Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165

Determinants of Land Conflicts and their Impacts

Social Cohesion in Nakuru County, Kenya
Evanson Njiru Nyaga, 254-721-685-619
Doctoral Student, Department of Political Science and Peace Studies, Kisii University, Kenya
P.O. Box 408, Kisii, Kenya

Abstract:- Land in Kenya is both complex and emotive over land-based resources like oil (Klare, 2002). Other
as a number of people have lost their lives over it due to international conflicts related to natural resources with the
high degree of inequality in ownership, access and use. base on land include the conflict between India and
Based on where people live, their ancestry and form of Pakistan over the state of Kashmir; Israel and Syria over
land acquisition have often fueled land related conflicts. Western Golan Heights; Korea and North Korea over
This study sought to understand the determinants of Korean Peninsula; Russia and Ukraine over Crimean
land conflicts and their impacts on social cohesion in Peninsula which was occupied by Russia in 2014 and
Nakuru, one of the cosmopolitan counties in Kenya. The assessed by the UN to be part of Ukraine, among other
study is grounded on these objectives: to establish global conflicts. These conflicts have affected security,
historical development of Land Tenure disputes, to peace and social cohesion among the populations of these
examine deployed Land Tenure systems and challenges nations. Whereas right to property ownership is a universal
to secure land ownership and their implications on human right enshrined in the Universal Declaration of
social cohesion. The study is underpinned on the Human Rights (UDHR, 1948), dispossession of people of
Entitlement Theory and used mixed method research their property in some countries persist (Huth and Allee,
design with a sample size of 500 respondents. The 2002).
research established that historical land disputes have
negative implications on social cohesion; deployed land In Africa, is known for frequent conflicts that no other
tenure systems did not provide necessary security and world continent has experienced, notable in regional
stability to land owners; while issues of negative conflicts include Ethiopia – Eritrea; Sudan and South
ethnicity, divisive politics, widespread corruption, Sudan over ownership of several states including Abyei;
unresolved historical injustices, among other factors, Ethiopia and Somalia over the Ogaden region; Kenya and
impede the attainment of secure land ownership in Somalia over the boundaries of a maritime region along the
Kenya, leading to conflicts. The study recommends for Indian Ocean. There are also inter- ethnic conflicts over
sustainable efforts to ensure secure and stable land land itself leading to massive deaths and displacement of
ownership, enforcement of laws criminalizing political people among communities, as well as erosion of peace,
incitements and ethnic hate speeches; frantic fight security, justice and equality in the society (Derman,
against corruption, involvement of communities in Odfaard and Sjaastad, 2007). The conflicts have had
seeking solution to historical land injustices and negative impact on the quality of social relations among
sensitizing community members against negative to communities, (UNDP, 2015) and interferes with respect of
enhance social cohesion. individual and people’s collective freedoms, their economic
well-being, while undermining the value of tolerance and
Keywords:- Land Conflicts, Social Cohesion, Land diversity among groups (Delhey et al, 2018).
Ownership.
Kenya is one of the countries most affected by land
I. INTRODUCTION related conflicts with ethnic bearing, driven by the fact that
land is the most valued factor of production in Kenya, with
Conflicts over natural resources are a prominent over 80% of the population relying on the only 20% that is
global feature, often blended with ethnic, religious and arable for the practice of agriculture, leading to increased
tribal resentments and pose a serious social threat to global competition (Okowa, 2015). Additionally, land conflicts
peace and stability (Klare, 2002). Land is one of such have long colonial imprints; they are considered to have
natural resources considered the most valuable, with an started during colonial era and continue to persist in post-
ever-appreciating monetary value and the foundation of all colonial Kenya due to colonial land policies and
other economic resources such as minerals which drives frameworks that led to dispossession, dislocation and
conflicts globally (Sifuna, 2009). This is witnessed in the displacement of local communities from their lands and
historical conflict between Israel and Palestine, since 1948, unfair redistribution of land in post-colonial era (Syagga,
where Israel feels entitled to the land occupied by Palestine 2011). Ethnicity and politics are considered to be strong
especially in East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, West Bank, an triggers to land conflicts and as Boone (2002) argues, land
issue which has led to incessant violence and death of issues and politics of ethnicity are intertwined. Nakuru
thousands of people, hence affecting security, peace and County in Rift Valley Region, is one of the most
social (Reinhart, 2011). A similar situation happened cosmopolitan areas in Kenya, is considered the epicenter of
between Iraq and Kuwait, which led to war in early 1990’s, land-based conflicts involving indigenous communities, the

