INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 30

Constructive Strategies for Enhancing Public Engagement in

County Governance: A Focus on Nandi, Kenya, 2024.

*Dr. Benjamin Kipkios Ng’etich, PhD & Prof. Jepkemboi Choge, PhD

School of Education, Koitaleel Samoei University College (A Constituent College of the University), Kenya

Corresponding Author

DOI : https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2025.140105

Received: 19 January 2025; Accepted: 24 January 2025; Published: 29 January 2025

Abstract: This article examined the effectiveness of constructive strategies for engaging the public in county governance in

Nandi County, Kenya, 2024. It highlighted that the legal and institutional framework has not ensured public participation as

intended by the Kenya 2010 constitution. The study’s objectives included examining the effectiveness of constructive strategies

for engaging the public in county governance in Nandi County. It utilised Adam Smith’s Rational Choice Model and employed a

concurrent mixed research design, incorporating purposive sampling. Data was collected through questionnaires and interviews,

with secondary data from document analysis. Analysis was done using a statistical package for the social sciences for descriptive

statistics, and qualitative data was processed through thematic analysis. Devolution in Kenya, implemented in 2013, shifted

responsibilities to county governments to enhance transparency and public participation. It allowed citizens to elect local leaders

and engage in decision-making, promoting responsive governance. The County Government Act (2012) emphasises timely access

to information and the role of non-state actors in fostering citizen involvement. The findings revealed that the most common

mode of collaboration was electing project leaders. However, many individuals were unaware of the importance of participation,

leading to low engagement, especially in project identification and implementation. The primary source of information on

development projects was barazas (public meetings). The study concluded that public participation in development projects is

below desired levels as per the County Government Act and recommended that Nandi County should improve public engagement

across all sectors for a more significant impact on constructive strategies.

Keywords: Constructive strategies, County Government, Nandi, Kenya.

Introduction

The concept of public involvement in government decision-making has a rich history that dates back to ancient Greece, around

508 BC. During this time, the significance of constructive strategies for engaging the public in governance became increasingly

acknowledged, marking the establishment of public participation and constitutional laws. However, evidence suggests that

various forms of collaborative engagement may have existed in different regions of the world even before the 5th century BC

(Muse & Narsiah, 2015). Public participation, often referred to as a collaborative approach, extends beyond mere citizen

involvement in electing representatives; it encompasses all processes that facilitate public engagement in decision-making.

Haque (2003) points out that public participation in governance is limited in Eastern Asia despite the region’s strong economies.

Conversely, Latin America is making strides in democracy and citizen engagement, particularly in countries like Bolivia and

Brazil, with a focus on accountability and oversight (Oropeza & Perron, 2013).

Public participation in Africa has changed over the last 30 years. In Ghana’s Upper West Region, low participation is due to

citizen unawareness and limited resources. In contrast, Uganda promotes involvement through strong decentralisation, with local

councils and annual budget conferences that include public input, as seen in the Local Government Development Program

(LGDP). Kenya’s devolution also enhances citizen engagement in governance. Overall, increased participation fosters trust,

informs decisions and strengthens community appreciation for local projects. Participatory development in Kenya began with

donor-funded projects, but the District Focus for Rural Development (DFRD) launched in 1983 faced criticism for ignoring

Indigenous knowledge and remaining centralised (Wakwabubi & Shiverenje, 2003; Chitere & Ireri, 2008). The Physical

Planning Act of 1996 aimed to improve community involvement but failed to educate the public, especially in rural areas

(Okello et al., 2008). After 2001, initiatives like the Local Authority Service Delivery Action Plan (LASDAP) and the

Constituency Development Fund (CDF) enhanced participation, with the CDF effectively decentralising resources to reduce

poverty (Kimani, Nekesa, & Ndungu, 2012). Currently, the 2010 constitution promotes constructive strategies through public

involvement in decision-making, as devolution has strengthened accountability and political engagement (Muriu, 2013).

Devolution in Kenya, implemented in 2013, shifted responsibilities from the central government to county governments,

promoting transparency and public participation in governance (Article 201 (1) (a). This decentralisation allows local authorities

to address community issues better and enhances citizen engagement in decision-making. Kenya’s unique model of devolution,

influenced by South Africa, empowers citizens to elect local leaders and participate in development planning, aiming for more

effective and responsive governance. Citizen participation is anchored on the sovereignty of the people of Kenya, as outlined in

Article 1 (1) of the Constitution. Article 10 (2) (a) recognises public participation as a key national value, emphasising

democracy. Chapter 11 highlights self-governance and citizen involvement in decision-making, focusing on empowerment and

responsible resource use. Key articles, such as 232 (d) and 196 (1) (b), mandate public participation in policy-making and

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 31

legislative processes. The County Government Act (2012) emphasises timely access to information, involvement in law

processes, and the role of non-state actors in oversight for citizen participation.

This article, therefore, provides a comprehensive examination of the research findings, accompanied by a thorough

interpretation of the data and an extensive discussion regarding the various modes of public participation. The study specifically

investigates how the public engages in county development projects, analysing the diverse methods and levels of involvement

utilised by individuals and communities. The findings are organised and presented in direct relation to the overarching research

question, yielding valuable insights into the effectiveness and impact of constructive strategies on public participation to engage

the public on Nandi County governance.

