Animal health services at work Evidence from and City

Financial support provided by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Contents Executive summary ...... ii

1. Introduction ...... 1 2. Geographic location and dataset ...... 2 3. The organization of veterinary Services in Kiambu and Nairobi City counties ...... 3 3.1. Institutional set-up ...... 3 3.2. Finance ...... 5 3.3. Human resources ...... 5 4. Frontline animal health officers at work ...... 6 4.1. Working facilities...... 6 4.2. Incentives ...... 7 4.3. Knowledge...... 9 5. Summary and conclusions ...... 10

References ...... 12

Executive summary Animal health policies and strategies are, in most countries, comprehensive and well-designed but poorly implemented. One of the reasons is that there is little systematic information on the challenges and constraints policy implementers face, which makes it difficult to design effective policy implementation mechanisms. This report explores the functioning of public animal health services in two local governments of Kenya – Kiambu and Nairobi City county – which are in charge of implementing the animal health policy and legislative framework at local level. It relies upon official data on the availability of financial and human to provide animal health services at local level, and on a representative survey of frontline animal health staff operating in the two counties. Frontline animal health officers are empowered by the government to facilitate the implementation of the prevailing policy and legislative framework as they regularly interact and cooperate with private sector actors along the livestock value chain. Results suggest that animal health services are greatly understaffed and underresourced, and that the working environment of frontline health officers is not conducive in terms of personal incentives, working procedures, and knowledge of the prevailing policy and legislative framework and of emerging animal health issues. While more resources should be allocated to public animal health services, local administrations could make veterinary services more effective also by establishing partnerships with private actors and improving the working environment of animal health officers.1

1 This report has been drafted by Stephen Gikonyo (FAO Kenya), Joy Kiplamai (FAO Kenya), Ugo Pica-Ciamarra (FAO, Italy), Tabitha Kimani (FAO Kenya) and Joseph Mwangi (State Department of Livestock). We thank for their inputs and comments participants in the ASL2050 policy validation workshop (, October 2020), including representatives from Nairobi City County and , as well as Michael Apamaku (FAO), Lucia Latino (FAO), Orsolya Mikecz (FAO), Andrew Thaiyah (USAID) and Damian TagoPacheco (FAO). Thanks to Giusy Cinardi for preparing the geographical map of Kenya.

ii

1. Introduction Animal health policies and legislations that support the adoption of biosecurity practices along the livestock value chain abound, but remain poorly implemented. One of the reasons is that the policy- making and legislative processes do not take into adequate account the capacity of public animal health services to deliver and perform. This is the case as, in most countries, animal health policy formulation and implementation fall under the responsibility of two different levels of government, the former being in the hands of the national or central government and the latter in the hands of the local administration. In many cases, therefore, the overarching animal health policy and legislative framework poorly reflects local conditions and, hence, is partially implemented. There are laws, for example, that prescribe poultry farmers to get a movement permit from a public veterinarian before shipping broilers to the market. The public veterinarian, who does not receive any transport allowance, is however supposed to provide services to hundreds of broiler farmers as well as to perform functions in slaughterhouses, milk processing facilities and livestock markets. In this context, it is difficult for a farmer to access veterinary services and abide to the law, to the extent that such behaviour would be unpunishable in several judicial systems. Accurate information on the constraints and challenges local governments face when providing their services helps design animal health policies and legislations that are consistent with the reality on the ground, and hence actionable. However, while documentation abounds on the behaviour and constraints of private actors along the livestock value chain, such as farmers and traders, there is little systematic information on the functioning of public animal health services. The relevant exception is the OIE Performance Evaluation of Veterinary Services (PVS) (OIE, 2019). The PVS, however, is a national level document and, as such, it broadly portrays the functioning of veterinary services but does not provide details on issues and challenges at local level, where policies and legislations are implemented. This report presents an analysis of public animal health services in two counties of Kenya, Kiambu county and Nairobi City county. It relies upon official government data on the availability of financial and human resources to provide animal health services at county level as well as on a representative survey of frontline animal health staff operating in the two counties. Frontline animal health officers include public field veterinarians, veterinary para-professionals, meat inspectors and market inspectors among others. They play a fundamental role in supporting the implementation of the prevailing policy and legislative framework by, for instance, providing advice on biosecurity practices to livestock farmers and vaccinating their animals against selected diseases; conducting ante mortem and post-mortem inspections on animals before slaughter; monitoring the safety and quality of the food on sale to consumers. To our knowledge, this is the first time that, in Kenya, frontline animal health officers are systematically interviewed to directly hear from their voice the constraints and challenges they face when performing their functions. The next section introduces to Nairobi City and Kiambu counties and presents the dataset. Section three presents and discusses the institutional set up of veterinary services in the two counties and their financial and human resource availability. Section four discusses the working facilities, the incentives and the knowledge of frontline animal health officers. Section five summarises and concludes with some recommendations for decision-makers.

