UNITED NATIONS HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PROGRAMME (UN-HABITAT)

URBAN AND PERI-URBAN AGRICULTURE AND RURAL-TO-URBAN FOOD FLOWS: CASE STUDY OF NAIROBI

by

John Thinguri Mukui

Consultant report prepared for Urban Economy and Finance Branch, United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT), Nairobi May 2002

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The study was commissioned by the Urban Economy and Finance Branch, United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT). I thank Mr. Don Okpala (Chief, Urban Economy and Finance Branch), Mr. Naison MutizwaMangiza (Coordinator, Urban and Regional Economy Unit, Urban Economy and Finance Branch) and Ms. Rose NgaaraMuraya (Human Settlements Officer, Urban Economy and Finance Branch) for their regular support and understanding during the conduct of the entire exercise. I thank the City Council of Nairobi for their support in data collection and logistical issues during fieldwork, and the Nairobi Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension (PDALE) especially in provision of information on urban agriculture. I also thank the enumerators for their selfless commitment to the data collection exercise despite the difficulties they encountered in the process. The support of Julius Kuria in supervising data collection is gratefully acknowledged. Finally, the survey would not have been possible without the cooperation of the wholesalers and traders who kindly agreed to be interviewed. This report was presented to the workshop on Urban Policy Implications for Food Security in African Cities, organized by the UN-HABITAT in partnership with the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), International Development Research Centre (IDRC) and Strategic Initiative on Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture (SIUPA), held during 27-31 May 2002 at the United Nations conferences facility, Nairobi, Kenya. The only change to the original text is insertion of footnotes 1, 3 and 5.

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................ i CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 FOOD SECURITY IN AN URBAN CONTEXT .................................................................................. 1 1.3 THE CONCEPT OF URBAN AGRICULTURE ................................................................................... 2 1.4 URBAN AGRICULTURE IN NAIROBI ................................................................................................. 3 1.5 REGULATIONS GOVERNING FOOD AND URBAN AGRICULTURE ................................... 5 1.6 REGULATIONS GOVERNING MARKETS AND FOOD OUTLETS ......................................... 7 1.7 STUDY METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................ 8 1.8 OUTLINE OF THE REPORT ................................................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER 2: URBAN AGRICULTURE IN NAIROBI ....................................................................................... 10 2.1 ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION OF NAIROBI ................................................................... 10 2.2 CROP FARMING ........................................................................................................................................ 11 2.3 LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES........................................................................................ 11 2.4 PRODUCTION TRENDS AND SECTOR PERFORMANCE ........................................................ 15 2.5 THE EFFECTS OF URBANIZATION ON AGRICULTURE ........................................................ 19 2.6 WOMEN IN URBAN AGRICULTURE ................................................................................................ 21 2.7 SOME POLICY ISSUES IN URBAN AGRICULTURE .................................................................... 22 2.8 THE STATE AND URBAN AGRICULTURE ..................................................................................... 23 2.9 THE SEARCH FOR A NEW PARADIGM ........................................................................................... 26 CHAPTER 3: SURVEY DESCRIPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION............................................................ 28 3.1 SAMPLE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................ 28 3.2 ESTIMATION PROCEDURES ............................................................................................................... 29 3.3 DEVELOPMENT OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE ............................................................................... 29 3.4 TRAINING OF ENUMERATORS ......................................................................................................... 30 3.5 FIELDWORK ............................................................................................................................................... 30 3.6 CLASSIFICATION OF COMMODITIES ............................................................................................. 33 3.7 RELIABILITY OF THE RESULTS......................................................................................................... 34 CHAPTER 4: MARKETS FOR FRESH AND DRY CROP PRODUCE .......................................................... 36 4.1 CITY COUNCIL MARKETS .................................................................................................................... 36 4.2 INDEPENDENT MARKETS .................................................................................................................. 42 CHAPTER 5: DELIVERIES OF FRESH AND DRY CROP PRODUCE TO NAIROBI MARKETS ..... 50 5.1 ALL MARKETS EXCLUDING NYAMAKIMA ................................................................................. 50 5.2 FOOD DELIVERED TO NYAMAKIMA ............................................................................................ 55 5.3 TOTAL DELIVERIES OF FOOD TO ALL SURVEYED MARKETS ......................................... 56 5.4 QUANTITIES OF FRESH AND DRY FOOD DELIVERIES ........................................................ 56 5.5 SURVEY OF FOOD PROCESSING FIRMS........................................................................................ 56 CHAPTER 6: COMMERCIAL INFLOWS OF MEAT AND MEAT PRODUCTS ....................................... 57 6.1 SURVEY COVERAGE .............................................................................................................................. 57 6.2 ANALYTICAL CLASSIFICATION OF ABATTOIRS ....................................................................... 60 6.3 NUMBER OF ANIMALS SLAUGHTERED ........................................................................................ 60 6.4 NUMBER OF ANIMALS SOLD IN NAIROBI ................................................................................... 61 6.5 LIVESTOCK SLAUGHTERED AND SOLD IN NAIROBI BY ABATTOIR............................. 61 6.6 SOURCES OF LIVESTOCK SLAUGHTERED IN EACH ABATTOIR ...................................... 61 6.7 COSTS OF ANIMALS SOLD IN NAIROBI ........................................................................................ 62 6.8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................... 62 6.9 RELIABILITY OF THE RESULTS......................................................................................................... 63 CHAPTER 7: COMMERCIAL INFLOWS OF CHICKEN AND FISH ........................................................... 64 7.1 SURVEY COVERAGE .............................................................................................................................. 64 7.2 CHICKEN INFLOWS TO NAIROBI .................................................................................................... 67 7.3 FISH INFLOWS TO NAIROBI ............................................................................................................... 69 7.4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................... 71 7.5 RELIABILITY OF THE RESULTS......................................................................................................... 71 CHAPTER 8: SUMMARY OF THE MAIN FINDINGS ...................................................................................... 73 8.1 COVERAGE ................................................................................................................................................. 73
ii

8.2 OVERALL RELIABILITY OF THE RESULTS................................................................................... 73 8.3 COMMERCIAL FOOD INFLOWS ........................................................................................................ 74 8.4 URBAN AGRICULTURE.......................................................................................................................... 76 8.5 LESSONS LEARNT .................................................................................................................................... 76 8.6 THE WAY AHEAD .................................................................................................................................... 77 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................................ 79 STATISTICAL ANNEX ............................................................................................................................................... 84 SURVEY INSTRUMENTS AND ENUMERATORS REFERENCE MANUAL ........................................ 157 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES ................................................................................................................................ 194 MAP OF AGRICULTURE IN NAIROBI .............................................................................................................. 202 MAP OF MARKETS IN NAIROBI ......................................................................................................................... 204

iii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND

As a result of worsening poverty within urban areas, many low income households are increasingly turning to urban agriculture for production of food for own consumption and for income generation. Higher income households are also turning to urban agriculture as a way of augmenting declining salaries within the formal sector. At the same time, due to spiraling costs of transportation, many low income households that were previously dependent upon direct food remittances from their rural homes can no longer afford this. For this reason, rural-to-urban food flows are increasingly dependent on organized transportation and marketing networks. These emerging dynamics have in turn given rise to new policy issues that need to be addressed by urban planners and managers. These issues may be put in the form of questions as follows: (i) How should cities respond to the phenomenon of urban agriculture, in light of its increasing importance in the fight against urban poverty and especially given that this type of land use has not traditionally been accepted as a typical urban land use? How should urban planners and managers address peri-urban land use conflicts, so as to manage the urban-rural transition in ways that respond to both agricultural and non-agricultural needs? What approaches should planners adopt to facilitate the inflow of food into cities and its marketing therein?

(ii) (iii)

To address these concerns, the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT) commissioned this study with the following objectives: To determine the relative contributions of urban agriculture, peri-urban agriculture, and rural-to-urban food inflows, to the overall food needs of Nairobi City and to poverty reduction. To determine, within the context of urban planning, the policy implications arising from the findings of the research, focusing on: agricultural land use within the city; management of peri-urban land-use conflicts; and adequacy of the infrastructure necessary for facilitating rural-to-urban food flows and of food markets within the city. To develop, on the basis of lessons learnt from the research on Nairobi, generic urban planning policy guidelines on: the integration of urban agriculture in city planning and management; the management of peri-urban use of land for agriculture; and how to improve the transport infrastructure and urban market facilities necessary for feeding the cities.

A parallel study on Using Urban Planning Instrument in Improving Urban Food Security was commissioned to undertake a thorough analysis of and to develop policies for the use of the urban planning instrument in improving urban food security. The study was supposed to cover (a) food supply to cities and food distribution problems; (b) contribution of urban planning in improving food security (land use planning including transportation, regulatory requirements, and information systems); and (c) policies, strategies and implementation (respective roles of city authorities, nongovernmental organizations and community groups). The two studies were designed to complement each other. 1.2 FOOD SECURITY IN AN URBAN CONTEXT

According to Maxwell (1998, 1999) on The Political Economy of Urban Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa, the nature of urban food insecurity has changed from the problem of feeding the cities (or maintaining aggregate supply) to that of access at household and individual level. The responses of urban households to the economic crisis are normally the focus of efforts to combat poverty and food security. There has been a tendency toward household-level responses of coping and adaptation and depoliticization of urban food insecurity problems. Formal programs have emphasized individual-centered approaches of poverty, such as training, credit and other self-help mechanisms. The study argues a case for examination of poverty for a

particular location rather than looking at poverty from rural/urban comparisons. Secondly, the policymakers should view urban food insecurity from the point of view of access rather than aggregate supply. Thirdly, it will require understanding of the livelihood strategies of the urban poor. Fourthly, it requires incorporation of these issues into the political agenda of cities and urban communities. The causes of malnutrition and food insecurity in urban and rural areas are different due to a number of phenomena of urban life. Ruel, Haddad and Garret (1999) argue that urban facts of life include greater dependence on cash income, weaker informal safety nets, greater labor force participation of women (and its consequences for childcare), lifestyle changes (mainly relating to diet and exercise patterns), greater availability of public services but questionable access by poor slum dwellers, greater exposure to environmental contamination, and governance by a new set of property rights. Urban people are more dependent on food purchases, and factors that determine cash income thus become important determinants of urban food security. Other factors include food prices and efficacy of the urban marketing system e.g. bad roads linking producing areas to the cities, and internal food distribution systems. Households can reduce their reliance on cash income for food in a number of ways, including urban agriculture. The rural-urban nutrition transition is characterized by changes from diets rich in complex carbohydrates and fiber (mainly food staples) to more varied diets with higher proportions of fat, refined sugars, and meat products1. Urban diets are generally higher in refined cereals and sugars and in animal products, and lower in staple foods. The greater dietary diversity may have a positive impact on micronutrient nutrition, but the higher refined sugar content combined with sedentary lifestyle and overall environmental contamination increases the risks of obesity, cardiovascular diseases, certain forms of cancer and other chronic diseases.

1.3

THE CONCEPT OF URBAN AGRICULTURE

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (2001), urban agriculture is often used to refer to small areas (e.g. vacant plots, gardens, verges, balconies, containers) within the city for growing crops and raising small livestock or milk cows for owner-consumption or sale in neighborhood markets. Peri-urban agriculture normally refers to farm units close to town which operate intensive semi- or fully-commercial farms to grow vegetables or other horticulture or raise chickens or other livestock. However, urban agriculture is also viewed as farming and related activities that take place within official urban boundaries. This definition is used in an attempt to analyze the laws and regulations on land use and tenure rights, use of water, and the environment that have been established and are operated by urban or municipal authorities. However, the boundaries between urban, peri-urban and rural activities are ambiguous, they are fluid, presenting opportunities for potentially beneficial linkages (FAO, 2001). The literature identifies three main benefits of urban agriculture (Freeman, 1988; Foeken and Mwangi, 1998). First, it provides the farmers with (additional) food, ideally resulting in a higher level of food consumption. Secondly, because less food will be purchased and/or cash income realized by selling part of the produce, household welfare can be improved. This is based on the concept of fungibility, i.e. the notion that through production of their own food, poor urban residents are freeing up scarce cash that would otherwise go towards purchase of food. Some of this cash may augment household savings, be invested in small business, An attitudinal problem is related to the urban definition of food, as observed below: The task of promoting indigenous vegetables to urban consumers is challenging on several fronts. First, there is the problem of image. There are many reports that indigenous vegetables are overlooked by city dwellers (particularly young people) because they are perceived to be old fashioned and poor mans food. Second, there is a question of convenience. As a result of urbanization and modernization forces, as well as busier lifestyles, it is possible that urban consumers are increasingly turning to fast foods, consuming less fresh produce, especially if it requires a lot of preparation effort (as is the case with many indigenous vegetables). And lastly, there is the influence of wider economic forces, resulting, for example, from globalization, which has increased economic opportunities for a restricted number of commodity groups, leading to the marginalization of local agro-biodiversity (Charlie M. Shackleton, Margaret W. Pasquini and Axel W. Drescher (editors), African Indigenous Vegetables in Urban Agriculture, Earthscan, London, 2009).
1

or used to improve household welfare through health and education expenditures. Finally, since most of the farmers are not employed, farming provides a greater existential satisfaction.

1.4

URBAN AGRICULTURE IN NAIROBI

According to Lamba (1994), agriculture was one of the major activities practiced within Nairobi area before it was converted to an urban center. The Maasai, Kikuyu and Dorobo who lived in Nairobi and the surrounding areas established trading links involving agricultural products such as skins and hides, grain, vegetables and fruits. The area was used for livestock and wildlife grazing, arable farming and forestry, but with minimum impact on the natural resource base. The development of Nairobi as a city can be traced to May 1899 when the Uganda Railway reached Nairobi, and started using the present site of Nairobi as a stores depot and shunting yard (place where trains are shifted from one track to another). Freeman (1991) shows that the initial layout of Nairobi can be traced to the need to appropriate sufficient land for the railway and the attendant workshops and living quarters of its employees, and the discovery (a few years before) that malaria is caused by anopheles mosquito2. It was previously thought that unhealthy vapors (miasma) or even certain types of vegetation caused malaria3. The debilitating fever was thought to be transmitted only by mosquito that had bitten infected Africans (Frenkel and Western, 1988). In 1901, the Colonial Office issued a directive to all tropical colonies requiring that all new buildings, as far as practicable, and with due regard to expense, be located away from native quarters, clear of jungle, at a distance from stagnant waters, and where possible, on high ground. There were therefore plenty of open spaces which were carefully maintained by the European settlers as a cordon sanitaire between whites and the non-white (Indian and African) populations, and by the railways as reserve for possible expansion in the future. There were also sufficient wayleaves along rivers and streams to allow for spraying of mosquito larvae and clearing of the dense bush that harbored adult mosquitoes. The open spaces (sanitation corridors between white settlers and the non-white population) and wayleaves along rivers later became plots for urban agriculture. The first national survey covering urban agriculture was conducted by Mazingira Institute in 1985 and covered Mombasa, Kisumu, Kakamega, Isiolo, Kitui and Nairobi (Lee-Smith, Manundu, Lamba and Kuria, 1987; Lee-Smith and Memon, 1994). The survey showed that 29% of all urban residents engaged in urban farming. The proportion practicing urban farming was much higher in the smaller towns, such as Kitui (57%), than in the larger cities e.g. Nairobi (20%), Mombasa (26%) and Kisumu (30%). A reported 71% of the Nairobi shambas (gardens) were in backyards, 10% by roadside, 9% by riversides, and 9% were in other places (e.g. open spaces in residential areas). Only 33% of Nairobi farmers owned the land. A reported 7% of the sampled Nairobi households kept livestock within Nairobi. Among the livestock keepers in Nairobi, the incidence of poultry was highest (77%), followed by goats (18%), cattle (16%), sheep (12%) and rabbits (10%). Freeman (1988, 1991) conducted a survey of active cultivators in open spaces during May-July 1987. The open spaces included roadside, riverbank or drainage wayleave, a park, beside a railway line, and vacant residential or industrial land. A reported 64.2% of the cultivators were female. A reported 13.4% of the cultivators were born in Nairobi, while the highest number was born in Kiambu (23.3%), followed by Muranga (14.1%), Machakos (12.8%) and Kakamega (9.1%). Freeman (1991) states that a firm aggregate The term miasma was used to describe dangerous fumes from the ground that is transported by winds and can cause serious illnesses, and the name malaria was derived from malaria or bad air in medieval Italian. 3 See also: Philip Curtin, Medical Knowledge and Urban Planning in Tropical Africa, American Historical Review, 90 (3), 1985; Myron Echenberg, Black Death, White Medicine: Bubonic Plague and the Politics of Public Health in Colonial Senegal, 1914-1945, Heinemann, 2002; Stephen Frenkel and John Western, Pretext or Prophylaxis? Racial Segregation and Malarial Mosquitoes in a British Tropical Colony: Sierra Leone, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 78(2), 1988; Odile Goerg, From Hill Station (Freetown) to Downtown Conakry (First Ward): Comparing French and British Approaches to Segregation in Colonial Cities at the Beginning of the Twentieth Century, Canadian Journal of African Studies, 32(1), 1998; and Sarah L. Smiley, The City of Three Colors: Segregation in Colonial Dar es Salaam, 1891-1961, Historical Geography, Volume 37, 2009.
2

