care, we need to adopt the following measures: Mandatory multidisciplinary review for every breast cancer case, protected time for decision-making optimizing the recommended window period to ensure the patient is prepared physically and psychologically, reconstruction as an essential part of the holistic management of breast cancer surgery and care and lastly, encourage shared decision making between multidisciplinary teams and patients.

This October, let’s move beyond pink ribbons. Let’s push for real change in how we treat women facing breast cancer and demand healthcare that respects their dignity and their right to make informed choices.

Because while surgery might take hours, the long-term decisions that shape a woman’s future should not be rushed.

Investment inflows into public-private-partnership (PPP) projects in Kenya, have reached a cumulative total of Sh145 billion since 2013, new disclosures showed, signalling the growing influence of the financing option.

Treasury documents show that Kenya netted Sh17.7billion into PPP projects in the year ended June 2025 alone, an indication of the rapid growth of the model.

‘Since inception of the public-private partnership in 2013, approximately Sh145 billion private capital investments in PPPs has been mobilised, Sh17.7 billion of which was mobilised in the financial year 2024/25,’ the PPP Directorate of the National Treasury said.

Kenya adopted the PPP model in 2013 in a bid to deliver huge infrastructural projects without tapping Exchequer funds or incurring direct loans amid a ballooning debt burden.

The PPP model has delivered five projects: the 27.1-kilometre Nairobi Expressway, roads totalling 170.57 km in 11 counties and the 35-megawatt Sosian Menengai Geothermal Power Plant.

In a PPP-funded project, the investor recoups their investment by charging user fees over a defined period, for example, the Chinese firm that funded the construction of the Nairobi Expressway is charging toll fees to motorists using the road until 2047. Currently, there are 36 PPP-funded projects at various stages of approval in Kenya, as the country targets to raise an additional Sh65 billion worth of private investor capital via the model in the current 2025/26 financial year.

However, the Treasury says that the PPP model is still facing bottlenecks that have led to the cancellation of deals.

‘The programme continues to face challenges, including lengthy project preparation timelines and limited technical capacity at some of the contracting authorities,’ the PPP unit says.

In 2021, Kenya amended the Public-Private Partnerships Act of 2013 to streamline the process of onboarding private investors by reducing bureaucracies involved in finalising deals.

The Public-Private Partnerships (Amendment) Act, 2021 repealed the previous Act of 2013, allowing public entities in PPP deals to single-source work in an effort to accelerate projects.

Kenya had previously struggled to attract private investors to PPPs, prompting the legal changes that were signed into law by former President Uhuru Kenyatta.

The subsidiary legislation on the PPP Act 2021, also introduced a raft of other sweeteners, including doubling the limit of fees payable to transaction advisors behind successful PPP projects.

In the changes, the Treasury set the success fee at one percent of the total cost of a PPP project-double the previous one.

A success fee is a conditional agreement whereby a consultant or advisor is paid a set rate if a PPP project’s outcome is positive. If the outcome is not positive, there is no obligation to pay the fee. It serves as motivation to the consultants or advisors to do their best and earn the maximum.

Rising smartphone ownership has lifted mobile banking uptake in recent years, with the share of banked Kenyans using the service growing from 25.3 percent in 2019 to 32.6 percent in 2024.

Commercial banks have expanded mobile applications and USSD platforms to keep pace with customer demand for faster and cheaper services, reducing reliance on branch visits and ATMs as the phone becomes the preferred point of contact for routine banking.

Industry data shows that nearly one in three adults now uses a phone to access bank services, affirming the growing role of digital channels in extending access to formal finance across both urban and rural populations.

The Central Bank of Kenya’s (CBK)’s 2024 FinAccess Household Survey shows that in towns, about 46 percent of adults bank through mobile applications compared to 27 percent in rural areas, reflecting how stronger internet connectivity and higher income levels have accelerated the shift to mobile in urban centres. The Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) estimates smartphone penetration at about 83.5 percent of active mobile devices by June 2025, or 43.8 million devices, a prevalence that has expanded access to digital platforms, including formal banking services and other everyday transactions such as e-commerce and bill payments.

The growth has coincided with increased investment by banks in mobile infrastructure as institutions align with customer preference for self-service transactions and remote account management through mobile platforms, a shift that has also reduced operational overheads and improved service efficiency.

Most lenders now operate dedicated mobile applications alongside USSD services to accommodate both smartphone and feature phone users, widening the reach and cutting transaction costs associated with physical branches while responding to evolving customer expectations for convenience and reliability.

The FinAccess data shows that education and income remain key determinants of usage, with adults holding tertiary education more likely to bank through mobile channels than those without formal schooling, while men account for a higher share of mobile-bank users than women, reflecting broader access disparities.

The adoption of mobile banking has also been supported by competition among lenders to digitise credit, deposit and payment services as customers favour real-time transactions and 24-hour access through their phones, a trend that has forced banks to innovate faster to retain market share.