II.

Statement of the Problem

The public participation framework in Nandi County has faced several obstacles, including issues related to corruption and

mismanagement, which have resulted in resource losses and a level of public dissatisfaction. Despite the constitutional measures

designed to promote accountability, challenges such as political disagreements and difficulties in oversight have arisen. These

issues have led to public demonstrations, highlighting the community’s demand for increased transparency, a collaborative

approach, and constructive dialogue with their leaders regarding the ongoing challenges the county faces.

Objectives of the study

The study endeavoured to examine the effectiveness of constructive strategies for engaging the public in county governance in

Nandi County, Kenya, 2024.

III.

Methodology

This article applies the Rational Choice Model to examine constructive and collaborative decision-making in Nandi County. It

suggests that individuals, driven by self-interest, evaluate alternatives in various contexts, including voting and government

oversight. Rational choice theory posits that voters have little incentive to monitor government activities effectively. The theory

informs data collection on participation in government oversight, focusing on attitudes, constraints, and social outcomes

(Callahan, 2007). The study used a mixed-methods design to evaluate constructive strategies for public participation in Nandi

County’s development projects. It involved questionnaires and interviews about participation modes and information access.

The target population was individuals over 18 years, eligible for decision-making, with secondary data used for population

estimates (Kothari, 2004).

This article is a survey of a diverse county population. To minimise sampling error and control bias, the researcher employed

purposive and cluster sampling (Creswell, 2012; Kothari, 2004). The researcher randomly selected six sub-counties and

stratified them into clusters based on ward boundaries, allowing for more precise estimates and reliable results for each ward in

the study. Data was collected in Nandi County across six sub-counties: Nandi North, Nandi East, Chesumei, Nandi Central,

Nandi South, and Tinderet. The population in these areas represents the broader characteristics of the county, making it a

suitable sampling unit. A list of Wards from these six sub-counties was obtained from county offices. Wards are the smallest

units of authority recognised by the constitution and are led by elected Members of County Assembly (MCAs), who participate

in county development legislation.

The sample size for this research was determined using Fisher et al.’s (1991) formula, which is based on national population

statistics and secondary sources for characteristics. It gives for infinite populations. This study used questionnaires with both

closed-ended and open-ended questions and interview schedules to obtain the primary data. Secondary data was obtained by

analysing documents and records on various activities related to public participation. This research used a mixed-methods

approach, analysing both quantitative and qualitative data for reliability and validity. Quantitative results were processed with

descriptive statistics and presented in tables, while qualitative themes were reported alongside to enhance the findings.

IV.

Results and Discussion

Effectiveness of Each Mode of Participation

The researcher sought to find out from the participants which constructive strategies to engage the public they think are the most

effective. This study was tailored to help the researcher cross-check the responses on the involvement of individual respondents

through the various constructive strategies, vis-a-vis opinions on the effectiveness of each approach. The options provided,

therefore, included attending the budget reading, scrutinising records, participating in the demonstrations, and attending for, and

the rest were presented as others.

Table 1: Effectiveness of modes of participation

Effective participation mode

N (%)

Attending budget reading

27(11.6)

Scrutinising records

40(17.2)

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 32

Participation in demonstration

56(24.0)

Attending fora

74(31.8)

Others

36(15.5)

Attending public fora on issues of development projects

The findings from the collected data indicate that attending forums is the most effective mode of participation. This model is

demonstrated by the high number of participants, 74 (31.8%), who identified forums as the most effective means of engagement.

A forum is defined as a public deliberation meeting where individuals gather face-to-face for discussions aimed at addressing

specific issues (Bone, Crockett, & Hodge, 2006). In the context of this study, a forum involves meetings between county

government officials and members of the public. These forums are typically organised by the governor’s office, in collaboration

with six sub-county administrators and county assembly members, to tackle developmental issues, resolve problems, and solicit

public input and ideas.

The results regarding effectiveness further affirm the popularity of forums as a mode of participation. For example, when asked

if they had attended a forum focused on public participation, 56 (24%) participants agreed, while an additional 19 (8.2%)

strongly agreed, resulting in a cumulative total of 75 (32.2%) participants who have attended at least one forum in the past.

Table 2: Participation in the public forum

Mode of participation

Strongly

Disagree

Neither

Disagree

nor Agree

Agree

Strongly

Agree

Attend fora where the governor

or other county executives are

addressing issues of

development around our area.

72(30.9)

53(22.7)

29(12.4)

56(24.0)

19(8.2)

The results indicate that the Nandi County government has done little to promote forums as a means of public participation,

which has led to low attendance. However, the public perceives these forums as effective. The researcher sought to understand

the reasons behind the lack of participation among those who do not attend development forums. For example, there were 72

participants (30.9%) who strongly disagreed with the statement that they usually attend forums, while another 53 participants

(22.7%) disagreed. In total, 125 participants (53.6%) reported that they had never participated in a forum in the past.

Additionally, 29 participants (12.4%) neither agreed nor disagreed about their participation in forums. Those who disagreed

about their attendance provided various reasons, which the researcher considered valuable for planning future public

engagement. Addressing these reasons could lead to higher attendance and greater efficiency.