figure for the total value of urban agriculture in Nairobi and other cities is difficult to estimate with precision, since much of it is subsistence production. Lado (1990) on informal urban agriculture in Nairobi is a summary of Freemans (1988, 1991) book. There are also studies on roadside farming in the areas close to Nairobi (see, for example, Mbwesa, 1988). Mwangi (1995) reports the findings of a study on urban agriculture (specific to food component) undertaken in Nairobi during June-October 1994. The study was conducted in two clusters that had already been identified with poverty: Korogocho in Kariobangi-North sub-location; and Kitui (in Pumwani sub-location) and Kanuku and Kinyago in Eastleigh sub-location. The villages in Kitui, Kanuku and Kinyago areas were involved in the Undugu Society Urban Agriculture Project (USUAP). In Korogocho, three out of seven villages were selected, which showed that 30% of the households were engaged in urban agriculture. The household survey included demography, household characteristics (housing materials and household assets), agricultural activities, non-farm income activities (wage income and self-employment), household feeding patterns, general food security, and nutrition status of under-fives. In Korogocho, the study included a control group (non-farmers). Generally, the USUAP households were better off than the Korogocho households. Although the average calorie intake in all the groups was below the required daily allowance, Korogocho non-farmers were below those of farmers, while Korogocho as a whole was below the USUAP farmers. Nutritional status showed the same trend. Most Korogocho farmers had plots in Kasarani, about 3 kilometers to the northeast, as no farming land was available in their residential area. Most USUAP farmers had plots along Nairobi River adjacent to their residential area. The most common crops were maize, beans and kale (sukuma wiki). Larger livestock (cattle, sheep, and goats) were more common among Korogocho farmers, while smaller stock (chicken, ducks, rabbits and doves) were common in both areas. Dennery (1996) presents the findings of a study conducted during August-October 1994 in Kibera. Kibera is the largest informal settlement in Nairobi, with a population of over 286,000 as per the 1999 Kenya Population and Housing Census. The types of crop production systems in Kibera are rain-fed cultivation, irrigation with wastewater, and close to waterways where water logging and periodic flooding occurs. The study used qualitative methods to investigate how food producers with limited material and monetary resources engage in urban agriculture. The paper starts from the premise that practices are in fact decisions that have been implemented and that they are a reflection of the complexity of the decision-making process. None of the households in the study relied solely on food production for their livelihoods, and none were able to satisfy their total food requirements through urban food production alone. However, all respondents stated that they would be worse off if they did not engage in urban agriculture because of the high prices of staple foods and fresh produce in Nairobi. Sale of surplus perishables (e.g. kale and green maize) provided cash to purchase other foods and essential non-food expenditure (e.g. school fees). The Kibera producers were keenly aware of the insecurity of land tenure, which tended to limit producer incentive to protect soil from erosion. Foeken and Mwangi (1998) provide a useful synthesis of research on urban agriculture in Nairobi. The paper distinguishes three types of urban agriculture. The first is farming activities in backyards, referring to growing food or keeping animals on ones own compound. The second one is in open spaces not belonging to those who use it. Finally, there is farming in the former rural areas that became part of the city due to expansion of the city boundaries (e.g. Dagoretti). Foeken and Mwangi (1998) highlighted the difficulties of comparing findings from the abovementioned studies since the surveys utilized different sampling schemes. Lee-Smith sampled households in the whole city area; Freeman (1988; 1991) used selected plots; while Mwangis (1995) survey covered two low-income areas. Only one study, by Mazingira Institute (Lee-Smith, Manundu, Lamba and Kuria, 1987; Lee-Smith and Memon, 1994), can claim to present a representative picture of farming in Nairobi (as well as five other towns in Kenya).

All the studies show that the majority of urban farmers are women. The majority of the farmers were not born in Nairobi, but came from the neighboring districts (mainly in Central province). Relatively few people in the farming households in Nairobi were employed in the formal sector. Some of the constraints faced by urban farmers included flooding and/or water-logging (for farmers with plots along rivers), destruction by animals, pests and diseases, theft of crops, theft of livestock (mainly chicken), lack of financial means to purchase inputs, and the use of their plots as public toilets, but few mentioned harassment by local authorities. The paper reviews the prospects for urban farming in Nairobi from the perspectives of environment, policy, and development. The study notes that rivers flowing through Nairobi are heavily polluted with industrial effluent and human waste. This can contaminate crops with minerals harmful to human and animal health (in case of fodder such as Napier grass). The paper by Hide, Kimani and Thuo (2001) reported the results of a survey of irrigation activities along Nairobi River right from its source. The project identified 3,700 farmers engaged in informal irrigation within 20-kilometre radius of the Nairobi City center. The farmers were located in 55 clusters and farmed over 2,000 hectares. The study included areas upstream of the main city and its industries, all the way to Maili Saba where wastewater irrigation is practiced. The only major study identified that focused on an urban area outside Nairobi was by Foeken and Owuor (2000) on urban agriculture in Nakuru. The study reports that Nakuru was one of the three towns in the world where UN-HABITAT launched the Localizing Agenda 21: Action Planning for Sustainable Development. The objective of the program is to provide training in order to develop a new approach towards urban planning and management, focusing on environmentally conscious development of Nakuru (Peoples Green City), with particular attention to low-income groups. The survey used a representative sample of 594 households based on the national sample frame maintained by the Central Bureau of Statistics. The survey showed that 75% of the total responding households was in one way or other performing farming activities in 1998. About a third of the population was farming in the built-up area of the town. The findings of the studies on urban agriculture in Nairobi are in line with those obtained by Maxwell (1995; 1996) and Maxwell, Levin and Csete (1998) for Kampala, Uganda. Maxwell (1995) describes urban farming as a womans strategy rather than a household strategy due to predominance of women in urban agriculture in Kampala. The major constraint to farming in the city is access to land. The impact of urban farming at the household level is a combination of three factors: income, food security, and nutritional status. Income refers to in-kind income or fungible income through savings in food expenditure. The measurable outcome is nutritional status. The study showed a positive association between farming in the city and improved child nutrition status. Maxwell, Levin and Csete (1998) shows that urban farming is primarily an activity of urban women: nearly 80% of the labor is provided by women and both production and consumption decisions are largely made by women. The nutritional status of children in farming households was significantly higher than for children in non-farming households, especially with respect to height-for-age measure. Urban agriculture is seen as a component of an informal safety net. Urban agriculture in Kampala faces two major constraints: access to land, and its suppression by municipal governments. Maxwell (1996) analyzes the means of access to land, much of it informal, and discusses possible policy responses to competing demands over urban and periurban land in Kampala.

1.5

REGULATIONS GOVERNING FOOD AND URBAN AGRICULTURE

Kenya has a hierarchically nested administrative organization, from nation, province, district, division, location, to sub-location. The hierarchically nested administrative organization of government is normally referred to as the provincial administration. It starts from the President (in his capacity as the chief executive) all the way to the assistant chief at the sub-location level. Within the administrative set-up, local authorities are a dual administrative structure parallel to the central government.
5

The laws governing local authorities have no rival in obscurity and confusion. The laws include the Local Government Act, cap 265 of the Laws of Kenya, which governs the operations of municipal, town and county councils. In addition, local authorities, especially cities and municipalities, operate under delegated powers e.g. under the Public Health Act (cap 242) and the Education Act (cap 211). The delegation of powers is not matched by delegation of resources to undertake the functions of the central government at the municipal level. Within the central government, there are jurisdictional disputes between the Ministries of Health and Agriculture in enforcement of laws governing food quality. Under the Organization of Government dated June 2001, development of fisheries and veterinary services is under the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. Although meat inspection is the responsibility of the Ministry of Health under the Public Health Act, inspection of cattle, calves, pigs, sheep and goats is conducted by public health technicians (staff of the Ministry of Health) in the rural areas and veterinary officers (of the Ministry of Agriculture) in the urban areas. Incidentally, the Public Health Act is silent on inspection of camel meat. The Public Health Act is silent on inspection of fish for human consumption. The Ministry of Health used to be responsible for inspecting fish, including issuance of trade and transport permits. Fish inspection was quietly transferred to the Ministry of Agriculture, which is now responsible for inspecting all fish before it reaches consumers. The Ministry of Health argued that the fisheries staffs (Ministry of Agriculture) do not have sufficient knowledge of sanitation issues that are considered important in the fish industry. 1.5.1 The Local Government Act

Section 154 (c) of the Local Government Act gives every municipal council, county council or town council the power to prohibit the cultivation by unauthorized persons of any unenclosed and unoccupied land in private ownership and of any Government land and land reserved for any public road. Section 155 (b) of the Act gives every county, municipal or town council the power subject to any other written law relating thereto, to engage in livestock and agricultural undertakings (including the provision of services for improving the agricultural and livestock industries in the county, municipality or township). Section 155(c) vests them with the power to require the planting of any specified crops by persons for the support of themselves and their families in areas which in the opinion of the county, municipal or town council are suffering from or likely to suffer from a shortage of foodstuffs. Section 162(b) of the Local Government Act gives every municipal council (excluding town council or urban council) the power to prohibit or control the keeping of animals, birds and bees so that their keeping shall not be a public nuisance or injurious to health. Most of the City of Nairobi by-laws were made to domesticate sections 160-167 of the Local Government Act and other enabling legislation (e.g. the Public Health Act and the Traffic Act). 1.5.2 Delegated Authority4

The Public Health Act, cap 242, section 157, empowers the minister for health to prohibit cultivation or irrigation within and around townships where the growing of any crop or the irrigation of any land being within the boundaries of a township or within three miles of such boundaries is unhealthful or unsanitary. The Local Government (Transfer of Functions) Act, 1969, transferred functions from the local authorities, except municipal councils, to the central government in relation to education, public health and roads. The Act expired on 31 March 1970, and was replaced by LN 41 of 1970, which amended the relevant enabling legislation specific to health (Public Health Act; Malaria Prevention Act; and Food, Drugs and Chemical Substances Act), education (Education Act), and relevant sections of the Local Government Regulations of 1963. The functions assigned to Nairobi City Council are shown in the Report by the Independent Probe Committee on Financial and Management Problems of Nairobi City Council (1983) chaired by S.K. Ongeri. The Ongeri report proposed that the Government consider pegging small percentages of various aspects of national taxation to accrue to a fund known as the National Percentage Income for Local Authorities. The Local Authority Transfer Fund Act of January 1998 pegged the fund to 5% of ordinary revenue.
4

The Public Health Act, Section 118(1) (f-g), specifies livestock and livestock buildings which may be judged nuisances, injurious or dangerous to health, and therefore subject to proceedings for removal under the Act. The Public Health (Milk and Dairies) Rules, made under the Public Health Act and domesticated into municipal law by the Nairobi Municipality (Milk and Dairies) By-Laws of 1949 - requires purveyors of milk to be licensed, while Section 135A of the same Act delegates authority to municipal councils on various aspects of milk marketing. The City Council of Nairobi is a duly appointed water undertaker under the Water Act. The City of Nairobi (Water Supply) By-Laws, Legal Notice No. 123 of 1974, states that the Council may prohibit the use of water from the water supply for the purpose of watering any garden, grounds or plant by publishing a notice in the Press and Kenya Gazette. The By-Laws are violated only if such a prohibition order has been issued. The City of Nairobi devised by-laws to enforce the powers conferred upon it by the Local Government Act and the Public Health Act, and domesticated the concept of nuisance (a la the Public Health Act) into municipal law. For example, City of Nairobi (General Nuisance) By-Laws (LN 275/1961) specifically prohibits cultivation, but only on public streets. Any person who shall dig, plough, till or cultivate any public street without the written permission of the town clerk shall be guilty of an offence. Section 2 of the same by-laws defines a public street to mean a street maintained by the council. City of Nairobi (General Nuisance) By-Laws 1961 (LN 275/1961), Section 9(1), states that any person who shall, except with the written permission of the Town Clerk and subject to such conditions as he may deem fit, keep within the city, except in agricultural land, a game animal or reptile, other than a lizard, or any ass, mule, ox, bull, or cow, goat, sheep or pig shall be guilty of an offence. Even where such permission is granted, section 9(2) requires that such game animal or reptile, or any ass, mule, bull, goat, sheep or pig should not cause a nuisance or annoyance to any of the residents in the area, be or likely to become injurious to the health of any person, or wander on a street in such a manner as to cause obstruction or inconvenience to traffic. The Animal Diseases Act (cap 364) prohibits grazing of livestock on railway land (as defined by the Kenya Railways Corporations Act, cap 397) or a public road (as defined in the Public Roads and Roads of Access Act, cap 399). The Crop Production and Livestock Act, cap 321, also gives powers to local authorities to make by-laws to either prohibit the keeping or grazing of any livestock or to control the numbers and kinds of livestock that may be kept. As Lee-Smith, Manundu, Lamba and Kuria (1987) observe, the keeping of cattle, goats, sheep, pigs and draught animals is expressly prohibited except with permission, while keeping of other animals (including poultry and rabbits) is not forbidden but may be stopped if these animals cause a nuisance. As Freeman (1991) observes, the actual enforcement of the by-laws is more liberal. The City Council ignores private backyard plots on enclosed residential ground and shambas of ground-hugging food crops on vacant land, provided no crops are planted that will exceed four feet in height at maturity (obviously excluding sugarcane, bananas, cassava, pigeon peas and maize). Tree crops, non-food crops (e.g. flowers for sale and fodder), or crops grown explicitly for sale (e.g. coffee) are not tolerated within the city.

1.6
1.6.1

REGULATIONS GOVERNING MARKETS AND FOOD OUTLETS

Food Quality and Formal Food Outlets

The by-laws governing food quality were first issued in the early twenties and revised during 1948-49. There have been subsequent revisions especially in the period before independence. The City Council of Nairobi by-laws still in force after independence were specified in LN 53/1967 as Gazette Notice 1083/1948 (general), LN 884/1950 (sale of ice cream), LN 952/1949 (milk and dairies), LN 21/1950 (nursing homes and maternity homes), LN 463/1958 (day nurseries), LN 26/1960 (fire service), LN 301/1960 (parking bay), LN 275/1961 (general nuisance), LN 169/1963 (taxi-cab), LN 748/1963 (hawkers), LN 384/1958 (food shops and stores), and LN 674/1961 (restaurant, eating house, and snack bar).

The City of Nairobi (Food Shops and Stores) By-Laws issued as LN 384 of 1958 specifies that grocers, butchers, fishmongers, greengrocers, and food stores operating within the City must be licensed, and specifies conditions for issuance of such licenses. The provisions relating to all stores specify that workers in any shop or store should not be suffering from any infectious or contagious or venereal disease, that food should be kept separately from other items for sale, and licensees must take specified steps to prevent contamination of food. A grocer is not permitted to sell unprocessed vegetables, unprocessed fruit, unprocessed meat or unprocessed fish. A butchers license authorizes the sale of processed and unprocessed meat. The law specifies that meat must be sold in structures built of permanent materials, there should be cold storage, and traders can only deal in inspected meat. The City of Nairobi (Slaughterhouse) By-Laws gives the impression that the Council is responsible for meat inspection within the City, although the central government is the one currently responsible. The City of Nairobi (Food Shops and Stores) By-Laws were amended in 1969 (LN 27/1969) to allow for a Supplementary Butchers License for selling of roast meat within a portion of the licensed butchers shop approved for that purpose. Such license require a meat roasting and eating room with sufficient seating accommodation, at least one washbasin with running hot and cold water, and sanitary conveniences for the separate use of persons of each sex eating roast meat. No other form of cooking (except meat roasting) is permitted in a licensed butchers shop. Fishmongers were required to operate in permanent premises, have adequate cold storage, and ensure high cleanliness of staff and premises. Greengrocers are authorized to trade in fruits and vegetables, whether processed or unprocessed. The City of Nairobi (Restaurant, Eating House and Snack Bar) By-Laws, issued as LN 674 of 1961, attaches conditions for sanitation and hygiene to a licensee carrying out the trade of restaurant, eating house, or snack bar, and the types of food that can be sold in each type of food outlet. The City of Nairobi (Control of Hamali Carts and Handcarts in Public Streets) By-Laws issued as LN 299/1966 under the Traffic Act empowered the Council to issue orders prohibiting the use of specified streets by hamali carts (four-wheeled carts propelled by human energy) or handcarts (two or three-wheeled carts propelled by human energy) either all times or in specified days or hours. In 1967, the Council published a notice (Gazette Notice 1239/1967) specifying the roads that should not be used by hamali carts and handcarts during specified hours (7.30am-8.30am, 12.30pm-1.00pm, 1.30pm-2.00pm and 4.20pm5.00pm) on any day except Sundays and public holidays. The specified roads were Doonholm road (Jogoo), Landhies road, New Pumwani road, Racecourse road, Haile Selassie Avenue, Kenyatta Avenue, Government Road (Moi Avenue), Fort Hall road (Muranga), Limuru road, Ngaara road, Victoria Street (Tom Mboya street) and Uhuru Highway. 1.6.2 Public Markets

The 1948 General by-laws (part VIII) are applicable to all public markets established privately or established by the City Council. The by-laws prohibit establishment of a public market without the authority of the Council, and that all such markets will be under the control of the City Council. The regulations prohibit lighting fires or cooking any food or meat in the markets. The Council is also authorized to charge suppliers of vegetables, fruits or flowers to the markets a specified commission based on the wholesale value of such produce. The regulations also forbid hawking within the precincts of any market, calling out for customers, and riding or bringing into a public market a scooter, bicycle or tricycle.

1.7

STUDY METHODOLOGY

The study covers two main sources of food consumed in Nairobi: urban agriculture and commercial food inflows. The main source of data on urban agriculture was the office of the Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension (PDALE), while commercial food inflows were captured through questionnaires administered on wholesalers delivering food to Nairobi. The suppliers included those delivering fresh crop produce to markets in Nairobi, wholesalers of dry crop produce, and abattoirs in and around Nairobi. Questionnaires were also sent to forty food processing firms as a proxy for household purchases of semi-processed foods. However, only 15 food-processing firms responded, two of which deal in slaughter and sale of animal products (pigs and chicken).

