In Kenya, government programs often begin as temporary interventions designed to address specific challenges. However, many of these programs outlive their initial objectives, morphing into permanent fixtures of the state’s operations.
One notable example is the Youth Enterprise Development Fund (YEDF), introduced in 2006 as a temporary initiative to combat youth unemployment. While its intentions were noble, the fund has faced allegations of corruption, inefficiency, and mismanagement. Despite these issues, it continues to operate, often undergoing restructuring instead of winding down as initially envisioned. The program has become a permanent part of Kenya’s policy landscape, even as questions about its effectiveness linger.
Another example is the Constituency Development Fund (CDF). Initially launched in 2003 to decentralize development and ensure equitable distribution of resources, the CDF was conceived as a stopgap measure. Over two decades later, the fund has not only persisted but expanded its scope. Critics argue that it undermines institutional checks and balances, with members of Parliament wielding disproportionate influence over its implementation. Yet, political resistance to dismantling the CDF is immense, as it has become deeply entrenched in Kenya’s political framework.
Why do temporary programs become permanent in Kenya? One reason is political inertia. Programs that promise economic relief or development become politically sensitive, and leaders are reluctant to terminate them for fear of backlash. Additionally, these programs often create bureaucratic structures that resist dissolution. Once established, these structures develop vested interests, making it difficult to disband them.
The permanence of these programs comes with significant costs. Resources are diverted to sustain inefficient initiatives, often at the expense of new, impactful interventions. Moreover, their long-term existence can breed complacency and corruption, undermining their original goals.
To address this, Kenya must embrace a culture of accountability and periodic program evaluations. Temporary initiatives should have clear timelines, with success measured against specific milestones. Only by recognizing the dangers of institutional stagnation can the country ensure that its programs serve the public interest effectively.
Temporary solutions must not become permanent burdens. The path forward lies in agility and a commitment to meaningful reform
