Kenya must make room for biodiversity

By  Nancy Karugi

Policy and Advocacy Manager

Nature Kenya

An elephant does not understand a county boundary while a vulture wouldn’t know that a wind turbine has been erected along a flight path it has used for years. Yet, as Kenya expands its roads, towns, farms and energy infrastructure, wildlife is increasingly expected to adjust to a world being redesigned almost entirely around human needs.

I was reminded of this during a recent wildlife count at Kapiti Conservancy. What began as an opportunity to observe wildlife and engage with conservationists soon became a reflection on a fundamental question: When we claim land for development, whose home are we taking over?

During the count, a colleague jokingly wondered whether a gazelle entering his home could be interpreted as God sending him a meal. We laughed, but the question stayed with me.

Animals are not merely objects moving across a landscape, they are living creatures whose survival depends on their environment, social relationships and freedom to move. That encounter brought into sharp focus a question Kenya can no longer afford to ignore: Are we planning development around the realities of our natural environment, or are we expecting nature to make way for us at any cost?

Kenya’s development ambitions are understandable. We need roads, housing, electricity, industries, agricultural production and expanding urban centres. These are essential to economic growth and improved livelihoods.

But development becomes shortsighted when it treats biodiversity as an inconvenience to be addressed after the location has been selected, the designs completed and the investment committed. Before approving a major project, how often do we ask which species inhabit the proposed site?

Do we understand the wildlife corridors, breeding grounds, feeding areas and bird flight paths that could be affected? Have we considered the less visible species, including insects and other organisms that sustain ecosystems? Too often, biodiversity risks receive attention only after key decisions have already been made. At that stage, avoiding environmental damage becomes difficult, more expensive and sometimes impossible. This is not simply a conservation challenge. It is a failure of development planning.

Kenya’s biodiversity is not separate from the economy. It supports livelihoods, tourism, water security, agricultural productivity and ecological stability. We cannot continue to measure development solely by Kilometers of road constructed, megawatts generated, buildings completed, or investments attracted. We must also measure biodiversity lost, protected and conserved.

Consider Kenya’s renewable energy. Even green energy projects carry ecological risks if improperly sited. For instance, placing wind turbines along Kenya's vulture flight corridors introduces severe collision hazards and disrupts established wildlife movements, proving that engineering feasibility must be balanced with environmental impact. The solution is not to abandon renewable energy. It is to plan it better.

Environmental assessments must provide credible evidence to guide decisions about where projects are located, how they are designed and what safeguards are necessary. This requires appropriate ecological surveys, reliable baseline information and meaningful consideration of cumulative impacts across a landscape.

Where significant risks are identified, developers and decision-makers should consider alternatives, redesign infrastructure, avoid sensitive areas and implement effective mitigation measures. Where necessary and feasible, operations can also be adjusted when biodiversity faces heightened risks.

Follow our WhatsApp channel for breaking news updates and more stories like this.