There are likely many reasons why people are reluctant to attend public forums, but the researcher identified some key factors

through interviews. For instance, one respondent (interview respondent 1) stated, “They are not effective since not everybody is

invited, and such workshops create a pretence of public opinion.” This comment aligns with the findings of Burkhalter, Gastil,

and Kelshaw (2002), who noted that people often leave forums feeling disappointed and discouraged. This feedback could help

to identify and address the underlying resentment and mistrust towards planners, as well as the unintended negative effects of

technical planning practices.

Regarding workshops, another respondent (interview respondent 8) mentioned, “They are only held in halls far from us.” This

response highlights the issue of accessibility, which should be a concern for the county government. Moreover, a different

respondent (interview respondent 3) commented on barazas, stating, “The barazas are very inactive.” This response suggests that

barazas may not be delivering the expected outcomes. Other responses about attending public forums included feedback from

respondent 7, who noted, “Not all people can manage to attend them.”

Additionally, interview respondent 9 pointed out the lack of awareness, saying, “There is a lack of awareness or knowledge

about such forums.” While it was anticipated that many people would be informed about county communications, these

responses indicate otherwise. Interview respondent 12 also shared, “I have not been invited to any forum or received any

information related to meetings. “The results indicate that the Nandi County government has made limited efforts to promote

forums for public participation, leading to low attendance. However, the public views these forums as effective. The researcher

aimed to understand why many people do not attend. Specifically, 72 participants (30.9%) strongly disagreed that they usually

attend forums, and 53 participants (22.7%) disagreed, resulting in 125 participants (53.6%) stating they had never attended a

forum. Additionally, 29 participants (12.4%) were neutral about their participation.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 33

Participants offered various reasons for their lack of attendance. One respondent noted, “They are not effective since not

everybody is invited, creating a false impression of public opinion,” which reflects sentiments expressed by Burkhalter, Gastil,

and Kelshaw (2002) about disappointment with forums. Another respondent mentioned that workshops are often held far from

their communities, raising concerns about accessibility. A different comment pointed out that barazas are inactive and may not

yield the expected results.

Many responses highlighted a lack of awareness about these forums, with one participant stating they had not been invited or

informed of any meetings. Addressing these issues could enhance public engagement and increase attendance at future forums.

The results from the above interviews show that the use of a forum as a mode of public participation is popular, though not as

expected. A comparison of those who at least agree to have attended a forum in the past 75(32.2%) and those who think fora as

a form of participation is effective, 74(31.8%) reveal a slight difference in participation. The low attendance, which again

reflected in those who think the mode is effective, explains why Bone, Crockett and Hodge (2006) noted that, for public fora to

succeed, those planning should frame the issues so that they are clear to all participants; convene the process and ensure all

stakeholders are involved.

Participation in Demonstrations

According to the data collected, participation in demonstrations is the second most effective mode of participation, at

56(24.0%). The researcher again compared the results with those of a question on whether individual respondents in this study

have ever been involved in demonstrations to protest negative developments in government projects and plans.

Table 3: Participation in the demonstration

Mode of participation

Strongly

Disagree

Neither

Disagree

nor

Agree

Strongly

Agree

Participate in demonstrations

to protest against specific

county government plans and

projects

82(35.2)

65(27.9)

42(18.0)

26(11.2)

15(6.4)

The results indicate that 26(11.2%) strongly agreed to have taken part in demonstrations and another 15(6.4%) strongly agreed

to have participated. The number of participants in this study who have been part of a demonstration is cumulatively 41(17.6%).

Those who think demonstration is an effective mode of participation in government projects are more than those who have taken

part in such demonstrations. The results from the data collected indicate that 82(35.2%) participants in the sampled population

strongly disagree with their participation in demonstrations, and another 65(27.9%) also indicated that they disagree.

Cumulatively, those who have never been part of a demonstration are 147(63.1%). There are 42(18%) participants who neither

agree nor disagree. The results of both those who disagree and those who neither agree nor disagree form a significant part of

the participants in this research study. This view can be interpreted to mean that the members of the public are not sure if this is

the right way to solve grievances. This perspective can be understood from the standpoint of the Rational Choice Theorist, so

that in this study, participation comes at a cost. An individual’s choice to participate in the demonstration is subjective to

constraints and social outcomes. For instance, if demonstrations could receive social approval, then it could increase the

psychological benefits of participation. However, based on the understanding of the demonstration available out there, it could

become a constraint, hence removing it as an alternative for certain groups in the population. For example, people may have

perceived demonstrations to be a method used by idlers and bad people in society.

The difference in participation can be attributed to the nature of activities involved in demonstrations that do not favour the old,

physically challenged persons and those who fear violent activities. Some of the so-called peaceful demonstrations have ended

up, on many occasions, violent and with casualties. Also, most demonstrations take place in urban areas because they are meant

to capture the attention of senior government officials and the media. Based on Innes and Booher, (2000) explanation, there may

be misconceptions that have led to people being silent and tongue-tied concerning misdeeds or non-performance on the side of

public officials.

