Climate Risk Profile: Kenya

Summary

This profile provides an overview of projected Agro-ecological zones might shift, affecting ecosystems,
climate parameters and related impacts on different biodiversity and crop production. Models project regionally
sectors in Kenya until 2080 under different climate varying changes in species richness and an increase in tree
change scenarios (called Representative Concentration Cover in response to climate change.
Path­ways, RCPs). RCP2.6 represents the low emissions
scenario in line with the Paris Agreement; RCP6.0
represents a medium to high emissions scenario.
Model projections do not account for effects of future
socioeconomic impacts.

Agriculture, biodiversity, health, infrastructure and Per capita water availability will decline by 2080 mostly
water are highly vulnerable to climate change. due to population growth. Model projections indicate that
German development cooperation is committed water saving measures are expected to become particularly
to addressing these challenges by seeking to important after 2030.
mainstream climate change adaptation into its
cooperation portfolio.

Depending on the scenario, temperature in Kenya The population affected by at least one heatwave per
is projected to rise by between 1.2 and 3.2 °C year is projected to rise from 0.6 % in 2000 to 6.0 % in 2080.
by 2080, compared to pre-industrial levels, with This is related to 59 more very hot days per year over this
higher t­ emperatures and more temperature period. As a consequence, heat-related mortality is estimated
extremes projected for the north and east of Kenya. to increase by a factor of five by 2080.

Precipitation trends are highly uncertain: Model

projections vary between indicating almost no change
and an annual average precipitation increase of up to
53 mm by 2080, within the same climate scenario. Future
dry and wet periods are likely to become more extreme.

Under RCP6.0, the sea level is expected to rise by

40 cm until 2080. This threatens Kenya’s coastal
communities and may cause saline intrusion in
coastal waterways and groundwater reservoirs.

Climate change is likely to cause severe damage to

the infrastructure sector in Kenya. Especially transport
infrastructure is vulnerable to extreme weather events,
yet essential for trading agricultural goods. Investments
will need to be made into climate-resilient roads and
other infrastructure.

The models project a possibility of an increase in crop

land exposure to drought. Yields of millet and sorghum
are projected to decline, while yields of cassava and
cow peas are projected to benefit from CO2 fertilisation.
Farmers will need to adapt to these changing
conditions.
 Context
Kenya is an East African country with direct access to the Indian country’s economy [4] with approximately 70 % of the popula-
Ocean and more than 500 km of coastline [1]. The current popu- tion being at least partially employed in farming or livestock
lation is 51 million, with an annual demographic growth rate of rearing [1], [4]. The majority of agricultural produce comes from
2.3 % and a projected number of 91 million inhabitants by 2050 smallholder farms and is cultivated on rainfed land. Important
[2], [3]. Over the past 30 years, Kenya’s population has more than staple crops include maize, beans, cow peas, sorghum, potatoes,
tripled, further increasing the pressure on its natural resources wheat, millet and cassava, in addition to dairy products [4].
[4]. The majority of the inhabitants live in the western part of the Although maize is one of the most cultivated crops in the country,
country near Lake Victoria, in the capital region of Nairobi and on Kenya cannot meet its demand and is dependent on imports
the south-eastern coast around the city of Mombasa [1]. Kenya’s from Uganda and Tanzania [4]. Increasing interseasonal climate
economy is dominated by the services sector, contributing 42.7 % variability, declining precipitation amounts and more frequent
to the country’s GDP in 2018, followed by the agricultural sector extreme weather events have already led to severe crop and
with 34.2 % and the industrial sector with 16.4 % [5]. Tea, cut livestock losses [9]. In addition to low productivity levels, demo-
flowers, petroleum and coffee are the main exports [6]. Kenya graphic pressures and the effects of climate change increase the
is the world’s third largest tea producer and the fourth largest sector’s vulnerability and threaten food security and livelihoods.
cut flower producer [7], [8]. Since 2014, the country counts as Kenya is also an important host country for a large number of
a lower-middle-income country (LMIC) and, with a real GDP refugees: Currently, there are more than 300 000 Somali refugees
per capita of 1 238 USD, is considered the economic hub of East living in the country, in addition to refugees from other nearby
Africa. Nonetheless, agriculture remains the b ­ ackbone of the countries affected by violent conflicts [1].

Quality of life indicators [2], [10]–[12]

Human Development ND-GAIN Vulnera­bility GINI Coefficient Real GDP per Poverty headcount Prevalence of under-
Index (HDI) 2018 Index 2017 2015 capita 2019 ratio 2015 nourishment 2016–2018

0.579 36.9 40.8 1 238 USD 36.8 % 29.4 %

147 out of 189 150 out of 181 (0–100; 100 = (constant 2010 (at 1.9 USD per day, (of total population)
(0 = low, 1 = high) (0 = low, 100 = high) perfect inequality) USD) 2011 PPP) ¹

© Ninara / flickr

¹ Poverty headcount ratio for the year 2015 adjusted to 2011 levels of Purchasing Power Parity (PPP). PPP is used to compare different currencies by taking into account
national differences in cost of living and inflation.