1.8

OUTLINE OF THE REPORT

Chapter 2 is on urban agriculture using administrative data from the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. Chapters 3-7 are mainly on commercial food inflows to Nairobi. Chapter 3 is on survey design and implementation, including fieldwork and limitations of the study. The chapter also highlights the problem of the right population to consider in urban food studies due to the population normally working in Nairobi but hail from the dormitory towns of, say, Ongata Rongai, Ngong, Athi River, Githurai, Wangige, Kikuyu and Kiambu. Chapter 4 is a narrative of the markets for fresh and dry crop produce that were included in the survey. The chapter distinguishes between Nairobi City Council markets and those managed by independent committees of traders. Little is known about how the markets operate e.g. price formation and role of intermediaries (brokers). The best measure of our lack of knowledge is the tendency to call informal everything that is not of Western inspiration (Fafchamps, 1997) or any market phenomenon that is not properly understood. Chapter 5 reports on the findings of the survey on deliveries of fresh and dry crop produce. The questionnaires were administered on wholesalers delivering fresh crop produce to the markets, while data on dry crop produce was mainly from wholesale shops in Nyamakima. Chapter 6 covers commercial inflows of livestock products, while chapter 7 covers commercial inflows of chicken and fish. Chapter 8 presents a summary of the main findings, and reliability of the results. The reliability of the entire survey was based on the imputed calorie and protein availability per adult equivalent of the Nairobi population. The test of the overall reliability of the survey shows under-coverage of calorie supply (mainly due to poor response by food processing firms) and a fairly good coverage of protein sources.

CHAPTER 2: URBAN AGRICULTURE IN NAIROBI 2.1 ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION OF NAIROBI

The Ministry of Agriculture has divided Nairobi province into six agricultural divisions headed by divisional extension coordinators (DEC). The agricultural divisions are the implementing points of the provincial work plans. Each division is further split into extension units each manned by a front line extension staff. The divisional agricultural activities are outlined broadly as follows: 2.1.1 Dagoretti

The area has a rural setup with activities similar to the adjoining Kiambu district, with livestock (mainly zerograzing), food crops and horticultural farming as major enterprises. Farming is mainly of subsistence nature mixed with small-scale commercial activities. The farmers can be easily grouped together and hence group approach to extension is applicable. 2.1.2 Langata/Kibera

The farmers with large to medium scale farms exhibit individualism and group approach to extension is therefore not practical, though identified neutral grounds could work as demonstration sites. Floriculture is practiced but staffs do not give extension services since there are qualified farm managers employed in these farms. Major activities include dairy, horticulture, pigs and poultry. There are also specialized pedigree breeders of cattle, horses and dogs. 2.1.3 Westlands

Commercial agricultural activities include poultry, pigs, horticulture and dairy. The commercial farmers exhibit individualism that makes it difficult for group approach to extension. Small-scale horticultural activities specializing in vegetable production are practiced in the division. Neglected coffee estates are also found in the division. 2.1.4 Kasarani

The division has urban to peri-urban farming systems ranging from small-scale to large-scale commercial categories. Farmers keep dairy cattle, pigs, poultry, sheep and goats, and grow kale, spinach, tomatoes, maize, beans and fodder crops. Group approach is applicable in most areas. 2.1.5 Embakasi

The settlements have resulted from sub-division of ranches into smaller residential plots. The settlers practice subsistence farming with livestock and food crops as major enterprises. The area is characterized by unreliable rainfall and severe water shortage in certain years. Major crops grown include maize, beans, arrowroots, kale, spinach, tomatoes and fodder; while dairy, beef, shoats (sheep and goats), poultry and piggery are the major livestock activities undertaken in the division. Wastewater irrigation is practiced along Kangundo road near Saika Estate and Maili Saba. In Mowlem dam-site, clean dam water is used for irrigation of vegetables, beans and fodder. Group approach is possible as a mode of extension. 2.1.6 Makadara/Central

The division is characterized by housing estates, schools and other learning institutions. Home economics, rural youth and kitchen gardening are the major activities. There is also livestock which graze on available open grounds against City Council by-laws. With adoption of available technologies in proper housing and manure disposal, the environment could be turned into economic units of production due to accessible market outlets.

10

2.2

CROP FARMING

The horticultural industry is the biggest farming activity in Nairobi province and is done either under irrigation or rain-fed depending on the farmers capabilities. There is always a ready market for these crops. Flower farming is also a growing business mainly in Langata and Westlands divisions. The flowers are grown intensively and are mainly for the export market though some end up in the local market. In total, 35 acres are under flower farming in Nairobi. The flower farmers employ their own managers and the extension staffs do not offer extension services to these farmers. The major food crops grown in Nairobi are maize and beans. Maize is mainly eaten while green. A few of the other crops e.g. potatoes, arrowroots, sweet potatoes and cowpeas are also grown. The only cash crop grown is coffee. The acreage has been declining as residential estates have replaced most of the coffee in Kasarani and Westlands divisions. All the small-scale coffee farms in Dagoretti division have been replaced with residential houses whose income is more regular than that of coffee. Land rates (to the City Council) and land rent (to the Ministry of Lands) have contributed to the decline of agricultural activities within the Province. 2.3 LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES

2.3.1

DAIRY

Milk Production Dairy farming in Nairobi ranges from large-scale producers/breeders (with more than 200 animals) to smallscale farmers with one or two animals. The predominant production system is zero-grazing though some of the large-scale producers also practice semizero grazing (i.e. animals graze freely on improved pastures and are supplemented with concentrates). Table 2.1: Estimated Number of Dairy Animals per Division: Year 2000 Division Exotic/Crosses Dagoretti 4,620 Kibera 4,610 Westlands 2,050 Kasarani 4,067 Embakasi 1,680 Makadara/Central 160 Total 17,187 Source: Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension, Nairobi. Local 1,390 676 700 846 3,850 253 7,715 Total 6,010 5,286 2,750 4,913 5,530 413 24,902

Major pasture types are Rhodes grass and natural pastures. The important fodder crops grown in Nairobi are Napier grass, desmodium and lucerne. The fodder crops are grown either under irrigation or rain-fed. Table 2.2: Estimated Area under Pasture and Fodder per Division: Year 2000 Division Pasture (ha) Dagoretti 137 Kibera 156.7 Westlands 47 Kasarani 46 Embakasi 120 Makadara/Central 17.6 Total 524.3 Source: Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension, Nairobi. Fodder (ha) 160 231 105 39.5 20 12 567.5

The total milk produced was estimated at 28,648,025 litres, at an average price of Shs 33 per litre. Thus, the economic value of milk was estimated at Shs 945,384,825 in year 2000.

11

Table 2.3: Estimated Milk Production and Farm-gate Prices per Division: Year 2000 Division Total (litres) Price range per litre (Shs) Dagoretti 5,760,640 Kibera 8,680,000 Westlands 4,287,415 Kasarani 8,496,000 Embakasi 1,380,000 Makadara 43,970 Total 28,648,025 Source: Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension, Nairobi. Milk Marketing

30-35 25-30 30-35 30-35 30-35 32-35

Nairobi is a net importer of milk. Most of the milk produced in Nairobi is sold informally. This is mainly due to the fact that the major milk processors offer low producer prices (Shs 1618 per litre), whereas the farmers are able to sell their milk at farm gate for as much as Shs 30 per litre. Moreover, the processors also require that the milk be delivered either to their premises or bulked (up to 300 litres) for them to collect it. In addition to the milk produced in Nairobi, it is estimated that more than 200,000 litres of raw milk is brought into the city daily from the districts that surround Nairobi. The bulk of this milk is sold informally. The Kenya Dairy Board (KDB) has registered about 80 small-scale operators to sell milk through milk bars and other hygienic outlets but hawking is still a major challenge that needs to be addressed. Apart from the largescale processors (e.g. Kenya Cooperative Creameries, Ilara, Limuru, Aberdares, Spinknit and Brookside), there are farmers and individuals who have began to make yogurt, skimmed milk, cheese and butter as valueadded products. These are mainly based in Kasarani, Westlands and Kibera divisions. The quality of milk supplied from some farmers is substandard due to adulteration, poor hygiene and milk handling practices (Omore et al, 2002). Most suppliers use plastic containers (jerry cans and drums) to transport milk. Plastic containers are unhygienic, as they are more difficult to clean than the more expensive aluminum cans. The use of plastic jerry cans should be actively discouraged by the KDB through ban on their usage, supported by producer and customer education on the effects of their usage. The 15% duty on imported aluminum or stainless steel milk cans should be removed or lowered. Non-processed (raw) milk constitutes an estimated 88% of marketed milk in Kenya (Omore et al, 1999). Trading and hawking of raw milk fills an important segment of the total milk market. Trade in raw milk in urban areas has remained illegal since 1953 when the colonial authorities set up measures to keep raw milk produced by African smallholders from competing with large-scale settler interests. Regulation of raw milk hawking has been justified on the grounds that they compete unfairly (e.g. do not pay taxes) compared with dairy plants. A proportion of raw milk in the market is adulterated by addition of water, preservatives and other chemicals and substances. The Kenyan standard for milk is that nothing can be added. Hygiene problems like high bacteria counts also arise from the long period between milking and the time the milk reaches the final consumer. The competition from raw milk discourages investment by formal sector processors and their distributors, transporters, and kiosk owners who market pasteurized and packaged milk. Constraints and Future Outlook The constraints in pasture/fodder relate to lack of sufficient and appropriate irrigation facilities to ensure sufficient fodder production throughout the year; poor agronomic practices by many farmers in fodder/pasture production; lack of knowledge on simple pasture/fodder conservation methods; and failure to adequately utilize crop residues and other industrial products and by-products available as feeds. The constraints to milk production are lack of affordable good quality breeding stock, long calving intervals, poor feeding practices, loss of breeding stock due to prolonged drought and diseases, and inadequate extension services due to low funding levels.

12

Despite the high growth rate of Nairobi population, dairy consumption is low due to low disposable incomes and inadequate appreciation of the nutritional value of dairy products. Per capita milk consumption in Nairobi is quite low (about 60-80 litres per capita per year), compared to the FAO recommendation of 200 litres milk equivalent of milk and dairy products. Using expenditure data based on the 1997 Welfare Monitoring Survey conducted by the Central Bureau of Statistics, annual per capita milk consumption among the poor in Nairobi was estimated at 28 litres, compared with 59 litres among the non-poor. There is therefore a big unmet need for milk and milk products in Nairobi. However, a successful future dairy industry in the city would have to be characterized by the following features: Small to medium sized dairy herds of high milk producing breeds. Efficient artificial insemination system that is regulated properly to ensure high standards are maintained and that the costs are not prohibitive to the farmers. Use of better designs for dairy structures and incorporation of new biotechnology to take care of environmental concerns and other issues like offensive smells, better waste disposal, and noise. An enabling City Council by-laws framework that actually supports urban agriculture. Currently, the only live animals allowed within the City boundaries are lizards/geckos. High quality industrial dairy feeds. Efficient extension services with all the necessary equipment, staff and adequate funding. POULTRY

2.3.2

The poultry industry comprises of the broiler (meat) and layers (for table eggs). It is second to dairy in popularity among farmers. Poultry have the advantages of availability of a ready market, close proximity of hatcheries, availability of feeds from a wide range of manufacturers, high fecundity, and low requirements for space. Table 2.4: Poultry Population by Division Division Broilers Layers Indigenous Dagoretti 3,500 6,000 Kibera 100,300 27,500 Westlands 73,200 1,200 Kasarani 93,100 21,300 Embakasi 11,850 5,240 Makadara 8,000 6,800 Total 289,950 68,040 Source: Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension, Nairobi. The major constraints include: Hatcheries are sometimes unable to cope with the demand for day-old chicks. Inadequate market information as it has proved difficult to get records/data from the majority of producers, feed manufactures, processors and consumers. As such this has led to insufficient marketing and production information. Proper preventive measures are lacking on most farms and as a result the industry experiences regular disease outbreaks. Broiler and egg producers continually complain of high feed prices, which are not commensurate with quality. This has affected the productivity of the industry. The marketing of poultry is totally neglected and the poultry farmer is on his or her own. As a result, prices of poultry products continue to lag behind the cost of inputs to the detriment of many producers. Currently it is difficult for many egg producers to break even given the current feed prices. Most farmers are willing to venture in the industry, but credit/loan facilities are inadequate. The high initial costs required for housing, equipment and purchase of day-old chicks and feeds is prohibitive to most potential farmers. Total 9,000 42,000 10,000 29,250 5,160 1,100 96,510 18,500 169,800 84,400 143,650 22,250 15,900 454,500

13

A sound feed industry is an essential prerequisite for intensified poultry production. Problems relating to availability, pricing and quality of feeds must be looked into more critically and urgently. Other measures should include: The present hatcheries should increase the capacity to produce quality day-old chicks. The government should ensure that quality parent stock is maintained to ensure a well-sustained source of good quality day-old chicks in the country. The importation of eggs, day-old chicks and parent stock should be controlled so as to stabilize the local market. The poultry industry faces many challenges to meet consumer demands for safe and natural food in an efficient manner. There is an urgent need to improve slaughter facilities in Nairobi to meet international standards. Credit agencies should be encouraged to give loans for smallholder poultry development. Such loans should be able to cover the costs of housing, feeds, water and equipment at flexible repayment terms. Farmers should be encouraged to form cooperatives, which will assist in the marketing of poultry products. The cooperatives would be in a better position to compete for tenders to supply poultry to various hotels and restaurants. At the Government level, there should be proper documentation of poultry industry (market volumes, quality, prices and general market conditions). Information on current and projected input prices and availability and other parameters are required on a continuous basis. Farmers need to be aggressively educated on the importance of proper disease prevention. The importance of respecting the cold chain should particularly be stressed to ensure vaccine integrity. PIGS

2.3.3

Piggery is the third livestock activity after dairy and poultry. It has been made popular by the demand for pork, which is boosted by hotels in the city and close proximity to Farmers Choice. The farming systems employed range from small-scale enterprises with 10-20 fatteners to large-scale commercial farms of up to 200 sows. The population of pigs for the year 2000 is estimated at sows (13,166), gilts (15,026), and piglets (19,158), making a total of 47,350. Some of the current characteristics of the industry include: Most popular breeds are the Large White and Landrace. Pigs are fed on swill and supplemented on commercial feeds. Some farmers buy weaners to fatten them for sale. A few farmers are beginning to venture into artificial insemination (AI) for pigs. There are farmers contracted by Farmers Choice and freelance farmers who sell to butchers.

The constraints and limitations facing the industry include: Market for pigs is seasonal and cyclical thus creating seasons with surplus or deficit of pigs, which causes high fluctuations in prices. Poor husbandry practices by farmers especially on housing and disease control. Prices of breeding stock, when available, are prohibitive to prospective farmers. Farmers would like to establish processing plants for pork, but are constrained by lack of credit.

Future Outlook: The opening up of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) trading block will increase export of pork products in the region. As the bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) - commonly known as mad-cow disease - incidence becomes more common, the demand for pork especially for export and the tourism industry might increase, and hence boost the industry at the expense of the beef industry. The genetic potential of pigs will improve as it exploits the potential for higher productivity through AI. This will also reduce the overhead costs of keeping boars.
14

More processors will emerge as the demand for pork increases. RABBITS

2.3.4

Traditionally young children have kept rabbits as pets. Recently the need for cheaper sources of protein has brought rabbit keeping into the limelight. The rabbit industry is yet to gain prominence and the campaigns to encourage acceptability of rabbit meat by consumers should be promoted. The population of rabbits in year 2000 was estimated at 3,810 exotic breeds, 3,406 local breeds, and 1,955 crosses, making a total of 9,171. Some of the characteristics of the industry include: Kept by 4K clubs and out-of-school youths. People are yet to accept rabbit meat due to religious and cultural beliefs. Supply of rabbit meat exceeds demand. Some meat is sold to museums and wildlife parks to feed game (e.g. snakes). Schools and childrens homes are receptive to rabbit keeping.

The constraints and limitations include: Husbandry is done in a negligent manner as no serious economic value is attached. Breeding rate is faster than marketing of the same since demand is low. Inadequate campaigns to boost demand for rabbit meat due to funding constraints. Poor market outlets deter producers and potential keepers.

This is potentially the cheapest production system for animal protein. Due to the current economic status of the population, it can be targeted to become the most affordable protein source for middle and lower class households in Nairobi. The secret lies in getting people to fully accept rabbit meat and to exploit the productive potential of the industry in Nairobi province.

2.4
2.4.1

PRODUCTION TRENDS AND SECTOR PERFORMANCE

PRODUCTION TRENDS

In 1997 and 1998 the El Nino rains boosted crop production in all the divisions of the Province. High yields were recorded in all the divisions except the crops that were affected by flooding and pests e.g. tomatoes, onions, beans and spinach. Livestock production also thrived because there was plenty of pasture and fodder in the Province. However, Rift Valley Fever and Blue Tongue diseases were reported in the Province, and inflicted high death loses in both cattle and sheep. Some farmers lost chicken and pigs through drowning. In 1999, the La Nina effect followed the El Nino rains and very hot and dry conditions prevailed in the Province. The long rains, which are usually expected in April-May, were inadequate and crop production was affected. The livestock sector did fairly well. But in 2000, a serious drought was experienced and farmers reported total crop failure in all the divisions except a few isolated cases where farmers were using irrigation water from boreholes and City Council water. Livestock deaths were reported in Embakasi, Kasarani and parts of Makadara. The farmers who practice zero-grazing had to spend more financial resources on purchase of conventional feeds and drugs in order to keep their animals at maintenance levels. Farmers utilized more banana stalks, sweet potato vines, crop residues and market wastes. Nairobi did not experience food shortages since food was imported from outside the country, while others were brought in from provinces that were less affected by drought. Nairobi has a bimodal rainfall distribution with two peaks in April-May and October-November, with an annual precipitation of about 1000 mm. Embakasi division receives 700mm per annum. Because of this rainfall distribution, agricultural activities are confined within these peaks with the exception of irrigated farmlands. In the tropics, weather forecasts are becoming more unpredictable and aridity is increasing. In years of low rainfall, the failure of rain-fed agriculture is widespread and, on average, one in every five years is
15

a crop failure for arable agriculture. During the recent drought, livestock farmers in Nairobi spent more money on purchasing conventional animal feeds and crop wastes from the markets to maintain their livestock. During recovery after the onset of rains, the sequence of recovery usually starts with crop farmers, followed by livestock farmers. It takes a livestock farmer a minimum of one to three years to recover fully and this is only possible if the farmer was left with a mature cow or a yearling to start off his enterprise. The tables below show the crop and livestock performance over the four-year period 1997-2000. Many farmers in the Province are abandoning farming for real-estate development because the latter has better returns with fewer risks. Nairobi City Council allocates land to developers to put up industries, shopping malls, petrol stations and housing estates, thus contributing to the loss of agricultural land in the Province. High land rates/land rent has driven farmers out of farming to real estate development. Embakasi Division is a new settlement area and thus more land has been opened for agriculture. Embakasi used to be a ranching area where livestock farming, particularly beef, was the main enterprise. With land subdivision, more land is put under crop farming as a result of enterprise substitution from ranching. Farmers are utilizing the unoccupied plots for agricultural purposes before the owners of such plots settle in. Others cultivate land belonging to their relatives and this is the cause of the increase in acreage in Embakasi division. In Nairobi, farmers are constrained by the following: Theft of both crops and livestock, but it is more rampant in livestock. AI services are expensive for small-scale livestock farmers. High land rates/land rent that have necessitated the switch to construction of residential houses. High cost of inputs and price uncertainty of produce Unreliable rainfall. Lack of well-organized markets and high fees charged by cartels for market entry. Reduced yields per given area. Unaffordable certified seeds. Unavailability of certified seed, especially potato. High incidences of pests and disease outbreaks. Decreased area under food crops as farmers shifted to livestock and horticultural crops.