Another way to understand this is that there have never been any demonstrations in their area or on any development issue

concerning them. Demonstrations are a rare phenomenon in rural areas of the country. Most demonstrations take place in urban

areas, and they may have an insignificant impact if held in rural areas. This scenario explains the discrepancy in attendance, but

on many occasions, the method is efficient, and the results are almost guaranteed.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 34

Scrutinising records to seek information on projects

Scrutinising records came third in efficiency, with the support of 40(17.2%) of the participants in this study. Scrutinising records

involves going through the county documents to check them against what one knows or expects. Records scrutinising is a

process of finding out information which may not be readily available to the public but is accessible through the county offices

or the county website.

Scrutinising records may not be effective across the population in this study because of the technicality in understanding such

records as can be found in the county government. Applying the rational choice theory, therefore, scrutinising records is not a

possible alternative for participation for all members of the population. The inability to meet the cost of participation in this

mode automatically creates a limitation on the use of the mode. In that sense, it requires one to be trained or to be an expert in a

given field or even more to receive an explanation. In another question, when the respondents were asked whether they had

participated in scrutinising records, 32(13.7%) did affirm their participation in such an exercise. There are a further 13(5.6%)

who strongly agree to have participated in scrutinising county records on development, bringing the total of those who have

participated to 45(19.3%).

Table 4: Participation in scrutinising records

Mode of participation.

Strongly

Disagree.

Neither Disagree nor

Agree.

Strongly

Agree

Participate in scrutinising

records to seek information

about a particular project.

91(39.1)

70(30.0)

21(9.0)

32(13.7)

13(5.6)

The results confirm that, indeed the mode of participation ranks third most effective. The differences in numbers for those who

have participated 45(19.3%) and those who think it is the third most effective 40(17.2%) can be explained. Not all of those who

participated think the exercise provided them with the information they needed, and therefore, only 40(17.2%) found value in

the exercise. This percentage is acceptable since not all who are literate can understand county government records. As Kauzya

(2007) explained, scrutinising written documents by members of the public is for the purpose of judging the accuracy of the

information provided. The researcher notes that some records are complex to understand, and unless one gets the required

assistance, the records can be of little significance. Levels of understanding differ and may very well be the reason others

thought the method was not effective in providing the much-desired information about a given project.

Another possible reason is that access to such records may have financial implications. Some records, such as tender documents,

may require buying copies from cybercafé. Some require internet access, which also requires paying. One respondent explained

that scrutinising records can be the best, but there is no motivation to spend money on such a course. For instance, on print

media, the respondent indicated that they are “not effective because not all people can manage to afford them.”

Participation in budget reading at the County headquarters

Attending budget reading is not a popular mode, with only 27(11.6%) of the study participants indicating that it is effective.

Table 5: Participation in budget reading at the County headquarters

Mode of participation

Strongly

Disagree

Neither Disagree

nor Agree

Agree

Strongly

Agree

Regularly attend a budget

reading at the county

headquarters

119(51.1)

60(25.8)

28(12.0)

20(8.6)

3(1.3)

When the results were checked against those of participation in attending the budget reading, 20(8.6%) participants agreed with

the opinion that they regularly attended the budget reading, and another 3(1.3%) strongly agreed. There was a total of 23(9.9%)

participants in the study who attended the budget reading.

There is a small difference between those who think attending budget reading is effective as a mode of participation in

government projects and those who actually attend. More think it is effective than those who attend the budget reading sessions.

This result can be interpreted to mean the method is effective, but because of the difficulty in understanding budget issues,

people opt for much easier modes of participation. Budget reading takes place at the county headquarters annually at the start of

the government financial year. At the budget reading forum, a breakdown of all county activities and allocations to various

ministries are unveiled to the public. The process is aimed at promoting transparency on the use of public funds by the county

government. The public is then able to demand accountability and monitor the projects to ensure the prudent use of county

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 35

government resources for the public good. The rational choice is based on the level of education of individuals and their

understanding of financial records, which allows them to participate effectively and demand what is due for their government

expenditure.

The fact that budget reading takes place at the county headquarters can cause inconveniences to people living in far places,

hence a higher cost of participation. Utilising the Rational choice theory, individuals are likely to attend or ignore such budget

reading functions depending on how much it costs or the benefits they draw from the process. For example, some of the rural

dwellers could be willing to participate, but due to proximity to the county headquarters, they are not able to attend.

For instance, results on the attendance of budget reading showed that 119(51.1%) participants in the study strongly disagreed

that they regularly attended budget reading at the county headquarters. Another 60(25.8%) disagree with the opinion that they

regularly attend budget reading at the county headquarters. Cumulatively, 179(76.9%) disagree with the opinion of having ever

attended the budget reading. These results suggest that attendance of budget reading in not a popular mode of participation

among the residents of Nandi County. Those who indicated that they neither agree nor disagree with the opinion could mean

they are not able to determine the relevance of such an exercise. This situation could also be attributed to the fact that county

budget reading is not well-popularised as a mode of participation, and therefore, people think their attendance is of little

significance. The respondents, for instance were asked a question on whether they could tell the budget allocation for road

projects in their area. The results from the data were tabulated as follows:

Table 6: Knowledge of budget allocation for road projects

Awareness of budget allocation for road projects

Yes

(14.2)

189

(81.1)

Those who know the budget allocation for road projects in their area are 33(14.2%). A significant number, 189(81.1%), do not

have any idea about the amount of money allocated for road projects in their area. There was an open-ended question that

sought an explanation on why the participants could not tell allocations for the particular roads around their area.