2
Topography and environment
The topography of Kenya is diverse. While the east of the country generation could be further limited due to increasing precipitation
is characterised by low coastal plains, the altitude rises gradu- variability as a result of climate change [15]. Lake Victoria presents
ally from the Indian Ocean towards Mount Kenya, the highest another major natural resource: It is the largest lake in Africa and
peak at 5 199 m [1]. The western part is dominated by mountains the second largest freshwater body in the world, producing 90 % of
and fertile plateaus, which descend towards Lake Victoria in the Kenya’s total fish catch and sustaining nearly half of the country’s
far west. Each of these topographies is characterised by different population [16]. In addition, it provides much needed water for
agroecological conditions with specific temperature and moisture forests, wetlands and rangelands to local communities. However,
regimes, and consequently, specific patterns of crop production climate change is likely to impact these and other ecosystems
and pastoral activities. The highest temperatures are reached in through rising temperatures, droughts, floods and rising sea levels.
March. There are two rainy seasons – a major one from March to For example, increasing temperatures have facilitated the spread of
May and a minor one from October to December (Figure 1). The water hyacinth, algae and other invasive species in Lake Victoria,
main streams in Kenya include the rivers Tana and Galana, which putting at risk the livelihoods of millions of people. Kenya’s rapidly
rise in the eastern highlands and flow south-east to the Indian growing population will require further agricultural expansion
Ocean. The Tana is one of the few perennial rivers having water the which is likely to result in additional environmental challenges
whole year-round [13]. With many hydraulic engineering projects including land degradation, deforestation and pollution of water,
in the upper watershed, concerns about decreasing water levels in highlighting the need for adaptation measures to protect biodiver-
the delta region grow [14]. The overall suitability of hydropower sity and maintain fragile ecosystems and their services [1], [17].

Present climate [18]

Kenya has a diverse climate largely influenced by alti- Annual precipitation sums range from 200 mm Kenya has two rainy seasons (bimodal precipita-
tude: Highlands exhibit a mean annual temperature of in northern and eastern Kenya, which are tion regime) – a major one from March to May and
15 °C, while lowland areas in northern and eastern Kenya ­characterised by steppe, to over 1 600 mm in a minor one from October to December.
exhibit values of up to 29 °C. The coastal area and the western K
­ enya. The highlands have a moderate
shores of Lake Victoria in the far west have a tropical climate with annual precipitation sums between
climate with temperatures ranging from 23 °C to 27 °C. 800 and 1 000 mm.

Figure 1: Topographical map of Kenya with existing precipitation regimes.²

² The climate graphs display temperature and precipitation values which are averaged over an area of approximately 50 km x 50 km. Especially in areas with larger
­d ifferences in elevation, the climate within this grid might vary.

3
 Projected climate changes
How to read the line plots
 historical   best estimate Lines and shaded areas show multi-model percentiles of 31-year running mean values
 RCP2.6   likely range under RCP2.6 (blue) and RCP6.0 (red). In particular, lines represent the best estimate
 RCP6.0   very likely range (multi-model median) and shaded areas the likely range (central 66 %) and the very
likely range (central 90 %) of all model projections.

How to read the map plots

Colours show multi-model medians of 31-year mean values under RCP2.6 (top row) and RCP6.0 (bottom row) for different 31-year
periods (central year indicated above each column). Colours in the leftmost column show these values for a baseline period (colour
bar on the left). Colours in the other columns show differences relative to this baseline period (colour bar on the right). The presence
(absence) of a dot in the other columns indicates that at least (less than) 75 % of all models agree on the sign of the difference.
For further guidance and background information about the figures and analyses presented in this profile kindly refer to the supple­
mental information on how to read the climate risk profile.

Temperature
3.0
Air temperature change (°C)
In response to increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations,
air temperature over Kenya is projected to rise by 1.2 to 3.2 °C 2.5
(very likely range) by 2080 relative to the year 1876, depend-
ing on the future GHG emissions scenario (Figure 2). Compared 2.0
to pre-industrial levels, median climate model temperature
1.5
increases over Kenya amount to approximately 1.4 °C in 2030 and Figure 2: Air temperature
1.7 °C in both 2050 and 2080 under the low emissions scenario projections for Kenya
1.0
for different GHG emissions
RCP2.6. Under the medium / high emissions scenario RCP6.0, scenarios.3
median climate model temperature increases amount to 1.3 °C in 2010 2030 2050 2070
2030, 1.6 °C in 2050 and 2.2 °C in 2080. Year
2000 2030 2050 2080
2000 2030 2050 2080 Very hot days
RCP2.6
RCP2.6 RCP2.6

In line with rising mean annual temperatures, the annual number

of very hot days (days with daily maximum temperature above
RCP6.0

35 °C) is projected to rise substantially and with high certainty,

RCP6.0

in particular over central and eastern Kenya (Figure 3). Under

the medium / high emissions scenario RCP6.0, the multi-model
120 140 160 180 200 220 240 100 50 0 50 100 median, averaged over the whole country, projects 25 more very
Very hot days (number/year) Difference to year 2000 hot days per year in 2030 than in 2000, 36 more in 2050 and 59
RCP6.0

more in 2080. In some parts, especially in northern and eastern

Kenya, this amounts to about 300 days per year by 2080.

