Category: Business Daily

Across Kenya, many SMEs face the same dilemma: grow quickly and risk losing control, or grow cautiously and miss opportunities. Yet for many businesses, the real obstacle to growth is not a lack of capital but a lack of capability.

For years, the debate around SMEs has centred on access to finance. However, many entrepreneurs miss growth opportunities because they lack the systems needed to manage expansion and demonstrate readiness. Poor record-keeping, weak governance, and limited reporting often prevent businesses from securing contracts, attracting investors, or accessing credit.

The most successful SMEs invest in systems not simply because banks demand them, but because strong systems provide visibility and control. Business owners who understand their costs, customers and cash flow make better decisions and grow more sustainably. In turn, they become more attractive to lenders.

As Kenya’s regulatory environment increasingly emphasises transparency, governance and risk management, capacity-building has become essential. Supporting SMEs to strengthen these areas is no longer a goodwill initiative; it is a strategic investment in a more resilient economy.

Policymakers should treat SME capability-building as essential infrastructure, alongside roads and power.

Incentives such as matching grants, tax relief and risk-sharing mechanisms can encourage greater investment in business development programmes. The returns are significant: faster business growth, stronger tax revenues and a more resilient financial sector.

Without strong systems, growth can become overwhelming. Sales may rise, but so do inefficiencies. Financial records fall behind, profitability becomes unclear and lenders lose confidence in the business. By contrast, better governance and operational discipline help SMEs deploy capital effectively and generate reliable data for future borrowing.

The benefits extend beyond individual enterprises. More finance-ready SMEs can access working capital, adopt technology, create jobs and expand into new markets. Stronger businesses create stronger lending portfolios, generating a virtuous cycle of growth and reinvestment.

Kenya’s economy runs on the resilience of SME owners. Many are held back not by a lack of ambition, but by invisible barriers: spreadsheets instead of systems, guesswork instead of data and uncertainty instead of evidence.

The businesses that will shape Kenya’s next decade already exist. With the right systems, skills and support, they can unlock their full potential-and when they do, the entire economy benefits.

Every year, at Pwani Oil, we participate in a coastal clean-up along the Indian Ocean shoreline in Kilifi. In just about three kilometres of beach, we routinely collect more than a tonne of non-biodegradable waste.

But what is perhaps most striking is the sheer variety of what we find. Flip flops, water bottles, cigarette butts, food wrappers, toys, phone chargers, fishing lines, broken household items and even discarded electronics all wash ashore. Unfortunately, the reality is that it just won’t stop; we clean this year and next year we return to find another tonne waiting for us.

It is difficult not to feel frustrated during these exercises. Every item we pick up tells the story of someone who purchased a product, used it briefly and then abandoned it without thought for where it would eventually end up. This makes the ocean effectively a dumping ground for habits we refuse to confront on land.

This personal frustration soon gives way to a much larger reality. What we often see on the beach is only a fragment of a far deeper ecological and economic crisis unfolding in plain sight. Scientists estimate that around eight million metric tons of plastic waste enter the oceans every year, while studies suggest that nearly 90 percent of seabirds have ingested plastic in some form.

Marine life across the food chain is paying the price for human convenience as sea turtles mistake floating plastic bags for jellyfish and fish consume microplastics that ultimately make their way back into human diets.

Coral reefs, already under pressure from warming oceans, are increasingly also suffocated by pollution. For Kenya, a country whose coastline supports tourism and fishing livelihoods, this challenge carries serious national implications.

The problem, however, is not unique to the coast. One only needs to look at the state of urban drainage systems after heavy rains in Nairobi to see how deeply embedded poor waste disposal habits have become.

Plastic bottles clog waterways, food packaging blocks drainage channels and illegal dumping sites emerge almost overnight. Flooding in many urban areas, initially viewed purely as a consequence of weather patterns, is now increasingly linked to human negligence.

Seen in this urban context, the same patterns that choke coastal ecosystems are clearly echoed inland, pointing to a wider behavioural and systemic issue. It is within this broader reality that Kenya has, to its credit, previously shown leadership in environmental policy.

The country’s 2017 ban on single-use plastic carrier bags remains one of the boldest such decisions globally.

Initially, many predicted public resistance, but, instead, citizens adapted remarkably quickly. Today, it is difficult to imagine our supermarkets and retail spaces reverting to the era of thin plastic carrier bags.

That success demonstrates that behavioural change is possible when policy and public education align around a common goal.

At the same time, the next phase of the waste challenge is far more complex because today’s pollution crisis involves a wide ecosystem of consumption habits and waste management gaps, which no single policy or clean-up exercise will solve. I say this from my perspective as a leader in a company that relies significantly on plastic packaging.