From the responses, the researcher found out that many people do not have information about county allocation on roads.

Different reasons can explain that, for instance, in some of the respondents, site accessibility to such information is the main

challenge. That information is, however, public and should be easily accessible to all the residents of Nandi County. Some of the

responses also point out the inefficiency of the county officials in communicating information concerning county developments.

For instance, instead of reading the budget at the county headquarters, the budget unveiling process can be further delocalised to

the sub-county level. That will promote participation on the side of the public and help avoid invalid claims of corruption on the

side of public officials. An informed population is an empowered population that can ensure effective public monitoring of

county projects.

A keen analysis of the qualitative responses from all the participants reveals, among other possible reasons, that the proximity of

the county headquarters from where most people live is likely to affect attendance. There is limited information reaching the

public either intentionally or because of some barriers. Other reasons may include the fact that most of the information released

during such forums is technical and may not be presented in simple language. There is no motivation for individuals with

limited knowledge of financial matters unless the county works to ensure that information is presented in the simplest manner

possible. All these reasons border on the efficacy of budget reading as a mode of public participation.

Other modes of participation listed by survey respondents

When given the option to list any other modes of participation that participants thought could be more efficient if used, they

listed a number. They include election of representatives in projects, seminars, partnerships, workshops, signed petitions and

elected leaders (Members of County Assembly). The researcher picked a few that had additional data from other questions in

the study to check on the reliability of the results. Those picked include the election of representatives in county projects,

seminars, and providing labour in county government projects and workshops. Overall, the results indicate that other modes had

36(16.5%) efficiency. The results of the question on individual respondents’ participation in the modes listed are tabulated as

follows:

Table 7: Other modes of participation

Modes of participation

Strongly

Disagree

Neither Disagree nor

Agree

Strongly

Agree

Participated in providing labour in county

government projects

93(39.9)

69(29.6)

18(7.7)

38(16.3)

12(5.2)

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 36

Participated in the election of leaders to serve in

particular projects funded by the county

government.

75(32.2

37(15.9)

14(6.0)

65(27.9)

41(17.6)

Attended seminars/workshops that provide

education on participation in county

government plans and projects

79(33.9)

65(27.9)

23(9.9)

44(18.9)

21(9.0)

Providing labour in county projects

Providing labour in development projects is a means of public participation. 38(16.3%) participants indicated that they have

participated by providing labour in county development projects. Another 12(5.2%) strongly agree that they have participated in

providing labour in county government development projects. Cumulatively, those who have provided labour in government

projects in the past are 50(21.5%).

On another hand, 93(39.9%) of the participants in this study strongly disagree with having provided labour in any county

development project. Another 69(29.6%) indicated that they disagreed with the opinion. Hence, a cumulative 162(69.5%) do not

agree with the opinion on having provided labour. The researcher was keen to understand why so many of the respondents have

not rendered their service in development projects. These findings necessitated finding out information on the distribution of

county projects with the help of an interview schedule. For example, the researcher carried out an analysis of the interview

schedule responses using the theme “development projects”. On roads, respondent number 1 explained that “nothing currently

but previous road construction”. Another one, respondent 81, pointed out that “not aware of any”. The responses signify the

presence of few or no development projects within some areas.

Although one can argue that usually, those who work in public development projects are employed on wages or salary, it is

important to note that the government recommends that they be sourced from the area of the project. That is to ensure the locals

benefit and, at the same time, own the project. Only technical or skilled labour that cannot be found in the particular area of the

project can be sourced from outside. In areas where contractors have been perceived to outsource labor especially those

available locally, it has elicited negative reactions both from the public and local leadership. For example, road project contracts

from the county government of Nandi are expected to source human resources locally so as to open opportunities for the people

around the area where the project is being implemented.

Participation through elections of project leaders

In this study, the researcher sought to find out participants’ opinions on the election of leaders in projects funded by the county

government. The efficacy of an electoral process is dependent on a properly structured electoral system and the independence of

such bodies. In Kenya, elections are a characteristic of our governance structure. Leaders both at the national and county

governments ascend to power through a popular vote in elections. The same is replicated in the elections taking place at the

lowest level, including in development projects.

Results suggest that many participants may have used elections. For instance, 65(27.9%) participants agree that they have

participated in the election of leaders for particular projects, and another 41(17.6%) strongly agree. Cumulatively, those who

agree that they have participated in the election of leaders for particular county projects are 106(45.5%). The difference between

those who agree and those who do not is smaller for this opinion, meaning that such elections are there. It is, however not clear

as to why people do not take part so that close to half the population participates while the rest do not take part.

The results show that 75(32.2%) participants strongly disagree to have participated in any election in county projects. Another

37(15.9%) disagree with the opinion that they have participated in the election of leaders in county projects. Cumulatively, those

who disagree with the given opinion are 112(48.1%). There are 14(6%) who neither agree nor disagree on their participation in

such elections as for particular project leaders. This high number of residents who do not participate in elections supports

Aklilu, Belete, and Moyo’s (2014) explanation that elections are less effective as an accountability mechanism. Another thing

about elections is that they cannot be of use in transforming a regime that tolerates poor performance. Elections do not also

provide a means to give feedback. These elections confirm the postulations of the Rational Choice Theory that self-interest

motivates individuals to participate only if it is rational. In this case, if casting an informed vote does not guarantee maximum

benefits, then the process is not worth the cost.