Figure 3: Projections of the annual number of very hot days (daily

50 100 150 200 250 100 50 0 50 100 maximum temperature above 35 °C) for Kenya for different GHG
Very hot days (number/year) Difference to year 2000 emissions scenarios.

Sea level rise 60

In response to globally increasing temperatures, the sea level
50
Sea level change (cm)

off the coast of Kenya is projected to rise (Figure 4). Until 2050,
very similar sea levels are projected under both emissions 40
scenarios. Under RCP6.0 and compared to year 2000 levels, the 30
median cli­mate model projects a sea level rise by 10 cm in 2030,
20
21 cm in 2050, and 40 cm in 2080. This threatens Kenya’s coastal Figure 4: Projections for sea
communities and may cause saline intrusion in coastal waterways 10 level rise off the coast of Kenya
for different GHG emissions
and groundwater reservoirs. scenarios, relative to the year 2000
0
2010 2030 2050 2070
Year
3
Changes are expressed relative to year 1876 temperature levels using the multi-model median temperature change from 1876 to 2000 as a proxy for the observed
­h istorical warming over that time period.

4
 Precipitation

Precipitation change (mm/year)

Future projections of precipitation are less certain than projec- 100
tions of temperature change due to high natural year-to-year
variability (Figure 5). Out of the three climate models underlying 50
this analysis, one model projects no change to a slight decrease
in mean annual precipitation over Kenya under RCP6.0, while the 0 Figure 5: Annual mean
other two models project an increase under the same scenario. precipitation projections
Under RCP2.6, median model projections indicate a slight in- 50 for Kenya for different GHG
emissions scenarios, relative to
crease towards the year 2030 but an overall decrease towards the the year 2000.
end of the century. Under RCP6.0, the projected precipitation 2010 2030 2050 2070
Year
increase is likely to intensify after 2050, reaching 53 mm per year
at the end of the century compared to year 2000. Higher concen-
tration pathways suggest an overall wetter future for Kenya.

11 Heavy precipitation events

In response to global warming, heavy precipitation events are
10
expected to become more intense in many parts of the world
days (number/year)
Heavy precipitation

due to the increased water vapour holding capacity of a warmer

9
atmosphere. At the same time, the number of days with heavy
Figure 6: Projections of
8 the number of days with
precipitation events is expected to increase. This tendency is also
heavy precipitation over found in climate projections for Kenya (Figure 6), with climate
7 Kenya for different GHG models projecting an increase in the number of days with heavy
emissions scenarios, relative
to the year 2000. precipitation, from 7 days per year in 2000 to 9 days per year
2010 2030 2050 2070 in 2080 under RCP6.0. Under RCP2.6, the number of days with
Year heavy precipitation remains unchanged.

© Sopotnicki / Shutterstock

5
 Soil moisture 15
Soil moisture is an important indicator for drought conditions. In 10

Soil moisture change (%)

addition to soil parameters and management, it depends on both
5
precipitation and evapotranspiration and therefore also on tem-
perature, as higher temperatures translate into higher potential 0
evapotranspiration. Annual mean top 1-m soil moisture projec- Figure 7: Soil moisture
5
tions for Kenya show almost no change under either RCP (Fig- projections for Kenya
ure 7). However, looking at the different models underlying this 10 for different GHG emissions
scenarios, relative to the
analysis, there is considerable year-to-year variability and model- 15 year 2000.
ling uncertainty, which makes it difficult to identify a clear trend. 2010 2030 2050 2070
Year

12 Potential evapotranspiration
Potential evapotranspiration

10 Potential evapotranspiration is the amount of water that would

8 be evaporated and transpired if sufficient water was available at
and below the land surface. Since warmer air can hold more water
change (%)

6
vapour, it is expected that global warming will increase potential
4
Figure 8: Potential evapotranspiration in most regions of the world. In line with this
2 evapotranspiration projections expectation, hydrological projections for Kenya indicate a stronger
0 for Kenya for different GHG and more continuous rise of potential evapotranspiration under
emissions scenarios, relative to
2 the year 2000. RCP6.0 than under RCP2.6 (Figure 8). Under RCP6.0, potential
2010 2030 2050 2070 evapotranspiration is projected to increase by 1.9 % in 2030,
Year
3.0 % in 2050 and 4.5 % in 2080 compared to year 2000 levels.