Businesses cannot continue to manufacture products while leaving the burden of waste management solely to consumers or government.

The scale of the problem demands honesty about the role citizens play. Building a cleaner country will remain impossible if public spaces continue to be treated as dumping grounds. The habit of throwing waste from car windows, leaving litter after public gatherings or dumping refuse into rivers reflects a culture problem. We all must now agree that environmental stewardship cannot be outsourced.

Importantly, we must all strive at reducing the amount of waste that requires collecting. That means investing more seriously in waste segregation at household level, improving recycling infrastructure, enforcing anti-dumping regulations consistently and encouraging innovation around circular economies.

Thankfully, across Kenya, encouraging examples are now emerging, including community-based recycling initiatives in places like Mombasa, Nakuru and Kisumu that are demonstrating how waste can become an economic resource. Informal waste collectors, often overlooked in public discourse, are helping recover thousands of tonnes of recyclable material every year while creating livelihoods for themselves and others.

Elsewhere, Start-ups converting plastic waste into construction materials and paving blocks are proving that environmental sustainability and economic opportunity can coexist. Counties are also strengthening their waste collection systems, but citizens are equally called upon to support those systems by using them responsibly.

Meanwhile, schools, community organisations and even faith institutions have a role to play in shaping attitudes from an early age. Children who grow up understanding the connection between waste and environmental protection are far more likely to become responsible citizens and consumers.

Ultimately, the conversation around waste management is about the kind of society Kenya hopes to become in the decades ahead. The progress already being made across communities shows that solutions are within reach but sustaining that progress will require a shared understanding that waste is not someone else’s problem.

The choices made in homes, schools, markets, roads, offices and beaches every day will determine whether Kenya becomes cleaner and all-round resilient.

Kenya’s strengthened macroeconomic buffers, including a narrower current account deficit and sizable official reserves, have helped the country absorb shocks from the US-Israel war on Iran, sustaining its assessment of being at a lower risk of debt default.

Sovereign credit ratings agency Moody’s notes that its recent upgrade of Kenya as a long-term foreign currency sovereign credit rating from ‘Caa1’ to ‘B3’ in January has largely held firm through the Middle East crisis which has resulted in a sharp spike in fuel prices.

Kenya’s usable foreign currency reserves have come under pressure but have largely held above five months of import cover, standing at Sh1.7 trillion ($13.14 billion) as per the latest CBK data while the current account deficit has expanded moderately to 2.6 percent of GDP through 12 months to April 2026 from 1.7 percent at the same time last year.

The Kenya shilling has held steady, trading within a narrow-bound range of 129 to 130 units against the US dollar while the country’s Eurobond yields remain in single digits, mirroring resilience against external shocks.

‘Kenya entered the shock from a position of strength with the current account having narrowed significantly. It has also helped to have a stable exchange rate leading to the shock as this has not been a time when the currency is weakening or when the central bank is having difficulties in terms of keeping inflation under control,’ said David Rogovic, Vice President and Senior Credit Officer at Moody’s Ratings.

‘We have, however, seen a modest deterioration in the growth outlook which is not uncommon for countries that are commodity importers and have also seen inflation pick up again.’

Growth for Kenya is expected to moderate in 2026 on the backdrop of the Middle East crisis with the CBK revising its growth projection to 4.9 percent from 5.3 percent while the National Treasury sees growth at a flat five percent.

The slower-than-expected growth outlook comes amid a weaker revenue projection which has deteriorated further with the Iran war.

The combination of weaker revenue and higher spending requirements is expected to see the National Treasury running a wider fiscal deficit at 6.4 percent of GDP in the current 2025/26 fiscal year from the prior year’s 6.1 percent as the consolidation path deviates from previous estimates of sub-five percent.

The wider deficit will see Kenya increasingly turn to borrowing to plug the hole where it holds a bias for the domestic credit markets.

Net domestic financing is expected to cover Sh995.7 billion of the Sh1.11 trillion borrowing requirement for the next fiscal year starting July 1 while the projection for net foreign financing has been set at Sh116.2 billion.

Despite its preference for domestic credit markets, Kenya has a variety of funding options available including tapping the international capital markets, Samurai bonds and funding from multilateral institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Kenya’s long awaited Sh97 billion ($750 million) loan from the World Bank’s Development Policy Operations (DPO) is for instance set to be disbursed this Friday.

The country at the same time remains in discussions with the IMF over a new funded programme.

Moody’s has underlined the importance of Kenya maintaining access to international capital markets even as it finds multiple funding sources.

The National Treasury has mainly leveraged the external capital markets to refinance near-term maturities and conducted two Eurobond buybacks in 2025, helping it earn a ratings bump from Moody’s in January.

‘This is a country that would likely need to maintain market access. The IMF has in the past been an important source, but Kenya is close to reaching its limit in terms of its quota,’ added Mr Rogovic.

‘Whether Kenya accesses the markets now, I would say it’s a tradeoff. It’s a balance between the cost of funding in the market, the level of reserves in place and access to other sources of financing.’

‘It is better to have enough ideas for some of them to be wrong, than to be always right by having no ideas at all’ –Edward de Bono.

Do market capture innovation ideas require moving out of one’s comfort zone? Are you able to take the risk of looking stupid? Is it possible to see what everyone sees, but grasp a profitable insight that others missed? What does ‘zero to one’ mean? Why do we keep doing the same thing, hoping for a different result? Is perfect competition a good thing?2

Is ‘copy’ the standard procedure? What new innovative product have insurance companies or banks introduced in the last three years? What happens is a lot ‘me too’ copying in, for instance, digital products for the youth market, AI assisted customer service, or taking on a warm and cuddly approach.

Strangely, the more enterprises compete, the more they look the same – in an environment of almost perfect competition. This is despite the fact that the idea of differentiation is drilled into every managers’ business school training.

Clayton Christensen’s landmark ‘innovator’s dilemma’ thinking pointed out that corporates are not the source of disruptive innovations. Paradoxical reason for this is that managers are taught to maximise profits in the short-term, and control the exposure to risks. By following accepted good management practice, major corporations that have skills and resources miss opportunities right under their noses.

Trace the history of disruptive innovations like, for instance, the personal computer, or even AI chips and you will see that they were developed by the misfits, the upstarts on the fringe that no one was paying any attention to. In the beginning these oddballs’ products may have served a tiny [often unprofitable] niche market, and been a touch unreliable. But gradually, lean and hungry, they sort out the bugs and move up the value chain displacing the well endowed market leader incumbents.

Questions to ask

Time to assess how innovative your organisation really is — not what it says in the strategy documents, but what it actually does. These are just some of the questions that may provoke a mindset shift to stress genuine innovation.

What percentage of revenue comes from products, services, or business models introduced in the last three years? How often does leadership discuss innovation in management meetings? What major assumptions about the business have been challenged in the last 12 months? Do staff feel safe proposing unconventional ideas?

How are new ideas captured and evaluated? How frequently does the organisation engage customers to identify unmet needs? What customer problems are currently being solved that competitors are ignoring? Is there a formal process for ‘test and learn’ experiments moving ideas from concept to implementation? How many new ideas are generated, tested, and implemented annually?

When it comes to innovation, helps to consider the original ideas of ever controversial Peter Thiel, one of the first investors in Facebook, and co founder of Palantir with a market capitalisation of $ 279 billion.

‘Listen to anyone with an original idea, no matter how absurd it may sound at first. If you put fences around people, you get sheep,’ said William McKnight, the original force behind innovator 3M.

Escaping daily survival mode

Peter Thiel views perfect competition not as an ideal economic state, but as a destructive force that annihilates profits.

“Competition is for losers” is his famous phrase — meaning that if businesses are locked in a struggle for survival, no one is actually making money.

In his book Zero to One, he outlines his core ideas. In a world of perfect competition, all economic profits are eventually competed away as identical firms undercut each other. Companies are forced to focus solely on daily survival and margins, leaving no room for long-term innovation.

An ‘illegal, predatory entity’ is how we normally think of a monopoly. But Thiel defines a monopoly differently as — a company that is so uniquely differentiated – innovative- that it owns its market.

In Thiel’s view, true monopolies create so much value that they no longer have to compete, allowing them to set their own prices and reinvest in future innovations. Prime example would be Google, or M-Pesa – that the owners would not want to be considered a monopoly in the conventional sense.

Copycat markets are everywhere. Restaurants and hotels are the prime examples of business trapped in perfect competition. Hundreds of similar establishments battle for localised market share on razor-thin margins, often resorting to gimmicks just to stand out.

Thiel’s view is that entrepreneurs should aim for value creation by building proprietary technologies and leverage advantages – creating a disruptive innovation, leveraging network effects, scale, or brand — that make competition irrelevant, rather than mindlessly fighting incumbents in crowded, highly competitive markets.