IJISRT20MAR313 www.ijisrt.com 1064

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Maasai and Kalenjin and non-indigenous communities, Exclusion: it is the extent to which people have accesses to
mostly the Kikuyu and Kisii. The main reason for conflicts resources such as land, homes, education in the society in
over land is that non-local communities have acquired land an equal and proportionate manner. This provides
which the locals claim to have been their ancestral land, opportunities for individuals to maximize their abilities for
taken away during the British colonial rule between 1895 the benefit of society, thereby lessening chances of social
and 1963 and was not returned to the owners, rather, exclusion, which is characterized by conflicts, resentment
benefited non-locals after independence, who comprise of and injustices (Oxoby, 2009). iii. Participation and Non-
more than 35% of the total population in the region (Veit, Involvement: Participation is active engagement in the
2011). Prior to the 1895 declaration of Kenya as a British affairs and systems of a society, where members take part
Protectorate, communities in Kenya occupied portions of in decision-making processes that benefit the entire
land where they lived and used it for cultivation, community, regardless of their affiliations. When there is
pastoralism, or for hunting and gathering (Wayumba, no involvement, there is discord, segregation and divisions,
2015). They practiced these primordial economic activities leading to conflicts. Land is considered as one of the factors
on swaths of land which they owned communally guided of exclusion in Nakuru County. iv. Recognition and
by customary practices and regulations Githinji (2017). It Rejection: Recognition addresses the issue of respect and
was easy to acquire land because of low population at that tolerance; it encourages accommodating differences and
time, land size was big and land related disputes were opinions of others in a pluralist society. It also celebrates
simple and easy to manage (Wayumba, 2015). diversities by recognizing it as an important aspect of any
vibrant society. Rejection, on the other hand, results when
In post-independent period, many Kenyans were these positive tenets of the society are not recognized.
disillusioned because the land was not returned to them. Rejection leads to people feeling ostracized from the
Koissaba (2015) indicates that there were considerable society in which they are members. v. Legitimacy and
policy developments geared towards addressing the land Illegitimacy: Legitimacy is about the legal recognition and
issue after independence, however, in practice, not much respect to institutions have been lawfully put in place to act
changed. Instead, land owned by the settlers was taken up as mediators when conflicts arise in society. It gives
by elite political class (Ichuloi, 2018). This is supported by conflicting parties security of property ownership and
Kimaiyo (2015) who argued that in Nakuru County, public confidence. When legitimacy fails, parties tend to
Kenyans who bought such land were perceived to be take the law unto their own hands, thereby violating the
‘outsiders’ such that, by 1977, close to 95% of the former principle of justice and human rights, which eventually
White Highlands had been bought by Kenyans, with leads to illegitimacy and conflicts (Jenson, 1998).
majority of the buyers being from the Kikuyu community
from Central Kenya. The feeling by the local Kalenjin and When there is a strong sense of identity in the society;
Maasai communities against the non-local community has inclusion in the affairs of the society; people participate
been immense, with politicians using the land issue as a and are involved in the activities of the society; there is
tool to achieve their goals by creating divisions among respect and tolerance among members and communities
communities (Kalma, 2006). This explains the reason for within the society and people respect and adhere to the
violence during general elections in Kenya (1992, 1997, institution in place that offer services, there is strong social
and 2007) mostly targeting non-local population in Nakuru cohesion. Lack of or insufficiency of these elements in the
County, with the political class continuing to use land as a society leads to conflicts, with land being identified the
tool for mobilization leading to conflicts, affecting underlying driver to these conflicts
cohesiveness among communities hence the need for this
study to find out the determinants of land conflicts and how II. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
they impact on social cohesion.
This study was guided by the Entitlement Theory
Social cohesion is the quality of coexistence between which was developed in 1974, by Robert Nozick, an
individuals within their own group and the institutions that American scholar and is anchored on his understanding of
surround them (UNDP, 2015) Emile Durkheim, an 18th rights to property ownership, lawful acquisition and
Century scholar, is considered the first scholar to use social transfer or disposal of property grounded on the principle of
cohesion the inter-dependence among members of different justice and equality. Nozick (1974) states that that
communities within the society, shared loyalties and distribution of property is just if everyone involved is
solidarity. Jenson (1998), having been influenced by entitled to the property they possess. His theory is based on
Durkheim, narrowed herself to five key components that three main principles: i. A principle of justice in
characterise cohesive societies and in the context of this acquisition: This principle is an account of how people
study: i. Belonging and Isolation: the extent to which first come to own property not previously owned, natural
members of a given community experience or express a world property, what type of properties can be possessed
sense of connection to the society or the nation and feel and the manner in which they can be owned. ii. A principle
pride in it. Land ownership is a primary fact that gives of justice in transfer: This principle explains how a person
owners a sense of belonging regardless of their place of can acquire property from another person, including
origin. But when people are denied their rights to own land voluntary exchange, purchase and transference of gifts or
in the area or are dispossessed, they become isolated, inheritance. Iii. A principle of rectification of injustice:
affecting social cohesion negatively. ii. Inclusion and This principle explains means of dealing with properties