© Flore de Preneuf / World Bank

6
Sector-specific climate change risk assessment

a. Water resources

Current projections of water availability in Kenya display high 5000 (A) without population 5000 (B) with population

Water availability (m3/cap/year)

uncertainty under both GHG emissions scenarios. Assuming a
change change
constant population level, multi-model median projections sug-
4000 4000
gest an increase of water availability under RCP6.0 and no change 3000 3000
under RCP2.6 (Figure 9A). Yet, when accounting for population
growth according to SSP2 projections4, per capita water avail- 2000 2000
ability for Kenya is projected to decline by 73 % under RCP2.6
and by 63 % under RCP6.0 by 2080 relative to the year 2000 1000 1000
(Figure 9B). While this decline is primarily driven by population
2010 2030 2050 2070 2010 2030 2050 2070
growth rather than climate change, it highlights the urgency to Year Year
invest in water ­saving measures and technologies for future
Figure 9: Projections of water availability from precipitation per capita
water consumption. and year with (A) national population held constant at year 2000 level
and (B) changing population in line with SSP2 projections for different
GHG emissions scenarios, relative to the year 2000.
Projections of future water availability from precipitation vary
depending on the region and scenario (Figure 10). Under RCP2.6,
water availability will decrease by up to 25 % in western Kenya
and increase by up to 25 % in southern Kenya by 2080. Most mod- 2000 2030 2050 2080
els agree on this trend. The picture is different for RCP6.0: Model
agreement shifts to eastern Kenya, where water availability will
RCP2.6

increase by up to 80 %.

Climate model projections for East Africa, including Kenya, have

been predicting a wetter future under climate change. Yet, recent
experience shows an opposite trend with droughts occurring
RCP6.0

every three to four years and a major drought every ten years
[15]. This discrepancy between model projections and experience
on the ground has been termed the East African climate paradox
[19]. Though different hypotheses exist, the scientific community
has not yet been able to provide a reliable and comprehensive 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 75 50 25 0 25 50 75
Runoff (mm/day) Difference to year 2000 (%)
explanation for this paradox. Climate variability and the steady
degradation of water resources are likely to make water avail- Figure 10: Water availability from precipitation (runoff) projections for
Kenya for different GHG emissions scenarios.
ability even less predictable and limit capacities. Even areas
which were known to receive high precipitation amounts and
to be abundant in freshwater, such as the Mount Kenya region,
experience more dry spells with rivers falling dry in an increas- downstream water users. Lack of water availability has further
ing frequency [20]. These changes are driven, amongst other been responsible for power shortages from decreased hydro-
factors, by high rates of water extraction for irrigation, livestock power, which provides over 65 % of Kenya’s electricity, resulting
and domestic use, leading to conflicts between upstream and in production and income losses in various sectors [15].

4
Shared Socio-economic Pathways (SSPs) outline a narrative of potential global futures, including estimations of broad characteristics such as country-level ­population,
GDP or rate of urbanisation. Five different SSPs outline future realities according to a combination of high and low future socio-economic challenges
for mitigation and adaptation. SSP2 represents the “middle of the road”-pathway.

7
 b. Agriculture

Smallholder farmers in Kenya are increasingly challenged by the 10

to droughts (% of national total)

uncertainty and variability of weather caused by climate change

Exposure of crop land area

[21], [22]. Since most crops are rainfed, yields depend on water 5
availability from precipitation. However, the length and intensity
of the rainy season is becoming increasingly unpredictable and
the use of irrigation facilities remains limited due to poor exten- 0.4
Figure 11: Projections of crop
sion services and irrigation management, and lack of credit and land area exposed to drought
technical equipment [23]. In 2003, only 28 % of the potential area 0.2 at least once a year for Kenya
for different GHG emissions
(1 % of crop land) was irrigated [24]. The main irrigated crops are
0.0 scenarios.
vegetables, fruit, coffee, rice and maize [23]. 2010 2030 2050 2070
Year
Currently, the high uncertainty of projections regarding water
availability (Figure 10) translates into high uncertainty of drought Climate change will have a negative impact on yields of millet
projections (Figure 11). According to the median over all models and sorghum (Figure 12) 5 . Compared to 2000, yields are projected
employed for this analysis, the national crop land area exposed to decline by 8.0 % under RCP2.6 and by 5.3 % under RCP6.0 by
to at least one drought per year will only slightly increase in 2080. The stronger decrease under RCP2.6 can be explained by
response to gobal warming, while other models project a strong non-temperature related parameters such as changes in precipita-
increase. Under RCP6.0, the likely range of drought exposure of tion, while the weaker decrease under RCP6.0 can be explained by
the national crop land area per year widens from 0–0.8 % in 2000 the CO2 fertilisation effect under higher concentration pathways,
to 0–1.6 % in 2080. The very likely range widens from 0–1.9 % in which benefits plant growth. Yields of cassava are projected to
2000 to 0–9.8 % in 2080. This means that some models project a gain from climate change, with a 25 % increase under RCP6.0.
fivefold increase in crop land area exposed to drought over this Cassava is a C3 plant, which follows a different metabolic pathway
time period, while others project no change. than millet, sorghum and maize (C4 plants), and benefits more
from the CO2 fertilisation effect. Yields of maize, wheat and cow
peas are projected to decrease slightly under RCP2.6 and to not
change under RCP6.0, with the exception of cow peas which are
10
(A) Maize (B) Millet and Sorghum (C) Cassava
projected to increase by 10.2 % under50 (D) Wheat
RCP6.0. Although there
60 25 40
appears to be almost no change in multi-model median national-
5 20 40
level yields of maize and wheat, some models simulate consider- 30
Yield change (%)