Table 3: Trends in Crop and Livestock Production, 1997-2000 DAGORETTI DIVISION

CROPS Maize Beans Irish Potatoes Sweet Potatoes Cabbages Kales Tomatoes Spinach Onions French Beans Carrots Lettuce Bananas TOTAL AREA Area (ha) 1,880 1,195 181 5 13 110 90 110 8 16 4 2 8 3,622 1997 Yield (Tons) 3,384 860 434 50 80 550 900 550 18.8 80 20 45 60 Area (Ha) 1,750 1,930 240 6 15 95 90 125 2 18 5 3 9 4,288 1998 Yield (Tons) 2,889 1,061 624 60 135 998 1,472 688 15 100 23 90 100 Area (Ha) 1,850 2,000 255 8 10 90 90 130 4 25 8 4 12 4,486 1999 Yield (Tons) 1,800 640 350 80 10 900 1,350 550 10 60 30 72 96 2000 Area Yield (Ha) (Tons) 1,890 2,560 2,200 1,250 270 500 8.5 50 15 80 70 70 8 22 5 1 30 4,669.5 60 1,200 700 910 40 90 30 10 150

16

LIVESTOCK Poultry Sheep and Goats Beef Cattle Dairy Cattle Pigs Rabbits Milk Production (litres) LANGATA DIVISION
CROPS Maize Beans Irish Potatoes Sweet Potato Cabbages Kales Tomatoes Spinach Onions French Beans Carrots Lettuce Bananas TOTAL AREA Area (Ha) 80 35 12 5 16 28 15 8 3 6 4 0.5 25 237.5 1997 Yield (Tons) 120 9 43 50 230 224 270 64 24 60 20 5 120

1997 10,000 2,500 200 9,340 9,430 3,050 6,153,000

1998 Area (Ha) 75 40 20 6 22 35 12 6 4 9 1 0.6 25 255.6 Yield (Tons) 94.5 14 77 60 286 350 216 48 32 77 5 6 110

1998 8,000 2,040 180 9,263 8,670 2,800 6,646,000

1999 Area (Ha) 60 45 22 8 24 30 10 8 6 5 4 1 25 248

1999 8,750 4,850 210 9,095 8,570 3,250 7,200,000

2000 9,500 3,906 250 6,010 8,600 3,400 5,760,640

2000 Area (Ha) 70 42 20 8 25 35 10 8 10 10 4.5 1.5 25 269 Yield (Tons) 40 8 40 20 140 180 150 25 30 60 16 10.5 80

Yield (Tons) 50 10 50 50 288 240 180 48 30 40 12 9 100

LIVESTOCK Poultry Sheep and Goats Beef Cattle Dairy Cattle Pigs Rabbits Milk Production (litres) WESTLANDS DIVISION
CROPS Maize Beans Irish Potatoes Sweet Potatoes Cabbages Kales Tomatoes Spinach Onions French Beans Carrots Lettuce Bananas TOTAL AREA Area (Ha) 190 160 50 3 10 30 8 6 2.5 5 0.1 0.5 20 485.1 1997 Yield (Tons) 342 80 100 30 30 270 100 46 11.25 30 1.8 3 168

1997 76,560 9,560 200 4250 7800 2,500 2,900,400

1998 82,500 10,500 250 4582 8576 2,800 5,215,000

1999 87,052 12,133 280 9095 11,545 3,140 8,760,000

1999 Yield (Tons) 356 60 160 30 8 260 108 60 6 20 2.4 12 140

2000 189,800 12,815 300 5286 12,640 3,560 8,680,000

2000 Area Yield (Ha) (Tons) 130 120 170 55 50 170 4 25 7 6 35 250 7 70 7 60 1 4.5 8 15 0.1 0.6 0.5 4 20 80 439.6

Area (Ha) 200 180 40 2 5 25 6 5 1 6 0.3 0.8 20 491.1

1998 Yield (Tons) 360 86 270 20 50 250 108 100 6 42 2.7 5 180

Area (Ha) 220 190 55 3 5 26 6.5 5 2 7 0.3 2 20 542.1

17

LIVESTOCK Poultry Sheep and Goats Dairy Cattle Pigs Rabbits Milk Production (litres) KASARANI DIVISION
CROPS Maize Beans Irish Potatoes Sweet Potatoes Cabbages Kales Tomatoes Spinach Onions French Beans Carrots Lettuce Bananas TOTAL AREA Area (Ha) 360 325 27 10 13.5 25 17 10 2.7 5 2 2 10 809.2 1997 Yield (Tons) 504 150 108 30 13.5 40 354 40 4 20 6 7 40

1997 85,000 2,090 2,650 1,800 1,100 4,506,400

1998 Area (Ha) 260 200 20 15 1 25 15 10 3 5 0.8 3 10 567.8 Yield (Tons) 360 86 21 45 3 250 120 80 9 30 2.4 9 50

1998 95,000 2,203 2,723 1,916 1,200 4,200,000

1999 Area (Ha) 270 250 25 18 6.5 10 34 6 4 12 2 1 10 648.5

1999 90,420 2,591 2,750 2,305 1,145 5,300,000

2000 84,500 1,170 2,750 2,250 1,260 4,287,415

2000

Yield (Tons) 180 50 18 40 52 110 510 30 5 5 6 5 70

Area (Ha) 280 260 27 19 8 7 28 8 5 5 2 1 10 660

Yield (Tons) 250 70 22 45 30 42 420 20 10 16 5 6 20

LIVESTOCK Poultry Sheep and Goats Beef Cattle Dairy Cows Pigs Rabbits Milk Production (litres) EMBAKASI DIVISION
CROPS Maize Beans Irish Potatoes Sweet Potato Cabbages Kales Tomatoes Spinach Onions French Beans Carrots Lettuce Bananas TOTAL AREA Area (Ha) 300 330 22 4 2 5 30 20 15 20 21 769 1997 Yield (Tons) 405 280 105 40 6 40 300 60 60 80 210

1997 50,500 4,860 2,000 5,560 24,500 2,000 8,500,600

1998 65,000 5,689 2,500 6,826 29,944 2,500 9,307,053

1999 48,330 5,600 2,200 7,016 25,522 2,295 6,500,300

2000 144,150 6,260 2,300 4,913 24,600 2,300 8,496,000

1998 Area (Ha) 300 350 25 6 2 10 39 20 15 26 26 819 Yield (Tons) 270 226 90 60 6 50 390 60 75 100 260 Area (Ha) 340 360 27 6 1.5 10 18 12 17 20 26 837.5

1999 Yield (Tons) 306 160 97 60 4.5 70 180 48 50 60 130 Area (Ha) 360 350 26 6 1.5 5 30 15 18 25 30 866.5

2000 Yield (Tons) 250 180 65 40 2.5 50 340 40 35 50 170

18

LIVESTOCK 1997 1998 Poultry 12,600 12,400 Sheep and Goats 15,040 16,255 Dairy Cattle 2,560 3,140 Pigs 3,650 4,510 Rabbits 2,000 2,500 Milk Production (litres) 515,000 530,200 Source: Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension, Nairobi. 2.4.2 LIVESTOCK FOR SLAUGHTER

1999 14,800 17,110 3,500 5,000 2,640 763,000

2000 25,200 18,030 5,530 4,600 2,800 1,380,000

An estimated 80% of livestock for slaughter (beef cattle, meat goats and sheep) have their origin in dry and semi-arid areas while 20% comes from high potential areas. The returns from the movement permits issued by government shows that the main dry and semi-arid districts of origin are Narok, Kajiado, Mwingi, Homa Bay, Baringo, Lodwar, Turkana, Marsabit, Isiolo, Kuria, Wajir, Garissa, Machakos, Moyale, Naivasha, Koibatek, Buret, Kitui, Kilifi, Samburu, Migori, Laikipia, Marakwet, Kuria, Trans Mara, Lugari, Mandera, Makueni, Bomet, Suba, Nyamira, Keiyo, West Pokot and Gucha. The high potential area districts of origin are Trans Nzoia, Meru, Kericho, Kiambu, Uasin Gishu, Nyambene, Nakuru, Embu, Bungoma, Kisii, Nyandarua, Thika, Nandi, Siaya, Chuka, Nairobi, Buret, Bomet, Nyeri, Kakamega, Mt. Elgon and Muranga/Maragua. The meat from the slaughterhouses in Nairobi and its environs is consumed in Nairobi, the periphery towns (e.g. Thika, Kiambu, Wangige, Kikuyu, Kangundo and Machakos), small towns along Nairobi-Mombasa road (e.g. Athi River and Salama), and big hotels (e.g. Serena, New Stanley, Hilton, Windsor and Hotel Intercontinental). There are also big butcheries and companies that can meat for export e.g. Hurlingham, Springfields, Farmers Choice, NAS export, and Kenya Cold Storage. The main slaughterhouses for beef cattle are Nyonjoro (Dagoretti division), Hurlingham (Ruai, Embakasi), Kirima (Njiru, Embakasi), and Ngama (Njiru, Embakasi). The porcine slaughterhouses are Farmers Choice, and Ndumbuini slaughterhouse. The main small stock slaughterhouse is Kiamaiko abattoir. The poultry abattoirs are Kariakor market, Burma market and Roseline slaughterhouse. The gazetted inspection fees collected by veterinary inspection services division on each livestock carcass inspected for consumption at the slaughterhouses is bovine e.g. cattle (Shs 100), ovine e.g. sheep (Shs 25), caprine e.g. goats (Shs 25), porcine e.g. pigs (Shs25) and poultry (Shs 2). According to official records, the average number of livestock slaughtered in Dagoretti slaughterhouses in November 2001 per day was New Dagoretti (300), Nyongara (240), Mumu (100), Nyonjoro (100) and Thiani (260). Cattle slaughtered in New Dagoretti had a higher live weight and cold dressed weight than the other abattoirs. The wholesale price per kg of carcass was Shs 110-130 per kg in all the abattoirs except Thiani where it was Shs 80-120 per kg. The five Dagoretti slaughterhouses are in Kikuyu division, Kiambu district, except Nyonjoro which is in Nairobi.

2.5

THE EFFECTS OF URBANIZATION ON AGRICULTURE

According to the Ministry of Agriculture, Nairobi Area Agricultural Activities Report for 1995, out of a total land area of 695 km2, concrete (buildings, roads) occupied 267.9 km2, game reserve/park (114 km2) and forest land (19.1 km2). Out of total agricultural land of 173.2 km2, only 120 km2 was in use. Unexploited agricultural land was estimated at 53.2 km2, distributed between Dagoretti (4.5 km2), Makadara/Embakasi (18.0 km2), Langata (18.1 km2), Kasarani (6.7 km2) and Westlands (5.8 km2). Urbanization (or sub-urbanization) is used to represent the set of forces involved in the movement of nonagricultural economic activities away from urban centers. According to Lopez, Adelaja and Andrews (1988), urbanization involves the tendency of the average residential household (or firm) to locate at an increasing distance from the city center. The location of the residential household (and conversion of land to urban uses) takes place in concentric circles away from the city center. A transect was drawn along Thika road starting from Githurai roundabout through Nairobis city center and onward to Langata road ending at
19

Karen. It was observed that the expansion was increasing more rapidly on the western side of the transect compared with the eastern side. This was attributed to the relatively good climate and soils on the western side. This is also an area where the high income earners reside. The western side receives adequate rainfall with an annual precipitation of 1000mm, while the eastern side receives a maximum of 750mm per annum. Fig.1 Karen

Western side

Eastern side Roundabout LINE TRANSECT

Githurai

The city is also expanding on the eastern side of transect, albeit slowly. The Eastlands area of the city is considered a medium to low class residential area where the middle to low-income earners lives. This explains the slow rate of expansion. This area has poor drained black cotton soils that get waterlogged during the rainy season. It is also an area where industries are located because the land is relatively cheap but the security is generally poor. Urban development has both direct and indirect effects in agriculture (see Lopez, Adelaja and Andrews, 1988, which is the main source of the text below). The direct impact of urbanization is the conversion of land from farming to suburban uses. The indirect effects, which result from mixing residential and agricultural uses of land, can be categorized into regulatory, technical, speculative and market effects. Regulatory effects are caused by the decline in the political clout of the rural community. As urbanization intensifies, agricultural and non-agricultural land use conflicts become more severe. This may lead to enactment and enforcement of local municipal by-laws designed to force farmers to internalize some of the negative externalities normally generated from agriculture. By laws that are common to suburban agricultural areas include regulation of livestock effluent discharge and pesticide usage, restrictive building codes, and controls on the density of livestock and poultry operations. Technical effects alter the technical efficiency of agricultural practices. Vandalism and theft are major concerns to farmers at the suburban fringe. The most common forms of vandalism include destruction of crops and damage to farm equipment. This reduces technical efficiency in farming. The condemnation of land for public purposes breaks up farms and affects the efficiency of farm machinery use. Speculative effects of urbanization refer to distortions in agricultural production decisions caused by development pressures. The opportunity cost of land increases as a result of high demand for land by developers. Farmers may be reluctant to invest heavily in new technology because planning horizons are shortened by the possibility of selling their land. Land takes on the characteristics of a financial asset, and its
20

use as productive input may be less responsive to current agricultural market conditions. This phenomenon, called the impermanence syndrome, leads to a reluctance to maintain and replace farm machinery, drainage systems, and other farm infrastructure. Market effects occur because increased urbanization brings farmers closer to their markets and thus reduces transportation costs. The location advantage of suburban farmers makes them more competitive in marketing their products and even allows direct marketing to consumers. This may result in higher farm-gate prices and lower input costs. Furthermore, urbanization affects the user cost of land mainly through property taxes and capital gains from increased land values.

2.6

WOMEN IN URBAN AGRICULTURE

Kenya has since independence relied heavily on the agricultural sector as the base for economic growth, employment creation and foreign exchange generation. The sector is also a major source of the countrys food security and a stimulant to growth of off-farm employment. Urban and rural women in Africa are the primary producers of food and therefore play an important role in household food security. Women in urban and rural areas do not normally own the land they till. The land normally belongs to their husbands, who then pass it on to their sons. The women have the traditional right to till the land, planting and harvesting the crops which grow on it. Men play the role of administrators and supervisors, which means they have the power to control access, crops to plant, and to sell the land or distribute it when necessary. Some institutional constraints and regulations that originate from the land tenure systems limit womens access to credit, productive assets, technology, extension services and training. There are many provisions based on law, culture and religion (e.g. Islam) that limits womens right to inherit land and other property rights. Husbands and male kin migrate to towns for more remunerative employment leaving women in the rural homes. In cities or towns, men acquire land through purchase, gift, lease, borrowing, exchange, pledge, inheritance, government allocation, informal access (squatting), or temporary user rights. By the time their families join them in towns, they may already have acquired title deeds or other official rights of access. Women, especially the poor, lack access to credit. In addition to lack of title to land and other property rights which can be held as lien, there are various social and cultural constraints that preclude womens full access to formal sources of credit e.g. banks and cooperatives. Furthermore, some formal lenders assume that women do not save or repay loans and are therefore high credit risks. Urban womens access to formal credit is also limited by high levels of illiteracy, male bias in extension and development programs, and their lack of knowledge of the availability of credit and the procedures to obtain it. Credit from informal moneylenders, friends and relatives, is normally short-term and in small amounts. Womens lack of access to formal credit excludes them from (a) the benefits of cheaper credit, (b) access to cheaper inputs from credit provided through suppliers of inputs, (c) integration into projects benefiting the urban poor, and (d) advice and training that may be part of credit extension programs. Women also lack access to productive assets and livestock. Research and extension work lay emphasis on large animals such as cattle (which normally belong to men), leaving small animals such as chicken and goats for urban women. Male bias in extension limits womens access to improved technology from formal or informal networks that revolve around bars, hotels and market places that are relatively inaccessible to the urban women. In most cases, extension services are provided by men for men. This is because men are more available to listen to extension agents, while women are busy working in their plots or in domestic chores. The vast majority of extension workers tend to be male. However, the Kenya government has addressed this by establishing a gender desk at the headquarters and by employing female extension workers. The development of urban agriculture based on growth-with-equity requires full integration of urban women, including equitable access to land, water, other natural resources, inputs and services, and equal opportunity to develop and employ their skills.