IJISRT20MAR313 www.ijisrt.com 1065

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
that are unjustly acquired or transferred, compensation for III. STUDY METHODOLOGY
those people who have been deprived of their properties
through injustices and government acquisition for general The study took place in Nakuru County, which is one
public use, among others. of the 47 Counties in Kenya. It is situated in Rift Valley
Region and has eleven constituencies covering an area of
According to Nozick, a just acquisition of property about 7,495.1Km2, a diverse population of about 2,162,202
implies lawful ownership and the person who justly people (male –1,077,272, female –1,084,835 and intersex -
acquires property can subsequently transfer the property to 95) as per the 2019 census (KNBS, 2019). Kalenjin and the
someone else who becomes a lawful owner. Justice in Kikuyu communities comprise of about 70% of the
acquisition of property, and in this study the acquisition of population (KNBS, 2019). The county has faced conflicts
land, implies entitlement of the same property and the mostly between the two communities since 1992 climaxing
authority to transfer it to someone else as willed by the to 2007 Post Elections Violence where 213 people died and
owner. In relation to the third tenet, persons who incur loss thousands displaced in the County (Waki Commission,
of property they justly and lawfully acquired as a result of 2008). Five areas in the County, which were most affected
unjust and insincere transactions have the right to be land conflicts were selected, with study population
compensated. The three tenets of the theory informed the comprising of victims of land conflicts, local population
reflection on a rational transaction of land as property for who had been dispossessed of their land and land owners
peaceful and cohesive relationships with those in the who had purchased land in the area from outside the
transaction process. Any violation of these tenets results county. Targeted population was 1706 people, with a
into conflicts between parties involved in the transaction. sample size of 500 comprising of 400 people for structured
Ownership to land as lawfully understood in Kenya is that questionnaire, 25 elders and 25 government/political
everyone has a right and privileges to land ownership under leaders for interview schedules and 50 in five Focused
the principles of property ownership and justice. However, Group Discussions (FGDs). Mixed Method Design was
there have been numerous cases reported where families used and data collection used the following instruments:
have been dispossessed of their land through corruption and questionnaires, interview schedules, FGDs and
violence (Ndung’u Land Commission, 2004). Most land Observations. Data was analyzed using SPSS, and
conflicts come as a result of undermining the above laid presented in form tables, graphs and charts for quantitative
down principles by Nozick and most legal and policy data while qualitative data was presented in form of
frameworks globally have used these principles in verbatim and narrative reports. Sampling techniques used
administration of justice. However, Nozick’s theory has were, purposive simple sampling and snowballing.
limitations such that it forms a basis for creation of a strong
and inconsiderate system of private property within the IV. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
framework of free – market economy, which enhances
exploitation of those who do not have the means of The Sample Size for the study was 500 and the
production (capital). In communities where land is a response rate was as follows: 369 respondents for
community property, this theory raises serious concerns of questionnaire, 44 for interviews and 37 for FGDs, totaling
which when they are undermined in land entitlement, can to 450 respondents, which is a response rate of 90%. The
cause the community to use all available means, including findings are discussed under the following thematic areas:
violence, to repossess their land. However, the theory
remains a strong base for secure land ownership which, if A. Historical Development to Land Disputes
adhered to, can be a preventive measure to many land based The first objective for this research was to establish
conflicts. historical development to land disputes and respondents
were asked to name causes of historical land disputes and
Table 1 presents the results:

Cause Responses Percentage

Divisive Politics 186 23.6
Negative Ethnicity 171 21.7
Corruption 132 16.8
Inheritance Disputes 104 13.2
Colonial land policies and legal frameworks 98 12.4
Others (inequalities, poverty, 97 12.3
Totals 788 100
Table 1:- Causes of Land Disputes
Source: Field Research (2019)

From Table 1 above, the respondents identified the following factors as the main causes of historical land disputes and
conflicts in Nakuru County.