40 15 30 will likely cause crop

able increases. Regional climate variability
0 20
10 to increase in some areas and decrease
yields 20 in others.
20 5
5 10 10
Overall,
0 adaptation strategies such as switching to high-yielding
0 0
0 10 improved
5 varieties in climate change sensitive crops need to
be 10
10considered, yet should be carefully weighed against adverse 10
2010 2030 2050 2070 2010 2030 2050 2070 2010 2030 2050 2070 2010 2030 2050
outcomes, such as a resulting decline of agro-biodiversity and2070
a
Year Year Year Year
loss of local crop types.

10
1010
10
(B)
(B)(B)
(B) Millet
Millet
(A)Millet
Millet
and
Maize and
and
and Sorghum
Sorghum
Sorghum
Sorghum 10(C) (C)
(C)
(C) Cassava
Cassava
Cassava
Cassava 50(D) (D)
(D)
(D)
(C) Wheat
Wheat
Wheat
Wheat
Cassava (E)
(E)
(E)(E)
(D) Cow
Cow
Cow
Cow peas
peas
peas
peas
Wheat
25 (B) Millet and Sorghum
25
2525 50
5050
25 40
40
4040
50 40
60
5 555 20
20
20205 40
40
4040 40
20 30
30
3030 30
Yield change (%)

40 15
15
1515 30
30
3030
15 30
0 000 0 20
20
2020
10
10
1010 20
20
2020
10 20
20
5 20
555 5 555 5 10
10
1010
5 10
10
1010 10 10
0 000
0 0000 0 000
10
1010
10
0 555
5 10 0
5
10
1010
10 10
10
10
1010 10 10
10
1010 10
070
2070
2070
2070 20102030
2010
2010
2010
2010 20302050
2030
2030
2030 20502070
2050
2050
2050 2070
2070
2070
2070 2010
20102030
2010
2010
2010 2030
20302050
2030
2030 2050
20502070
2050
2050 2070
2070
2070
2070 20102030
2010
2010
2010
2010 20302050
2030
2030
2030 20502070
2050
2050
2050 2070
2070
2070
2070 20102030
2010
2010
2010
2010 20302050
2030
2030
2030 20502070
2050
2050
2050 2070
2070
2070
2070
Year
Year
Year
Year
Year Year
Year
Year
Year
Year Year
Year
Year
Year
Year Year
Year
Year
Year
Year
Figure 12: Projections of crop yield changes for major staple crops in Kenya for different GHG emissions scenarios assuming constant land use and
agricultural management, relative to the year 2000.

5
Modelling data is available for a selected number of crops only. Hence, the crops listed on page 2 may differ. Maize, millet and sorghum are modelled for all countries.

8
c. Infrastructure

Climate change is expected to significantly affect Kenya’s infra-

2.75

to floods (% of national total)

structure sector through extreme weather events, such as floods

Exposure of major roads

and droughts. High precipitation amounts can lead to flooding 2.50
of transport infrastructure, especially in coastal areas with 2.25
low altitudes, while high temperatures can cause roads, bridges 2.00
and protective structures to develop cracks and degrade more 1.75 Figure 13: Projections of
quickly. This will require earlier replacement and lead to higher major roads exposed to river
1.50
maintenance and replacement costs. Transport infrastructure is floods at least once a year
1.25 for Kenya for different GHG
vulnerable to extreme weather events, yet essential for agricul- emissions scenarios.
tural livelihoods. Roads serve communities to trade goods and 2010 2030 2050 2070
access healthcare, education, credit and other services. Especially Year
in rural areas, Kenya’s transport sector is dominated by road
transport, which accounts for 99 % of non-aviation transport
GHG emissions [25]. Investments will have to be made into build-
ing climate-resilient road networks.

land total)
to floods (% of national total)
Exposure of urban land area
area
0.4
0.4

Extreme weather events will also have devastating effects on national

urban
0.3
0.3
human settlements and economic production sites, especially
of of

in urban areas with high population densities such as Nairobi or 0.2

0.2
floods (%

Mombasa. Informal settlements are particularly vulnerable Figure 14: Projections of

