evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Makueni County's Multi-Tier Participatory Budgeting Model

Kenya · Wote · See the Kenya profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 74% 57/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

After Kenya's 2010 devolution, Makueni County built a six-tier participatory budgeting process from village to county level. By FY2016/17, World Bank data show 32% of its development budget (Kshs 823 million) was allocated through forums reaching over 350,000 people.

>3000
Village Peoples' Forums (FY2015/16 onward)
11
Members per village forum committee
1000 approx.
County Forum delegates
3867
Participatory meetings (FY2016/17)
>350000
Participants engaged (FY2016/17)
32 %
Share of development budget allocated via process (FY2016/17)
823 Kshs million
Development budget allocated via process (FY2016/17)
84
Medium-size earth dams built
189 KSh million
Own-source revenue (FY2013/14)
1.291 KSh billion
Own-source revenue (FY2024/25)
Makueni County's Multi-Tier Participatory Budgeting Model

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
Makueni County Government
Period
2013–present
Keywords
public finance, citizen participation, devolved governance

Context

Kenya's 2010 constitution devolved budgeting to 47 new counties and required public participation under the 2012 Public Finance Management Act. After early consultations under Makueni's first governor, Kivutha Kibwana (elected 2013), suffered from elite capture and low turnout, the county redesigned its process from FY2015/16 with support from the World Bank's Kenya Accountable Devolution Program.

Objectives

To build a structured, non-hierarchical, multi-tier participatory budgeting process to allocate development budget in line with citizen priorities, avoiding elite capture experienced in the initial consultations.

Activities

A six-tier cascade: Village Peoples' Forums (over 3,000, each with an 11-member committee), Village Clusters, Sub-Wards, Wards, Sub-Counties, and a final County Forum of around 1,000 delegates.

Results

World Bank data for FY2016/17 record 3,867 participatory meetings, over 350,000 participants engaged, and 32% of the county's development budget (Kshs 823 million) allocated through the process, funding projects such as 84 medium-size earth dams built without land-purchase disputes. Makueni's own-source revenue grew from KSh 189 million in FY2013/14 to KSh 1.291 billion in FY2024/25, which the county attributes in part to trust built through citizen engagement. In August 2018 the Council of Governors, with World Bank, UKAID and USAID support, brought all 47 county governors to Makueni to study the model.

Conclusions

The World Bank's own working paper cautions that Makueni's results 'should not be considered a best practice that can be readily replicated,' given how much depended on sustained political commitment from a single reformist governor who faced an impeachment attempt. Citizens systematically prioritise visible, immediate needs over longer-term strategic investment, rural participants often had limited feedback on which prioritised projects were funded, and reported figures have varied by year and source.

Implementation

Indicative cost
Low (< €50k)
Time to results
Long (> 3 years)
Staffing & skills
Makueni County Government, World Bank Kenya Accountable Devolution Program (technical support), Elected community committees at every tier

Conditions for success

  • Sustained political commitment from county leadership
  • A structured, non-hierarchical multi-tier cascade to avoid elite capture
  • External technical-partner support (World Bank/UKAID/USAID)

Common failure modes

  • Heavy dependence on a single reformist governor who faced an impeachment attempt
  • Citizens systematically prioritise visible, immediate needs over strategic investment
  • Rural participants often had limited feedback on funded outcomes
  • Reported participation/budget-share figures vary significantly by year and source

Where it fits

Governance type
devolved county government
Scale
county
Income level
lower-middle-income

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful