Premium
Laikipia communities demand fair share and transparency in carbon credit deals
Nkiloriti health centre. The facility, the first in the area, was constructed at Sh2 million from Community Climate Fund.
What you need to know:
- Told they were merely ‘selling air’, local landowners now demand to know who's buying their carbon credits, for how much, and why they receive so little of the multi-million-dollar deals that rely on their conservation efforts.
In Laikipia County, a new battleground is emerging — not over grazing land or boundaries, but over invisible assets: carbon credits. As global demand for carbon offsets grows, Kenya’s vast landscapes have become prime ground for climate action investments. But the rush for this new “green gold” is exposing deep inequalities between project developers and the communities hosting them.
“Our land is more than just a resource—it is our identity and livelihood. Everyone here is a pastoralist whose survival depends on this land for pasture and water,” says Frank Setek, former chairperson of Nkiloriti Community Land Management Committee (CLMC).
Nkiloriti Community Land in Laikipia County is part of Naibung’a Conservancy, covers over 6,900 acres and is legally registered.
Despite this sense of ownership, Mr Setek says the community has struggled to understand the carbon project introduced in 2012. “We started receiving money in 2021, but there was no Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC),” he explains. “The project proponents never met with the CLMC or the community assembly. Up to today, we still lack information about how the carbon business works.”
Frank Setek, former chair of the Community Land Management Committee.
He believes the project was designed in a way that excludes communities. “The contracts run for 30 to 40 years, full of technical language that ordinary people can’t understand. When we ask for information, we are ignored. It feels like a project for a few experts, not the people who live on this land,” Mr Setek expresses his frustration.
Mary Lempoye, the women’s representative at Nkiloriti CLMC, notes that carbon trading has benefited the community, but it lacks transparency. “If we understood how it’s sold, we would ensure everyone — women, students, and the elderly — benefits equally.”
Since 2021, her community has received periodic payments from a carbon offset project, yet few understand how the credits are traded or valued. “We can’t tell whether we’re getting our rightful share or being shortchanged.”
Mr Setek says: “We don’t know who buys the carbon, at what price, or how much the project earns. From what I have seen in the contracts, the community gets just about 20 per cent of the total value.”
He also questions the long-term nature of the agreements. “Thirty years is too long. If we realise the deal is unfair, can we withdraw? Those questions have never been answered.”
Across Laikipia, similar concerns are surfacing: Do local communities truly understand the terms of these carbon deals? Are they receiving fair compensation for conserving the environment on behalf of global polluters?
“We need our project proponent to explain how carbon credits are sold so we can appreciate the process,” Ms Lempoye adds. “We’re also worried that by offsetting carbon elsewhere, we might be causing future harm to our environment. We are told we will benefit more by conserving trees and wildlife, yet communities in drylands seem to earn more than us even though we have denser tree cover.”
“Just the other day our proponent informed us that they are selling the carbon credits per kilometer,” she adds. “This raises so many questions because it is not what we had been informed at the onset.”
Mapping errors have also caused new conflicts. “Some private ranches were included in the project area without consultation,” Mr Setek says. “Now their owners are demanding a share of carbon revenues because their land appears in the project map. Some private ranches now claim Sh9 million from Naibung’a Conservancy, alleging their parcels were included in the project’s aerial mapping. Whenever the project team flies drones over our land, we never sign contracts,” Ms Lempoye explains.
Frank Setek, former chair of the Community Land Management Committee.
“Now ranches say our carbon maps overlap their land. We don’t even know how to resolve this — some fear we might have to sell cattle to pay them.”
In Musul, one of the lands within Naibung’a Central Conservancy, the community has been part of a carbon offset project since 2012.
“At first, we barely understood what carbon was — we just heard tunauza hewa (we’re selling air),” recalls Jackson Nkaiduri, a community leader. “Only after registering our land under the Community Land Act (CLA) 2016 did we gain the legal right to meet the project proponents.”
After registration, community leaders demanded to see all agreements signed on their behalf. “It took effort, but CLMCs across Northern Kenya — representing over 30 community lands — came together to demand accountability,” he says.
That scrutiny revealed gaps, including a Project Implementation Agreement signed without proper community consent. “Thankfully, our proponent allowed us to correct this.
We’re now transitioning to the Community Development Agreement Committee (CDAC) model to align with the CLA 2016 and new carbon regulations,” Mr Nkaiduri explains.
Some communities have proposed reviewing contracts every 10 years, with the goal of eventually forming Special Purpose Vehicle (SPVs) — community-owned entities that would enable them to manage their own carbon projects and directly negotiate with buyers, shares Moses Wakhisi, director of communications at the Northlands rangers Trust (NRT). Musul is one of the communities that are forming SPVs; companies owned and managed by the communities, to eventually act as its own project proponent.
“In five years, we want to manage everything ourselves: know who buys our credits, at what price, and ensure all proceeds go directly to the community,” Mr Nakiduri notes.
The project has already delivered tangible benefits. The Community Climate Fund recently financed a Sh2 million dispensary in Nkiloriti, a Sh3.1 million resource centre in Musul, and an ECDE centre in Kijabe.
Still, Mr Nkaiduri warns of growing frustration. “We feel we’re not getting the full value for our land,” he says. “We want our CLMC chairpersons to sit at the negotiation table with Native, our carbon buyer, so our voices are heard.”
Legal disputes are compounding tensions. “Several conservancies have gone to court over benefit-sharing. With so many cases, there’s a risk the value of our carbon credits will drop,” he adds.
A similar story unfolds in Lekurruki Community Land, a 6,000-hectare conservancy straddling Laikipia North, Isiolo, and Samburu counties.