Exposure

urban land area exposed to

to extreme weather events: Makeshift homes are often built in 0.1
0.1 river floods at least once a
unstable geographical locations including riverbanks and coastal
to

year for Kenya for different

areas, where flooding can lead to loss of housing, contamina- 0.0
0.0 GHG emissions scenarios.
2010
2010 2030
2030 2050
2050 2070
2070
tion of water, injury or death. Dwellers usually have low adaptive Year
Year
capacity to respond to such events due to high levels of poverty
and lack of risk-reducing infrastructures. According to a study on
urban flooding in Kibera, Nairobi’s largest informal settlement
GDP total)
to heatwaves (% of national total)

with a population of more than 300 000, over 50 % of residents 1010
(% ofofnational

reported that their houses were flooded in the 2015 rainy sea-
88
Exposure of GDP

son [26]. The study documents various consequences including

death, outbreaks of cholera and diarrhoea as well as the destruc- 66
Exposure

tion of houses and other types of property.

to heatwaves

44
Figure 15: Exposure of GDP
Despite the risk of infrastructure damage being likely to in Kenya to heatwaves for
22 different GHG emissions
increase due to climate change, precise predictions of the loca-
scenarios.
tion and extent of exposure are difficult to make. For example, 2010
2010 2030
2030 2050
2050 2070
2070
projections of river flood events are subject to substantial model- Year
Year
ling uncertainty, largely due to the uncertainty of future projec-
tions of precipitation amounts and their spatial distribution, The exposure of the GDP to heatwaves is projected to increase
affecting flood occurrence (see also Figure 5). In Kenya, projec- from around 0.7 % in 2000 to 5.7 % (RCP2.6) and 7.0 % (RCP6.0)
tions show a slight decrease in the exposure of major roads to by the end of the century (Figure 15). The very likely range of
river floods under RCP2.6 and an increase under RCP6.0. In the GDP exposure to heatwaves widens from 0.7–1.4 % in 2000 to
year 2000, 1.9 % of major roads were exposed to river floods at 1.7–7.1 % (RCP2.6) and 6.7–11.1 % (RCP6.0) in 2080. Hence, it
least once a year, while by 2080, this value is projected to change is recommended that economic policy makers start identifying
to 2.3 % under RCP6.0 (Figure 13). In a similar way, exposure of heat-sensitive production sites and activities, and integrating
urban land area to river floods is projected to barely change climate adaptation strategies, such as improved solar-powered
under RCP2.6, whilst increasing from 0.11 % in 2000 to 0.13 % in cooling systems, “cool roof” isolation materials or switching the
2080 under RCP6.0 (Figure 14). ­operating hours from day to night [27].

9
 d. Ecosystems

Climate change is expected to have a significant influence on the 2010 2030 2050 2080
ecology and distribution of tropical ecosystems, even though the
magnitude, rate and direction of these changes are uncertain [28].

RCP2.6
With rising temperatures and increased frequency and intensity
of droughts, wetlands and riverine systems are increasingly at
risk of being converted to other ecosystems, with plant popula-
tions being succeeded and animals losing habitats. Increased
temperatures and droughts can also affect succession in forest

RCP6.0
systems while concurrently increasing the risk of invasive spe-
cies, all of which affect ecosystems. In addition to these climate
drivers, low agricultural production and population growth might
motivate further agricultural expansion resulting in increased
150 200 250 300 350 400 20 10 0 10 20
deforestation, land degradation and forest fires, all of which will Number of species Difference to year 2010 (%)
impact animal and plant biodiversity.
Figure 16: Projections of the aggregate number of amphibian, bird and
mammal species for Kenya for different GHG emissions scenarios.
Model projections of species richness (including amphibians,
birds and mammals) and tree cover for Kenya are shown in Figure
16 and 17, respectively. Projections of the number of animal
2020 2030 2050 2080
species vary depending on the region and scenario (Figure 16).
Since every species reacts differently to climate impacts, some
areas in Kenya are projected to gain in the number of animal
RCP2.6

species, while other areas are projected to lose animal species

due to climate change. The locations of projected changes shift
from RCP2.6 to RCP6.0 with higher certainty under the latter.
Nevertheless, a clear picture cannot be drawn. With regard to
RCP6.0

tree cover, model results are clearer and more certain, especially
for RCP6.0 and after 2050: Median model projections agree on
an increase of tree cover by up to 9 % in south-eastern Kenya
(Figure 17). This increase can be explained by the increasing pre-
cipitation levels which are projected in this region. 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8
Tree cover (%) Difference to year 2020
Although these results paint a rather positive picture for climate Figure 17: Tree cover projections for Kenya for different GHG emissions
change impacts on tree cover, it is important to keep in mind that scenarios.
the model projections exclude any impacts on biodiversity loss
from human activities such as land use, which have been respon-
sible for significant losses of global biodiversity in the past, and
which are expected to remain its main driver in the future [29].

