The Impact of the Kenya 2008 Post-Election Violence on Rural Farm Households

Study Context

On December 30, 2007, Kenya experienced its worst post-election violence (PEV) since the inception of multiparty politics in 1992. The violence persisted until the end of February 2008 and more than 1,100 people died and 650,000 people suffered internal displacement (Adeagbo & Iyi, 2011). Rivalry between dominant ethnic groups such as the Kikuyu and the Kalenjin, and disputes over the control of scarce arable land have led to PEV, impacting the socio-economic outcomes of agricultural households (Oucho, 2010). While existing literature mainly focuses on the causes of PEV in Kenya (Dercon & Gutiérrez-Romero, 2012; Klopp & Kamungi, 2007; Oucho, 2010), there is limited empirical evidence on the effects of PEV on agricultural production and welfare outcomes of farming households. This study will fill this gap by investigating whether and how PEV affects agricultural production and household welfare.

Study Design

This study used an objective measure of PEV using conflict data from Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED), Commission of Inquiry into Post-Election Violence (CIPEV), and Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP), which reported information on internal political conflict primarily by date, location, and actor. Combining the household data with external data measuring PEV reduced measurement error associated with using self-reported measures of PEV.

The final dataset included a balanced panel of 1,243 households in 22 districts sampled from eight agro-regional and agro-ecological zones. Spanning ten years, the panel contained four waves of data from the 2000, 2004, 2007, and 2010 surveys.

The study used a DID estimator to measure the average treatment effect on the treated (ATET) in order to address endogeneity concerns and assess how PEV impacts agricultural production and consumption expenditure on rural farm households in Kenya.

Results and Policy Lessons

Researchers found that exposure to the PEV crisis had a negative impact on household welfare. Households suffered declining per capita income. Causal pathways leading to these negative impacts likely include declining crop income and off-farm income. Notwithstanding, the PEV crisis increased livestock income among the surveyed households.

The empirical findings put forward by this study have important implications for policies promoting rural development and post-PEV economic recovery strategies. In particular, ex ante mitigation strategies and ex post coping strategies, such as off-farm diversification, including non-farm activities may play a vital role in cushioning households against negative welfare impacts of conflict. Non-farm activities provide alternative sources of income and employment during the conflict. Hence, investment in the rural non-farm sector can play a vital role in enhancing income diversification and promoting post-PEV economic recovery. In addition, livestock markets may play a key role in sustaining livelihoods pre- and post-conflict; thus, investments in livestock market systems can be vital in enhancing resilience to shocks including conflict.

In 2015, the government set aside funds to make reparations and compensate households that suffered significant losses during the 2008 PEV crisis. However, demands for compensation by internally displaced persons that fled their homes are still the norm, almost 15 years later. As such, social safety nets remain critical over the long-term. Moreover, while the government has instituted early warning and rapid response mechanisms and community peacebuilding programs, it is imperative that local, national, and international actors contribute towards sustained peacebuilding during and beyond national elections to mitigate and prevent election violence.