Business occurs in cycles of success and [often hidden] failure, and the in-between shades of gray. As Woody Allen said “If you’re not failing every now and again, it’s a sign you’re not doing anything very innovative.”

The Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) has integrated its electronic Tax Invoice Management System (eTIMS) with payments on ride-hailing platform Little Cab, in a broader push to enable Kenyans to claim digital taxi fares as tax-deductible expenses, while tightening tax compliance in the fast-growing sector.

The taxman’s integration of eTIMS with Little Cab’s receipt system will enable businesses and other taxpayers to support claims for business travel expenses with KRA-compliant tax invoices, while helping drivers meet their tax obligations.

Little Cab is the first ride-hailing platform to complete the integration, but KRA says other operators are also in the process of joining the system as it seeks to expand tax compliance among digital taxi drivers and allow business travel expenses to be supported by eTIMS invoices.

‘Businesses now are required to support their expenses with eTIMS invoices, so this is very relevant for purposes of VAT and income tax filing,’ said Caroline Wacuka, integrity assurance officer in the eTIMS operations department at KRA.

‘We have other players in the process of integrating, including some in this space of ride-hailing. By integrating, these businesses will help people they are doing business with to be compliant by supporting their business expenses with compliant invoices.’

Currently, many ride-hailing firms generate automatic receipts for users after a trip is completed, but these receipts are not accepted by KRA as supporting documentation for tax-deductible business expenses because they are not generated through eTIMS.

The integration follows changes introduced under the Finance Act 2025, which require taxpayers to support deductible business expenses with eTIMS-generated tax invoices, a move aimed at improving tax compliance and sealing revenue leakages.

Once an eTIMS invoice is generated, the transaction is captured within KRA’s tax system, helping account for VAT where applicable while also improving visibility of drivers’ income for income tax compliance. The integration is significant for Little Cab because of its strong focus on corporate business-to-business (B2B) clients.

Before the integration, its corporate customers could not use Little Cab receipts to support claims for deductible business travel expenses, potentially making the platform less attractive than alternatives offering KRA-compliant invoices.

Beyond corporates, self-employed professionals, freelancers and contractors who file their own income tax returns also require eTIMS invoices to support eligible business expenses incurred in the course of earning their income.

The taxman has increasingly turned its attention to the digital economy in recent months, with platforms operating in sectors such as ride-hailing, short-term accommodation and digital content creation increasingly required to strengthen tax compliance measures, including collecting users’ KRA PIN details where required.

The High Court has dismissed a petition seeking an immediate ban on talc-based Johnson and Johnson baby powder, ruling that claims the product causes cancer were not supported by sufficient evidence, and that existing consumer protection mechanisms had not been exhausted.

The court found that the petitioner, Frederick Bikeri, failed to prove that Johnson and Johnson baby powder sold in Kenya was carcinogenic or posed a demonstrable threat to consumers.

The judge also held that the dispute should first have been pursued through statutory consumer protection and product standards processes before being lodged as a constitutional case.

“The petitioner has failed to establish, to the required standard of proof, that the talc-based Johnson and Johnson baby powder sold in Kenya is carcinogenic,” the court said in the judgment.

The multinational has paid billions of dollars to claimants who sued it in the United States where the company is still fighting other cases brought by litigants alleging that its products -primarily Johnson’s Baby Powder- causes cancer.

The consumer goods maker paid $2.5 billion to one group of claimants in June 2021.

“Notwithstanding the company’s confidence in the safety of its talc products, in certain circumstances the company has settled cases,” Johnson and Johnson said in its latest annual report.

Bikeri had sued Johnson and Johnson entities, the Kenya Bureau of Standards (KEBS), the Public Health Standards Board and the Health ministry. He sought orders to stop the manufacture, importation, sale and distribution of the product in Kenya.

He also wanted all existing stocks withdrawn from the market and an order compelling regulators to undertake comprehensive testing and research into the product’s safety.

The petition was anchored on a July 2024 assessment by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which classified talc as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

The petitioner argued that the continued sale of talc-based baby powder violated constitutional rights to life, health, information and consumer protection.

He further relied on litigation in the United States linking Johnson and Johnson talc products to ovarian cancer, as well as restrictions and recalls implemented in countries including Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka and the Republic of Congo.

The petitioner told the court that despite Johnson and Johnson’s global announcement in 2022 that it would discontinue talc-based baby powder, the product remained available in Kenya.

Johnson and Johnson opposed the case, arguing that no credible evidence had been presented to show products sold in Kenya were contaminated with asbestos or were carcinogenic.

The company maintained that its decision to phase out talc-based baby powder was a commercial decision linked to a transition to cornstarch products and not driven by safety concerns.

