1. General information
Location and description of the intervention
City or FUA
Nairobi (FUA)
Region
Africa
Short description of the intervention
Kibera is Nairobi's largest slum/informal settlement. Kibera houses about 250,000 people and is the biggest slum in Africa and one of the biggest in the world. The Government owns all the land in this settlement. 10% of people are shack owners and many of these people own many other shacks and let them out to tenants. The remaining 90% of residents are tenants with no rights. Most of the inhabitants confront themselves with a food crisis. The project at Kibera is a recent initiative of the National Youth Service (NYS), a government agency that promotes youth affairs through the ministry of devolution and planning. The approach is seen as a cheap and healthy solution to food insecurity and runaway unemployment in Nairobi’s slum. The project also addresses climate change as food insecurity is related to an intense period of droughts: longer periods of drought (likely a result of climate change) in sub-Saharan Africa, meant the farmers had to depend on rainfall to water their crops. From a biodiversity point of view, the project will help with the urban biodiversity restoration (1,3)
Address

Off Thika Rd
Nairobi
00500
Kenya

Area boundary
POINT (36.7724 -1.307875)
POINT (36.808595 -1.314777)
POINT (36.787733 -1.30559)
NBS area image
Source of NBS area image
Map of the Kibera slum, Image retrieved from Google Maps, Image accesible at https://digital.hbs.edu/platform-digit/submission/map-kibera-empowering-africas-biggest-slum-with-collective-wisdom/ (accessed 13-03-2022)
Type of area before implementation of the NBS
Timeline of intervention
Start date of the intervention (planning process)
pre-1990
Start date of intervention (implementation process)
2007
End date of the intervention
ongoing
Present stage of the intervention
Goals of the intervention
Urban agriculture in Nairobi is practiced in backyard farms, on open spaces under power lines, along roadsides, railway
lines and riverbanks as well as on institutional land. In the mid 1980s, when the urban population reached one million mark, 20% of Nairobi households were growing crops and 17% kept livestock within the city limits. It is estimated that 30% of households in Nairobi are involved in urban farming. The present project has as goals the following:
1. To create social value by the promotion of value-chain development and direct producer– consumer marketing.
2. To provide pluvial flood regulation: Outdoor urban farms increase the amount of pervious surface, and can capture, store, and infiltrate rainwater, reducing runoff.
3. To provide heat regulation: Urban agricultural areas reduce urban heat by creating shade and have an ameliorating effect on the immediate local climate, and in the case of arid climates, increased humidity.
4. To promote the sack gardening technique.
5. To impact biodiversity at all levels: insects, crops, opportunistic plants etc. (1,2,3,4,5)
Quantitative targets
Including 10-13 areas of the slum in the project by spreading thousands of sack gardens in those zones: Makina, Mashimoni, Laini, Saba, Soweto East, Lindi, Silanga, Soweto West, Kianda, Gatwekera, and Kisumu Ndogo
Targeting a population of approx. 700,000 people
Raising the quality of life and the income of the locals to approx. 50 Eur/month as of 2015
Starting with a pack of 100,000 seeds
Engaging 5,000 Kibera households in the project (1,2,4)
Monitoring indicators defined
NUmber of people benefiting from the project
Number of areas included
Number of seeds proposed in the first stage (2007-2008)
Amount of money to measure income above poverty line (1,2,4)
Implementation activities
This is a project that dates back to the 1980s as peri-urban agriculture has always been an integral part in the lives of inhabitants around big cities. In the early 2000s parts of the slam were considered garbage dumps. More than 1,000 people started growing food in a similar way (so, tall sacks, filled with dirt, and people grow crops in them on different levels by poking holes in the bags and planting seeds)–something that Red Cross International recognized during 2007 and 2008 when there was conflict in the slums of Nairobi. No food could come into these areas, but most residents didn’t go without food because so many of them were growing crops–in sacks, vacant land, or elsewhere. The urban farmers grow vegetables such as spinach, kale, green onions and tomatoes, a source of important nutrients to supplement diets dominated by ugali maize meal. The surplus is sold in markets to boost daily income. Small plots were voluntarily given by the communities (without compensation) for the establishment of nursery beds. Solidarités provides the seeds, and community mobi- lisers support the community members in management of the nurseries.