IJISRT20MAR313 www.ijisrt.com 1066

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
 Divisive Politics: It identified as the leading cause of The findings above are also supported by Waki
land disputes in the County, at 23.60% and the findings Commission (2008), which established ethnicity as the
are in tandem with research by Kipkemoi (2015) who main cause of conflicts in the region, with land issue as the
identified political factors as the leading cause of underlying factor. Negative ethnicity is a major cause of
conflicts in Kuresoi, Nakuru County; Kimenyi and historical land disputes that continues to dominate social
Ndung’u (2006) found out that most clashes in Nakuru relations in the region, thereby creating inequalities,
County occurred during general elections since 1992 injustices and discrimination among communities.
with politicians using the land issue to incite
communities. From the observations of the study, there  Corruption: The respondents, as illustrated in the table
were indications of tensions building up among the above, also identified corruption as a major cause of
communities over the 2022 general elections as historical land disputes, at 16.80%. Corruption
exemplified by a key informant from Kuresoi area who constrains secure land ownership as evident in ‘British
stated: collaborators’ who were allocated big chunks of land as
an ‘appreciation’ for their ‘co-operation with the ruling
There has been violence in the County mostly colonizers (Syagga, 2011). The vice continued in post-
between the Kalenjin and the Kikuyu communities since independence period where the Kenyan ruling class
1992. However, in 2013 and 2017, the two communities allocated themselves large portions of land obtained
were in the same political vehicle and this ensured from white settlers, which was to benefit the landless in
relatively peaceful situations in the two political seasons. the region. But this generated and sustained reactionary
At the moment, we are worried of what will happen in 2022 conflicts from the local communities to date. During
general elections given the current political undertones. We interviews, one key informant stated:
have been informed by our Kalenjin brothers that lazima
turudishe mkono (we must reciprocate political support) Corruption is a major issue not only in Nakuru, but
failure to which hakutakuwa na amani (there will be no nationally. It is difficult to get services if you don’t ‘oil’ the
peace). This is making us worry since such undertones hands of those offering the services. I have been going to
preclude ethnic violence during general elections. and from the Lands Office in Nakuru for registration of my
land but am informed by some of whom have got the
The sentiments were echoed during all the five FGDs, documents that lazima utoe kitu kidogo mambo yako
where divisive politics was identified as the leading trigger yatembee kwani hii ni Kenya bwana (that you have to give
to land conflicts in the County, with tensions over 2022 bribes for your plans to work since this is Kenya).
general elections building up.
These findings are buttressed by the Akiwumi Report
 Negative Ethnicity: This is another key factor (1999), Ndung’u Report (2004), Waki Commission (2008)
identified by most respondents, at 21.70% and it is used who identified corruption in land administration, allocation,
as a tool to fight other communities, deny and registration, titling, among others as a major cause of
discriminate them in the offering of basic services. conflicts in the country. During interviews and FGDs,
Ethnicity and politics go hand in hand and this is informants identified the following as manifestations of
attested by Oyugi (2000), who argues that ethnicity per corruption in land issues affecting social cohesion:
se, is a positive thing, but when it is politicized, then it inducements in the processing of titles and other ownership
becomes negative. Interviews with key informants documents, illegal land allocation that undermines
revealed that despite efforts to correct negative ethnicity members from other communities, double land allocation to
through the creation of NCIC, nothing seemed to individuals and their family members, land grabbing and
change. A Key informant stated: dispossessing those who legally owned it, encroachment of
public land, among others.
Negative ethnicity is a national cancer that is killing
the nation since one cannot get services without being  Other factors identified as causes of historical land
looked with the spectacles of ethnicity. Employment injustices: These include inheritance disputes, with
opportunities at Nakuru County Government are only by 13.20% which affects members of the same family or
two dominant communities and minorities are denied community; colonial legal frameworks, policies and
opportunities because they don’t belong to either Kikuyu or historical injustices, identified by 12.40% of the
Kalenjin communities. We have also suffered during respondents; lack of land identification documents;
general elections by virtue of belonging to a different dependence on land based economy which influences
community. Where shall we resort to? Unless we abandon the thinking of the people that to have land is the only
this notion of negative ethnicity which is ingrained in all source of wealth; poor policies by governments on land;
our realms, our societal and national values will be boundary disputes over unclear land boundaries among
compromised. other factors. Having established the causes of
historical land disputes, the research resorted to
investigate the consequences of unresolved historical
land disputes and the respondents were requested to
enumerate the effects of unresolved historical land
injustices and the results were as presented in Figure 1.