“When carbon credits were introduced about five years ago, we didn’t understand what carbon was,” recalls Robert Nantiri, a community member. “We saw drones and thought wazungu wanaiba hewa yetu (foreigners are stealing our air).”
Each of the 14 conservancies, including Lekurruki, received Sh36 million in the first round of payments. “We were told it was payment for absorbing carbon — a reward for protecting our environment,” Mr Sairi explains.
The funds were transformative for this remote pastoralist community. “We built access roads, funded bursaries, drilled boreholes, and later constructed schools and dispensaries,” he says.
Yet, key questions remain unanswered. “We still don’t know how much carbon is sold, or how our share is calculated,” he says. “Only the project proponent knows — we just receive ‘surprise money.’ Since the land is ours, we should have ownership and decision-making power.”
Mr Setek insists that communities are not against carbon trading. “We support efforts that protect the environment,” he says. “But we want transparency, fairness, and informed participation. The people who own and protect the land must understand and benefit from it.”
According to Stephen Latia, Laikipia County’s Environment executive, inequities persist across conservancies. “Some receive Sh36 million, others Sh13 million, regardless of size or number of communities involved.”
“Naibung’a Conservancy, for example, has nine community lands but receives less than single-unit conservancies like Murkusi. Carbon proceeds should reflect land size and conservation effort,” he adds.
“For instance, Naibung’a conservancy has three units and each has three community lands, bringing them to nine. They always receive small amount of money, while Murkusi conservancy is made up of one community land but they earn more. If carbon money can be earned according to the size of land being conserved, it can make the difference, Mr Latia observes.
Mr Latia also expresses concern that NRT and Native Kenya are not transparent about the amount they get from purchasing the carbon credits on the community’s behalf.
NRT has been supporting communities in Laikipia, Kajiado, Samburu and Isiolo counties to conserve their land so they can earn from carbon offsetting projects. The communities have a CPOC committee that works alongside NRT to ensure that the entire conservancy is well managed.
In a detailed response to queries from Climate Action on the benefits sharing, the NRT explains that the first carbon credits were sold in 2021, with revenues reaching communities the following year. “Under the 2021 Project Implementation Agreement, NRT, as project proponent, retained only fixed administrative costs agreed with communities, while all net revenues were distributed among 14 conservancies between 2022 and 2024,” explains Mr Wakhisi.
Each year’s total revenue is divided into 15 equal portions, he notes. “One portion is saved in a reserve fund to cushion communities against future market fluctuations or low credit issuance periods. Of the remaining 14 portions; five per cent is a voluntary levy to the respective county government, directed toward rangeland management or drought relief. Also, 40 per cent of the revenues funded conservancy operations to support project management and rangeland activities; while 60 per cent goes to the Carbon
Community Fund, through which communities prioritise projects such as bursaries, water infrastructure, and health facilities.”
Mr Wakhisi notes: “All financial decisions are made through AGMs or community assemblies, with detailed records and attendance lists maintained. Conservancies also submit annual financial audits to enhance transparency and accountability.”
Mr Latia confirms that the Laikipia County government receives a levy of five per cent which goes to support the communities so they can do other things on their land. “For instance, in 2024 we sent Sh5 million back to the conservancies, and the communities benefitted from water tanks and a dam. We do this to support the communities so they can increase their conservation efforts. The development funds have ensured that communities do not cut down trees for charcoal as they now get some relief in terms of education bursaries, and so forth.”
Laikipia, which has three sub-counties — East, West, and North — has made significant progress in community land registration. All 13 community conservancies in the county are now registered under Section 47 of the Community Land Act, 2016, having transitioned from group ranches between 2019 and 2021.
“This has strengthened land tenure security and given communities confidence to manage their land,” says Michael Mudenyo, the county’s chief physical planner. “We’re now urging them to develop land-use plans so they can attract investment and maximise value.”
Still, planning is expensive. Many communities cannot afford to complete land-use plans; a gap that investors exploit, notes Elizabeth Maskonte, project officer, Land Programme at Impact Kenya, a local NGO working on land rights awareness.
“Many investors skip the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) process because communities don’t fully understand it,” Ms Maskonte says. “We’re helping them define FPIC in their own terms, so they know their rights and negotiate fairly.”
A new legal era for Kenya’s carbon market
Kenya’s carbon market is now the third-largest in Africa after Tanzania and Zimbabwe, covering over 1.2 million hectares. Carbon credit issuances rose from 4.5 million in 2018 to 27.5 million in 2024, according to the National Carbon Registry.
The sector’s rapid expansion led to the government enacting the Climate Change (Carbon Markets) Regulations, 2024, which came into effect on May 17, 2024.
“Carbon credit is a sovereign good that must be protected by the government,” says Festus Ng’eno, State Department for Environment and Climate Change PS. “We must safeguard Kenya’s carbon future while ensuring equitable benefits.”
The 2024 regulations require project registration, community participation, and mandatory benefit sharing — with at least 40 per cent of revenues going directly to communities. Developers must also sign Community Development Agreement Committee and obtain FPIC before project approval.
The Northern Kenya Rangelands Carbon Project is a 40-year initiative designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while helping communities derive value from improved rangeland management. The project promotes better grazing practices, vegetation restoration, and soil conservation to enhance carbon storage and ecosystem resilience.
In line with the Kenya’s 2024 Carbon Markets Regulations, NRT is transitioning from the Carbon Project Oversight Committee to CDAC, according to Mr Wakhisi. “The new model strengthens local ownership of carbon projects while embedding accountability within county structures,” he observes.
PS Ng’eno notes that all developers operating under the voluntary market must transition to compliance markets by May 2026, under the oversight of the National Environment Management Authority. “Previously, we didn’t know what was happening in the carbon market,” he says. “Now, with over 300 registered projects, we can coordinate and monitor activities through a transparent legal framework.”