KEBS also opposed the petition, saying it had already taken regulatory action after a 2019 alert issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration concerning a specific batch found to contain traces of asbestos.

According to KEBS, investigations established that the affected batch, identified as 22318RB, had never been imported into Kenya.

The standards agency said it subsequently revised regional standards to require mandatory asbestos testing for baby powder imports and subjected such products to stricter inspection under the Pre-Export Verification of Conformity programme.

The court agreed that KEBS had acted within its mandate and taken reasonable measures to address consumer safety concerns.

“The evidence demonstrates that it took timely and proportionate regulatory action,” the court said.

It found that the petitioner had not lodged complaints through mechanisms established under the Consumer Protection Act and Standards Act before filing the constitutional petition.

The court said those laws already provide frameworks for consumer complaints, product testing, regulatory enforcement and dispute resolution.

Further, the court noted that no evidence had been presented showing cancer cases in Kenya linked to Johnson and Johnson baby powder or proving contamination of products available in the local market.

“The claims remain speculative and unsubstantiated,” he said, dismissing the petition in its entirety.

The recent Ebola outbreaks in Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) have once again underscored the persistent threat that emerging infectious diseases pose to East Africa.

As of 29 May 2026, the World Health Organization (WHO) had reported more than 900 suspected Ebola cases and over 220 unconfirmed deaths in the DRC, alongside nine confirmed cases and one death in neighbouring Uganda linked to cross-border transmission.

The disease is caused by the Bundibugyo strain of Ebola, for which no licensed vaccine currently exists, and the outbreak has triggered heightened surveillance and preparedness measures across the region.

Against this backdrop, reports that the United States is supporting construction of a state-of-the-art infectious disease isolation facility in Kenya have been welcomed with mixed feelings.

Although the facility is widely viewed as an important investment in Kenya’s ability to prevent and respond to infectious disease outbreaks, its development also prompts a broader debate about national sovereignty, the politics of global health security, and the extent to which donor-funded preparedness infrastructure contributes to sustainable health systems strengthening.

As Kenya seeks to enhance its readiness for future outbreaks, it must carefully consider how such investments can advance national health priorities while safeguarding local ownership, long-term resilience, and strategic autonomy.

At first glance, the investment appears both timely and necessary. Kenya is a regional transport and commercial hub, connecting East and Central Africa through extensive air, sea, and land networks. A specialised isolation facility could significantly enhance the country’s capacity to detect, isolate, and manage highly infectious diseases such as Ebola, Marburg, and future pandemic threats.

The public health case is indeed compelling, but from a policy and social framing point of view, the timing is very wrong. The WHO has repeatedly warned that outbreaks of Ebola and other emerging infectious diseases are becoming more frequent due to environmental change, population growth, urbanisation, and increased global mobility.

For Kenya, preparedness and responsive systems are not optional.

The country has experienced repeated public health emergencies, including Covid-19, cholera outbreaks, Rift Valley Fever, and recurring threats of cross-border disease transmission.

Investments in advanced treatment and isolation infrastructure can, therefore, enhance national readiness and potentially position the country as a regional centre of excellence for outbreak response. However, preparedness infrastructure alone cannot be viewed in isolation from broader questions of governance and sovereignty.

Historically, global health security investments have often reflected the interests of both donor and recipient countries. Following the anthrax attacks, SARS, Ebola, and Covid-19, high-income countries increasingly recognised that disease threats emerging elsewhere could rapidly become domestic security concerns.

Consequently, investments in surveillance systems, laboratories, and outbreak response mechanisms must always be prioritised.

There is nothing inherently wrong about mutually beneficial partnerships. Indeed, Kenya has benefited significantly from international cooperation in HIV/Aids, Tuberculosis, Malaria, Immunisation, and recently Pandemic Preparedness due to Covid-19.

However, major investments in infectious disease infrastructure should be accompanied by transparency regarding governance arrangements, ownership, data management, and long-term sustainability.

These concerns are particularly relevant as African countries advocate for greater equity in global health governance.

Experience from previous outbreaks suggests that the first line of defense against Ebola and other pandemics is rarely a sophisticated isolation ward. Rather, it is effective disease surveillance, well-trained health workers, strong laboratory networks, trusted community health systems, and rapid response mechanisms.

Kenya should welcome partnerships that strengthen epidemic preparedness anchored in national priorities and health system resilience rather than narrowly focused on disease-specific infrastructure.

When a prolonged drought wiped out his crops, Kennedy Macharia faced a choice familiar to many farmers in Kenya’s drylands: keep gambling on unreliable rains or find a crop that could survive without them. He chose the latter.