It takes at least three weeks for the seedlings to mature enough to be transplanted into the sacks or kitchen gardens. And already at this stage community participation is impor- tant. It is important to explain that the seedlings will be distributed for free to community members who qualify as per the selection criteria.
In the context of a slum, crops with a short growing period and long-term benefits are needed. For instance, in the first phase of the programme it was noted that (crop bulb) onions took too long to mature, so the participants opted for leafy onions. Furthermore, the quality of the soil and water for irri-gation present challenges. However difficult, it is important to ensure that hygiene and good sanitation are practiced, especially near the seedbeds, to prevent contamination. Throughout the years different international and local organisations provided support to inhabitants and therefore the project is still ongoing. (2,3,4)
NBS domain and interventions
Ecological domain(s) where the NBS intervention(s) is/are implemented
Community gardens and allotments
Allotments
Community gardens
Horticulture
Please specify the number of plots or allotment gardens
Unknown number
Vegetation Type
Amenities offered by the NBS
Please specify "other marginalized group"
The target groups are low-income populations and those affected by HIV/Aids (who need better nutrition) (4)
Services
Expected ecosystem services delivered
Provisioning services
Food for human consumption (crops, vegetables)
Raw materials
Medicinal resources
Regulating services
Local climate regulation (temperature reduction)
Flood regulation
Pollination
Habitat and supporting services
Habitats for species
Pest and disease control
Cultural services
Physical and experiential interactions with plants and animals
Scale
Spatial scale
Micro-scale: District/neighbourhood level
Beneficiaries
Governance
Non-government actors
Non-governmental organisation (NGO) / Civil society / Churches
Citizens or community groups
Please specify the roles of the specific government and non-government actor groups involved in the initiative
It seems that throughout the years, the project has been supported financially and from a know how perspective by different NGO, some international such as NGO Solidarités, or local such as the National Youth Service (NYS), a government agency that promotes youth affairs through the ministry of devolution and planning. (1,4)
District officers and area chiefs were involved in negotiations to obtain land for the nursery beds, in charge of securing access to water through the Nairobi City Council and Nairobi Water Company and of ensuring security of the staff and of seed nursery beds. (5)
Key actors - Other stakeholders involved (besides initiating actors)
Local government/municipality
Non-government organisation/civil society
Citizens or community group
Policy drivers
NBS intervention implemented in response to an Regional Directive/Strategy
No
NBS intervention implemented in response to a national regulations/strategy/plan
Yes
Please specify the national regulations/strategy/plan
The project is not addressing speciffically a national plan, however it is part of the activities of the National Youth Service in regards to food security. The National Youth Service (NYS) is an organisation under the Government of Kenya. (1)
NBS intervention implemented in response to a local regulation/strategy/plan
Unknown
Mandatory or voluntary intervention
Voluntary (spontaneous)
Enablers
Presence of specific city-level GI/NBS vision/strategy/plan - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Presence of specific city-level GI/NBS section/part in a more general plan - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Presence of city network or regional partnerships focused on NBS - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Presence of GI / NBS research project - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify
The project has been the focus of a study from 2013: Gallaher, C.M., Kerr, J.M., Njenga, M. et al. Urban agriculture, social capital, and food security in the Kibera slums of Nairobi, Kenya. Agric Hum Values 30, 389–404 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-013-9425-y
Subsidies/investment for GI / NBS in the city - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Co-finance for NBS
Yes
Co-financing governance arrangements
Yes
Co-governance arrangement
Was this co-governance arrangement already in place, or was it set up specifically for this NBS?
Financing
Total cost
What is/was the Cost/Budget (EUR) of the NBS or green infrastructure elements?
Unknown
What are the total amount of expected annual maintenance costs?
Unknown
What is the expected annual maintenance costs of the NBS or GI elements?