21

The policy issues in urban agriculture should address gender concerns through: Equal access to land, livestock, productive assets, and credit and extension services. The content of extension services for urban women needs to be broadened beyond home economics to include actual urban realities such as land preparation, planting, harvesting, storage, food processing, marketing, and consumption. Research institutes, Government agencies, extension workers and nongovernmental organizations should provide technology that is appropriate, affordable and relevant to urban woman. The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development needs to include urban agriculture as a core agricultural activity and more financial and human resources be committed to its promotion and development. The government should continue to support the gender desk at the national and district levels to address gender disparities in extension service delivery. The City Council by-laws need to be re-drafted to allow for agricultural activities within its area of jurisdiction, and for such changes to take into account all environmental concerns of the City.

2.7
2.7.1

SOME POLICY ISSUES IN URBAN AGRICULTURE

THE POLICY REGIME

The current food policy in Kenya does not address urban agriculture. The assumption is that rural agricultural policy will take care of urban food needs. The City and Municipal by-laws either ignore urban and peri-urban agriculture or suppress it. Livestock and crop production in Nairobi is practiced under totally different conditions from a rural setup. The farming takes place within the confines of residential areas and in a legal regime (municipal by-laws) that restrict any activity associated with crop and livestock production within its jurisdiction. In addition, central government personnel (including agricultural extension staff) in the rural areas and policy makers in charge of agriculture do not have sufficient understanding of the issues in urban agriculture. The Ministry of Agriculture has also not included urban agriculture in its extension policy and therefore allocates insufficient financial and human resources for the promotion of urban agriculture. 2.7.2 WASTEWATER IRRIGATION

Wastewater irrigation is practiced on a large scale in Makadara and Embakasi divisions. In Makadara, the over 100 acres of irrigated land is under crops that include kale, spinach, tomatoes, chilies, onions, cabbages, arrow roots, sugarcane and maize. In Embakasi, the estimated 80 acres of land under wastewater irrigation mainly grow arrowroots, kale and spinach. This is mainly practiced in Maili Saba, around Saika Estate and along Kangundo road. The vegetables are consumed at the household level, sold in the nearby estates, and the surplus sold in City Council markets and informal markets as head-loads in order to avoid City Council levies. It is easy to identify these vegetables when cooking as they emit a foul smell when simmering and tastes different. These vegetables pose a health risk to consumers since heavy metals like lead and mercury are deposited in the plant tissues and can lead to heavy metal poisoning when substantial quantities are consumed over a long time5. A few farmers grow fodder crops along the river e.g. Napier grass for zero-grazing animals, while others grow Napier grass strictly for sale. Heavy metals (e.g. lead and mercury), which are industrial effluents, might be finding their way into plant tissues and finally into animal products which can pose serious health risk to See, for example, Atayese et al, 2009, on heavy metal contamination of amaranthus grown along major highways in Lagos, Nigeria; Cornish and Kielen, 2004, on wastewater irrigation in Nairobi, Kenya, and Kumasi, Ghana; Karanja et al, 2010, on wastewater for urban agriculture in Nairobi; Makokha et al, 2008, on lead pollution and contamination in food around Lake Victoria, Kisumu, Kenya; Makita, 2009, on urban and peri-urban agriculture and its zoonotic risks in Kampala, Uganda; and Tumbo-Oeri, 1988, on lead and cadmium levels in some leafy vegetables sold in Nairobi vegetable markets.
5

22

consumers. Extension staffs try to discourage wastewater irrigation, but the farmers are adamant, claiming that the produce is an important source of food to their families and the crops sold provide for cash needs of their families. 2.7.3 POLLUTION

In the real world, we observe actions that are taken not because the benefits from the action exceed the total costs, but because the actor finds it possible to impose some or all the costs upon others. The costs imposed on others include (a) polluting emissions and effluents from industrial processes, (b) non-point pollution from construction sites and farming operations, (c) polluting emissions from consumption activities (e.g. automobile exhaust emissions and tobacco smoke), (d) careless disposal of non-biodegradable waste (e.g. plastics), and (e) any activity that impose noise, ugliness or other offensive impacts on other parties. Pollution controls tend to restrict production and raise prices, but the restricted production is the efficient amount and the higher price is the efficient price. Efficient pollution controls reduce production and raise prices only because, in their absence, prices are inefficiently low, output is inefficiently large, and an inefficiently large quantity of pollution is released. Pollution is an inexpensive method of waste disposal, if the polluter is assured that the rights of others will not be enforced. To be effective, a system of rights must be enforceable and effectively enforced. Effective enforcement involves discovery of violations, apprehension of violators, and imposition of appropriate penalties. The specified penalties should be sufficiently large so as to exceed the benefits the polluter could obtain from violation. This mandate falls under the Ministry of Environment, the City Council, Office of the President and the judiciary. The polluter must be made to bear the cost of his actions through (a) taxes for environmental clean-up, or (b) to internalize the externalities associated with his actions through recycling of waste before it is discharged to the main sewer line or to Nairobi River, or pay compensation to the aggrieved parties. A few decades ago, Nairobi River was a river. Today, what remains of the river is nothing more than a big wastewater drain that can hardly move the thick sludge lying on its riverbed. When it was still alive and it could support numerous life forms, the river gave the city its name and identity. It had, for generations, quenched the thirsts of wandering Maasai herdsmen. There are four major rivers in the province, namely, Mbagathi, Ngong, Kamiti and Nairobi, all draining into the Athi river along the eastern border. The rivers are under threat due to wanton destruction of forests (e.g. Karura and Ngong forests). The reduction in the volume of river water and increase in waste disposed into the rivers has tremendously increased the levels of pollution of the river water. There has been haphazard rezoning of the city and approval of illegal extensions in residential areas such as Buruburu and Umoja. The failure to plan for the citys sprawl has led to sprouting of many ghettos that discharge raw sewage into the Nairobi rivers. The city continues to extend to good agricultural and ranching lands in Kiambu, Kajiado and Machakos districts. These areas have in the past provided Nairobi with milk, vegetables and other fresh produce. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has started to support efforts in cleaning up Nairobi River. A multi-sectoral approach that involves the City Council, Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, UNEP and the residents will be an appropriate approach if the efforts are to be sustainable. The policy should focus on cleaning the rivers rather than discouraging farming based on the river systems. There should also be education campaigns on health hazards associated with poor waste management and disposal.

2.8

THE STATE AND URBAN AGRICULTURE

Nairobi province has an estimated 16,000 farming families who are the target of extension messages on agricultural production, marketing and consumption. These messages get to the farmers directly through 43 frontline extension workers i.e. a ratio of 1 staff to 372 farmers. The 43 are supported by a team of 30

23

divisional subject specialists, who are also supported by 14 provincial subject matter specialists at the provincial level. Extension methods applied include individual farm visits, on-farm demonstrations and field days, farmers training, researcher/farmer interactions, agricultural shows, and tours to other areas. Due to the nature of the Nairobi farmer, other methods of extension have been tried with success e.g. demand-driven approach where the farmer looks for the expert as the need arises, use of printed materials, and easy means of communication such as telephone have proved efficient and confidential. There has been successful collaboration and partnership with other stakeholders, e.g. nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), community-based organizations (CBOs), agro-based companies, feed and food processors, and Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI). This has enhanced pooling of human resources for easy accessibility of information and a more efficient use of the limited resources from the ministry of agriculture. Multidisciplinary approach to extension is applied in planning, while specialized technical staffs at provincial and divisional level draw the implementation strategy for message delivery. Relevant subject matter specialists at divisional or provincial levels visit highly specialized farmers. The advantages of available marketing outlets of farm produce and the challenges of limited productive resources (such as land) have made the Nairobi farmer highly receptive to technologies that will improve agricultural performance. This has encouraged the Governments technical staff to be more aggressive in searching for additional innovations in agricultural technologies from the Internet, further training, and academic literature. These technologies include ostrich farming, hydroponics (growing plants using mineral nutrient solutions, in water, without soil), and total mixed ration formulation methods (matching available feed resources to the requirements of each class of livestock and stage of production see, Stallings and McGilliard, 1984). 2.8.1 EXTENSION SERVICES PROVIDED

The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development provides extension services to farmers free of cost. Extension messages on proper crop and animal husbandry are passed to the farmers through farm visits, holding of demonstrations, field days, workshops and seminars, Agricultural Society of Kenya (ASK) shows, organized visits to research stations, and field trips. Farm Management Farm management involves the planning of farm layout, keeping of farm records, and farm budgets. Record keeping is an important management tool that allows farmers to manage costs, returns and profit margins. The records can also be used in enterprise selection and enterprise substitution (depending on returns from alternative enterprises). Marketing Information Marketing data (mainly wholesale prices) is collected from markets such as Gikomba, City Market, Kawangare, Wakulima, Githurai and the main supermarkets. The main idea is to track changes in commercial food inflows so that the staffs can advise the farmers with irrigation facilities to take advantage of the shortfalls to provide food during off-peak when prices are most lucrative. There is need to meet the planning and budgeting demands of Nairobi farmers through trained farm management officers, especially to serve Langata and Westlands divisions. Soil and Water Conservation As in all other districts and provinces, soil and water conservation is funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). It is implemented through the catchments approach as well as to individual farmers. Apart from Makadara and Pumwani, the other five agricultural divisions have been covered by the project. Community mobilization has not been possible in some divisions because of the patterns of social relations in the urban setting.

24

The continuous changes in land use and farm sizes call for approaches to conservation activities using applicable technologies that are acceptable to the farmers. There is need to explore possibilities of application of technologies peculiar to urban agriculture, and the provincial agriculture office is in the process of preparing a project proposal on the same. The Nairobi Environmental Committee has been revived to address various environmental issues in Nairobi province, as they pose a real danger. The Presidential Commission on Soil and Water Conservation and Afforestation spearheads this process. The meetings of the Committee are held every first Wednesday of the month. There is also a Soil and Water Conservation Model at the Nairobi show grounds. The provincial agriculture office has experienced serious problems in availability and use of project funds for a long time, as the Ministrys headquarters treats Nairobi province as part of the headquarters and hence does not appreciate the urgency and importance of planned activities when it comes to disbursement of funds. Home Economics Home economics activities are conducted alongside other extension work. There is a Home Economics Officer in every administrative division, while the general extension officers carry the messages to the farmers and women groups. The subject areas covered include promotion of household food security, nutrition, family resource management, income generating projects, and health and sanitation. Apart from individual households, the program covers 48 registered women groups with a total membership of 1,056. Rural Youth Programme The Rural Youth Programme embraces three categories of the youth, namely, 4K clubs (in primary schools), young farmers clubs (in secondary schools, colleges and polytechnics), and out-of-school youth (the informal education system). The youth activities are distributed in all the 6 agricultural divisions in the district/province. There are 68 4K clubs, 12 young farmers clubs and 12 out-of-school youth groups. The youth groups/clubs engage in agricultural and other income generating activities e.g. crop production (mainly horticulture), livestock production, soil conservation and garbage collection, transportation (using handcarts) and car wash. The youth, especially the out-of-school youth, need to be encouraged. The groups/clubs actively participate during the Nairobi International Show at the 4K clubs stand and at the young farmers stand. The rural youth work is done by the Provincial Rural Youth Officer at the provincial level, by the Home Economics Officers at the divisional level, and through the normal extension processes at the frontline level. Irrigation and Drainage There is a lot of potential for irrigation. Currently, about 900 hectares are under irrigation though most of it uses contaminated wastewater. However, some farmers use borehole water or City Council water to irrigate. The main rivers used are Mbagathi, Ngong, Kamiti and Nairobi. The position of an Irrigation Engineer in the province was filled for the first time in November 2001. At the divisional level, the Divisional Soil Conservation Officers are responsible for extension work in irrigation and drainage. The major problems are inadequate sources of water, water-logging, and theft of water pumps. 2.8.2 MAJOR CONSTRAINTS ENCOUNTERED IN EXTENSION

The major constraints encountered by extension agents in Nairobi province include: Inaccessibility to certain homes due to security measures adopted by the farmers especially in Langata, Westlands and parts of Kasarani. The extension staffs normally identify themselves or book appointments with the farmer(s).

25

Lack of appropriate mode of transport for the extension provider. This limits the number of farmers visited per given period. Individualistic outlook of the farmers which is exhibited by unwillingness to form groups. This hinders group approach to message delivery. Lack of adequate office space and office facilities limit modes of delivery systems such as telephone and demand-driven extension since office space is either unavailable or constrained. Unlike other provinces, accounting is centralized at the Ministrys headquarters which delays implementation of planned activities. There is need for decentralization to the provincial level as is the case with other provincial offices of line ministries. PROPOSALS FOR REFORM

2.8.3

Although extension for agriculture and livestock is a core function of the Ministry, there should be greater community and private sector participation by incorporating farmers organizations, inputs suppliers, agroprocessors, financial organizations, government departments, donors and NGOs. Such participation will enhance efficiency and adoption of technology that would in turn have forward and backward linkages with agro-industries. The primary role of extension is to offer farmers technical knowledge and skills to enable them make choices within the available market opportunities and constraints. For efficiency of extension service provision in Nairobi, the following proposals could be adopted: Provision of adequate office space to divisions such as Embakasi and Langata, office facilities (e.g. telephone) in all the divisions, and internet and e-mail services at the provincial headquarters for ease of accessing new technologies in agriculture and livestock production. This will also enhance use of demand-driven approaches to extension through telephone. Adequate funds for publication so as to use print and mass media as alternative extension methods. This would be very appropriate considering that some of the farmers are part-time and literate. Increased partnerships and collaboration with other extension providers to diversify sources of information and supplement the Governments poor resource base. Encourage group approach where applicable (in Embakasi, Dagoretti and parts of Kasarani) and limit individual farm visits to only follow-up. Increased use of mass and print media for awareness creation and encourage demand-driven approach. Farmers should know where to get required officers at the time they need them. This will be useful where insecurity is rampant and/or where farmers may not need regular visits. Central points like schools and show grounds could be used to demonstrate technologies required by farmers in areas where group approach is not applicable. Field days at farm-level should be encouraged where group approach is applicable, as farmers are the best teachers to one another. This would also facilitate on-farm demonstration of technologies and reduce burden on transport constraints experienced by the technical staff. Marketing information should be accessible to the relevant stakeholders i.e. through the Internet, mass and print media. Repeal of the City Council by-laws to allow agricultural activities in urban and peri-urban areas. Government should formulate policies on urban agriculture in order to give guidelines on agricultural activities within the city. Training of a few staff in urban agriculture at postgraduate level.

2.9

THE SEARCH FOR A NEW PARADIGM

There are approximately 16,000 farm families occupying about 15,400 hectares of farmland in Nairobi. This excludes the roadside farmers and subsistence farmers farming in open spaces in Nairobi. Although farmland in Nairobi is disappearing because of the lucrative housing business, well-planned urban and periurban agriculture will enhance income and food security, environmental management, and biodiversity. Landscaping and beautification programs could borrow from agriculture, soil and water conservation, flood control, and zero-grazing. Food crops such as spinach, kale, pineapples, chilies, onions and tomatoes can
26

blend well with low-height flowers to form gardens in front of buildings and recreational parks. Urban planners worldwide are searching for carbon sinks to provide cleaner environments through agriculture. Urban centers in Kenya need to close the nutrient cycle, i.e. where animals are fed on crop residues (which pollute urban centers) while animal waste is used to fertilize gardens. Composting could also reduce the mountains of garbage in the urban centers. Urban planning policies have continued to maintain artificially high urban standards designed to protect public health and aesthetics despite ruralisation of Kenyan towns. To encourage urban agriculture, a multi-sectoral approach is required that will involve the Nairobi City Council, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, Ministry of Local Government, and Ministry of Planning in order to rewrite the agricultural policy to include urban agriculture. Rooftop agriculture can be practiced on high-rise buildings in cities and towns by growing vegetables such as tomatoes, kale, cabbages, spinach and onions, thus improving on the beauty of the city and providing carbon sinks (for absorption of carbon dioxide). The following are the suggested ways through which the Government could promote urban agriculture: Provide a policy framework that outlines the future of urban agriculture in Kenya. Provide infrastructure facilities such as good roads, storage facilities, railways, electricity, water and establishment of markets for both retail and wholesale within the residential estates in Nairobi. Remove obstacles that hinder the promotion of urban agriculture such as city and municipal council bylaws. Encourage private investors in food processing, marketing and storage. Removal of tariffs that impact negatively on urban agriculture e.g. water rights for irrigation purposes.

The Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension (PDALE) is charged with the responsibility of implementing all extension services in Nairobi. The government allocates inadequate financial resources to PDALEs office to enable it implement its programs. To enable the Nairobi PDALEs office to carry out its extension services more effectively, it is necessary to: Facilitate extension agents to reach client (farmer) through designing of simple extension pamphlets, organizing extension forums/workshops with stakeholders, and provide staff training opportunities in urban agriculture at Diploma, Bachelors and Masters levels. Procure project funds to promote urban agriculture through collaborative work with other stakeholders. Liaise with the Nairobi City Council in formulating by-laws that promote urban agriculture within its jurisdiction e.g. by redesigning the roundabouts to incorporate crops/fruit trees. There is also need for a simple credit system for agricultural development targeting small-scale urban farmers since existing micro-finance institutions only target commercial enterprises.