IJISRT20MAR313 www.ijisrt.com 1067

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

Fig 1:- Effects of Unresolved Land Disputes

Source: Field Research (2019)

The results indicates that 28.77% of the respondents conflicts consequently polarize the relational gap between
consider clashes and insecurity as the leading effects of existing communities in Nakuru County. Their recurrence
unresolved historical land tenure disputes; followed by of these conflicts has an historical bearing on contributory
negative social relations at 21.99%, ethnic groupings at factors discussed.
16.05%, injustices and inequalities at 13.82%, loss of land
and livelihood at 11.44% and squatting at 7.73%. Clashes B. Deployed Land Tenure Systems
and insecurity are the results of conflict that degenerate to Land Tenure Systems are critical in assessing how
violence since 1992 Maela and Molo clashes, Olenguruone, government policies on land blend with other dimensions in
Njoro and Molo clashes in 1997, Kuresoi and Molo clashes areas with land conflicts. The second study objective
and the 2007/8 Post Election Violence (PEV). The most endeavoured to establish the implications of deployed Land
indicting thing in all these clashes is that they all happen in Tenure systems on social cohesion in Nakuru County. The
the advent of general elections, thereby confirming the land tenure systems practiced by the respondents are
political imprint in land conflicts. In essence, these indicated in the Figure 2 below:

Fig 2:- Land Tenure Type in Nakuru County

Source: Field Research (2019)

The Figure indicates that majority of the respondents, 81.00%, hold Freehold Tenure to the land they occupy while those on
leasehold are 15.00%, those who have customary tenure are at 3.00% while others including rent and squatters were at 1.00%. The
implications of this finding is that most of the residents of the area have absolute ownership to the land they occupy. This is in
agreement with Waiganjo and Ngugi, (2001) who found out that the statutory land tenure was the dominant tenure system
practiced in Kenya. The respondents were then asked to indicate whether the land tenure system they practice provides security
and stability for their land and Figure 3 indicates the results.

IJISRT20MAR313 www.ijisrt.com 1068

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

Fig 3:- Land Tenure and Social Stability

Source: Field Research (2019)

From the figure above, majority of the respondents, in Nakuru County do not provide envisioned security and
(69%) feel that the deployed land tenure systems do not stability to land, hence a source of conflicts, with one
provide security and stability to land owners, while 31% of discussant stating:
the study participants indicated that they do provide
security and stability. These percentages are confirmed by There is no guarantee that we shall continue
a key informant from interview schedule who stated: occupying the land we own. So we cannot sustain the
argument that having a Title Deed is the key to having a
We have Title Deeds as prove of ownership as secure and stable land ownership. If that is true, we would
required by the law. I remember one time the minister of not have lost our land in Mau Forest since it has the
lands in the Kibaki regime Mr. (Amos) Kimunya told us documents. I think we are at the mercy of the government
that a Title Deed is just a piece of paper and that is just since they control the policies and do not involve us.
what it has turned to be. Even though the land we occupy is
our heritage from our ancestors, since 2008, the caveat put Therefore, deployed land tenure systems do not
by the government that we cannot sell the land, has provide necessary security and stability in the land sector,
rendered land tenure and ownership documents useless. hence a trigger factor that can lead to or catalyze land
conflicts.
The caveat resulted to tribal politics, negative
ethnicity, encroachment to conservation areas, peoples’ C. Challenges facing Secure Land Ownership in Nakuru
inability to adhere to land ownership laws, among other County
factors. Those affected expressed that they cannot invest in The third objective sought to evaluate the challenges
the lands since they are not sure of their security and faced by the affected communities in acquiring secure land
investment thereby adversely affecting their socio- ownership that affect social cohesion in the study area. The
economic fabric. During the discussions with the five respondents were requested to indicate whether they own
FGDs, the groups were unanimous that land tenure systems land in the area, and the findings are indicated in Figure 4.