Unknown
Please specify cost savings
Unknown
Please specify total cost (EUR)
Funds have not been mentioned however it was expected that a family can save up to 33 USD/month in sales of the surplus production. (3)
Please specify other source of funding
The project was implemented by Solidarités and funded by the French government. (3)
Type of fund(s) used
Non-financial contribution
Yes
Type of innovation
Please specify technological innovation
This is a process innovation called sack gardening: With very little open space for urban agriculture, sack gardening is well suited for farming in slums because it allows farmers to grow crops in areas with limited space by planting crops into both the top and sides of a large sack. Sacks are built by filling a 50 to 90kg (approx. 110 to 200 lbs) sack with soil and a column of stones in the middle to improve
water filtration. Farmers then transplant seedlings into holes made into the sides of a sack as well as into the top. The majority of farmers grow kale and Swiss chard because these seedlings are easily purchased at local markets, and are also available free from an NGO called Solidarités which offers seedlings and training to farmers. In addition, some farmers have chosen to plant a variety of other crops including green onions, coriander, tomatoes, and several kinds of indigenous vegetables. (5)
Please specify novelty level of the innovation
There are no mentions that the practice was derived from a different project as local seed companies in East Africa are rare, and the Kibera project is a valuable source of affordable seed for rural farmers. (2)
Please specify Replicability/Transferability
The project has been extended to other areas in the Kibera and Kiambiu slums and is also introducinged into other slums:Mathare(alsonearNairobi) and Juba (southern Sudan). Juba is a big slum with very poor access to safe water and sanitation facilities, but very little NGOs work in the city. (4)
Impacts, benefits
Description of environmental benefits
Lowered local temperatures: it was expected from the project's actions to impact local temperatures and lower them however specific data was not released.
Green Space and habitat: A report produced by FAO and the NGO Solidarite in 2009 indicates that approximately 14,000 beneficiaries have received seedlings from the nursery beds.
The project targets 32,000 households, some of which are now cultivating tomatoes, cucumbers, onions, kale or spinach. . Over 18 nursery beds have been established in the Kibera slum.
Indigenous vegetables are also introduced: such as amaranth, okra and African cabbage which contribute to biodiversity conservation.
The projects also creates stable enviornments for pollination and attraction of other insects (2,3,5)
Description of economic benefits
The average person can mak between $40 and $70 per month from selling vegetables (1)
Households with access to three or more sacks have an estimated revenue of around 33 USD per month (5)
By increasing livelihoods’ resilience and reducing vulnerability to food price increases, the project has allowed households to maintain and improve their nutritional status without having to cut back on other expenses such as health and education. (5)

Description of social and cultural benefits
The project is also useful to support the social reinsertion of marginalised people (pick pockets, unemployed youth, etc, who were the main targets for riots and chaos in the slums). As a result, local Authorities reported the project had a positive side impact on social cohesion. (5)
Solidarités started its work with WOFAK (Women Fighting Aids in Kenya), which has been active in Kibera for ten years dealing with HIV/Aids-vulnerable people in the community and KENWA (Kenya Network of Women with Aids). (3)
Type of reported impacts
Indicators
Number of households impacted
Number of nursery beds created
Amount of money generated by the project (2,3,5)
Analysis of specific impact categories
Job creation: The NBS created ...
Environmental justice: The implementation of the NBS project resulted in ...
Please specify other method used to evaluate the impacts of NBS
Community mobilisers were instrumental to the success of the first phase of the programme because of their effective communication, monitoring and follow up. It is important to have community members as mobilisers. The local administration and village elders assisted in the identi- fication of these individuals; but to prevent political interfer- ence, the role of the local administration should be clear and the names given need to be well verified.
The team of mobilisers was composed of varied age groups (between 25 years and 80 years of age) and was balanced in gender. This increased the group cohesiveness and the level of acceptance by their communities. It also proved to be impor- tant that these community mobilisers were adequately paid (with a monthly salary and any other benefits) to ensure full commitment without the need to supplement their salaries. (4)
Negative impacts: Did the project cause any problems or concerns?
