Recent events in Kenya have cast a
disturbing light on the depth and complexity of social distress in
the country. The conflict arising from the disputed presidential elections
has roots in inequality, poverty, poor governance and a host of other
issues. However the major underlying issue is clearly the perception
of deliberate unfairness and inequality in the distribution of national
resources. These perceptions have a basis in the real practice of
successive Kenyan governments. However it can also be argued that
beyond the real biases in resource allocation is the widespread failure
of the State due to deliberate policies of retreat compounded by unchecked
corruption. Poverty has progressively deepened as the state has reduced
its provisioning of social services. This retreat of the state has
been coincident with the slow and persistent decline that characterized
the country’s economic performance from the 1980’s until
the turn of the century. Thus narrowing economic perspectives due
to declining economic growth, deepening inequality and pauperization
due to Structural Adjustment and the arbitrary ravages of corruption
have combined to create a multidimensional social crisis. The DPMF’s
research on Social Policy Development and Governance has hinted at
the inherent dangers of the ever yawning gap between the elite and
marginalized majority in this country. Public policy has failed to
gauge the depth of alienation and the consequent explosive social
climate. However signs of the malaise have been apparent to scholars
and policy makers for decades.
Our own research has looked at the
links between class formation and inequality. Ultimately class interest
may lie at the heart of policy choices that have been so harmful to
the poor in Kenya. Findings from our data analysis show for instance
that the income distribution of workers employed in the formal sector
is in the form a pyramid. Thus the highest wage from 0 to 90% level
is 15,000 a month. From 91% - 99 % the wage rockets to Kshs 100, 000.
And the 1% above the 99% level earn beyond Kshs 100,000 a month. Thus
the top 1% can be considered as the economic, social and political
elite. And the nine percent below may be categorized as the various
levels of the emerging middle class. The remaining 90% who earn 15,000
(highest) to 0 monthly are workers and peasants in urban and rural
areas.
A more comprehensive picture of social
stratification however is not possible given the lack of data on income
and especially assets. Most households do not report truthfully or
fully the assets they own in national surveys. Moreover such surveys
are often designed to collect data on household consumption rather
than ownership of assets or household wealth. Given these limitations,
a large part of our analysis is restricted to the 14% of the Kenyan
working population who are wage earners and their households. It is
nevertheless clear that this sub set of the sample is representative
of the broader society, in particular trends can be observed in the
constitution of socio-economic classes. The huge inequality in wages,
if anything understates that of wealth in general. Moreover it mirrors
the huge qualitative difference in the living standards enjoyed by
the ruling elite (political, business etc…) and those of everybody
else. The wealth gap between the elite constituting less than 1% of
the population but controlling disproportionate resources and earning
sometimes thousands of times the median wage earned by the bottom
90% is only hinted at by the wage differentials. Clearly the wealthiest
Kenyans make most of their money from their wealth and a more careful
study of the wealth distribution using adapted data sources and methodology
is required.
ii.) A Profile of Education
in Kenya
The basic data and information of
the report on Education that has been sourced from the ministry of
Education Publications reports and website. Additional literature
is sourced from various organizations and publications. Secondary
data consisting of enrollment statistics for Primary, Secondary and
Higher education consisting of Public and Private Universities and
Middle Level Colleges also inform the analysis. Enrollment statistics
for students across all eight provinces are presented for Primary
and Secondary levels of Education.
Enrollment levels have been highly
influenced by colonial policy on development: exclusionary practices
have seen certain regions in Kenya benefit more from ‘development’.
Access to infrastructure and social amenities as well as access to
educational amenities were and still are distributed along colonial
administrative divisions, with communities in the more endowed regions
benefiting from the proximity to these facilities. Even with the onset
of independence, colonial patterns of economic development inform
access to economic and social infrastructure, amenities and by extension
education. Regional disparities in development have spilled over to
the education sector.
As a consequence of SAP, basic and
higher education have been affected. Even with the introduction of
Free Primary Education, transitional rates from Primary to Secondary
level are still wanting. Poverty has a huge bearing on access to education,
in terms of drop out and ability to provide books, uniforms etc to
children.
Poverty levels also negatively impact
on transition to secondary school education. Students from middle
and upper income backgrounds, education is more accessible and dropout
levels are fewer. In higher institutions of learning cost sharing
policy means that many students have had to look for income generating
activities to supplement their costs of living. On the other hand,
liberalization of higher education attracted another category of individuals.
Self- sponsored programmes in public institutions of higher learning
have meant that more individuals and students from higher socio-economic
strata can afford to access higher education.
Gender disparities exist to date:
poverty, HIV/Aids and cultural practices have negatively affected
enrollment of females across the education divide even with the introduction
of Free Primary Education, enrollment of girls in some instances still
lags behind. Gender disparities in accessing basic education means
that fewer females can access higher education. In addition, gender
disparities even where more females are enrolled in institutions of
learning are biased in relation to academic disciplines. For instance
Private institutions of higher learning have a higher female to male
ratio; but focus mainly on institutions offer Arts and Business related
courses for bureaucracies of the service sector.
Unequal access to all levels of education
is a basic characteristic of the educational system in Kenya. This
leads to deepening regional, class and gender differentiation in the
country. Further the content of the education in Kenya is skewed in
favor of the softer subjects for the service sector at the expense
of IT and other development relevant science technologies.
iii.) A Profile of Crime and
Insecurity in Kenya
It is clear that the interplay between
economic, social and political factors have contributed to crime and
state of insecurity. Key issues that have a bearing on crime and insecurity
include inequality and poverty: most crime committed are poverty related
with crimes such as stealing and robberies forming the bulk of crime
recorded. Inequality in terms of access to social amenities and economic
opportunities is also a big contributory factor in exacerbating crime.
Conflict amongst pastoral communities has increased dramatically and
is attributed to poverty and inequality in accessing infrastructure,
social amenities and resources like water and land. Politics has sparked
off the latest post-election violence. The violence and conflict are
rooted in the favoritisms of state practice based on ethnic alliances.
Political activities that have often spilled over into violence and
hence insecurity are a characteristic feature of Kenya and these have
serious implications.
The analysis on insecurity uses quantitative
data. Secondary statistics on crime mainly from the Kenya police website
and statistical abstracts. It examines major crime incidences that
exacerbate the state of insecurity. Other sources of data and information
are crime surveys from Security Research and Information centre (SRIC),
other organizations such as Kenya National Human Rights Commission
and other literature on crime including media reports on crime and
insecurity incidences.
Poverty and inequality are a major
cause of crime, violence and conflict and therefore general insecurity.
More important however is the absence of democratic governance which
has led to the manipulation of state institutions giving rise to rampant
corruption, ethnicisation of state institutions, absence of accountability
and generalized impunity granted to the power elite. The state has
thus failed to provide a general state of peace and security and leads
people to feeling that the law is applied in a discriminatory manner
and that they are abandoned and unprotected.