Examining President Ruto’s decision to lift the logging ban: Implications and analysis

  • 10 Jul 2023
  • 3 Mins Read
  • 〜 by Naisiae Simiren

President William Ruto has severally made public statements on Kenya’s commitment to going 100% green by 2030, a move that has been lauded by many. Going green for Kenya means investing in green energy which includes promoting green manufacturing, sustainable agriculture, eco-friendly urbanisation, and green transportation. Kenya’s ambitious agenda of adopting 100% green energy in the next seven years means investing in renewable resources that will compensate for the much-needed energy. 

The majority of Kenya’s energy is obtained  from the burning of fossil fuels for industrialisation and development which is the largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Nonetheless, some of the renewable energy resources such as wind energy offer clean energy hence contributing to climate change mitigation. 

Kenya is a party to the 2015 Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement, 2015 is a landmark binding agreement in the multilateral climate change process as it binds all nations to combat climate change and adapt to its effects. Over the years since the entry into force of the Paris Agreement, countries have agreed on carbon-neutrality targets. The energy transition from burning coal and fossil fuels for energy to renewable energy sources requires supportive policies and regulations. 

President Ruto recently lifted a moratorium on logging that he put in place six years ago while serving as Deputy President with the aim of protecting water catchment areas and preventing drought. In a change of tune, the President noted that the lifting of the ban was necessitated by the need to create jobs for the youth in timber harvesting and furniture making. Dr Ruto argued that mature trees were rotting away in the forests and it was of no benefit to the Kenyan economy. This is in addition to the government’s increase of excise duty rate at 30% on imported furniture excluding furniture originating from East African Community Partner States that meet the East African Community Rules of Origin. While there is a need to create employment and promote local furniture industries, lifting the moratorium does more damage than good. Trees help in curbing climate change by removing carbon dioxide from the air, storing carbon in the trees and soil, and releasing oxygen into the atmosphere. 

The lifting of the moratorium will reverse gains made on forest coverage and further contradicts the government’s commitment to planting 15 billion trees in Kenya. This is because the moratorium lift is vulnerable to abuse and could lead to illegal logging and timber poaching that are likely to result in increased floods, landslides, and excessive soil erosion. In addition, lifting the logging ban, if left unmonitored, could also encourage forest encroachment and further lead to more critically denuded forest areas. 

In 2016, Kenya’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement was to abate greenhouse gas emission (GHG) by 30% relative to business as usual (BAU) by 2030 though the Paris Agreement targeted 2025. The lifting of the logging ban will therefore slow the achievement of Kenya’s NDC and the ambitious agenda of transition to 100% green energy by 2030. Notably, the government will be able to realise short-term benefits from the lifting of the logging ban. These include; raising revenue from the timber industry, creating employment and discouraging the importation of wood and furniture. The long-term impact is that as a country, Kenya will be unable to meet its NDC or achieve a 100% transition to green energy.

Illegal logging and tree poaching could further lead to increased carbon emissions taking into account the role of trees in carbon filtration hence resulting in extreme climate change. In order for the government to gain more from the lifting of the moratorium, there should be no room for lax enforcement and monitoring of the tree harvesting system. Government partnership with private sectors could come in handy in developing an effective and efficient system that will ensure gains made from the logging ban are not reversed in addition to the measures taken to combat climate change.