Over the past decade, mobile money usage has expanded sharply, with subscriptions rising from 27.7 million in June 2015 to 47.7 million in June 2025, while the number of active agents grew from 129,000 to 373,000, according to CA data, underlining the scale of Kenya’s digital finance ecosystem and the convergence between banking and payment platforms.

Mobile-bank usage has, however, been found to be limited by factors such as cost, trust and awareness among low-income users who continue to rely mainly on mobile money services, highlighting the need for deeper financial literacy and simpler digital products.

Formal financial inclusion reached 84.8 percent of adults in 2024, marginally higher than 83.7 percent three years earlier, underlining the role of digital channels in maintaining access as banks push more services onto mobile platforms and as smartphones become nearly ubiquitous.

The CBK has, over the years, encouraged digital innovation in the sector, noting that mobile banking has improved service reach and efficiency while reducing cash handling and branch congestion for both lenders and customers, an evolution that continues to redefine banking models.

The growing dependence on phones has also allowed banks to streamline operations, expand reach and reduce transaction costs, entrenching mobile as a key driver of Kenya’s banking model and a pillar of the broader digital economy that continues to shape how financial services are delivered.

October in Kenya is awash in pink. Companies sponsor walks, social media lights up with survivor stories, and “awareness” becomes the buzzword. But sitting across the table from women in my clinic, I see a slightly different reality. They’re not just grappling with cancer, sometimes they’re being rushed through life-changing decisions without adequate support and context.

Let’s be honest: we’ve mastered the marketing of breast cancer awareness, but we’re stumbling at the actual care. According to GLOBOCAN 2022, approximately 7,243 new breast cancer cases are diagnosed in Kenya annually. This comprises 16 percent of all new cancers diagnosed.

Yet, for all our pink ribbons and awareness campaigns, access to comprehensive care and surgical options remains very limited.

Time and again, women will share with me how they were given just days to make massive decisions about their bodies. Remove part, or all of their breasts? Immediate reconstruction or wait? Implants or using their own tissue? These aren’t just medical choices; they touch the core of a woman’s identity, her sense of self, her intimate relationships.

I’ve also held hands with countless women who broke down not because of their diagnosis, but because they felt pressured to make snap decisions without fully understanding their options. I’ve watched them choose mastectomies when they didn’t need to, simply because no one took the time to explain alternatives.

Some of my patients only learned about reconstruction possibilities after their surgery.

Here’s where the system gets it wrong: breast cancer surgery is classified as urgent, not emergent. International guidelines recommend initial treatments or surgery within 4-6 weeks of diagnosis. This window exists for good reason. It’s not just about emotional readiness.

A breast cancer diagnosis usually prompts additional tests and imaging that need to be performed and a multidisciplinary team discussion that is needed to develop a personalised treatment plan.

Once surgery is deemed to be the initial option, additional time might be needed to control for other conditions that the patient might have. This may involve correcting raised blood pressure, stopping blood thinners safely, controlling diabetes to ensure the best possible surgical outcomes and minimise surgical complications.

Breast cancer surgery is elective, meaning it is planned. We can, and should therefore, take time to get it right. However, women have been scheduled for theatre within 48 hours of hearing they have cancer. The shock hasn’t settled. They haven’t processed what’s happening. They’re making permanent decisions about their bodies while still in crisis mode.

The irony? This rushed approach often creates more problems than it solves. I’ve counselled women experiencing severe psychological fallout after surgery because they didn’t have time to fully process their decision-making.

What’s missing from the conversation? Here’s something you might not see or appreciate in pink ribbon campaigns: breast cancer isn’t one disease. Each type is unique, requiring different approaches and treatments – just as Panadol and Brufen both treat pain but work completely differently.

Every case deserves review by a full team of specialists before any surgery or therapy happens. This isn’t fancy extra care but basic best practice.

Women should know all their choices: Breast-conserving surgery can be just as effective as full removal, reconstruction can happen during the initial surgery or later, there are techniques to save skin and nipples, and various reconstruction options exist using their own tissue or implants. These aren’t merely cosmetic details, as they may help to enhance long-term wellbeing and body image perception post-surgery.

The real scandal isn’t really about awareness, but more about access. Sometimes medical factors limit some surgical options or make them unsafe. However, many times, the real issue is the patient’s ability to pay and insurance coverage. Unfortunately, breast reconstruction is often considered cosmetic, and patients frequently have to pay out of pocket to cover the costs.

In my practice, we do recognize that women need time to process. They may need repeat conversations, psychological support, the need to involve their families and additional information in order to arrive at a shared decision.

If we’re serious about improving breast cancer care, we need to adopt the following measures: Mandatory multidisciplinary review for every breast cancer case, protected time for decision-making optimizing the recommended window period to ensure the patient is prepared physically and psychologically, reconstruction as an essential part of the holistic management of breast cancer surgery and care and lastly, encourage shared decision making between multidisciplinary teams and patients.