27

CHAPTER 3: SURVEY DESCRIPTION AND IMPLEMENTATION 3.1 SAMPLE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

The study was intended to cover the sources of food consumed in Nairobi. The two main sources are commercial food inflows and urban agriculture. Due to budgetary limitations, primary data collection was only to cover commercial food inflows. Information on urban agriculture was based on background information available from the office of the Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension (PDALE) in Nairobi. The main types of commercial food inflows were fresh crop produce, dry crop produce, fish, poultry, and livestock and livestock products. The survey was designed to cover only wholesalers delivering food to Nairobi to avoid double counting that would arise from including food flows from one outlet to another within the City. The survey excluded sales of livestock to individual households for consumption, mainly because initial investigations found that such household purchases are not significant except during Christmas holidays and occasional ceremonies e.g. weddings. The outlets for deliveries of fresh crop produce were mainly markets under the Nairobi City Council and informal markets where the City Council does not provide services or charge any levies. The wholesalers of dry crop produce were mainly individual shops in Nyamakima and OTC/Athusi, and Gikomba open-air market. Data on livestock products was mainly from abattoirs in Nairobi and environs that supply goat, sheep, cattle and camel meat to Nairobi. Fish are mainly delivered to Gikomba and City Market. Data on chicken deliveries covered Jogoo road near City Stadium (Maziwa), Gikomba, City Market, Githurai and Kariakor. Eggs were not included in the survey although enumerators in Githurai market recorded egg deliveries to the market. The City Council owns and manages other markets that do not deal in the sale of crop produce. These include Westlands, Kariakor, Burma, Githurai, Karen, Dandora (six markets), Umoja I, Umoja II (two markets), Ngaara, City Market, Jogoo Road market, Kariobangi North, Kariobangi South, Jericho, Eastleigh, Kahawa West, Kenyatta market, Kayole (three markets), Mathare North, and Triangle Curios Market in Westlands. The office of the Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension expressed the need for the study to include milk supplies to Nairobi. However, initial investigations showed that it would be difficult to have a complete list of informal milk suppliers to Nairobi. The survey was also designed to include supermarkets due to their increasing role in sale of fresh crop produce (e.g. fruits and vegetables), dry foods (e.g. rice, maize flour, wheat flour, and other cereals and cereal products) and meat. However, there was little cooperation from the supermarkets, and they were therefore excluded from the survey. The survey also included food-processing industries. The industries selected fall under Standard Industrial Trade Classification (SITC) groups: 3111 (slaughtering, preparing and preserving of meat), 3112 (dairy products), 3116 (grain mill products) and 3117 (bakery products). It excluded SITC groups 3113 (canning and processing of fruits and vegetables), 3114 (canning, preserving and processing of fish), 3115 (vegetable and animal oils and fats), 3118 (sugar factories and refinery), 3119 (cocoa, chocolate and sugar confectionery) and 3120 (food products not elsewhere classified). The survey of fresh and dry crop produce in the markets that mainly deal with fresh crop produce was conducted every day for two weeks on all wholesalers bringing in food. The survey of dry crop produce in shops solicited information for the month prior to the survey. The survey of livestock wholesalers and abattoirs covered the month preceding the survey. Fish and chicken deliveries to the markets covered all wholesalers every day for two weeks. The survey of food processing firms was designed to cover calendar year 2001.

28

3.2
3.2.1

ESTIMATION PROCEDURES
Blanks and Nonresponse

There are various sources of errors/bias in a survey. Errors could be introduced by misreporting, enumerator or respondent bias, nonresponse, and in data entry. This section deals with nonresponse and its effect on sample weights. Nonresponse could be introduced through refusals and/or failure to cover a particular trader or outlet. Refusals were summed as nonresponse. Completed surveys may contain blanks or missing values attributable to lack of data or a question that was not asked. Blanks and nonresponse splits the original population (N) into two sub-classes, M non-blank members and B blanks and nonresponse, i.e. N=M+B. The presence of blanks and nonresponse introduces variation in the size of the sample. This variation is a function of the proportion m=M/N. 3.2.2 Weighting

In all markets, no sampling was conducted as the survey was intended to cover all wholesalers. It is not therefore possible to impute response rates to accommodate the impact of any nonresponse that may have occurred during the enumeration exercise. However, the survey estimates for shops dealing with dry crop produce will be adjusted for nonresponse to arrive at a final adjusted weight. The nonresponse adjustment factor (nr) = n/i, where (n) is the total number of traders originally selected and (i) is the number of traders that responded. 3.2.3 The Reference Population

There are normally two populations in urban food studies: the night population and daylight population. The night population is the one normally enumerated in population censuses and household-based surveys. The daylight population includes people from adjoining areas who regularly commute to Nairobi during working days (Monday to Friday) for work or school. The towns of Thika, Kangundo, Machakos, Athi River, Ngong, Kikuyu, Limuru and Kiambu are dormitory towns, whose economies depend largely on the citys influence. There is also a small transit population that can be ignored since at any given time there are also people normally resident in Nairobi who travel outside Nairobi. The daylight population is normally part of considerations for planning for food and services (e.g. electricity, water, garbage and traffic) in urban centres. There will therefore be large margins of error in estimating per capita food availability based on the survey data since the only population data available is based on population censuses (night population).

3.3

DEVELOPMENT OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE

The first step in the development of the questionnaire involved interviews with personnel from the Nairobi Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension, Nairobi City Council, and representatives of a few informal markets. The interviews with the PDALE mainly covered urban agriculture and the quality of the data on the same available in their records. The office of the PDALE also stressed the need for factual data on informal milk marketing, but the demands of a survey module specific to milk was considered to be outside the scope of this study. Interviews were conducted on personnel of the Nairobi City Council, mainly from the Director of Social Services and Housing (who is in charge of all markets managed by the City Council) and the Treasurers Department (which collects levies from the markets). The markets have personnel from the departments of Social Services and Housing, City Treasurer and City Inspectorate. The City Inspectorate provides a supportive role to the personnel from the other two departments, mainly in the area of security. There is normally tension in the markets between personnel in the other two departments, mainly because revenue collection in the markets was previously in the hands of the Social Services and Housing Department before being transferred to the Treasurers Department. The consultant decided to use the office of the City Treasurer since the latter is in charge of revenue collection from food wholesalers in the markets.

29

The key informant interviews assisted in short-listing of key variables to be included in the survey instruments (the questionnaire and the enumerators reference manual). An initial version of the survey instruments was discussed in a meeting between the client (UN-HABITAT), the Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension, the Nairobi City Council, and the consultant. The final version of the survey instruments was developed on the basis of recommendations of the review meeting.

3.4

TRAINING OF ENUMERATORS

The main criterion used in selecting enumerators was their familiarization with survey work or their knowledge of the particular market the enumerator was to be assigned. In addition, an enumerator was required to be resident near the market he/she was to enumerate. In the case of markets under the City Council, the enumerators were selected from the cess collectors in the markets they were working during the survey period. Enumeration in Gikomba market was undertaken by non-City Council employees. In Gikomba, Korogocho, Kangemi, Githurai and Kawangware, one enumerator was a trader within the market. The rest of the enumerators were familiar with survey work. The enumerators working with the City Council were trained separately. This was to avoid giving the impression that the survey was designed by the City Council to estimate the foregone revenue from the informal markets. The enumerators were also cautioned against giving impression to the respondents that the City Council had any interest in initiating the survey or in its findings. There were only minimal changes in the questionnaire after the training of enumerators. Initially, the consultant intended to conduct interviews on traders and management committees in the markets. However, due to the heavy demands of supervising the fieldwork, it was deemed impractical for one person to visit all the markets. Towards the end of the fieldwork, the consultant prepared a checklist of issues to be included in the interview schedule of markets and forwarded it to the enumerators. Most enumerators complained that it would have been more convenient if they had received the interview schedule during training.

3.5
3.5.1

FIELDWORK
Commitment of Enumerators to Assigned Tasks

Field data collection in all markets (except abattoirs) started on Tuesday 13 November 2001. The period was designed such that it did not coincide with school holidays. Field enumeration in Doonholm market was stopped after one day because activity in the market was very low and the little produce sold was from other markets already covered in the survey. In some of the markets, a trader in the market was assigned to monitor the activities of the enumerators. The enumerators were unaware that their activities were being monitored on a continuous basis. On Saturday 17 November 2001, the consultant was alerted that the enumerators in Kawangware, Fig Tree and Kaka did not report in the afternoon. The enumerator covering Kaka was replaced without any loss of information. The enumerators covering Kawangware were replaced very early the following morning, and only the Saturday afternoon was not covered. In Fig Tree, new enumerators were assigned on Sunday afternoon, thereby losing information for Saturday afternoon and Sunday morning. A surprise visit in Kariakor chicken market at dawn on Sunday 18 November 2001 found that the enumerator had not reported. The consultant did the enumeration until a replacement was found later in the day. The enumerators covering Gikomba fish market and Maziwa chicken market along Jogoo Road (opposite City Stadium) missed to record some deliveries. After one week, enumeration in Gikomba fish market and Maziwa chicken market was suspended, and enumeration restarted afresh for 14 consecutive days. 3.5.2 Problems Encountered During Enumeration

The enumeration in most of the markets proceeded smoothly. The City Council markets were supervised by the consultant and a senior City Council official from the Treasurers Department. In Gikomba, City Council officials could be seen collecting levies from traders without issuing receipts, but this did not affect the
30

quality of data collected since the enumeration was conducted by non-Council staff. In Gikomba, the City Council cess collectors briefly interrupted data collection, as they were not aware of the survey exercise. However, in the other City Council markets, the food deliveries recorded in the questionnaires tallied with the revenue returns, and it is therefore not possible to estimate the under-reporting in City Council Markets. It was only in City Market that the consultant personally witnessed deliberate diversion of chicken from the main gates to evade paying cess. Since the personnel in the market come from three separate departments of the City Council, it was not possible to establish the department the personnel involved in corrupt practices came from. In Korogocho, the City Council personnel raided the market demanding cess from wholesalers of crop produce. The brokers and wholesalers of crop produce presumed that the ongoing enumeration was sanctioned by the City Council. The brokers threatened the enumerator but officials of Korogocho Market Traders Association managed to cool the situation. The City Council accepted pleas from the consultant to postpone random visits to the informal markets to charge cess until the end of the data collection exercise. Some traders thought that the survey was interested in prices to announce in the local media. Most traders first sought assurance that the enumerators were not from the vernacular radio station, Kameme. The traders complained that the market information provided by the media outlet built price expectations among farmers, wholesalers supplying food to Nairobi markets, and local consumers. Some traders in Nyamakima dealing in dry crop produce refused to be interviewed in the pretext that they were new in the business; others thought that the information collected may jeopardise their businesses; while a few did not cite any reasons for refusal. The enumerators could not fill the questionnaire during the interview since the survey was conducted during the rainy season. The enumerators had therefore to write down the responses in the notebooks provided and transfer the notes to the questionnaires later. The enumerators also reported that it would have been easier to identify themselves if they had identification cards. The enumerators complained that it was risky starting work at 5 a.m. The traders complained that the enumerators were asking questions for two weeks without purchasing anything. The conversion of non-standard units of measurement into kilograms per unit was not easy especially for leafy vegetables (e.g. kale which was sometimes reported in bunches) and green maize (which was sometimes reported in number of maize cobs). A post-enumeration survey was conducted in several markets in February 2002 to estimate the conversion factors to be used in the survey, especially for Fig Tree and Dandora markets. The traders selling crop produce grown in wastewater in Nairobi were not willing to reveal the source of their produce as most customers have a negative opinion of such foods. In some smaller markets e.g. Dandora, transport costs for some items like potatoes were inclusive of cost of purchase. Most traders buy tomatoes from suppliers in Korogocho or Gikomba and have the produce delivered at no extra cost. The normal arrangement is for the trader to pay half the purchase price at the point of purchase and the balance after delivery. The respondents were generally cooperative although some fatigue crept in as the survey progressed. This was manifested by enquiries like: Why do you visit us every day? Are we going to be given loans? Are two weeks not over yet? 3.5.3 Change in the Subjects of Investigation

The survey of fresh crop produce was designed to capture wholesalers delivering food to the markets, and not the retailers selling fresh produce inside the markets. The survey was therefore designed to intercept wholesalers before offloading the produce into the markets. However, Fig Tree and Dandora are retail markets and the survey therefore covered retailers, but excluded purchases from other markets in Nairobi. Although this was designed to avoid double counting, it limited the usefulness of the survey in tracing intermarket flows.

31

3.5.4

Comments on the Questionnaire

The enumerators covering Dandora market reported that the legends (codes) for sellers of produce did not distinguish between other farmers from within Nairobi and those from other areas. However, information on the area code for source of produce was used to identify the cases of food purchases from farmers within Nairobi. Enumerators also noted that the unit of measurement for fresh crop produce should also have included number. This error was noticed early in the survey and enumerators instructed on the same. The enumerators suggested that the questionnaire should not have repeated the names of trader and market and date of interview on every page. It was also difficult to estimate distance to various sources of food items. 3.5.5 Other General Observations

The enumerators came into contact with Government personnel collecting wholesale price data in the markets. In markets like Githurai, Wakulima and Korogocho where there were brokers, the official wholesale price statistics did not reflect landed cost of food but also included brokers margins. There may also be problems with official agricultural data where Government charges revenue. A notable example was livestock slaughtered in the abattoirs. The official statistics of livestock slaughtered are based on total receipts of meat inspection fees, which could differ with the actual livestock slaughtered or inspected. It is understood that the under-reporting from this source is higher for small stock (e.g. sheep and goats) compared with cattle. The time the consultant spent studying the markets was not adequate. Ideally, a qualitative study should have been conducted prior to the survey, and its findings used to design the quantitative survey. Some important information on the operation of the markets became clear when the field enumeration was ongoing. This includes the role of brokers in determining wholesale prices of food in some markets. There was therefore no attempt made to capture brokers fees in the survey. The common understanding of the Kenyan nation state as a cluster of ethnic domains may have affected the accuracy of information on sources of food delivered to Nairobi markets. The main casualties are likely to be Kisii and Meru. In ordinary usage, Meru is understood to comprise the districts that house most of the Meru ethnic group, while Kisii is understood to refer to the Kisii country. There are also remote possibilities that a trader could have reported the place where he bought food from, which could differ from where the food was actually grown. In the case of husked maize (muthokoi), traders in Nyamakima only reported that the commodity was obtained from millers in Nairobi, but were not aware of where the maize used to produce the husked maize originally came from. The millers would have been the appropriate respondents for source of maize used to make muthokoi. There was underreporting in Kibera (Toi) market as the City Council staff responsible for the survey misplaced some completed questionnaires. However, given the low volume of business in Toi market, the information lost would not have made significant difference to the outcome of the survey. The wholesalers bringing food to the markets complained of the deplorable state of roads used in searching for food in the interior, which also keeps them away from home for long periods. Transport costs to the interior are normally very high, and in some cases, only animal transport and human carriers are available. They also cited harassment by traffic police soliciting for bribes. Vehicle breakdowns cause heavy losses in case of perishable goods.

32

3.6

CLASSIFICATION OF COMMODITIES

The following categories were used: cereals (1), starch roots and tubers (2), grain legumes (3), leafy vegetables (4), other vegetables (5), fruits (6), nuts and seeds (7), meat, poultry and eggs (9), and fish (10). Within each category, specific commodities were assigned specific codes. The codes are: Cereals Dry maize (including muthokoi) Green maize Rice Millet (pearl and finger) Sorghum Wheat Starchy Roots and Tubers English Potatoes Sweet potatoes Arrow roots Cassava Yams Grain legumes Beans (several varieties) Dengu (green grams) Njugu (pigeon peas) Njahi (bonavist beans) Green peas (minji) French beans Kunde/thoroko (cow peas) Dry peas Leafy Vegetables Cabbages Kale Spinach Coriander leaves (dania) Nightshade (managu) Amaranthus (terere) Kunde (cow pea leaves) Pumpkin leaves Lettuce Pigweed (mchicha) Kahurura (malabar gourd) Saget (bastard mustard) Sagaa Saragwa Mabaki Cauliflower Other vegetables Tomatoes Carrots Onions Pumpkins Cucumber
33

101 102 103 104 105 106 201 202 203 204 205 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 501 502 503 504 505

Brinjals Capsicum (hoho) Chilli Bitter gourd (karela) Okra Garlic Kojet (courgette) Dudi (mungu, nduthi) Lavaya Ginger Green bullet Fruits Bananas Oranges Pineapples Avocados Papaws Mangoes Sugarcane Water melon Lemon/lime Passion Apples Grapes Tangerine Nuts and Seeds Groundnuts Coconut Madafu (coconut milk) Meat, Poultry and Eggs Cattle Camel Goat Sheep Pigs Chicken Eggs Fish Tilapia Nile perch Dagaa (omena) Crabs Odol Kamongo Sea fish

506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 701 702 703 901 902 903 904 905 906 906 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007

3.7

RELIABILITY OF THE RESULTS

Initially, reliability of the survey data was to be based on comparisons with the results of the 1993/94 Urban Household Budget Survey conducted by the Central Bureau of Statistics. However, there are several limitations in the use of this source to gauge the reliability of the survey results. First, it is difficult to estimate the reference population for food consumption data collected in this survey. Secondly, the gap between the CBS survey and the survey of food inflows is eight years, and there have been changes in consumption
34

patterns and purchasing power since then. Thirdly, the survey covered only two weeks, and it is difficult to derive annual estimates due to seasonal variations in food availability. The coverage of fresh crop produce is expected to be high as the survey covered all wholesale markets, except Park Tower market (the private market behind Retail market). In the case of dry foods, there are other smaller shops and outlets involved in the trade, in addition to the fact that supermarkets did not respond and only about a third of the selected food processing firms responded. The coverage for fish and livestock was high, while that of chicken was low due to many chicken outlets in the city which were not covered by the survey.

