l Using stakeholder and power analysis and BCPs in multi-stakeholder processes 191
example, the coalition has been seen as anti
the Kenyan government itself, rather than
just its actions. They felt they needed to
appear readier to compromise and to negotiate. The power analysis helped them
identify spaces for action to change this
perception. For example, the Port Steering
Committee has been set up by the government to solicit views from the local
community. This was initially an invited
space, but is now moving towards a
claimed space as three members of the
coalition have joined it. As relations
between government and the coalition
have improved, local government officials
(such as the district commissioner) have
attended the fourth meeting of Save Lamu.
There is now an open door policy with local
government officials – Save Lamu can go
to the government offices any time for
discussions or to request information. This
step is crucial as it helps in developing a
formal MSP process.
The analysis also helped identify that it
was important for Save Lamu to talk to the
local media and put forward their point of
view, as media coverage of Save Lamu has
at times been quite negative.
Further analysis is needed to better
inform future meetings and the advocacy
strategy that will emerge out of them. After
four Save Lamu county meetings, a regional
and a national meeting are planned to coordinate and mainstream BCPs as an
advocacy and dialogue tool to engage with
powerful stakeholders. This meeting also
plans to present the BCPs to other communities that might be affected by the
LAPSSET project, in the hope that they will
be inspired to develop their own BCPs.
As one MSP researcher reports (Goldsmith, 2012):
It is naïve to expect one BCP by itself to
make the government of Kenya and the
international finance partnership be
accountable to local communities’ biocultural rights. Its influence will, in contrast,
increase exponentially when it becomes
part of a mosaic of BCPs covering all the
LAPSSET affected communities (and
others indirectly involved) in Kenya.
Bringing communities from Sudan and
Ethiopia will raise that influence to
another level.
The regional and national meeting will
work towards that agenda. The
interest/influence analysis will be repeated
to enrich and expand the information
generated by the meetings in Lamu
County. The power house will also be revisited to monitor changes in power positions
and rules for decision-making.
The Lamu communities decided in
Januar y 2012 to sue five Kenyan
ministries because their right of access to
information and their rights to a clean
and healthy environment and to their
land are being denied. The court case, the
BCP and the pressure to begin a multistakeholder process are thus mutually
reinforcing. It is not yet clear whether
powerful stakeholders (Government of
Kenya and politicians) will be ready to
listen to the demands of concerned citizens and negotiate modifications that
could make Lamu the greenest African
port, and safeguard community rights to
lands and livelihoods.
CONTACT DETAILS
Herman Brouwer
Centre for Development Innovation
Wageningen University
The Netherlands
Email: herman.brouwer@wur.nl
Website: www.cdi.wur.nl