Today, the former construction worker harvests up to 400 kilogrammes of dragon fruit every month from a quarter-acre in Joska, Machakos County, proving that even in one of the region’s driest areas, the right crop can turn adversity into profit.

‘In 2003, land in Joska was cheap because the area was undeveloped. I was working as a casual labourer in the construction industry,’ he recalls. He bought an acre for Sh600,000 and today, the parcel of land hosts a thriving dragon fruit farm.

Thanks to years of investment in agriculture and the area’s rapid growth, the land, located about 1.5 kilometres off Kangundo Road, has appreciated significantly in value. According to Mr Macharia, an acre in the area is now worth about Sh10 million.

‘In fact, finding an acre today is almost impossible. Most real estate developers buy large parcels, subdivide them into 50-by-100-foot plots and resell them for as much as Sh1.3 million each,’ he says.

The founder of Kran Farm, who hails from Kangema in Murang’a County, describes Joska as an arid and semi-arid land area whose economic potential can only be fully realised through real estate development or irrigated agriculture due to chronic water shortages.

‘If one does not invest in real estate, then farming is the other option, although it comes with challenges because the area is dry and rainfall is highly erratic,’ he explains.

Driven by his passion for agriculture, Mr Macharia ventured into farming after fully paying for the land and relocating his family there in 2014. He started small, growing maize, beans and soya beans for both household consumption and sale. He also cultivated various vegetables and kept chickens, goats and rabbits.

However, he relied entirely on rain-fed agriculture, which often proved challenging. Speaking to BDLife, Mr Macharia says some seasons were so dry that crops withered before maturity, forcing him to feed the damaged produce to his goats.

Those challenges eventually led him to one of the most profitable decisions on the farm. During the prolonged drought of 2022, which spilled over into 2023, Mr Macharia began questioning the viability of conventional crops in an area where rainfall had become increasingly unreliable. The situation was so severe, and only hardy plants such as sisal and aloe vera could survive the stress.

‘I realised that crops known to survive in dry areas were the only solution. I had to rethink what I was growing,’ he says.

The farmer embarked on extensive research, seeking crops capable of thriving under harsh climatic conditions while generating attractive returns. His search led him to dragon fruit, a cactus-like crop that has increasingly gained popularity among health-conscious consumers and high-end fruit buyers.

To understand the enterprise better, Mr Macharia visited a dragon fruit farm in Juja. What he saw convinced him he had found the crop he had been looking for.

‘The plants were thriving despite the dry conditions, and I was surprised to learn that a single fruit could fetch close to Sh1,000 depending on its size and quality,’ he says.

Unlike maize and beans, which depend heavily on rainfall and seasonal markets, dragon fruit promised year-round production and higher earnings from a relatively small area.

In 2023, he purchased 40 seedlings at Sh850 each and established his first plot. All the seedlings survived, giving him a rare 100 percent success rate. After about one year, the plants began fruiting, although the first harvest yielded less than 100 kilogrammes.

Encouraged by the results, he started expanding gradually. Today, Mr Macharia has between 700 and 800 dragon fruit plants spread across a quarter-acre parcel. The crop is planted in phases to ensure continuous production throughout the year.

‘Getting to this level has required sacrifice, patience and a lot of effort,’ he says. The farm currently produces between 250 and 300 kilogrammes of dragon fruit every month, with output sometimes rising to 400 kilogrammes during peak periods.

His goal, he says, is to produce larger fruits weighing about 500 grammes each, meaning two fruits make a kilogramme. To achieve this, he relies heavily on organic manure from his goats and chickens.

The venture has transformed what was once a one-man operation into a source of employment. During busy periods, he hires two casual workers to assist with farm activities.

Besides production, Mr Macharia has built a market that extends far beyond Joska. His largest customer base comes through digital platforms including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and YouTube, where his daughter plays a central role in promoting the farm and engaging potential buyers.

‘My Gen Z daughter is heavily involved in digital marketing,’ he says.

She also helps research new production techniques and market trends online, making her an important pillar of the business. Orders flow in from different parts of Nairobi, and Macharia regularly delivers fruits directly to customers in the central business district while also serving local markets.

To ensure sustainability and profitability, he closely monitors production costs, inputs and maintenance requirements: ‘You have to understand the mathematics of agribusiness. If you don’t keep records and monitor your costs, you can easily lose money.”

Record keeping has become one of the biggest lessons he has learnt during his agribusiness journey. Another lesson is the importance of research before investing in any enterprise.