35

CHAPTER 4: MARKETS FOR FRESH AND DRY CROP PRODUCE

The markets for fresh crop produce were split into two categories: those where the City Council maintains full-time offices for collecting cess from the traders, and those where food wholesalers do not pay cess on produce delivered. The City Council markets were Wakulima, Gikomba (Open), Retail market, Toi (Kibera), City Market, Ngaara, City Park/Highridge and Mutindwa. The independent markets were Korogocho (Soko Mjinga), Githurai, Kawangware, Kangemi, Fig Tree, Kaka, Dandora and Doonholm. The main wholesalers of dry crop produce were shops in Nyamakima and OTC/Athusi. The survey did not cover small retail markets (e.g. Maringo, Jericho and Westlands) because they obtain virtually all their produce from the markets covered in the survey. The designation of the markets into City Council and informal (or independent) arose by default. During survey organisation, the City Council allowed the consultant to use cess collectors as enumerators in the City Council markets, except Gikomba that was enumerated by non-Council staff. The City Council organises ad hoc operations at night or early in the morning to intercept transporters of fresh crop produce to collect cess on the produce. However, there is no organised system of collecting cess from the independent markets. Some markets (e.g. Toi-Kibera) which are ostensibly managed by the City Council and food deliveries are leviable do not receive services from the City Council. In addition, all the markets, including City Council markets, have independent committees of traders that manage the markets and protect the interests of traders. The designation of a market as City Council market does not therefore imply that the Council is solely responsible for managing the market. The description of the markets is based on interviews with City Council officials (at City Hall and in the markets), wholesalers and retailers in the markets, and independent committees of traders. The descriptions therefore reflect the views of those interviewed. In a lot of cases, the description of a market and how it operates changed when several key informants were interviewed. For example, the descriptions of efficiency of the management structures depended on whether the informant was a committee member or an ordinary trader. The history of the markets is based on interviews with the oldest traders that could be traced, and may therefore be inadequate in the markets where old traders could not be traced.

4.1
4.1.1

CITY COUNCIL MARKETS

WAKULIMA MARKET

Wakulima (or Marigiti - corruption of market) is the largest wholesale market for fresh crop produce. The market, whose name means farmers in Kiswahili, was moved from the City Market in the early fifties to the location where Hilton Hotel now stands, and later to where Kenya Planters Cooperative Union (KPCU) stands. In the late fifties, the market was moved to its present location. The market used to operate as both wholesale and retail market. However, in 1961, all retail traders were moved to Retail Market and Wakulima remained a wholesale market. In 1967, the Council erected the current structure. Wakulima remained a wholesale market until the late nineties when retailers moved into the market. There are two management teams: Nairobi City Council and traders management committee. The City Council collects cess on all deliveries of farm produce. The wholesalers and retailers operating within the market do not pay cess. The City Council regards the retailers within the market as illegal intruders. The City Council provides services e.g. cleaning the market, collecting garbage, lighting, water, sanitation facilities, and security. A traders committee was launched in 1999. The committee comprises of traders dealing with various categories of fresh produce e.g. dealers in cabbages elect their own representative. These representatives form a broad-based market committee. The committee represents the interests of the traders in dealings with the City Council, and coordinates with committees of other City Council markets. There is heavy congestion as population has outnumbered the capacity of the market. The incoming vehicles exceed the designated parking bays. Other causes of congestion are pushcarts and human traffic.

36

The main source of food delivered to the market is Nyandarua district (vegetables, potatoes, green maize and carrots). Other commodities delivered are fruits (from Coast and Central region), onions and oranges (Tanzania), and bananas (Uganda). The main problems faced by suppliers are distances from source, accessibility of rural areas (especially bad roads in the rainy season), hostilities of some communities that affect transporters en route, and transport. The food is delivered to hotels and other consumers by pushcarts, pickups and human carriers. Brokers determine prices and the general conduct of business. There are generally two types of brokerage commissions: a fixed commission per specified quantity of a particular produce (e.g. a net of onions or a bag of potatoes), and a margin between a fixed buying price agreed with the wholesaler and the selling price. The market does not have structures for storing or displaying crop produce. The traders use the ground/ floor to display their goods. The unsold produce is left within the market because there is adequate security from the City Inspectorate. The layout of the market is such that each crop produce has its designated area. The market has a permanent stonewall and a concrete roof (to keep the market cool). Electricity is paid for by the City Council. The City Council provides water free of charge. The toilets are clean but are not adequate for the high number of transporters, traders and customers. The parking and unloading zones outside the market are inadequate, and are also used by unlicensed retailers of fresh crop produce. The lorries with unsold produce are guarded overnight by the City Council for a fee. A disused railway line passing through the market was used in the early days to transport produce from other areas (e.g. bananas from Taita Taveta). The market operates between 5 a.m. and 12.00 noon every day. 4.1.2 GIKOMBA MARKET (FRESH PRODUCE)

Gikomba market was started opposite Quarry Road post office by a few old women around 1960-62. The women started their businesses on a small scale as they were getting food for sale from their own farms. As time went by, more traders flocked to the market and the area was consequently too small to accommodate all of them. Around 1975, the traders extended the market towards Nairobi River by clearing a bush adjoining the river. In 1979, the traders formed a cooperative (now Bondeni Housing Cooperative Society). They elected a committee of 12 members, which has remained under the same chairman since. Previously, the market was operating in open air. However, traders began to roof their stalls with polythene bags, but the City Council continued to demolish the structures at night as it intended to retain its status as an open market. This game of building and demolishing the structures continued until 1984 when the central government authorised them to roof their stalls with polythene bags. The City Council reacted by demolishing the stalls and destroying merchandise. However, the then chairman of the City Commission and the president later allowed the market to be independent. The market started expanding rapidly, and attracted many traders and a wide variety of merchandise. Only a few traders sold dry crop produce. There have always been complaints concerning the activities of the management committee. During 1994-95, the committee requested the stall owners (estimated at 2,000) to contribute money for improvement of access roads and introduced a compulsory registration fee. However, the traders have had little say in the management of the funds. In 1997, the El Nino rains destroyed almost all the stalls in the market, and traders had to rebuild their stalls. On 5 September 2000, the whole market was burnt. The members suspect that those responsible for the arson have an interest in the land occupied by the market. The committee charges retailers who bring produce Shs 50 per day (for sweeping the market), while each stall pays Shs 30 per month (for security). Cases were noted of traders who paid the City Council cess without being issued with receipts. Other traders were overcharged by the City Council and no receipts issued. In case of dry foods, offloaders (kuua) charge Shs 40 per bag and Shs 30 per box of tomatoes. Brokerage fees are normally Shs 50 per crate of tomatoes.

37

There are 13 watchmen, and each is paid Shs 1,500 per month. Security is poor as the watchmen also engage themselves in offloading - for extra pay - during night shift (around 5.30-6.30 in the morning) and therefore do not concentrate with security during that time. Cases of theft of traders merchandise are rampant. The conditions of social amenities were: (a) (b) There is shortage of water all over. Those running hotels get water from pipes located near toilets at Shs 5 per 20-litre can. Refuse is disposed into Nairobi River. There are many toilets but are not operational. The only operational toilet charges Shs 5 per visit. Another toilet is used by kuua (loaders) as a bathroom, who also sell water from the toilet. Sewage is directed towards Nairobi River. The roads are narrow and impassable during the rains due to mud and poor drainage. Traders who sell green maize do so on the roads, thus increasing congestion. The offloading area is inadequate as it can only accommodate three lorries at a time. Traders dealing with green maize, bananas and timber use one of the roads as their business site. Electricity is only available in the hardware stores, shops, grain mills and hotels located on the boundaries of the market.

(c)

(d)

The main business conducted in the market is selling of tomatoes and ripe and green bananas. There are also cabbages, green maize, potatoes, avocados, red onions, spring onions (Kikuyu), papaws, pineapples, sweet potatoes, oranges and mangoes. Dry crop produce includes rice, maize, beans, green grams, sorghum and millet. Other businesses conducted in Gikomba include new and second-hand clothes and shoes, chicken (though rare and in small numbers), while fish trade is well established and takes place in City Council market stalls located in the market. New traders are free to join the market as long as they pay City Council cess and the necessary levies to the market committee. Brokers determine the prices of most commodities brought to the market. For example, a trader may have bought a crate of tomatoes from rural markets at Shs 800. In Gikomba, he may sell the crate to the broker at Shs 1,400 while the broker sells it at Shs 1,600. The broker may therefore gain Shs 200 per crate, in addition to a standard fee of Shs 50 per crate. Wholesalers have no right to sell their commodities to the retailers in Gikomba. The standard brokerage fee per bag of potatoes is Shs 100, in addition to the mark-up between wholesale price and the one paid by the retailers. The enumerators reported that the traders interviewed were very cooperative, although they were curious to know the outcome of the survey. However, after interviewing a trader about three times, he/she became fatigued and thought that the survey was only interested in prices to announce to the local media. Most traders first sought assurance that the enumerators were not from the vernacular radio station, Kameme. The price information in the media outlet builds expectations in farmers, wholesalers supplying food to Nairobi markets, and local consumers. The traders recommended that the City Council should stop harassing traders and collect appropriate charges (and issue receipts for the same). Future surveys should be carried out for a shorter period of time to avoid respondent fatigue. The enumerators suggested that the questionnaire should not have repeated the names of trader and market and date of interview on every page. It was also difficult to estimate distance to various food sources. The data are reliable as many traders were willing to provide the information requested. 4.1.3 RETAIL (LANDHIES ROAD) MARKET

The market was constructed by the City Council during 1961-1963. Wakulima was then a retail and wholesale market. Landhies Road market was built to accommodate retailers so that Wakulima could operate as a wholesale market. By then, the City Council was only charging for stall rental, as cess was being paid at Wakulima market.

38

The management of the market is the responsibility of the City Council. The City Council provides all amenities available e.g. cleaning the market and adjacent areas, lighting, repair and security. There is a traders committee to protect the interests of the members, and to liaise with the City Council on issues concerning the management of the market. Food wholesalers pay cess to the City Council, while traders in the market pay rent for the stalls. Water is available in sufficient quantities from two water taps inside the market. The market is properly served by the roads that pass by the roundabout outside the market. There is one toilet which is cleaned by City Council staff. The City Council provides security through the askaris provided by the City Inspectorate. There is ample security for the retailers as the stalls are within a secure building, and security is also provided for wholesalers who offload their goods in the parking zone on the roadside. There are no brokers in the market. 4.1.4 TOI MARKET

Toi is an open-air market situated within the Kibera slums. Toi means mud in the language of the Nubians who were the first settlers in the area, while Kibera (first known as kibrah) is a Nubian lexeme meaning forest. Toi market started in 1988 with a small group of traders selling second-hand clothes and vegetables. The open space where the market is located belongs to various people, and hence no permanent structures can be constructed. A committee formed by the traders manages the market. One of the roles of the committee is to protect traders from harassment by the City Council and the provincial administration. The committee has assisted in the construction of a toilet, which the traders use at a small fee. The committee assists in settlement of disputes among the traders, especially with respect to allocation and arrangement of spaces. The committee charges a fee for allocation of space and some fine for settlement of disputes. The traders purchase water from individuals in the area. The traders have recruited their own watchmen to provide security, and each trader contributes Shs 10 per day for security. There are no security rights in the market, which makes the work of security staff rather difficult during the night. The traders leave their wares in the market overnight because there is ample security. The City Council charges cess on food delivered in the market by wholesalers or retailers. The total cess collected normally amounts to about Shs 350,000 per month. The City Council does not provide any services to the market despite the fact that it charges cess. The market does not have a permanent fence. The parking zone for offloading goods is inadequate, and there is normally a lot of congestion. The traders clean the market on a routine basis, and pool money from among themselves for garbage collection since the City Council does not provide any service to the market. The road network within the market is very poor, and vehicles cannot therefore enter the market during the rainy season. The market has a wide range of commodities since it acts as both wholesale and retail market. The types of food delivered to the market for both retail and wholesale trade include tomatoes, kale, cabbages, mangoes, green maize, dry maize and onions. The food is supplied from outside Nairobi rather than from other markets in Nairobi. The market operates throughout the week. There is no restriction on new traders. Wholesalers sell their produce through brokers who normally charge brokerage fees, on top of the profit margin the brokers make in selling the produce to the traders in the market. The brokers also charge for offloading of goods. The brokers have made some wholesalers to shy away from the market. 4.1.5 NGAARA MARKET

The market was started by the City Council in 1983 after traders were evicted from Fig Tree market where brokers were blocking access to the road and sanitary conditions were poor. The market had 321 stalls but currently has 319 because two stalls were demolished to pave way for additional gates to the market.
39

The market was initially managed by the City Council but its management changed hands in 1985 after traders complained of lack of services from the City Council. The market was originally meant for sale of vegetables and tailoring business, but the traders have ventured into other businesses e.g. carpentry, video libraries, sale of clothing materials, repair of radios and TV, and snack cafs. An elected committee of seven traders manages the market. The roles and responsibilities of the committee include security of the market, garbage disposal, and arbitration of disputes among traders. Each stall contributes Shs 150 per month for security and lighting within and outside the market. The members assist each other with funeral arrangements in case a member is bereaved. The members also have an accumulating savings and credit association (ASCA) where the accumulated savings are lent out to members. The City Council is responsible for cleaning toilets, sweeping the market, preventing illegal structures within the market, and ensuring health standards in the food stalls. The City Council collects monthly rent from traders and cess on deliveries of leviable commodities. The facilities and amenities include water and toilets. Water is supplied by the City Council free of charge. There is one main supply where all traders draw water. There are two flush toilets in the market, one for men and the other for women. The toilets are not adequate for the estimated 1,500 workers and about 8,000 customers visiting the market daily. The toilet cisterns ceased functioning long ago, but the toilets are cleaned twice a day by City Council staff. The City Councils cleaning staffs are not equipped with preventive gear (e.g. gloves and gumboots) and their health is therefore at risk. The sewerage system is in perfect condition and has never broken down. The road leading to the market is in a poor state. Hawkers have also put wares on the road, leaving little room for vehicles to pass. There is also mugging along the road, which puts off potential customers to the market. There is ample security inside the market as it is surrounded by stonewall and guarded by security hired by the market committee. The stalls are permanent but have illegal extensions that leave little passageways for customers. The parking space is adequate but tends to get congested during the weekends. The traders lock their wares in their stalls. A trader pays for his/her own electricity bill. The committee pays for the security and office lights. The market is generally clean and garbage is disposed off in a central place outside the market. The City Council normally collects the garbage every three weeks. Many traders deal in vegetables and fruits (papaws and mangoes). The papaws are mainly from Kirinyaga, while mangoes are mainly from Hola and Mombasa. There are two main market days for fresh produce when new supplies of papaws are delivered. Other types of food sold are mainly from Wakulima market (onions, potatoes, garlic, ginger and mangoes), Quarry Road (tomatoes, cabbages) and City Park (melon). Other commodities supplied from Wakulima in smaller quantities include courgette, cucumber, capsicum and dania. Hawking is strictly prohibited within the market. Some small quantities of lettuce emanate from urban agriculture (from Kawangware). There are no brokers since Ngaara is a retail market. 4.1.6 CITY PARK MARKET

The City Park market, located on the edge of City Park, was started in 1991 by the Asian Foundation, an organization linked to Manu Chandaria. The Foundation thereafter handed over the market to the City Council as the market stands on City Council land. The City Council deployed its staff to the market to provide services e.g. security, cleaning and garbage disposal. Some traders in the market created resistance to the Councils takeover of the market. The matter landed in court, which issued an injunction in favor of the traders. Consequently, the City Council pulled out its staff and left the market in the hands of a committee selected by the traders. Currently, the only functions of the City Council are collection of cess on farm produce and collection of garbage.

40

Initially, the main business in the market was retailing of fruits and vegetables by traders who had been expelled from the central business district for hawking. The market has grown to include wholesale of fruits and vegetables, food kiosks, dressmaking and embroidery, and sale of used clothes and shoes. The roles and responsibilities of the management committee include (a) provision of basic requirements e.g. water, security and general cleanliness, (b) allocation and transfer of stalls between traders, and (c) supervision of the traders. The traders pay a monthly fee to facilitate the provision of common services. The City Council used to provide a wide variety of services, but is legally unable to do so due to the court injunction. The City Council levies cess on farm produce entering the market, since it is allowed by statute to do so. The City Council is also in charge of garbage collection and disposal. There is no specified role for the provincial administration, although the location of the office of the assistant chief inside the market automatically implies some role in maintaining law and order. Water is available from two communal taps within the market, where water is sold. There are two toilets of four cubicles each, which are not adequate for the traders and their customers. The flush toilets do not work. The hygienic conditions are pathetic despite the availability of a sewerage system. Roads leading to the market are adequate and properly maintained. Congestion is common due to the small parking zone. Human traffic inside the market is also a problem due to the narrow passages, and human congestion is made worse by addition of extra stalls and selling of merchandise on the pathways. The market is partially fenced with Kaiyaba (kei apple), while some sides have barbed wire. The committee takes care of security from the monthly charges paid by traders. Each trader is responsible for storage of his/her produce. As an open-air market, ventilation is adequate. The market is of average cleanliness but uncollected garbage is a major health hazard. The market offers a wide variety of fruits and vegetables. Most of the food deliveries take place on main market days (Tuesdays and Fridays). The market also offers indigenous food crops such as cassava, sweet potatoes, yams and arrowroots. The wholesalers bringing food to the market complained of the deplorable state of roads used in searching for food in the interior, which also keeps them away from home for long periods. Transport costs to the interior are normally very high, and in some cases only animal transport and human carriers are available. They also cited harassment by traffic police soliciting for bribes, and attacks by highway bandits (e.g. in Hola, Tana River district). Vehicle breakdowns cause heavy losses in case of perishable goods. Women traders have on occasion been hijacked and raped en route. Wholesalers reported that rural brokers ensure that the produce is available by the time the wholesaler arrives to purchase, and the rural broker negotiates prices on behalf of the wholesaler. The brokers within the market act as middlemen between wholesalers (and farmers-cum-wholesalers) and the traders in the market. In addition, some brokers act as agents of hotels and other institutions in supplying the required farm produce. Brokers make it difficult for new suppliers to sell their produce at competitive prices. The brokers sometimes form cartels to fix prices for certain types of produce, or, in extreme cases, sell only to certain retailers. 4.1.7 MUTINDWA MARKET

The market was started by an individual in 1995. It is located in Umoja estate along Outer Ring road. Many traders started settling in from other parts of the city. The main types of goods sold are clothes and farm produce. The role of the management committee is to ensure peace in the market. The committee is in charge of allocating stalls and only charges a registration fee to the traders. The traders assist each other by transporting goods together. The role of the City Council and the provincial administration is to ensure that the land is not allocated to private developers (grabbed), and to ensure peace and harmony in the market. The City Council charges cess on traders of farm produce. Each stall also pays Shs 25 to the City Council on a daily basis.

