OPINION: Why Kenya needs better policy coordination for energy crops

By Purity Ndereba and Ally Jamah

A well-developed biofuels sector in Kenya could create green jobs, raise rural incomes, reduce pressure on forests and expand access to cleaner cooking fuels. Energy crops such as cassava, sugarcane and sweet sorghum could supply part of the feedstock needed for locally produced bioethanol, alongside agricultural residues and other sources of bioenergy.

A recent review of the policy and regulatory environment for energy crops in Kenya found that the country has made significant progress in putting in place policies and regulations to support the sector. The next step is to improve coordination and implementation across relevant institutions.

The review was conducted by Practical Action, Gamos East Africa and the Clean Cooking Association of Kenya, in partnership with the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum, as part of a UK PACT-funded initiative to strengthen clean cooking supply chains.

Policies affecting the biofuels sector cut across energy, agriculture, environment and forestry, and land at both national and county levels. There is an opportunity to strengthen joint planning and implementation across these institutions.

Kenya already has a strong policy foundation on the energy side. The Bioenergy Strategy 2020–2027 and its Action Plan provide direction for developing a modern bioenergy sector, although there is scope to clarify the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development's role in energy-crop development. The Kenya National Cooking Transition Strategy 2024–2028 gives bioethanol an important place in the country's clean cooking plans, while the Energy (Biofuels) Regulations 2025 set rules for the biofuels value chain. The National Energy Policy 2025–2034 also recognises bioethanol and the use of agricultural waste for energy.

Energy crops are less explicitly addressed in agricultural policy than in energy policy. The Agricultural Policy 2021 promotes diversification, commercialisation, research and value addition, while the Agriculture Sector Transformation and Growth Strategy 2019–2029 seeks to increase farmer incomes and strengthen agricultural value chains. However, energy crops are not clearly prioritised in either framework. Apart from sugarcane, crops such as cassava and sweet sorghum are still largely treated as food-security crops rather than potential industrial feedstocks for an emerging energy market.

Farmers supplying a new energy-crop market may require better planting material, specialised extension services, irrigation, research and stronger producer organisations. The review found limited extension capacity specifically for energy crops, including gaps in specialised knowledge on integrating them into existing farming systems. It also identified a wider research-to-policy gap, with findings on the viability of bioenergy feedstocks not consistently informing policy decisions.

Among its recommendations is the classification of cassava, sugarcane and sweet sorghum as scheduled industrial crops under the Agriculture and Food Authority, giving them a clearer place in agricultural research, production, processing and market development.

The Ministry of Energy and Petroleum leads bioenergy policy and regulation, while the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development oversees the farming systems that would produce much of the feedstock. Environment, forestry, land and water institutions also have responsibilities that become important as cultivation expands. Counties have an equally important role because agriculture is devolved and many of the decisions affecting extension services, local infrastructure and agricultural investment are made at county level.

Existing coordination arrangements within the national and county governments should be strengthened so that agriculture and the wider bioenergy supply chain receive greater attention alongside energy and clean cooking. Better coordination would need to happen around actual value chains, not only through meetings between institutions.

Consider a cassava-to-ethanol value chain. Energy agencies need to understand expected demand for fuel and the processing capacity required to meet it. Agriculture departments need information on suitable varieties, production costs, farmer organisation and the extension support needed to produce enough feedstock. Counties may need to address roads, electricity and other infrastructure. Land and environmental institutions need to consider what happens if cultivation expands and begins competing with food production, water or existing livelihoods.

The review found uneven recognition of energy crops in the five counties it examined. Kilifi identifies cassava and Kisumu sugarcane, but largely through agriculture and food security rather than as part of energy value chains. Energy-crop cultivation was not identified as a priority in the 2023–2027 County Integrated Development Plans of Nairobi, Nakuru and Kajiado. This does not mean that every county should become a major producer. It points instead to the need for counties to identify the role that makes sense locally, whether in crop production, processing, infrastructure, distribution or markets.

Commercial viability also depends on the wider business environment. The review identified concerns about limited incentives and the cost of meeting multiple regulatory requirements. Regulation is necessary for safety, quality and environmental protection. The cumulative cost of taxes, licensing and other compliance requirements therefore warrants closer examination to establish whether it is constraining investment by compliant local producers.

The current Bioenergy Strategy is approaching the end of its implementation period. The evidence now available from policy reviews, producer assessments and emerging commercial models provides an opportunity to examine how the next phase of bioenergy policy can deal more clearly with energy crops. Its recommendations include a clearer role for agriculture in feedstock development, stronger links between national and county planning, better land-use safeguards and closer coordination on research, extension, infrastructure and investment.

Kenya already has much of the policy foundation for developing biofuels. The priority now is to build on that progress through closer coordination across energy, agriculture, environment and forestry, land and county development, so that the policy foundation can translate into viable sector. 

Purity Ndereba and Ally Jamah work for Practical Action in Kenya. Email: purity.ndereba@practicalaction.or.ke