His success with dragon fruit, he says, was only possible because he took time to understand the crop, visit existing farmers and study market demand before planting.

To reduce production costs, he now propagates his own seedlings from mature plants. ‘I carefully select healthy suckers measuring about one foot from plants that are more than one year old.’

Even with the transformation he has done in Joska, water management remains his biggest challenge. To minimise water use, he has adopted raised-bed technology combined with mulching using dry organic matter. The practice helps conserve moisture and suppress weeds. He is also investing in water harvesting systems, including tanks and a dam with a storage capacity of about 50,000 litres.

‘Water shortage was the biggest problem when I started and it is still the biggest challenge today,’ he says.

Fortunately, dragon fruit has relatively few disease problems. To repel pests naturally, he has planted Mexican marigold between the rows of dragon fruit plants.

The transformation of his farm reflects the rapid growth of Joska itself. The area that was once characterised by dry bushes, sisal plants, hyenas and snakes has evolved into a thriving peri-urban settlement where land values continue to soar.

Mr Macharia believes dragon fruit offers an opportunity for farmers in arid and semi-arid areas to generate income from small parcels of land while making productive use of spaces that would otherwise remain idle.

‘Do not leave your land with empty spaces. Dragon fruit beautifies the farm and at the same time brings value and income,’ he says.

The Environment and Land Court has dismissed a suit by a widow seeking to evict former Kikuyu MP Lewis Nguyai from a disputed family home in Nairobi’s Lower Kabete and recover Sh61.2 million in alleged rent arrears and profits.

In a judgment delivered on June 15, 2026, the court found that Betty Wanjiku Gakuru failed to prove allegations that documents relied on by Mr Nguyai to claim ownership of the property were forged.

Mr Nguyai maintained that he purchased the land from Ms Gakuru’s late husband, George Gakuru, in 1999 for Sh3.2 million.

The widow challenged the validity of the transaction, arguing that signatures attributed to her husband on the sale agreement and an acknowledgement of payment were not genuine.

However, the court noted that she failed to provide expert evidence to support the allegations.

‘In the absence of expert evidence or any other cogent evidence demonstrating forgery, the court is unable to find that the defendant’s documents were forged merely on the basis of the plaintiff’s allegation,’ the court said.

The court emphasised that the burden of proving forgery rested squarely on the plaintiff and that she failed to discharge it.

Signature test

The widow claimed that Mr Nguyai unlawfully entered the property on or about January 1, 2005, and took possession without her consent, authority or any lawful justification.

She argued that he remained on the land for years without paying rent and without recognising her ownership rights.

Ms Gakuru further accused the former MP of erecting and maintaining structures on the property without permission, contending that his continued occupation amounted to a persistent violation of her proprietary rights.

She told the court that she reported the matter to Kikuyu and Spring Valley police stations in 2008 in an effort to have Mr Nguyai removed from the land.

Despite police intervention, the attempts to evict him were unsuccessful and he continued occupying the property.

Ms Gakuru also accused Mr Nguyai of using unscrupulous means to avoid liability while remaining in possession of the land.

Ownership claim

Mr Nguyai admitted occupying the property but denied claims that his occupation was unlawful.

He testified that he had occupied the land since 2001 and that his possession had been open, continuous and uninterrupted.

The former MP rejected claims that he owed rent, insisting that no landlord-tenant relationship had ever existed between him and the widow.

Instead, he maintained that the property was lawfully sold to him by Mr Gakuru under a sale agreement dated November 24, 1999, for a purchase price of Sh3.2 million.

Mr Nguyai told the court that he fully paid the agreed amount and that the deceased acknowledged receipt of the money and undertook to facilitate the transfer of the property.

He said the transfer process was never completed because of circumstances affecting the deceased’s advocates, despite him having already taken possession of the land.

He further testified that he had extensively developed the property and occupied it with his family for more than 12 years without interruption.

In the alternative, Mr Nguyai argued that even if the sale transaction was found to be invalid, he had acquired ownership through adverse possession, having remained in open, exclusive, continuous and uninterrupted occupation of the property for more than 12 years.

He also argued that Ms Gakuru had never been in possession of the land and that her claim was, in any event, time-barred.

Court findings

The court noted that Mr Nguyai had produced extensive documentary evidence to support his case, including banking records, escrow account documents and a written acknowledgement allegedly signed by the deceased confirming receipt of the purchase price.

‘Although the plaintiff challenged the validity of the transaction, she did not tender evidence capable of dislodging the documentary trail produced by the defendant regarding payment,’ the court said.

