Devolution at 14: Kenya's County Governments Grapple with Power and Responsibility

When Kenya promulgated its new constitution in August 2010, the creation of 47 county governments was hailed as the most significant governance reform since independence. The shift from a highly centralised state to a devolved system of governance was designed to bring political power, administrative resources, and decision-making authority closer to the people — correcting decades of marginalisation, inequality, and exclusion that had fuelled political instability and ethnic conflict.

Fourteen years later, devolution has fundamentally reshaped Kenya's political landscape. County governments now control approximately 15 percent of national revenue — approximately 370 billion shillings in the 2025-26 fiscal year — and are responsible for the delivery of critical services including healthcare, agriculture, early childhood education, and local infrastructure. The political class has been transformed: 47 governors, 47 deputy governors, and 1,450 county assembly members now wield significant power and patronage networks that rival those of national government.

Yet the devolution experiment remains a work in progress, characterised by notable achievements alongside persistent challenges that threaten to undermine its transformative potential.

The Service Delivery Record

In healthcare, devolution has arguably had its most visible impact. The transfer of health service delivery — including primary healthcare facilities, county hospitals, and community health programmes — to county governments has improved access to healthcare in many areas, particularly in historically marginalised regions.

According to the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, the proportion of births attended by a skilled health provider increased from 62 percent in 2010 to 84 percent in 2025. Immunisation coverage for children under five reached 88 percent, up from 77 percent. These improvements, while attributable to multiple factors, reflect the increased investment in health infrastructure and personnel at the county level.

Counties such as Makueni, Kisumu, and Kwale have been recognised for innovative health programmes. Makueni County's Universal Health Coverage programme, which provides free primary healthcare to all residents, has been cited by the World Health Organization as a model for sub-national health financing. The programme is funded through a combination of county revenue and a 2 percent levy on the county's own-source revenue, and has enrolled approximately 800,000 residents since its launch in 2021.

In agriculture, county governments have taken on a more active role in extension services, input distribution, and market access. In Kakamega County, the government's partnership with the Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organisation has introduced improved dairy farming practices that have increased milk production by 25 percent among participating farmers.

Fiscal Imbalances

The most persistent challenge facing county governments is fiscal. The Commission on Revenue Allocation, which determines the formula for distributing national revenue to counties, has been the subject of intense political negotiation since the first devolved disbursement in 2013. The current formula, adopted in 2023, allocates resources based on five parameters: population (45 percent), equal share (20 percent), poverty level (18 percent), land area (8 percent), and fiscal responsibility (9 percent).

The debate over the formula has been politically explosive. Counties in the marginalised north and north-east, which score highly on poverty and land area parameters, argue that the formula should allocate more weight to need-based factors. Counties in the more developed central and western regions, which have larger populations, argue that population should carry greater weight.

The total county revenue allocation of 370 billion shillings, while substantial, is widely regarded as insufficient to fund the full range of devolved functions. The Commission on Revenue Allocation has recommended that counties receive at least 20 percent of the last audited national revenue — approximately 490 billion shillings — but the National Treasury has resisted, citing competing fiscal demands including debt servicing and national government operations.

Counties' own-source revenue, collected through property taxes, business licences, market fees, and other local levies, has consistently underperformed expectations. In the 2024-25 fiscal year, counties collectively collected approximately 45 billion shillings in own-source revenue, against a target of 72 billion shillings — a collection rate of just 63 percent. The performance gap reflects capacity constraints in revenue administration, political resistance to tax increases, and the informal nature of many local economic activities.

Governance and Accountability

County governance has been plagued by corruption and accountability challenges. The Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission has investigated or prosecuted governors, county executives, and county assembly members in at least 28 of the 47 counties since devolution began. High-profile cases include the prosecution of former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko on corruption charges, the impeachment of Kirinyaga Governor Anne Waiguru on abuse of office allegations, and the arrest of several county procurement officers for fraud.

The Controller of Budget's oversight reports have consistently identified weaknesses in county financial management, including the misuse of conditional grants, the accumulation of pending bills, and the failure to utilise allocated funds within the financial year. In the 2024-25 fiscal year, 14 counties had expenditure rates below 70 percent of their budgets, indicating significant absorption capacity challenges.

Public participation, a cornerstone of the devolution framework, has been unevenly implemented. While counties are required by law to conduct public consultations on budgets, plans, and policies, the quality and inclusiveness of these processes vary widely. Civil society organisations have reported that in some counties, public participation exercises are tokenistic, with limited genuine engagement between citizens and their elected representatives.

Intergovernmental Relations

The relationship between county and national governments has been characterised by both cooperation and conflict. The Intergovernmental Relations Act established a framework for managing relations between the two levels of government, including the establishment of the National and County Government Coordinating Summit and the Intergovernmental Budget and Economic Council.

However, disputes over jurisdiction, resource allocation, and the deployment of national government officers in counties have been frequent. The Senate, which was established under the 2010 constitution to represent county interests at the national level, has been a forum for these disputes but has struggled to assert its authority against the more powerful National Assembly and the executive.

The devolved units' demand for a greater share of national revenue is the most contentious issue in intergovernmental relations. The Commission on Revenue Allocation's formula review process, conducted every five years, has become a politically charged exercise that pits county against county and threatens to derail the broader devolution agenda.

The Political Dynamics

Devolution has created a new class of political leaders — governors — who are increasingly positioning themselves as power brokers in national politics. The gubernatorial seat, which has attracted aspirants from across the political spectrum, has become the most contested elective position after the presidency. In the 2022 general elections, several high-profile national politicians, including former cabinet secretaries and senators, ran for governor, reflecting the office's growing prestige and influence.

The relationship between governors and county assemblies has also evolved. While the assemblies were intended to serve as checks on gubernatorial power, in practice, the balance of power has often tilted in favour of the executive, with county assemblies exercising limited independent oversight. The impeachment process, which has been used against four governors since devolution began, has been criticised as a tool of political intimidation rather than genuine accountability.

The Path Forward

As Kenya approaches the 2027 general elections, the devolution experiment stands at a critical juncture. The gains in service delivery and local governance are real but fragile, and could be reversed if fiscal constraints, governance failures, and political interference are not addressed.

Key reforms needed include the adoption of a more equitable revenue allocation formula, the strengthening of county revenue collection capacity, the enhancement of oversight institutions, and the deepening of public participation mechanisms. Above all, there is a need for a political consensus that devolution is not optional but essential — a structural reform that must be protected and nurtured regardless of which parties control national and county governments.

As former Council of Governors chairperson Anne Waiguru observed: "Devolution is not a destination. It is a journey. We have come far, but the road ahead is longer and harder than the road behind."