1

2. Geographic location and dataset There are 47 counties in Kenya. Nairobi City county and Kiambu county are the first and second most populous, with 4.3 million people living in Nairobi City county and 2.1 million residents in Kiambu county (KNBS, 2019). Nairobi City county is urban, while Kiambu county, which borders Nairobi City county to the South, is peri-urban. Nairobi City county is the major market for animal source food in Kenya and expected to grow rapidly in the coming decades. Available projections indicate that, by 2050, over 14 million people will live in Nairobi, i.e. in the next thirty years the capital city will become home to an additional 10 million people as compared to today (Hoornweg and Pope, 2014). Livestock value chain will grow and transform to serve this increasingly affluent and urbanized population and, particularly in the short and medium- term, an increased number of market-oriented urban and peri-urban livestock operations are expected to emerge around Nairobi (FAO, 2019). Already today there is evidence that, in developing countries, animal density in and around urban areas is as high as in rural areas (FAO, 2020; Latino et al., 2020).

Figure. 1. Kiambu county and Nairobi City county

Source: for country boundaries: United Nations, Map No 4170, October 2020; for regional boundaries, GADM, accessed in January 2021. The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this/these map(s) do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of FAO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers and boundaries. Dashed lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The importance of an effective system of animal health services in urban and peri-urban areas characterized by high density of both animals and humans cannot be overemphasized. On the one hand, it helps control and minimize the impact of animal diseases, thereby supporting farmer livelihoods and ensuring the availability of affordably priced and safe livestock products for consumers. On the other, it minimizes the risk of outbreaks and spread of zoonotic diseases that, if go uncontrolled, might have disruptive impact on society, such as avian influenza.

2

To appreciate how veterinary services function in Kiambu county and Nairobi City county we took a two-pronged approach. First, we gathered and examined government data on the institutional set up, the budget and the number of animal health staff operating in the two counties. This provides insight on the "hardware" available for the provision of animal health services on the ground. Second, we created a sample of the entire population of frontline animal health officers providing services in the two counties and interviewed a total of 108, including 24 over 30 (80 percent) in Nairobi City county and 76 over 90 (84 percent) in Kiambu county. The sample also includes all the eight dairy inspectors providing dairy inspectorate services in the two counties, who are employed by the Kenya Dairy Board. The survey included questions on the working conditions of frontline animal health officers, the procedures they follow to provide their services, the system of incentives as well as their knowledge of existing policies and laws as well as of the One Health approacj. Data from the survey allows investigating the "software" for the delivery of animal health services, i.e. the working modalities of frontline animal health officers and the constraints they face when operating on the ground.