Fig 4:- Land Ownership Status

Source: Field Research (2019)

IJISRT20MAR313 www.ijisrt.com 1069

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Figure 4 shows that majority of the respondents, 92.14% owned land while 7.59% did not own any land. Those who did not
own any land can be associated to those who embrace the Customary Land Tenure system, squatters and those who rented land.
The participants were also asked to indicate the size of land they owned and the following are the results

Fig 5:- Land Owned

Source: Field Research (2019)

The findings indicate that majority of the respondents, These sentiments were also expressed by discussants
37.94%, own 3-5 acres of land, while those with less than in all the five FGDs, who indicated that people will do
three acres were 35.59%, those with 6-10 acres were everything possible to protect their farms, including hiring
17.06% and those with land above 10 acres were 6.88%. armed vigilant groups to protect their property when there
This implies that most of the respondents 73.53% were are conflicts. The net effect of this move is that it
small scale farmers. This corresponds to the finding of a exacerbates land conflicts. This is backed up by Yamano
study by FARMUP (2015) from Egerton University which and Deininger (2005) who found out that conflict in Rift
found out that land owners in Nakuru had an average of Valley, Nakuru County included, intensified with the
3.48 acres, an indicator that majority practised small scale presence of vigilant groups who are hired by individuals
farming, their source of livelihood and would do anything and communities to protect property and to fight when
to defend it, as indicated by a key informant in an there is violence.
interview:
Possession of documents, especially Title Deed or
The little land I own is my only source of livelihood Certificate of Lease, is a legal proof of ownership of the
and my family depend on it for food, education and all land by the one who possesses it (Land Act, 2012). Those
other basic necessities. I bought the land and I will protect who possess these documents are perceived to have a sense
it by all means, from encroachers, those who would claim it of security for the land they own since it is legally
and from herders who leave their animals to roam and safeguarded. The participants were, therefore, asked to
destroy the crops. During elections people usually hire indicate whether they possessed any legal ownership
vigilante groups in this area to protect their property since it documents and 81%, and had ownership documents while
is a time when people turn against each other. 19% did not possess any form of land ownership
documents. The respondents were asked the type of
documents they possessed and Figure 6 indicates the
results.

IJISRT20MAR313 www.ijisrt.com 1070

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

Fig 6:- Types of Ownership Documents

Source: Field Research (2019)

The above figure reveals that 52.57% of the informant in an interview who lost his land during the
respondents, were in possession of Title Deeds, 15.18% 2007/8 PEV who stated:
were in possession of Allocation Letters, 13.28% had Lease
Certificates, 8.94% had Sale Agreements while 10.03% did As long as the land issue continues to be a tool for
not have any documents. Land Act (2012) identifies Title political mobilization and erratic violence, there can never
Deeds and Certificate of Lease as legal proof of ownership be security provided by these documents. Prior to the 2007
and can only be revoked by a Court of Law if found to have elections I had a Tittle Deed for my 3-acre piece of land but
been acquired fraudulently. This means that 65.85% of when the violence erupted after the elections, my property
those who possess legal documents for the land they was burnt and I had to flee together with my family for my
occupied are the right owners of the land. The findings are safety. I still have the Title Deed but the fear of what I
in tandem with the Nakuru County Government (2013), witnessed prevents me from returning to the land.
which states that about 72.5% of land in the County had
Title Deeds. However, when asked whether the possession Having established that possession ownership
of the documents make them secure on the land they documents do not necessarily provide security for their
occupied, majority, 63.14% indicated that it does not make land, the respondents were asked to name challenges that
them feel secure while 36.86% indicated that the impede secure land ownership and the following are the
documents gave them security. This is exemplified by a key results.

Fig 7:- Impediments to secure land ownership

Source: Field Research (2019)

IJISRT20MAR313 www.ijisrt.com 1071

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
The respondents identified politics as a major cause of During the PEV, I lost my property and forced to flee
insecure land ownership at 35.06%, corruption at 24.04%, my home because of my ethnic background. I lost my son
negative ethnicity at 14.69%, historical land injustices at during the violence and I regret why I settled in the area. I
10.84%, inheritance issues at 9.52% while other factors had documents to show that the land I occupied was mine,
such as boundary disputes, population increase, squatting, but non-locals were not needed. Though I returned to my
constituted about 5.84%. The findings are in tandem with home, I know there is no security of the land I own here
Syagga (2013) and Shongolo (2009) who also identified because politics and negative ethnicity reign.
these factors as triggers to incessant land conflicts and
which must be addressed to ensure stability in the land Having established the challenges of secure land
sector. This is emphasized by a key informant from ownership in Nakuru County, the participants were also
Naivasha in the interview schedule who stated: asked to name the effects of insecure land ownership and
they identified the following, as indicated in Figure 8.