As a result, the court ordered Ms Gakuru to transfer the property to Mr Nguyai within 60 days of the judgment.

Should she fail to do so, the Deputy Registrar will execute all documents necessary to complete the transfer on her behalf, effectively bringing the long-running dispute to an end.

The High Court has dismissed an application by Bonfire Adventures and Events Ltd co-director Sarah Njoki Nyaga seeking to stop her estranged husband and fellow co-founder Simon Waithaka Kabu from accessing or using 48 mobile phone lines registered with Safaricom and used in the tour firm’s operations.

The ruling marks the latest chapter in a bitter dispute between the estranged couple, who are also embroiled in divorce and matrimonial property proceedings, over ownership and use of the telephone lines.

At the centre of the case is a demand by Mr Kabu for Sh1.86 billion, which he says is owed for the company’s use of the lines that are registered in his personal name.

While Bonfire Adventures and Ms Njoki argued that the lines were registered in his name merely for administrative convenience and that he held them in trust for the company, the court found no evidence to support that claim.

‘As the defendant is the registered subscriber, the plaintiffs have no privity of contract with the telecommunications provider, Safaricom, regarding those lines and without evidence to the contrary, they remain, at least on a prima facie basis, the property of the Defendant,’ the court said.

The judge noted that Ms Njoki had not produced any trust document, board resolution, written agreement or other contemporaneous evidence showing that Mr Kabu agreed to hold the lines on behalf of the company.

The court further observed that a demand letter sent by Mr Kabu’s lawyers on November 3, 2025, acknowledged that the lines had been used by the tour company but did not seek to take them away from the company.

According to the court, the letter sought compensation for their use rather than deactivation.

The court also noted that the disputed numbers account for only 48 of approximately 154 telephone lines used by the company. Of those, 102 lines are registered in the company’s name, while Bonfire Adventures continues to acquire additional lines.

Rejecting claims of corporate sabotage, the court said there was no evidence that Mr Kabu had deactivated any of the numbers.

‘He only issued a demand for payment, which he is legally entitled to do considering the subject lines are registered in his name,’ the court said.

In dismissing the application, the judge found that Ms Njoki and the company had failed to establish a prima facie case.

The dispute arose after Mr Kabu demanded Sh1.86 billion from Bonfire and Ms Njoki, claiming accrued monthly licence fees for the use of the lines. He also sought an additional Sh14.4 million per month for their continued use. Ms Njoki had asked the court to issue temporary orders restraining Mr Kabu from tampering with the lines in the suit.

‘In the end, I find that the plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate a prima facie case with a probability of success as they have admitted the lines are registered in the defendant’s name, produced no trust document, board resolution, or written agreement showing that the lines are registered in the defendant’s name in trust for the company, they have not shown any direct financial contribution toward purchase of the lines themselves and they have not rebutted the statutory presumption that the registered subscriber is the owner,’ the court ruled.

She further sought orders barring him from accessing, copying or using company data and client information linked to the numbers, and compelling him to surrender SIM cards, passwords, login credentials and digital access codes.

She also requested a forensic audit and backup of company telephone records, WhatsApp Business accounts, customer relationship management (CRM) systems, email servers and client databases.

In her court filings, Ms Njoki said she and Mr Kabu are equal shareholders and co-directors of Bonfire Adventures and that the disputed lines had been used in the company’s business for years, some dating back to 2013.

She argued that the numbers were initially registered in Mr Kabu’s name in 2011 to facilitate the start of operations before the company completed formal registration arrangements with Safaricom.

‘However, the said lines have at all times been used for and on behalf of the company and maintained at the company’s expense,’ she said.

Ms Njoki accused Mr Kabu of asserting personal ownership over communication infrastructure that is critical to Bonfire’s operations.

‘The Defendant has unilaterally asserted personal ownership of the said telephone lines and has threatened to licence, block, transfer or otherwise interfere with them absent any Board resolution, contract, or lawful authority. The Defendant’s conduct is an attempt to expropriate communication infrastructure essential to the company’s business,’ she said.

Mr Kabu opposed the application, insisting that ownership of the lines was clear because they are registered in his name.

‘It is clear that in the absence of any right to be vindicated by the Plaintiff, as well as nothing to show any injury, the balance of convenience heavily tilts towards not granting the injunction,’ he argued.

He maintained that he was not seeking to disrupt Bonfire’s operations or gain access to its databases, WhatsApp accounts, CRM systems or client records, but was only seeking compensation for the use of his property.

Mr Kabu also argued that the company was free to acquire its own lines and migrate its systems if it was unwilling to pay for continued use of the disputed numbers.