3. The organization of veterinary Services in Kiambu and Nairobi City counties 3.1. Institutional set-up The 2010 provides the delivery of veterinary services be done at two levels of government, the national and county level. At national level, the directorate of veterinary services, headed by the Director of Veterinary Services (DVS), or Chief Veterinary Officer (CVO), is in charge to implement and coordinate animal health services in investigation laboratories, training institutions, border points and efficacy trial centres. Schedule Four of the Constitution stipulates the functions of the county governments, such as the provision of health care, pre-primary education, maintenance of local roads and agriculture, among others. In particular, within the county departments in charge of agriculture, the directorates of veterinary services, headed by a County Director of Veterinary Services (CDVS), are responsible to execute national veterinary policies, laws and regulations. They provide primary animal healthcare advisory services, implement vaccination campaigns and animal disease surveillance, manage the county abattoirs, inspect local livestock markets and other. Private veterinarians and para- professionals also play a role in the provision of animal health services at county level. They offer veterinary clinical and artificial insemination services and supply veterinary medicines, drugs and those vaccines whose markets were privatized as part of the restructuring of the veterinary services in 1986. Institutionally, the provision of veterinary services at county level is organized around a clear chain of command, from the CDVS through a hierarchy of sub-county veterinary officers and a series of frontline staff categorized as ward animal disease control officers, meat inspectors, artificial insemination providers, pound masters and leather development officers. These frontline officers, as their titles indicate, perform a multitude of functions, such as disease control and vaccination, provision of breeding services, meat and market inspection, regulation of livestock movement and, sometimes, clinical services. In both counties, there are also frontline staff specifically operating for the dairy industry: they are part of the Kenya Dairy Board and report to a regional compliance officer and not directly to the CDVS. Figures 2 and 3 present the proposed / partially implemented organograms of veterinary services in Nairobi City and Kiambu counties, respectively. It is worth noticing how, institutionally, the two counties are differently organized. This implies that the way the national policy and legislation

3 framework percolates to the ground will follow different pathways in the different counties, which will adopt different policy implementation procedures.

Figure 2. Nairobi City County: Organogram of Animal Health Services

County Executive Committee Member Food, Agriculture & Forestry

Chief Officer Food, Agriculture & Forestry

Director Director of Director Food Director Crops Livestock & Veterinary Systems & Development & Fisheries Services Sector Forestry

Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director Subject Specialist Subject Specialist Subject Specialist Subject Specialist Animal health Breeding services Leather Dev. Animal welfare

Sub County Veterinary Officers

Wards Veterinary service officers

Figure 3. Kiambu County: Organogram of Animal Health Services

County Executive Committee Member Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries

Chief Officer Chief Officer Livestock & Fisheries Agriculture

Director of Livestock, Veterinary Services & Fisheries

Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director of of Livestock of Veterinary Fisheries

Assistant Director Assistant Director Assistant Director Public Health & Surveillance & A.I. & Animal leather Vector Control Breeding

SMS Public SMS Leather SMS Disease SMS A.I Health Development and Vector Animal Control Breeding &

Meat Inspectors

4

3.2. Finance Availability of financial resources is essential for the effective provision of animal health services on the ground. County governments have three sources of revenue: those transferred from the national government; resources generated through local taxes and levies; other resources, such as loans or grants. The County Fiscal Strategy Paper, structured around the County Integrated Development Plan, contains the budget for the coming financial year and for the medium term (3-5 years) and allocates financial resources across the various sector departments. The County Treasury is in charge of preparing the County Fiscal Strategy Paper that, after approval by the County Executive Committee, is endorsed by the County Assembly by 28 February of each year. The Chief Officer (CO) in each of the sector departments – there are nine and 12 sector departments in Kiambu and Nairobi counties, respectively – is the accounting officer and responsible for managing the allocated resources. Directorates and other spending units access resources from their respective COs by requesting funds to carry out activities according to their quarterly work plans.