Participation in seminars and workshops

Seminars and workshops are meetings between trainers and participants in a given area. Both seminars and workshops are

aimed at the dissemination of knowledge in order to achieve a desired level of understanding. 44(18.9%) agree to have attended

a seminar on public participation, and another 21(9%) strongly agree with the opinion. Cumulatively, those who agree to have

attended at least a seminar or workshop in the past are 65(27.9%). This number is relatively small and may point out reasons as

to why it is perceived to have low-efficiency levels.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 37

On another hand, 79(33.9%) participants strongly disagreed to have participated in any seminars that provided education on

public participation rights. 65(27.9%) participants disagree with the given opinion. Cumulatively, those who disagree with this

opinion are 144(61.8%), meaning they have never attended a seminar on public participation. There are some 23(9.9%)

participants who neither agree nor disagree with the opinion.

Based on these results, those who disagree to have participated in any seminar in the past are 144(61.8%) compared to only

65(27.9%) who agreed to the opinion that they have attended a seminar in the past. This situation means seminars may not be

popularly used as a mode of public participation in Nandi County. The other way to understand this is that the seminars may be

there, but due to the vast nature of the county, they are organised only in a few areas. It is also possible that people are not

able to differentiate seminars from the other modes of participation like the “meet the people tour” by the governor and county

officials.

To clarify any uncertainty regarding participants’ ability to distinguish seminars from other types of involvement, the researcher

decided to compare the responses to this question with those from an earlier question in the survey. The earlier question asked

whether respondents had attended any training sessions, seminars, or meetings organised by the county government to

emphasise the importance of public participation.

Table 8: Attendance of training, seminar or meeting on public participation

Yes (%)

No (%)

Attended training, seminars or meetings organised

by the county government.

71(30.5)

162(69.5)

The researcher sought to find out if the participants had attended trainings, seminars or meetings organised by the county

government officials in the past to teach the importance of public participation. The results indicate that 71(30.5%) of the

participants in the study had attended at least a training, seminar, or meeting. However, as many as 162(69.5%) have never

attended anything organised by the county government on public participation. The question was answered by all the

participants, confirming that it was clearly understood and the answers provided therefore depicted the true situation on public

participation efforts in Nandi County. The comparison was helpful in understanding the previous results on attendance of a

seminar. For example, those who have attended at least a seminar increased from 65(27.9%) previously before broadening the

options to 71(30.5%) for training, seminars, or meetings. Those who have never attended any increased from 144(61.8%)

previously before broadening the options to 162(69.5%).

Strikingly the 23(9.9%) participants who neither agreed nor disagreed with the opinion that they have attended a seminar got to

be sure and indicated either Yes or No. This percentage means the doubts had been removed and could easily tell whether they

had attended training, seminars, or meetings so long as it was teaching on public participation.

The research sought to identify the reasons for those who indicated that they had never attended anything to do with public

participation pieces of training. Except for a few who cited their absence from the county or work-related reasons, many did

explain that they had never heard of such a meeting, seminar or forum aimed at training on public participation. From the

results, it is evident that the constitution of Kenya (CoK, 2010), which supports access to information on public service

management by citizens has not been fully implemented. This access is a key ingredient to active and effective citizen

participation. The constitution directs Kenya’s national and county assemblies to perform their roles openly and transparently.

Article 118 (1) (a) specifically directs the national and county assemblies, respectively, to hold public meetings and function

openly to the full view of citizens.

The results also proved that the governor of Nandi County may not have implemented the provisions of the County Government

Act (2012), which were meant to solve problems of public participation. The governors are directed to ensure public

participation as per the provision of the County Government Act 2012 (30) (3) (g), which requires governors to promote and

ensure the facilitation of citizen participation in the development of plans and policies and the delivery of services in the county.

For example, one interviewed respondent explained that “The County of Nandi has done less than expected since there are no

projects and good communication on what or which projects the county will do”. Another respondent, 3, explained that “Public

participation may be done, but the views given during participation ends up being disregarded by the executive or enablers”. The

above explanations give a sense of apathy; people expect more but receive too little or none. There was also another interview

respondent, seven, who explained that “Poor means of informing the public on participation make hard to understand.” Other

participants who took part in the survey gave the following narratives;

“The county government does selective public participation depending on the level of implementation of the project” (Survey

respondent 38). “The participation organisers do not mobilise participants in advance. The same organisers do not give the low

living standard people to express their issues during forums” (Survey respondent 56). “The county government has not educated

the public on their rights, including those of public participation” (Survey respondent 77). “In my opinion, the county

government has a long way to go in public participation. The first step must be educating the public that they have a lot to do by

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 38

participating in each project in the county that concerns them” (Survey respondent 165).

There are a few, however, who indicated that the county has done their work of educating the public properly. For example,

“They have actually done some projects, but some are not completed. They inform us”. (Survey respondent number 16) “The

county has constantly conveyed a plan of action”. (Survey respondent number 90).