10
e. Human health

Climate change threatens the health and sanitation ­sector

to heatwaves (% of national total)

through more frequent incidences of floods, heatwaves, droughts 8

Exposure of population
and storms [30]. Among the key health challenges in Kenya are
morbidity and mortality through HIV / A IDS, respiratory diseases, 6
vector-borne diseases such as malaria and impacts of extreme
weather events (e.g. flooding), including injury and mortality as 4 Figure 18: Projections of
well as related waterborne diseases such as diarrhoea and chol- population exposure to
era [31]. Many of these health challenges are ­expected to become 2 heatwaves at least once a year
for Kenya for different GHG
more severe under climate change. Climate change is also likely to
emissions scenarios.
impact food and water supply, thereby i­ ncreasing the risk of mal- 2010 2030 2050 2070
nutrition, hunger and death by famine. ­Studies found a strong Year
link between precipitation levels and child stunting, which serves 9
as a common indicator of malnutrition: Precipitation levels im-

(deaths/100 000 people/year)

8
pact food production, which in turn impacts food availability and

Heat-related mortality
7
ultimately growth, particularly during infancy [32]. Furthermore,
6
the WHO estimates that 70 % of the population in Kenya is at risk
of contracting malaria [33]. Climate change is likely to lengthen 5
transmission periods and alter the geographic range of vector- 4 Figure 19: Projections of heat-
related mortality for Kenya
borne diseases, for instance, due to rising temperatures. In this 3 for different GHG emissions
way, malaria could expand from lowland to highland areas, parts 2 scenarios assuming no
adaptation to increased heat.
of which have been malaria free so far [34].
2010 2030 2050 2070
Year
Rising temperatures will result in more frequent heatwaves in
Kenya, which will increase heat-related mortality. Under RCP6.0, year, which translates to an increase by a factor of five towards
the population affected by at least one heatwave per year is the end of the century compared to year 2000 levels, provided
projected to increase from 0.6 % in 2000 to 6.0 % in 2080 (Figure that no adaptation to hotter conditions will take place (Figure 19).
18). Furthermore, under RCP6.0, heat-related mortality will Under RCP2.6, heat-related mortality is projected to increase to
likely increase from 1.4 to 6.8 deaths per 100 000 people per 3.0 deaths per 100 000 people per year in 2080.