In fiscal year 2019/20, the Kiambu county government allocated Ksh 338.9 million (about USD 3.1 million) to the "Crop, Livestock and Fisheries Development and Management Programme", of which 9 percent or Ksh 32 million (almost USD 300 000) were devoted to "Disease Management and Control". The Nairobi City County allocated Ksh 113.4 million (about USD 1 million) to the "Livestock Resources Management and Development Programme", of which about 7 percent or Ksh 7.7 million (about USD 70 000) to the "Animal Disease and Pest Control Programme". These figures translate into about Ksh 228 (USD 2.1) and Ksh 336 (USD 3.1) for the provision of animal health services to each of the 147 137 and 22 818 households rearing livestock in Kiambu county and Nairobi City county, respectively (KNBS, 2019). Available resources are likely to be barely adequate for a functional system of veterinary services considering that between 80 and 90 percent of the recurrent budget is allocated to cover staff salaries, that farmers keep more than one animal, and that veterinary departments are in charge to provide animal health services to farmers, private companies as well as to perform other services along the livestock value chain, such as in slaughterhouses and markets. 3.3. Human resources Human resources are a key pillar for an effective system of animal health services. A review of staffing levels of animal health officers in Kiambu and Nairobi city counties in August 2020 reveals a huge variance between the in-post and the authorized establishment. With an established staffing level of 230 and in-post of 104, Kiambu county has a deficit of 126 staff. Nairobi Coty county, with an established staff level of 188 and in-post of 48, has a deficit of 140 staff. This mirrors the situation at national level, where the Department of Veterinary Services has 473 staff in post out of the expected 1 620, with a gap of almost 1 150 staff. Table 1. Animal health staff in Kiambu and Nairobi City counties and in the Directorate of Vet Services

Staff in post Staff expected Variance In- post level Kiambu County 104 230 - 126 45% Nairobi City County 48 188 - 140 26% State Department of Livestock 47 1620 - 1147 29% Directorate of Veterinary Services Frontline staff are the large majority of all animal health staff, representing about 86 and 83 percent of all officers in Kiambu and Nairobi counties, respectively. In Kiambu county, they mainly provide services at farm level, including disease control, extension services, and artificial insemination; in Nairobi City county, they provide services not only at farm level but also downstream along the

5 livestock chain, such as inspection in slaughterhouses, in milk collection and processing facilities and in food markets. In both counties, given the number of vacant posts, it is no wonder that frontline staff find themselves providing animal health services in more than one unit of responsibility (wards, slaughterhouses, milk collection & processing facilities, livestock markets). At current staffing levels, each frontline animal health officer is supposed to provide services to an average of 1 635 and 570 livestock-keeping households in Kiambu and Nairobi counties, respectively, beyond performing other functions at other nodes of the livestock value chain. It must be all but easy for frontline animal health officers to perform their functions efficiently.

4. Frontline animal health officers at work The sample of the interviewed animal health officers largely consist of staff with an age between 45 and 64 years (66 percent) and with a certificate as their highest level of education. Table 2. Education level of the frontline animal health officers. Level of Education Kiambu County Nairobi City County Overall Certificate 59 (77.6%) 7 (2.9%) 66 (61.1%) Diploma 9 (11.8%) 14 (43.8%) 23 (21.3%) Bachelor’s degree 3 (3.9%) 11 (34.4%) 14 (12.0%) Master’s degree 4 (5.3%) 0 (0.0%) 4 (3.7%) 4.1. Working facilities The working conditions of frontline officers, both in Kiambu and Nairobi City counties, are not always conducive, and not only because of limited human and financial resources. The majority of frontline animal health officers (> 78 percent in both Kiambu and Nairobi counties) have an office space, though only 21 percent (Kiambu county) and 40 percent (Nairobi City county), have access to a computer. which yet would be necessary, for example, to draft monthly reports as well as input data in the animal disease reporting form. As expected, all frontline officers own a mobile phone, which they widely use to communicate with stakeholders along the livestock value chain. However, only in a handful of cases (4 percent), the government provides frontline animal health officers with a mobile phone and only about 8 percent receives regular airtime allowance to utilize their phone. In Nairobi City county, a higher percentage of staff has been provided with a government computer and a government mobile phone than in Kiambu county. This is because all dairy instectors in Nairobi City County have received both a computer and a mobile phone from the Kenya Dairy Board. Frontline animal health officers travel around to provide their services either by public transport (39 percent) or on foot (33 percent). Less than half (43 percent) – 41 percent in Kiambu county and 47 percent in Nairobi City county – receive transport allowance, in the form either of a monthly lump sum or fuel coupons. Again, the frontline officers who received fuel coupons and regular monthly allowance are the dairy inspectors. The Kiambu county government has provided 16 frontline officers with a motorcycle, but only nine reported to receive fuel coupons. Local government provides personal protecting equipment (PPE) regularly to only 14 percent of all frontline animal health officers (five percent in Kiambu county and 34 percent in Nairobi City county), who therefore either purchase protecting clothing, gloves, goggles and other PPE using their resources or they do not use them at all. y