From the results in this section, the county government of Nandi has to improve their pieces of training, seminars and meetings

to ensure more people are reached. It could be true, however, that the county government does not invest much time and

resources on face to face-to-face meetings for fear of criticism from those who oppose the regime. Kauzya (2007) explained that

those who attend public hearings tend to be mostly the critics of government. This cohort affects government engagements with

the public because it ends up reflecting the nature and extent of the opposition. Such challenges notwithstanding, Bone, Crockett

and Hodge (2006) point out that public fora or face-to-face meetings are not about winning or losing but rather about listening to

individual experiences, concerns and what they value in regard to issues as well as hard facts. The nature of meetings is such

that, they build on the existing capacity of the public to think, articulate and act together for a common good. The choices are

then made considering the values and divergent views of people.

Lobbying for issues through elected leadership

The researcher sought to know if the individual participants in the study had ever lobbied on issues that required them to send

the Member of County Assembly (MCA) to address a specific issue. The results of the study showed that 83(35.6%)

participants indicated they had lobbied. The rest, 148(63.5%), have never lobbied, and only 2(0.9%) never responded to the

question. The results can be interpreted to mean that lobbying through elected leaders is not a popular form of public

participation. There are a few reasons that can explain this. First, it could be that the political leaders make it difficult to

reach them. Some participants answered the second part of the question open-ended, which sought to clarify the particular

issues they were lobbying. Responses received include,

“Reconstruction of damaged roads and supply of tap water to the community” (Survey respondent 53). “I have sent MCA to

make a follow-up Kenya power last mile electricity supply in our area, also to improve our ward rural roads” (Survey

respondent 91). “The issue of feeder roads in my village to be upgraded, water pipes to enable members of the public have clean

water in their homes” (Survey respondent 103).

These are but a few responses. Many of those who responded confirmed there is some level of lobbying that goes on throughout

Nandi County. Some of the projects they lobbied for have been done, while others await future actions. The fact that some of the

projects are already done confirms Irimieș (2017) postulations that, lobbying allows the decision-making processes and

institutions to achieve higher accuracy in the control of interests, priorities and the orientation of representative groups. The

representatives are able to respond to demands and issues and respond in a timely and accurate manner.

Participation in signing petitions

Another question was to find out if individual participants have ever petitioned against a proposal by the county government.

The results of the data collected for this question indicated that, only 12(5.2%) have participated in such an exercise. Many of

the participants, 217(93.1%), have never petitioned the county government. Only 4(1.7%) participants did not respond to the

question. The researcher notes that very few people have signed any petition. An analysis of the 12(5.2%) responses to the open-

ended question of the survey questionnaire proves that few people will take such initiatives. This cohort may be the preserve of

a few with technical knowledge or who are driven by specific interests.

Further analysis of the educational backgrounds of those who provided the narratives indicates that they possess a significant

level of expertise across various fields. Notably, all five individuals have attained university-level education. Survey respondent

14 did not specify their occupation, while respondents 26, 56, and 97 are both teachers, and respondent 155 is a retired high

school principal. This group suggests that leaders involved in any petition efforts should be individuals with a robust

understanding of the relevant issues. As members of the societal elite, these petition participants, due to their higher educational

qualifications compared to many, may feel a sense of obligation to engage in areas where others might lack the ability to

contribute.

V. Conclusion

In conclusion, this article notes that there is public participation in Nandi County. From the research findings, participation is

not as effective as was envisioned by the constitution of Kenya in 2010. There is, however, great improvement in participation

in the devolved unit compared to the previously centralised management at the national level. The public is aware of public

participation and the importance of their participation, but the researcher noted that members of the public cannot tell when to

participate and where. This study, therefore, concludes that Nandi County has not done enough to sensitise the public on the

importance of their participation. The county has also not made clear the role of the public in development projects.

The article further notes that there are many ways the public can participate in county development projects. They include

participation in budget preparation, attending fora, scrutinising records, elections of project leaders and seminars. Public

participation is present at all stages of development projects. Participation is, however, lower than the desired levels. There are