© Anouk Delafortrie / European Union / flickr

11
References
[1] CIA World Factbook, “Kenya,” 2019. Online available: [20] B. Notter, L. MacMillan, D. Viviroli, R. Weingartner, and H. P.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ Liniger, “Impacts of Environmental Change on Water Resources in the
ke.html [Accessed: 09-Sep-2019]. Mt. Kenya Region,” J. Hydrol., vol. 343, no. 3–4, pp. 266–278, 2007.
[2] World Bank, “World Bank Open Data,” 2019. Online available: [21] M. Herrero, C. Ringler, J. van de Steeg, P. Thornton, T. Zhu,
https://data.worldbank.org [Accessed: 31-Jan-2020]. E. Bryan, A. Omolo, J. Koo, and A. Notenbaert, “Climate Variability
[3] UNDESA, “World Population Prospects 2019,” New York, 2019. and Climate Change: Impacts on Kenyan Agriculture,” Washington,
[4] FAO, “Socio-Economic Context and Role of Agriculture: Kenya,” D.C. and Nairobi, Kenya, 2010.
Rome, Italy, 2015. [22] E. Bryan, C. Ringler, B. Okoba, C. Roncoli, S. Silvestri, and M. Herrero,
[5] World Bank, “World Development Indicators,” 2018. “Adapting Agriculture to Climate Change in Kenya: Household Strategies
Online available: https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world- and Determinants,” J. Environ. Manage., vol. 114, pp. 26–35, 2013.
development-indicators [Accessed: 09-Apr-2020]. [23] FAO, “Irrigation Market Brief: Kenya,” Rome, Italy, 2015.
[6] Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC), “Kenya,” 2017. [24] AQUASTAT, “Irrigation and Drainage Development,” 2002.
Online available: https://oec.world/en/profile/country/ken Online available: http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/
[Accessed: 06-Apr-2020]. results.html [Accessed: 17-Apr-2020].
[7] FAO, “World Tea Production and Trade: Current and Future [25] L. Cameron, L. Würtenberger, and S. Stiebert, “Kenya’s Climate
Development,” Rome, Italy, 2015. Change Action Plan: Mitigation. Chapter 7: Transport,” Nairobi, Kenya, 2012.
[8] Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC), “Cut Flowers.” [26] KDI - Kounkuey Design Initiative, “Building Urban Flood Resilience:
Online available: https://oec.world/en/profile/hs92/0603 Integrating Community Perspectives, Final Report 2015–2016,”
[Accessed: 09-Jan-2020]. Nairobi, Kenya, 2016.
[9] USAID, “Climate Risk in Food for Peace Geographies: [27] M. Dabaieh, O. Wanas, M. A. Hegazy, and E. Johansson,
Kenya,” Washington, D.C., 2019. “Reducing Cooling Demands in a Hot Dry Climate: A Simulation Study
[10] UNDP, “Human Development Index,” 2018. Online available: for Non-Insulated Passive Cool Roof Thermal Performance in Residential
http://hdr.undp.org/en/indicators/137506 [Accessed: 08-Oct-2019]. Buildings,” Energy Build., vol. 89, pp. 142–152, 2015.
[11] Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative, “ND-GAIN Ranking [28] T. M. Shanahan, K. A. Hughen, N. P. McKay, J. T. Overpeck,
Since 1995 Kenya,” 2017. Online available: https://gain-new.crc.nd.edu/ C. A. Scholz, W. D. Gosling, C. S. Miller, J. A. Peck, J. W. King, and
country/kenya [Accessed: 03-Jul-2020]. C. W. Heil, “CO2 and Fire Influence Tropical Ecosystem Stability in
Response to Climate Change,” Nat. Publ. Gr., no. July, pp. 1–8, 2016.
[12] FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, and WHO, “The State of Food Security
and Nutrition in the World 2019,” Rome, Italy, 2019. [29] IPBES, “Report of the Plenary of the Intergovernmental
Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
[13] Encyclopedia Britannica Online, “Kenya,” 2019. Online available:
on the Work of Its Seventh Session,” n.p., 2019.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Kenya [Accessed: 09-Sep-2019].
[30] B. Simane, H. Beyene, W. Deressa, A. Kumie, K. Berhane, and
[14] G. Belmaker, “The Tana River, Kenya’s Lifeblood, Strains Under
J. Samet, “Review of Climate Change and Health in Ethiopia: Status
Development and Drought,” Mongabay, 2017. Online available:
and Gap Analysis,” Ethiop. J. Heal. Dev., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 28–41, 2016.
https://news.mongabay.com/2017/04/the-tana-river-kenyas-lifeblood-
strains-under-development-and-drought [Accessed: 02-Mar-2020]. [31] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “CDC in Kenya,”
Atlanta, Georgia, 2016.
[15] World Bank, “Climate Variability and Water Resources in Kenya,”
Washington, D.C., 2009. [32] K. Grace, F. Davenport, C. Funk, and A. M. Lerner,
“Child Malnutrition and Climate in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Analysis of
[16] Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), “Kenya - Overview,”
Recent Trends in Kenya,” Appl. Geogr., vol. 35, no. 1–2, pp. 405–413, 2012.
2019. Online available: https://www.cbd.int/countries/?country=ke
[Accessed: 09-Sep-2019]. [33] WHO, “In Kenya, the Path to Elimination of Malaria Is Lined
With Good Preventions,” 2017. Online available: https://www.who.int/
[17] C. B. Awuor, V. A. Orindi, and A. Ochieng Adwera,
news-room/feature-stories/detail/in-kenya-the-path-to-elimination-of-
“Climate Change and Coastal Cities: The Case of Mombasa, Kenya,”
malaria-is-lined-with-good-preventions [Accessed: 18-Nov-2019].
Environ. Urban., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 231–242, 2008.
[34] USAID, “U.S. President’s Malaria Initiative: Kenya - Malaria
[18] S. Lange, “EartH2Observe, WFDEI and ERA-Interim Data Merged
Operational Plan FY 2019,” Washington, D.C., 2019.
and Bias-Corrected for ISIMIP (EWEMBI).” GFZ Data Service, Potsdam,
Germany, 2016.
[19] D. Rowell, B. Booth, S. Nicholson, and B. Good,
“Reconciling Past and Future Rainfall Trends over East Africa,”
J. Clim., vol. 28, no. 24, pp. 9768–9788, 2015.

This climate risk profile was commissioned and is conducted on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) in close
cooperation with the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) as the implementing partner.

The risk profile is based on data and analyses generated as part of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP), which is gratefully acknowledged.
Background information about the figures and analyses presented in this profile is available in the Climate Risk Profile – Supplemental Information.

On behalf of: Scientific content developed by: Scientific coordination: Contributors: Published and implemented by:
Federal Ministry for Economic Potsdam Institute for Climate Christoph Gornott (PIK) Paula Aschenbrenner (PIK), Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Cooperation and Development (BMZ) Impact Research (PIK) Abel Chemura (PIK), Internationale Zusammenarbeit
BMZ Bonn Telegraphenberg A 31 Main authors: Ylva Hauf (PIK), (GIZ) GmbH
Dahlmannstraße 4 14473 Potsdam, Germany Julia Tomalka (PIK), Lisa Murken (PIK),
53113 Bonn, Germany http://www.pik-potsdam.de Stefan Lange (PIK), Enrico Grams (GIZ), In cooperation with:
www.bmz.de Felicitas Röhrig (PIK), Sibylla Neer (GIZ), KfW Development Bank
Christoph Gornott (PIK) Rebecca Hadank-Rauch (GIZ),
Josef Haider (KfW)