6

Table 3. Working facilities of animal health frontline officers Kiambu County Nairobi City County Overall Have an office space 79% 78% 79% Access to a government-provided computer 21% 40% 27% Use a mobile phone for work 100% 100% 100% Provision of mobile phone by the government 1% 12% 4% Provision of regular airtime allowance by the 1% 22% 8% government Primary means of transport Public transport 36% 43% 39% On foot 30% 42% 33% Receive transport allowance 41% 47% 43% The government regularly provides PPE 5% 34% 14% Charge fee to cover the cost of providing 55% 44% 52% services Government fee 45% 71% 52% Non government fee 55% 29% 48% Engaged in other income-generating activities 34% 10% 27% Private animal health provision 12% 6% 10% Farm/livestock keeper 25% 6% 19% Small shop/Others 4% 6% 5% Because of limited government support, over half (52 percent) of the animal health frontline officers charge a fee, in addition to the government prescribed fee, when providing their in order to cover some of the costs they incur services (55 percent in Kiambu county and 44 percent in ). About 30 percent are also engaged in other income-generating activities as a way to complement their salary, such as raising livestock (19 percent), private animal health service provision (10 percent), and operating small shops (five percent). 4.2. Incentives The large majority of frontline animal health officers (92 percent) recognize to have a clear job description, which they have discussed with both their technical supervisor (91 percent) and their administrative supervisor (68 percent) upon taking office. They work hard: 57 percent of them work between six and seven days per week; 33 percent work nine hours per day if not more. Frontline officers spend about half of their working time providing services to clients, while the other half either travelling or performing administrative duties.

7

Figure. 4. Allocation of frontline animal health officers' working time across different activities

Nairobi City County Kiambu

Own business 1% Own business Travel 2% Travel 16% 23%

Admin Admin Provision of duties Provision of duties services 25% services 58% 49% 26%

Eighty-seven percent of frontline animal health officers have daily or weekly communication with their technical supervisor and the majority (57 percent) organize their weekly working schedule in consultation with him / her (50 percent in Kiambu county and 75 percent in Nairobi City County). Forty-two percent, however, plan their work schedule on their own, and hence act as they were independent contractors. The large majority (67 percent) state to follow clear procedures when on duty, such as reporting to their technical supervisor any suspected notifiable disease; observing working hours from eight am to five pm; writing weekly reports; registering their name at the farm they visit; wearing personal protecting equipment; etc. However, regardless of any planning, about 61 percent of the frontline officers state that emergencies, such as unexpected calls from farmers or their supervisor, force them to change their work plan rather frequently; about 17 percent also say that influential people within the community interfere with their work, for example by asking them to provide services to specific clients. Only few (six percent) of the frontline animal health officers agree that their salary is commensurate with their level of responsibility. In addition, only 56 percent assert that guidelines for career progression are sufficiently clear; 58 percent believe that the existing system of monitoring and evaluation is not effective; 65 and 92 percent contend that good work performance is not recognized by their technical and administrative supervisor, respectively; less than two percent report to have received some cash awards for their performance; and 78 percent are not aware of any officer who has been penalized for poor work performance.