No information was found regarding negative impacts of the project
COVID-19 pandemic
Unknown, as of March 13, 2022 there is no information regarding data on Covid19 pandemic.
Methods of impact monitoring
Methods used to evaluate the impacts of NBS
Evidence for use of assessment
Presence of an assessment, evaluation and/or monitoring process
Yes
Presence of indicators used in reporting
No evidence in public records
Presence of monitoring/evaluation reports
No evidence in public records
Availability of a web-based monitoring tool
No
Impact assessment mechanism
Name of any specific impact assessment tools
Unknown
Use of GIS in mapping impacts
No
Citizen involvement
Citizens involvement in assessment/evaluation
Yes
Mode(s) of citizen involvement in evaluation/assessment
Citizens involvement in the analysis of the assessment/evaluation
Yes
Please specify
Community mobilisers were instrumental to the success of the first phase of the programme because of their effective communication, monitoring and follow up. It is important to have community members as mobilisers. The local administration and village elders assisted in the identi- fication of these individuals; but to prevent political interfer- ence, the role of the local administration should be clear and the names given need to be well verified.
The team of mobilisers was composed of varied age groups (between 25 years and 80 years of age) and was balanced in gender. This increased the group cohesiveness and the level of acceptance by their communities. It also proved to be impor- tant that these community mobilisers were adequately paid (with a monthly salary and any other benefits) to ensure full commitment without the need to supplement their salaries. (4)
Follow-up to the evaluation / assessment
Unknown
References
List of references
1. The Guardian (2015), How to grow food in a slum: lessons from the sack farmers of Kibera, available at https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2015/may/18/how-to-grow-food-in-a-slum-sack-farmers-kibera-urban-farming, accessed 13-03-2022)
2. New Internationalist (2011), KIBERA'S VERTICAL FARMS, available at https://newint.org/features/2011/11/01/kibera-urban-farming-in-africa (accessed 13-03-2022)
3. Dave's Travel Corner (2010), Urban Farming in Kibera, available at http://www.davestravelcorner.com/journals/destination-africa/urban-farming-in-kibera/ (accessed 13-03-2022)
4. Solidarite (2009), A Garden in a Sack: Experiences in Kibera, Nairobi, available at https://www.urban-response.org/system/files/content/resource/files/main/pascal-a-garden-in-a-sack-experiences-in-kibera.pdf (accessed 13-03-2022)
5. Solidarite (2009), Soaring food prices and nutrition in urban areas - Sack gardens in KENYA, available at https://cdn.permaculturenews.org/files/SackGardens_in_Kenya.pdf (accessed 13-03-2022)
Comments and notes
Additional insights
Identified challenges:
The biggest challenges identified by the beneficiaries were plant pests and diseases, lack of access to pest control and water as well as the theft of vegetables. However, most of them reported that they received help from Solidarités, for example through spraying of infected plants.
Sanitation systems in slums are very poor. Laboratory tests conducted on soil, irrigated water and foliar samples from sack production at the household level or in the markets, have shown that soils and leaves were contaminated by Escherichia coli. However cooked samples of vegetables were not contaminated.
Getting accurate information is a challenge in the slums: there is no formal way of tracing a house in slums, and slum dwellers exaggerate the description of their situation to ensure they receive emergency aid.
Availability of arable soil is becoming a challenge. Most of the new areas of intervention are very densely populated and community members have to trek for long distances to have access to arable soil to fill their sack gardens, set up nursery beds and demonstration farms. In most cases, the beneficiaries have to source for manure to enhance the fertility of their soils. (4)
Public Images
Image
P1
After intervention - photo
https://cityfarmer.info/urban-slum-transformed-into-urban-farm/
Image
Before intervention in the slums
Before intervention photo
https://cityfarmer.info/urban-slum-transformed-into-urban-farm/
Image
Sack gardening
Sack gardening 1
https://newint.org/features/2011/11/01/kibera-urban-farming-in-africa