Kenya's irony of want amidst plenty

Hearing that nearly 400 Kenyans have joined the dollar millionaires’ list was quite uplifting.

Knight Frank’s 2015 Wealth Report paints the picture of country on the rise. It is not unusual to spot top-of-the-range cars parked in the city mall’s parking yards. Luxury brands have responded to the growing middle-class and have laid out their wares to be savoured. From electronics companies and fashion entities to high-end eateries and hotels, things are looking up for Kenyans.

Indeed, Kenya is changing, but at what expense? Is the wealth spreading around to the larger population? Knight Frank estimates that high net worth individuals will increase by nearly three-quarters in the next 10 years to reach 15,249 in 2024.

In a population of 40 million, this is a drop in the ocean.

World Bank reports paint a grim picture. It indicates more than half of the population live on less than a $1 a day.  That is about Sh100 or less a day.  A dollar millionaire has Sh99,999,900 more than the nearest poor.

Whereas most Kenyans cannot afford the most basic of services – affordable and quality health care, education and access to other essential services – a millionaire is free to splurge money at will.

In rural Kenya, the poverty index is even higher. This is where malnutrition and maternal child deaths are a daily occurrence. For example, Mandera accounts for more than 50 per cent of all maternal child deaths in the country.

Even though the devolved governments have the responsibility of addressing these issues, the priorities of spending funds received through the shared revenue seems to go to other projects such as roads, city beautification and investing in capital assets such as buying of cars. There is no doubt investing in viable development projects with immediate return on investment is worthwhile in fighting  poverty, addressing matters of health and basic education.

The World Bank has projected an economic growth of 6 per cent this year. This of course is something to celebrate but it is essential also to ensure an equitable benefit from the dividends of this growth.

Growth is less effective in the face of massive inequality. Given the depth of deprivation in Kenya, economic growth alone is not enough without attention to easing inequality and to removing the barriers that hinder poor people from benefiting from the expected growth.

With high prevalence of HIV/Aids and other communicable diseases, the sustainability of this growth is highly unlikely in the long run.

So, reducing poverty does not necessarily come as a consequence of development but rather it should be part of a viable economic development strategy. The distribution of the benefit of the growth and ensuring that the poor are also on board is essential.

 

The inequality in Kenya could be a reflection of what happens elsewhere in the world and especially in Africa. A report by Credit Suisse shows that the 10 richest people in Africa own more than the combined wealth of the bottom 50 per cent poorest people.

This seems to validate the Knight Frank report. It means only a handful of individuals are controlling not only the wealth, but also the lives of a large number of people.

In more developed nations where democracy and social accountability is more entrenched, governments put levelling mechanisms in place to cushion the poorest members of the society from extreme poverty.

Social services including income support are sometimes offered in form of doles. In Kenya, the poorest members of our communities continue to suffer malnutrition and other poverty-related problems whilst the wealthy continue to get wealthier.

The good news is that literacy rates in Kenya are improving. More girls go to school compared to two decades ago, thanks largely to the universal free primary education.

With higher literacy rates, it is easier for poverty alleviation programmes to be put in place because an educated population can easily learn how to cope and develop skills to improve their livelihoods.

The other good news is that stipends for elder people above 65 years of age have been introduced. That is a step in the right direction. This programme, if well sustained, can go a long way to reduce the gap between the rich and poor.

Some county governments like Bomet have also introduced similar measures to supplement the efforts by the National Government.

Counties can also introduce social safety net mechanisms such as basic health insurance for their people.

With a health insurance of less than a dollar per person, counties can create a fund that can guarantee sustainable health care for their people.

Most counties have also introduced bursary schemes for children in secondary education.

Such bursaries also need to target technical skills through strengthening of local polytechnics.

There is a shortage of carpenters, masons, electrical engineers and automobile mechanics in many counties.

The local polytechnics need to train students for these professions because these are skills that don’t necessarily require someone to get formal employment but can start own businesses.

To reduce the gap between the rich and the poor should be a priority for both levels of governments.