8

Table 4. Working procedures and career progression Kiambu Nairobi City Overall County County Have daily / weekly communication with technical supervisor 92% 75% 87% Organize their work plan alone 51% 19% 42% Have clear procedures to follow when on duty 68% 63% 67% Have a clear job description 91% 94% 92% Work at least 9 hours per day or more 32% 39% 33% Work 6 or 7 days per week 58% 56% 57% Contend that emergencies often change their work plan 63% 56% 61% Contend that influential people often interfere with work plan 21% 13% 17% Contend salary is commensurate with levels of responsibility 5% 9% 6% Agree there are good guidelines for career progression 34% 41% 36% Agree that good work performance helps in career progression 59% 50% 56% Agree that a good M&E system is in place 39% 47% 42% Agree that technical supervisor recognizes good work performance 46% 9.4% 35% Know someone who has been penalized 20% 28% 22%

4.3. Knowledge Frontline animal health officers appear to have limited knowledge of existing animal health policies and laws, though they are supposed to facilitate their implementation on the ground. About 46 percent of all frontline officers said they have some knowledge of livestock sector policies and strategies, but only 33 percent were able to quote at least one. The most quoted policies were the National Livestock Policy, the Veterinary Policy, the Dairy Master Plan and the Animal Feed Policy. However, what matters the most is that frontline officers are aware of existing laws and regulations, which support the implementation of the overarching policy framework. In this regard, about 57 percent of all officers reported to be aware of existing animal health laws and regulations, while 43 percent admitted not to know any animal health law or regulation. Indeed, only 12 percent and 15 percent of them had ever been engaged in any law and policy-making processes. The large majority (89 percent) of the sub-sample of frontline animal health officers conversant with animal health laws and regulations were able to mention at least one. They mainly referred to the Animal Disease Act (CAP.364) and the Meat Control Act and the accompanying Meat Control Regulations (CAP. 356). The former recommends measures public bodies and holders of animals should take for the control of animal diseases; the latter prescribes rules for licensing and controlling slaughterhouses with the objective to ensure health, sanitary and hygiene standards of food products. Frontline animal health officers also mentioned, among others, the Veterinary Surgeons and Veterinary Para-professionals Act (CAP. 366), the Public Health Act (CAP. 242), the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (CAP. 360) and the Cattle Cleansing Act (CAP 356). Frontline officers get information on animal health laws and regulations from a variety of sources, including from their supervisors (68 percent), consultation of hard copies (28 percent), communication material (24 percent), informal discussion with colleagues (23 percent) and other.

9

Table 5. Knowledge of policies, laws and awareness of the One Health approach. Kiambu Nairobi City Overall County County Contend to know relevant policies and strategies 49% 40% 46% Able to name livestock sector policies 34% 31% 33% Contend to know relevant laws 58% 56% 57% Able to name livestock sector laws 52% 47% 51% Have participated in the policy-making process 17% 9% 15% Have participated in law-making process 12% 13% 12% Are aware of policies / laws that has changed working 30% 38% 32% procedures Contend working procedures can be improved at no cost 74% 68% 72% Receive government training once per year or more 31% 40% 34% frequently Are aware of the One Health approach 28% 59% 37%

Frontline officers not only have limited knowledge of existing laws and regulations but also do not stay abreast of technical and process advancements, which is yet necessary to maintain an efficient system of animal health services. Only about 34 percent of frontline staff report to receive trainings at least once per year, and a large share state to have never received any government training (27 percent). As a result, for example, only 37 percent of frontline animal health officers are aware of the One Health approach, with the majority remaining ignorant of it. To add to that, the majority (>65 percent) of all frontline officers have concluded their course of studies more than two decades ago (33.3 percent fall in the 45-54 age bracket and 32.4 percent in the 55-64 age bracket) and, hence, are not necessarily familiar with the most recent technologies and processes.

5. Summary and conclusions Veterinary services in Kiambu and Nairobi City Counties face several constraints and, therefore, find it difficult to fully support the implementation of existing animal health policies and legislations. Limited human and financial resources make it challenging for frontline animal health officers, travelling with public transport or on foot, to be in the right place at the right time and provide efficient services to hundreds of farmers and other actors along the livestock of the value chain. Because of lack of resources, the services they provide essentially consist in sheer advice: a few shillings or cents per year per client, if any, are available to purchase vaccines, syringes and other equipment necessary to offer quality animal health services. In addition frontline animal health officers have limited incentives to perform well: they consider their salary incommensurate with respect to their levels of responsibility and their work efforts poorly rewarded. Over four out of six do not plan their weekly activities with their supervisor, de facto working alone. Frontline animal health officers also receive little training and, hence, have limited knowledge of the most recent technological and process advancements, of the One Health approach, as well of the existing policy and legislative framework. It is finally worth emphasizing that Nairobi City County and Kiambu Country are among the Kenya counties with the highest aggregate and per-capita gross domestic product, i.e. other counties may face many more challenges to provide effective animal health services. It does not come as a surprise, therefore, that frontline officers in Kiambu and Nairobi City counties contend that livestock operators along the value chain poorly comply with biosecurity practices, and