Fig 8:- Effects of Insecure Land Ownership

Source: Field Research (2019)

Figure 8 shows that most of respondents identify fear are likely to persist, with negative impact to social
of loss of land as the leading effect of insecure land cohesion.
ownership at 25.65%, clashes and insecurity at 16.27%,
lack of cohesion at 15.56%, political tensions at 12.83%, For recommendations, this study takes cognizance of
injustices and inequalities at 10.45% while 9.35% identify the efforts by Kenyan government to address historical land
low land productivity. These findings correspond to injustices, however, the public has not been sufficiently
Kamanthe (2011) who, in his research, identified loss of involved in finding a lasting solution to the problem, hence
lives and land, inequalities, incessant tensions as the most the need for greater and sincere public involvement.
immediate effects of land conflicts. When the land is not Secondly, divisive politics and negative ethnicity were
secure, there will also be lack of stability leading to identified as key triggers of land conflicts. The study,
conflicts with attendant implication to social cohesion in therefore, proposes the promulgation of appropriate laws
the County. When there is secure land, there will be that criminalize ethnic profiling and polarization and be
stability leading to peaceful coexistence devoid of political, enforced. Those inciting members of the public to be
social and economic tensions, in tandem with entitlement judged and if found guilty be prosecuted as well as
theory guiding this research. enforcement of the code of ethic for the political class
enshrined in the Kenyan Constitution. Thirdly, corruption
V. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS was identified as a major threat to secure land ownership
that contribute to land conflicts. The study recommends
From the discussion of the study findings, it can be Enhancement of the fight against corruption in the
concluded that there are four main determinants of land institutions within the government and the larger society.
conflicts in Nakuru County which continue to undermine Fourthly, the study recommends the safeguarding of land
the realization of secure and stable land ownership, hence rights and to ensure access and effective service delivery in
affecting social cohesion negatively. These are corruption, land administration and registration.
negative ethnicity, divisive politics and historical land
injustices. Without addressing these issues, land conflicts

IJISRT20MAR313 www.ijisrt.com 1072

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
REFERENCES [17]. Kalma, R (2006). Ethnic Conflict in Contemporary
Africa: The Nigerian experience. In Journal of Social
[1]. Boone, C. (2012). Land Conflict and Distributive Science. Vol. 12 Issue No. 2.
Politics in Kenya. In African Studies Review. Volume [18]. Kanga, M. (2019). The Status of Tenure Security in
55, Number 1, April 2012. The University of Texas, Kenya. Munich: University of Munich
Austin, USA. [19]. Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) (2019).
[2]. Constitution of Kenya. (2010). Nairobi: Government 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census: Volume
Printer I.
[3]. County Government of Nakuru (2013). Retrieved [20]. November, 2019. Nairobi: Government Printer.
from http://www.nakuru.go.ke/about/ [21]. Kipkemoi, L. J. (2015). Factors Influencing Inter-
[4]. Derman, B., Odgaard R. and Sjaastad E. (2007). Ethnic Conflicts in Kuresoi North Sub-County:
Conflicts over Land and Water in Africa. Oxford: Nakuru County, Kenya. Nairobi: University of
Michigan University Press. Nairobi.
[5]. Deininger, K. (2006). Land Policy Reforms. In [22]. Kimaiyo, T. (2004). Ogiek Land Cases and Historical
Analyzing the Distributional Impact of Reforms, Injustices. Nakuru: Ogiek Welfare Council.
Volume. 1. New York: World Bank. [23]. Kimenyi, M., & Njuguna, N. (2006). Sporadic Ethnic
[6]. Delhey, J. et. al (2018). Social Cohesion and its Violence: Why Has Kenya Not Experienced a Full-
Correlates: A Comparison of Western and Asian Blown Civil
Societies. Journal of Comparative Sociology. Volume [24]. War? In Economic Models and Case Studies of Civil
17, Issue 3-4. June 2018. Brielle, The Netherlands: War. Edited by Sambanis, N. and Paul, C. Retrieved
BRILL. from www.jstor.org
[7]. Environment and Land Courts Act. (2011). Nairobi: [25]. Klare, T. (2002). Resource Wars: The New Landscape
Government Printer of Global Conflict. New York: Henry Holt and
[8]. FARMUP. (2015). Baseline Survey of Agricultural Company.
Activities in Nakuru and Baringo Counties, Kenya. [26]. Koissaba, O. (2015). The Maasai Contestation of
Nakuru: Egerton University. Land Appropriation in Kenya: A Historical and
[9]. Githinji, P. (2017). How Colonial Policies and Contemporary Perspective. New York: Centre for
Practices led to Land Injustices in Kenya. Nairobi: Indigenous Studies.
Epic Kenyan. Retrieved from [27]. Land Act, Act No.6 of 2012. Nairobi: Government
https://www.epickenyan.com/colonial-policies-land- Printer
injustices-in-kenya/ [28]. Maina, M. W. (2015). Land Disputes Resolution in
[10]. Home, R. (2012). Colonial Township Laws and Urban Kenya: A Comparison of the Environment and Land
Governance in Kenya. In Journal of African Law. Court and the Land Disputes’ Tribunal. Nairobi:
Volume 56, 2 October 2012Cambridge: Cambridge University of Nairobi.
University Press. [29]. Muchiri, F. (2015). Analysis of the Resource Based
[11]. Huth, P., & Allee, T. (2002). Democratic Peace and Conflict between the Pastoralist and
Territorial Conflict in the Twentieth Century. [30]. Agrarian Communities in East African Region: A
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Case Study of Naivasha Sub-County in Kenya.
[12]. Ichuloi, A. (2018). The Dynamics of Ethnic Identity Nairobi: University of Nairobi.
Politics in Kenya’s Political Landscape. In [31]. National Land Commission Act. (2012). (Revised
International Journal of Humanities, Social Sciences Edition, 2016). Nairobi: National Council for Law
and Education. Vol. 5, Issue 11, 1-16. Reporting.
[13]. Jenson, J. (1998). Mapping Social Cohesion: The [32]. Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New
State of Canadian Research. In Canadian Policy York: Basic Books.
Research Networks. CPRN Study No. F03. Montreal: [33]. Ogendo, O. (1996). Tenants of the Crown: Evolution
CPRN. of Agrarian Law and Institutions in Kenya. Nairobi:
[14]. Kariuki, G. (2015). Lancaster Constitutional ACTS Press
Negotiation Process and its Impact on Foreign [34]. Okowa, D. (2015). Land Reforms in Kenya:
Relations of Post-Colonial Kenya, 1960-1970. Achievements and the Missing Link. Nairobi: Institute
Nairobi: University of Nairobi. for Law and Environmental Governance
[15]. Kamanthe, M. (2011). A Study on the Effects of [35]. Oxoby, R. (2009). Understanding Social Inclusion,
Kenya’s Land Policies on the Land Rights of Kenyan Social Cohesion and Social Capital. Calgary:
Women. KDI School of Policy and Management. University of Calgary, Canada.
Retrieved from [36]. Oyugi, W. (2000). Politicized Ethnic Conflict in
http://www.land.igad.int/index.php/documents-1 Kenya: A Periodic Phenomenon. Addis Ababa: East
[16]. Kalande, W. (2008). Kenyan Land Disputes in the African Education Publishers.
Context of Social Conflict Theories. In FIG [37]. Reinhart, T. (2011). Israel – Palestine: How to end
Commission 7 Annual Meeting and Open Symposium the War of 1948. New York: Vesco Press.
on Environment and Land Administration in Verona,
Italy. Verona: FIG.