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,   
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS) 
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025 
www.ijltemas.in                                                                                                                                                                      Page 39 
many sources of information for the public on county development projects. The county has, however, failed to identify the 
most appropriate way or channel of information to the various categories of their clients. 
It was also established that many people are not bothered by the budget allocations for various government projects in their area. 
Also,  some  modes  of  participation,  for  example,  budget reading,  scrutinising records and  signing petitions are likely  to  be 
influenced by factors like level of education, individual occupations and proximity from the county headquarters. This situation 
is in line with the postulations of Rational Choice Theorists that constrains affect an actor’s choice. The modes of participation 
provided in the study were not exhaustive. Participants indicated that there are other modes, including consultations, working 
groups, workshops and partnerships. 
VI. Recommendations 
This study, therefore, recommends that the Nandi County government should educate the public on formal and informal modes 
of participation, empowering citizens to voice concerns about mismanagement. This approach should include promoting strong, 
community-driven, and knowledgeable civil  society organisations. Furthermore, the government  should inform the public of 
their roles in development projects, emphasising that monitoring can involve independent individuals or community groups, not 
just  government  authorities.  Those  responsible  for  overseeing  county  projects  should  be  held  accountable,  as  successful 
participation in development relies on valuing public opinion throughout planning, implementation, and evaluation. 
The  government  should  prioritise  establishing  effective  communication  channels  to  clearly  disseminate  information  to  the 
public, empowering citizens to hold officials accountable during project development. Encouraging direct public feedback is 
essential  for  reporting misconduct related  to public resources.  For  example, the  county  could  form advisory  committees of 
citizens to gather insights on public opinion while being mindful of the diverse values among members to prevent conflicts that 
may  hinder  effectiveness.  Additionally,  the  county  government  should  actively  promote  public  participation  in  all  sector 
development projects to maximise their positive impact. 
References 
1.  Aklilu, A., Belete, A., & Moyo, T. (2014). Analysing Community Participation in the Municipal Integrated Development 
Planning  Processes  in  Limpopo  Province,  South  Africa.  Mediterranean  Journal  of  Social  Sciences,  5(25),  257-257. 
Retrieved on 17
th 
January 2024 from https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/289871435 
2.  Bone, Z., Crockett, J., & Hodge, S. (2006). Deliberation forums: a pathway for public participation. Practice change for 
sustainable communities: Exploring footprints, pathways and possibilities, 1–16. 
3.  Burkhalter, S., Gastil, J., & Kelshaw, T. (2002). A conceptual definition and theoretical model of public deliberation in 
small face—to—face groups. Communication theory, 12(4), 398-422. 
4.  Callahan, K. (2007). Citizen participation: Models and methods. International Journal of Public Administration, 30(11), 
1179–1196.  Retrieved  on  16
th
  September  2024  from  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233360483_Citizen_ 
Participation_Models_and_Methods 
5.  Chitere,  P.,  &  Ireri,  O.  (2008).  District  Focus  for  Rural  Development  as  a  Decentralized  Planning  Strategy:  An 
Assessment of its implementation in Kenya. Kibua, TN and Mwabu, G. eds. 
6.  Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. 
Pearson Education, Inc. 
7.  Fisher,  A.  (1991).  Calculating  a  sample  size.  In  Jung,  S.  H.  (2014).  Stratified  Fisher’s  exact  test  and  its  sample  size 
calculation. Biometrical Journal, 56(1), 129–140. 
8.  Haque,  M.  S.  (2003).  Citizen  participation  in  governance  through  representation:  Issue  of  gender  in  East  Asia. 
International  Journal  of  Public  Administration,  26(5),  569–590.  Retrieved  on  15
th
  July  2020  from 
http://ap4.fas.nus.edu.sg/fass/polhaque/ijpa-gn.pdf 
9.  Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2000). Public participation in planning: new strategies for the 21
st
 century. 
10.  Irimieș,  L.  M.  (2017).  Lobbying  and  Social  Participation–Key  Features  for  an  Effective  Public  Administration  in 
Romania. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 13(SI), 57-73. 
11.  Kauzya,  J.  M.  (2007).  Political  Decentralisation  in  Africa:  Experiences  of  Uganda,  Rwanda  and  South  Africa. 
Decentralising governance: emerging concepts and practices. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC, 75-91. 
12.  Kenya Law Report, (2012). County Governments Act No. 17 of 2012. The National Council for Law Reporting with the 
Authority of the Attorney-General. (www.kenyalaw.org). Microsoft Word - Paged County Governments Act _No. 17 of 
2012_.doc Accessed on 12
th
 September 2024. 
13.  Kimani, F., Nekesa, P., & Ndungu, B. (2012). Best practices in constituency development fund (CDF). A Paper Prepared 
for the Collaborative Centre for Gender and Development and International Development Research. Retrieved from on 
19
th
  October  2024.  https://unwomen.org%2Fresources%2Fdocs% 
2Fgendereqaulity%2FCCGD_Best%2520Practices%2520in%2520CDF_2008.pdf 
14.  Kothari, C.  R.  (2004).  Research methodology:  Methods and techniques. New Age 
15.  Muriu, A. R. (2013). Decentralisation, citizen participation and local public service delivery: a study on the nature and 
influence of citizen participation on decentralised service delivery in Kenya (Master’s thesis, Potsdam: Universitätsverlag 
Potsdam). Available at http://hdl.handle.net/10419/104749. Accessed on 7th May 2024. 

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue I, January 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 40

16. Muse, S. A., & Narsiah, S. (2015). Public Participation in Selected Civilisations: Problems and Potentials. Journal of

Sociology and Social Anthropology, 6(3), 415-421.

17. Okello, M., Oenga, I., & Chege, P. (2008). Participatory Urban Planning Toolkit based on the Kitale Experience.

Available at https://knowledgebase.permaculture. Org.uk/resources/books/participatory-urban-planning-toolkit-based-

kitale- experience-guide-community-based

18. Oropeza, J., & Perron, M. (2013). Citizen Participation in Latin America: Innovations to Strengthen Governance.

Retrieved on 23

April 2024 from http://ella.practicalaction.org/knowledge-guide/citizen-participation-in-latin-

america-innovations-to-strengthen-governance/

19. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students. Pearson education.

20. Wakwabubi, E., & Shiverenje, H. (Eds.). (2003). Guidelines on Participatory Development in Kenya: Critical Reflection

on Training, Policy and Scaling Up. Participatory Methodologies Forum of Kenya (PAMFORK).