This October, let’s move beyond pink ribbons. Let’s push for real change in how we treat women facing breast cancer and demand healthcare that respects their dignity and their right to make informed choices.

Because while surgery might take hours, the long-term decisions that shape a woman’s future should not be rushed.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming the insurance industry by accelerating claims processing, reducing costs, improving accuracy, and enhancing customer experiences through automation, fraud detection, and data analysis.

This streamlining of workflows can help address deep-rooted skepticism toward insurers, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, where insurance uptake remains modest at 2-3 percent, far below the global average of 7 percent.

Globally, insurers are adopting AI for claims adjudication, fraud detection, and customer communication. However, in much of Africa, insurers remain tied to manual, paper-based systems. AI adoption faces infrastructural, regulatory, and cultural barriers despite gains in mobile penetration and digital innovation. Legacy systems, weak governance, and traditional perceptions of technology continue to slow progress. Outdated infrastructure is a key obstacle, with many insurers still storing records in file cabinets rather than in the cloud, making it difficult to produce the structured, high-quality historical data that AI models require.

In countries like Zambia and Uganda, insurers struggle with fragmented customer information stored across paper files, Excel sheets, and incompatible software. Without centralised, digitised claims data, automation remains out of reach.

Cloud computing, which is essential for scalable AI, remains underutilised, especially in rural areas where slow or unreliable internet hampers real-time AI processing and remote claims assessment. This digital divide limits access to modern insurance services for the very populations that could benefit most.

Even where infrastructure exists, regulatory ambiguity is a major hurdle. Most African countries lack data protection laws aligned with global standards such as the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), exposing insurers to compliance risks around privacy, consent, and cross-border data sharing.

AI introduces further complications as it can infer sensitive personal information, perpetuate biases, and facilitate intrusive monitoring through tools like telematics and facial recognition.

In Kenya, the Data Protection Act 2019 provides a solid legal base, but uneven enforcement creates uncertainty. Without clear rules on auditing AI-driven decisions, such as claim denials, insurers risk legal disputes and reputational harm.

The absence of AI-specific legislation limits oversight by bodies such as the Insurance Regulatory Authority (IRA), causing insurers to proceed cautiously.

Cultural resistance adds another layer of difficulty, where insurance employees fear that AI will displace jobs, particularly in claims assessment, underwriting, and customer service. Despite evidence that AI is more likely to complement rather than replace human roles, this fear fuels resistance to digital transformation.

Financial barriers also loom large, as implementing AI-driven claims systems requires substantial investment in software, hardware, training, and cybersecurity. For small and medium-sized underwriters operating on thin margins in competitive markets, the return on investment is uncertain.

Additionally, many African insurers lack in-house expertise to manage complex AI systems, forcing them to rely on external vendors. This reliance raises concerns about vendor lock-in, accountability, and long-term sustainability, especially in the absence of a strong local InsureTech ecosystem.

On the consumer side, low trust remains a major challenge to insurance penetration. Many, especially older clients prefer face-to-face engagement and the reassurance of dealing with a human representative. In Ghana and Tanzania, customers have complained about automated claim follow-up responses, insisting on speaking to a ‘real person.’ Mistrust of algorithmic decision-making is especially high in emotionally sensitive cases such as health or funeral claims. As a result, AI adoption in customer-facing roles is slow.

That said, AI can bring significant benefits to consumers. It can analyze policy documents, align claims with coverage terms, anticipate potential objections from insurers, and ensure that submissions are complete and well-structured. This reduces back-and-forth communication, accelerates claim resolution, and boosts operational efficiency without sacrificing accuracy.

However, even the most advanced AI solutions can fail if end-users are not ready to adopt them. Digital literacy remains low in many parts of the region, particularly among rural and older populations.

Many lack access to smartphones or reliable internet, making full-scale digital claims processes difficult to implement. In Nigeria, for example, insurers that introduced mobile apps for claim reporting saw poor adoption among low-income clients, who preferred SMS or in-person visits.

This reality underscores the need to balance innovation with inclusivity. Without careful planning, AI could widen the gap between well-served urban customers and underserved rural populations.

Unlocking AI’s potential in claims management will require a multi-pronged strategy. First, insurers must digitize core systems to create centralized, high-quality data repositories. Governments need to develop and enforce AI-specific regulations that protect consumers while enabling innovation. Industry players should invest in capacity-building programs for AI, machine learning, and digital ethics across the insurance value chain.

Transparency and fairness must be central to AI deployment, while insurers should ensure algorithmic decisions are explainable and unbiased. Similarly, collaboration with local InsureTech firms can foster homegrown, scalable solutions tailored to African market realities.

The bottom line is, technology is no longer optional for the insurance industry, rather an essential driver for insurers, policyholders, and every link in the insurance value chain.

The writer is the Associate General Manager – Minet Risk Solutions, Claims, at Minet Kenyam