IJISRT20MAR313 www.ijisrt.com 1073

Volume 5, Issue 3, March – 2020 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[38]. Report of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry
Appointed to Inquire into the Tribal Clashes in Kenya.
(Akiwumi Commission, 1999). Nairobi: Government
Printer
[39]. Report of the Commission on Illegal and Irregular
Allocation of Public Land. (Ndung’u Report, 2004).
Nairobi: Government Printer.
[40]. Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Post-
Election Violence. (Waki Report, 2008). Nairobi:
Government Printer.
[41]. Shongolo, A. (2009). Interaction of Ethnicity and
factors of Land and Power in generating the 2007
Post Election Violence in Kenya. Nakuru: Egerton
University.
[42]. Syagga, P. (2011). ‘Land Tenure in Slum Upgrading
Projects’ Retrieved from
[43]. http://halshs.archivesouvertesfr/docs/00/75/18/66/PDF
/__LAND_TENURE_IN_SLUM_UPGRADING.pdf
[44]. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR,
1948). New York: United Nations.
[45]. UNDP. (2015). Social Cohesion and Reconciliation (SCORE)
Index Project. Retrieved from http://www.cy.undp.org/
[46]. Veit, P. (2011). History of Land Conflicts in Kenya.
New York: World Resources institute.
[47]. Wakhungu, J., Chris H., & Elvin N. (2008). Land
Tenure and Violent Conflict in Kenya. Nairobi:
African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTs).
[48]. Wayumba, G. (2015). A Historical Review of Land
Tenure Reforms in Kenya. In International Journal of
Scientific Research and Engineering Studies
(IJSRES). Volume 2 Issue 1, January 2015. ISSN:
2349-8862) Nairobi: Technical University of Kenya.

IJISRT20MAR313 www.ijisrt.com 1074