10 hence that the current policy and legislative framework is partially implemented. For example, according to them, only 42 percent of cattle farmers always or frequently adopt biosecurity practices, 31 percent of small ruminant keepers, 62 percent of poultry farmers, and 50 percent of pig producers. Improving animal health services in both Kiambu and Nairobi City county so that existing animal health policies and legislations are better implemented calls for a three-pronged approach. First, in the long- term, veterinary services should be better funded. This implies either an increased transfer of resources from the national to the county governments or a different allocation of resources at county level. While any increase in resource availability is welcome, it is unlikely that the county governments will access anytime soon sufficient resources to provide high-quality services. Doubling resources overnight, for example, would mean that about KS 430 (USD 4.2) and Ksh 670 (USD 6.2) per livestock farmer per year could become available to provide veterinary services, resources that should also be used to pay for salaries, equipment and other material as well as to provide services to other clients at the various nodes of the livestock value chain. Second, in the medium term, given the limited availability of human and financial resources, county governments could seek to establish a constructive and fruitful partnership with private sector actors. The latter include private animal health service providers, such as private veterinarians and agro-vet shops, farmers and other operators along the livestock value chain, as well as actors such as feed millers, finance institutions and others. Already today, as most of frontline animal health officers utilize their own resources and charge farmers to provide their services, the existing system of animal health services is implicitly based on a cost-sharing arrangement between the public and the private sector, though this arrangement is not institutionalized. Third, in the short term, county governments could improve the working environment of frontline animal health officers. On the one hand, effective information sharing, such as on existing laws and regulations, as well as participatory planning involving all actors from the County Director of Veterinary Services (CDVS) to the Ward veterinary officers, could assist in identifying low-cost adjustments for making the provision of animal health services more effective. On the other hand, an open dialogue with livestock farmers and other value chain actors, which takes into account their challenges and constraints, could also assist in identifying more effective ways to provide veterinary services in the existing institutional environment. Indeed, about 72 percent of all frontline officers' state that there are opportunities to improve their working modalities with no need of additional financial resources. The above analysis and its conclusions should be refined and expanded to other counties of Kenya and avoid being generalized. The results should also prompt the international community to re-think its modalities to support improvement in animal health services provision, in Kenya and in other developing country for that matter. The long-term returns of short-term investments in policy and legislative reviews, a variety of assessments, trainings, provision of ICT equipment and veterinary supplies materialize only if, at the same time, complementary investments are undertaken to improve the institutional framework within which frontline animal health officers operate and provide services to actors along the livestock value chain.

11

References FAO. 2019. The future of Livestock in Kenya: Opportunities and challenges in face of uncertainty. Nairobi: FAO. FAO. 2020. The future of livestock in Kenya. Emerging public health threats in urban and peri-urban areas. Nairobi: FAO. Hoornweg D. and Pope K. 2016. Population predictions for the world's largest cities in the 21st century. Environment & Urbanization 29(1): 195-216. (DOI: 10.1177/0956247816663557). Latino L.R., Pica-Ciamarra U., Wisser D. 2020. : The livestock revolution urbanizes. Global Food Security 20: 100399. (DOI: 10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100399). KNBS. 2019. Kenya Population and Housing Census: Volume IV: Distribution of population by socio- economic characteristics. Nairobi: Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. OIE. 2019. Tool for the Evaluation of Performance of Veterinary Services. Seventh Edition. Paris: World Organization for Animal Health.

12

21 2 .

0

/ 1 / 2021

Some rights reserved. This work is available AO , F under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO licence B30 2 4E N C ©