41

There are no toilets in the market. There are storage facilities in the form of three containers. The traders have hired their own security guards. Normally, food wholesalers bring food from the bigger markets e.g. Gikomba.

4.2
4.2.1

INDEPENDENT MARKETS
KOROGOCHO MARKET

Korogocho market, formerly known as Soko Mjinga, is next to the sprawling Korogocho slums. Access to the market is normally through Komarock road near the Komarock Bridge. The market is a major source of food to Dandora, Kayole, Huruma, Mathare, Umoja, Buruburu and many other estates in Nairobis Eastlands. The market was started by a few grocers in the seventies to sell food to the poor who were migrating to Korogocho after being evicted from Grogan area (Kirinyaga road) in the central business district, Gikomba and Highridge so as to develop and polish the image of the face of Nairobi. The Market was then located where Korogocho Primary School currently stands. The market moved to its present location in 1991 to give room for extension of Korogocho Primary School. In 1985, the Korogocho Market Traders Association was formed. The associations representatives were selected from various groups, namely, sellers of fresh maize, sellers of tomatoes, sellers of cabbage, sellers of cereals, sellers of fruits, sellers of kale, sellers of old clothes, sellers of new clothes, and hand cart pushers/ human load carriers (beba). The present office bearers were elected in April 2000. The roles of the committee are to resolve conflicts between traders, manage security of the market, and manage market facilities and amenities (e.g. water, toilets, bridges and access roads to the market). The current committee has managed to secure a lease for the land occupied by the market. Every member of the association pays Shs 10 to the committee every month for management of the market. Every stall pays Shs 3 per day to cater for security of the market. Every vehicle delivering food to the market in the night pays Shs 60 per entry for security of the vehicle and the goods. There are other payments e.g. one shilling to use the toilet - which is used to pay the cleaner. The management has also installed water points where water is sold at one shilling per 20-litre container. The toilets were built by the City Council but were not connected to the piped water system. The main types of food delivered to the market were potatoes, cabbages, kale, tomatoes, green maize, leafy onions, red onions, oranges, mangoes, cereals, avocados, bananas and carrots. A small proportion of kale is delivered from Maili Saba (near Dandora) and Karen. The narrow road passing through market is almost inaccessible during market days (Wednesdays and Saturdays) due to congestion. The major problem is that of brokers. For example, tomato wholesalers from Mwea pay brokers in Mwea Shs 100 for a load of a pickup and an additional Shs 1,500 to brokers in Korogocho regardless of the number of tomato boxes. Brokers in the rural areas are the ones in direct contact with farmers and are also responsible for grading and packaging. The wholesalers reported that there are brokers in rural areas who charge for sale of cabbages (at Shs 600 per four-ton lorry), kale (at Shs 600 per pickup), and green maize. In Korogocho market, there are brokers for cabbages and maize, while onions cannot attract brokers since most of the onion wholesalers are retailers in the market. In case of kale, brokers charge Shs 150 per pickup. Brokers are in direct contact with retailers and sell to the latter beyond the prices paid to the wholesalers. When prices are low, wholesalers are severely affected because brokerage fees never go down. A broker can sell goods entrusted to him by a wholesaler and disappear with the money. 4.2.2 GITHURAI OPEN AIR MARKET

Githurai open-air market is situated 12 kilometres north of Nairobi along Thika road. In 1991, the Ruiru Municipal Council fenced the market and issued the stalls to the hawkers who pay monthly rent to the municipal council. The market is surrounded by commercial and residential premises of three to four storeys. The market mainly deals with fresh crop produce, dry crop produce, chicken, and new and second-hand
42

clothes. The market supplies fresh and dry crop produce to other estates e.g. Kahawa Sukari, Githurai 44, Kahawa West, Soweto, Mwiki (Kasarani), Ruiru and Zimmerman. When the market was started, a fresh water tap was installed but water was disconnected after about two years. The traders buy water from nearby hotels at one shilling per 20-litre container. There are only four toilets (pit latrines), two for men and two for women, which are always dirty. The traders with stalls near the toilet sometimes clean the toilet to reduce smell coming from the toilet. There are no sewerage facilities in the market and the wider Githurai area. There is no electricity in the market, which forces traders to close early in the evening. The market is very congested, which makes some retailers to sell their goods on the roadside outside the market. The hawkers on the roadside (at the Githurai 45 roundabout) had caused several fatal road accidents where they had made a temporary market. After a major road accident, the hawkers at the roundabout were chased away and had to seek some space in the market. This increased congestion in the market, and some retailers currently sell their commodities outside some shops around the market. The congestion on the road in the market has led to reliance on human carriers and pushcarts due to lack of space for motorised transport. The market has no permanent committee. The committee keeps on changing, and there was none during the period of the survey. Security is provided by watchmen paid by traders. Nobody is allowed inside the market before 6 a.m. and after 7 p.m. The traders outside the market have their own watchmen as their commodities are delivered late at night. Cases of theft in the market are very rare. There are no watchmen during the day. The local authority charges traders Shs 10 per day. Charges on wholesalers are not fixed but range between Shs 300 and Shs 400 depending on the type and quantity of produce delivered. Traders reported that they sometimes pay less cess without getting receipts. During the survey period most of the tomatoes came from Kirinyaga. Rural brokers seek farmers in Mwea to purchase tomatoes from. The brokers charge between Shs 50 and Shs 100 per box of tomato regardless of grade. Those who grade the tomatoes (grades 1 to 3) are paid Shs 50 per box. At Githurai market, brokers determine the prices, as the wholesalers do not have direct contact with the traders in the market. The brokers receive Shs 50-100 per box depending on availability of tomatoes. When the supply is high, brokerage fees are low, but the fees increase when the supply is low. In Githurai market, prices are negotiated between brokers and the wholesalers. During the interview, the farm gate price was Shs 1,000 per box of grade 1 Onex tomatoes. The broker at the farm level received Shs 100 per box of tomatoes, and additional Shs 100 is paid to brokers at Githurai market for the same. The broker then sells the tomatoes to retailers at Shs 1,600 per box. The retailers sell to final consumers and to retailers who sell tomatoes in the housing estates but cannot afford a full box. During the interviews some traders asked whether UN-HABITAT could assist the traders with loans to expand their businesses or support in setting up a permanent market, as Githurai market is small and temporary. The traders were also concerned about poor roads in the rural areas, which delay delivery of produce to the market, especially during the rainy season. They also expressed concern about the brokers in the market, who sometimes refuse to sell in the market thus forcing the traders to search for goods in other markets. The enumerators reported that there could be a few traders who did not give the correct information on transport costs and farm gate prices. However, most traders provided correct information. Many wholesalers did not want the enumerators to record the vehicle registration numbers. The enumerators reported that they covered supply of eggs to the market although they were not included in the questionnaires or their work schedule. There are suspicions that the area occupied by the market has already been allocated to private individuals, while another portion of the market is on road reserve. The market burnt down in February 1997, and it is widely rumoured that the cause of the fire was arson. The Nairobi City Council supplies water to the market although the market belongs to Ruiru Municipal Council.

43

4.2.3

KAWANGWARE MARKET

The name Kawangware is said to have originated from partridge birds (ngware in local dialect) since they used to be very many in the area. Other traders said the name originated from a trader, Mr Ngware, who used to run a retail shop in the area before independence, and the area first acquired the name Kwa-wa-ngware before the name was corrupted to Kawangware. It is an open-air market which mainly deals with fresh and dry crop produce, new and used clothes, and household utensils. It is located about 12 kilometres west of Nairobi. The market started near Precious Blood Secondary School at Riruta about twenty years ago as a roadside market. Thereafter, the traders increased due to population increase in the adjoining slum. After about three years, the traders organised themselves with the assistance of the area chief and moved to the present site of the market. The chief and the local administration were collecting levies ostensibly to help in building the market and improving its infrastructure. When it became evident that the local administration was not using the levies for the intended purposes, the traders formed their own independent organisation. The market was registered in 1999 with 17 committee members and 5 officials of the executive committee. The management committee protects the market from land grabbers and ensures that the stalls are erected in the spaces provided. It also ensures that the levies collected are put into proper use, and proper sanitation facilities and security are provided. There are 518 members. Each member pays Shs 200 as registration fee and a regular Shs 100 per month. For every entry to the market, a loaded lorry pays a maximum of Shs 600, a three-ton Canter (Shs 500), 1-2 ton pickup (Shs 200), cart (Shs 70) and head load (Shs 10). There is an additional fee of Shs 20 per bag, Shs 30 per extended bag, and Shs 15 per crate/box. The facilities and amenities include: (a) (b) (c) Water is obtained from boreholes outside the market as the metered water supply was disconnected. There are seven pit latrines (four for women and three for men) and one urinal pit. The toilets are not adequate. All the toilets are functional but are not clean. There are two roads leading to the market. There is great congestion during the main market days (Tuesdays and Fridays). It is normally difficult for motorised suppliers and customers to enter the market. The roads are not tarmacked and have potholes. Security in the market is adequate because there are seven watchmen, four during the day and three at night. The market is walled by surrounding buildings, apart from one side of the market. The stalls are built of temporary materials. The walls are made of wood and are poorly roofed with polythene papers. The parking and offloading area is not adequate. Each trader is responsible for storage of his/her goods. They do not have storage facilities and goods are therefore left in the open at night and only covered to protect them from rain. There is no electricity in the market. The market is open and clean. Garbage is collected daily by a private garbage collector contracted by the management committee.

(d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i)

Fresh crop produce is brought to the market on the main market days (Tuesdays and Fridays). The fresh produce includes green maize, English potatoes, sugarcane, cabbage, kale, bananas, tomatoes, onions, pineapples, carrots, avocados, mangoes, spinach and coriander leaves (dania). Dry foods (mainly maize and beans) are brought from other Nairobi markets, mainly Nyamakima. Business is conducted in the open. The business booms during market days and month-end. Food is mainly brought into the market in lorries and
44

pickups. The main problems faced by wholesalers are unavailability of cash for purchase of food, selling to retailers in the market on credit, and demands for bribes by traffic police en route to the market. The traders in Kawangware market also sell to smaller retailers in the surrounding areas. There are no brokers as the committee does not allow them to operate there. The enumerators reported that the fieldwork should have been longer so as to capture variations in quantities and sources of food over time. They suggested that future surveys should preferably cover one year as sources of food, quantities and prices vary according to season. 4.2.4 KANGEMI MARKET

The market is located about 8 kilometres west of Nairobi. The market started alongside Waiyaki way in 1973. The area chief recognised the danger of traffic accidents on the busy highway and allocated them a new place where the current market is situated. Initially, the market was dominated by three types of women groups (Pot industries, Kanini Kega and Mukuogo women groups) although men also infiltrated the market. The main activities were selling clothes, pots and foodstuffs in the open. In 1993, the traders held their first elections for a committee to run the market. In 1997, the area district officer (DO) gave individual traders permission to build stalls so that they could store their merchandise overnight. The management committee consists of ten selected from the traders and another ten appointed by the DO. They are all unsalaried but enjoy some sitting allowance. The roles of the committee are to ensure cleanliness, attend to disputes, ensure fair allocation of stalls, advocacy on behalf of members, and to provide security. There are five paid workers (one cleaner and four watchmen). The sources of revenue are Shs 50 per crate of tomatoes, which is levied on wholesalers, and daily fees to those who own stalls and those occupying trading spaces in the market. There is piped water supplied by the City Council. The two toilets (pit latrine and flush toilet) were functional and clean. The security was good given the presence of four watchmen, barbed wire fence, and a stonewall on one side. There is minimal theft of merchandise. The watchmen are paid from the levies collected. The stalls are made of iron sheet walls and roofs. The parking and offloading area is occupied by traders who they refer to as aliens. Traders store their merchandise in their stalls. There is no general lighting but traders have connected their stalls to the main electricity grid. The market is clean as garbage is cleared daily. The main business conducted in the market was sale of kale, cabbages, tomatoes, English potatoes, spinach, oranges, dry maize, bananas, onions, mangoes, sugarcane, sweet potatoes, green maize, pineapples, carrots, and small quantities of grain legumes (e.g. green grams, beans, peas). The wholesalers who deliver fresh produce to the market reported that the quality of the roads where the food comes from varies. In Kinare (in Lari, Kiambu), donkey carts are normally used during the rainy season, while tractors are used in Narok to bring food to more passable roads. The main market days are Mondays and Thursdays when commodities like cabbages, kale, carrots, English potatoes, spinach and dania are brought to the market. The market has both open ground and stalls. Other goods sold in the market are second hand clothes, kitchenware, travelling bags, electronics and chicken. There was hardly any produce from urban agriculture. The retailers in the market buy directly from the wholesalers. There are no brokers in the main market. However, in the roadside market called Kinare, there may occasionally be brokers who earn Shs 50 per box/crate (or Shs 700 per pickup) of tomatoes. The market is owned by 660 members. The market burnt down on 4 August 2000 and most of the traders have not recovered from the loss. A rival group has occupied the parking bay and made it an open-air market. The members of the main market have complained about the latter group to the provincial administration since it is next to the highway and blocks access to the main market. The traders in the main market are refusing to pay the daily access fee of Shs 10 until the dispute is resolved. There are therefore two parallel markets, and the open market was selling goods cheaper than the main market.

45

The enumerators reported that the contents of the questionnaire fulfilled the purpose, but it was impossible to use the A3 size questionnaire when it rained. The enumerators therefore wrote down the responses in the notebooks provided and transferred the notes to the questionnaires in the evenings. In addition, the enumerators should have been issued with identification cards/badges. The enumerators complained that it was risky starting work at 5 a.m. The traders complained that the enumerators were asking questions for two weeks without buying anything. 4.2.5 FIG TREE MARKET

Fig Tree market is located in Ngaara, about two kilometres from the City Centre. It owes its name from the neighbouring Fig Tree hotel. It was started in the early sixties by individual hawkers. When it was started, it was referred to as kaaheho (cold) or kaariua (scorching sun) because the hawkers used to arrive very early in the morning in the cold and spend the whole day under the scorching sun. The hawkers started the market on shop verandas. Later, the City Council allocated the hawkers the area currently known as Nyayo market, where the hawkers erected temporary stalls. However, the majority of the hawkers sold the stalls to new traders and returned to Fig Tree. There was an enormous increase of new traders at Fig Tree market thereafter. The City Council again allocated the traders the current City Park market on Forest road. The hawkers again sold the allotted space in City Park market and went back to Fig Tree. Fig Tree market operates illegally and on illegal ground (shop verandas). The hawkers have elected a committee to govern the operations of the market that also safeguard the interests of the hawkers and the market as a whole. The committee does not collect any revenue from the traders. The City Council does not collect any revenue in the market, but collects garbage from the market every two weeks. A new entrant to the market pays Shs 4,000 to the management committee. The hawkers use water purchased from a kiosk. The nearest public toilet does not flush, is dirty and unhygienic. The two roads serving the market, Limuru and Kipande roads, are in good condition. There are four private stores nearby which charge traders small fees for keeping their goods overnight. The hawkers have employed a sweeper for cleaning the market and putting all garbage in one central location. The wage of the sweeper is paid through daily contributions by traders of Shs 10 each. The main business conducted in the market is sale of fresh crop produce (mainly vegetables), some dry crop produce, shoes and second hand clothes. The fresh crop produce includes kale, spinach, saget, dania, cabbage, potatoes, tomatoes, pineapples, nightshade (managu), pumpkin leaves, green maize, green pepper, red onions, bananas (from Kisii and Tanzania) and spices (from Sotik and Uganda). There are also small quantities of spices (kavya, chilli and brinjals). The market operates daily with an estimated 10% of food supplies coming from Gikomba and Wakulima markets. The dry crop produce comes from markets and shops in Nairobi. Most of the customers are from the vicinity, although some retailers from Kibera and Ngumba estates also buy their food from the market. The volume of food sold in the market and the prevailing prices solely depend on the weather as 90% of the food flows from farms directly to market. An estimated 40% of the traders are farmers selling their own produce while 60% purchase food from farmers. Most of the traders who are not farmers purchase their stocks directly from farmers right in their farms without involving brokers or middlemen. Traders-cumfarmers complained of regular bribes to police, especially between Wangige and the market. There are no brokers in the market. Table 4.1 below shows the value of the main food items purchased for sale in Fig Tree market during the reference period. The food items in the Table represented 76.5% of the purchases made by the traders for resale, including those from other markets in Nairobi. The main food item in terms of value was kale, followed by potatoes, cabbages, spinach, tomatoes and onions. The main source of kale was the neighbouring Kiambu district, especially Wangige. The main source of potatoes and cabbages was Nyandarua, while most of the spinach was from Kiambu. The market is therefore heavily dependent on produce from Wangige; witness the large number of minibuses that ferry crop produce from Wangige to Fig Tree market in the afternoons.
46

Table 4.1: The Value of Main Food Items Purchased for Sale in Fig Market (Shs) Source Value Nairobi Kiambu Kirinyaga Nyandarua Nyeri Meru Nakuru Total % Nairobi Kiambu Kirinyaga Nyandarua Nyeri Meru Nakuru Total Potatoes 12,650 1,200 0 42,560 0 6,000 0 62,410 20.27 1.92 0.00 68.19 0.00 9.61 0.00 100.00 Cabbages 0 4,105 0 37,150 0 600 17,500 59,355 0.00 6.92 0.00 62.59 0.00 1.01 29.48 100.00 Kale 300 80,841 0 0 0 0 0 81,141 0.37 99.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 Spinach 30 43,850 0 450 0 2,000 0 46,330 0.06 94.65 0.00 0.97 0.00 4.32 0.00 100.00 Tomatoes 0 0 11,600 0 0 22,400 0 34,000 0.00 0.00 34.12 0.00 0.00 65.88 0.00 100.00 Onions 8,600 0 0 0 19,500 0 0 28,100 30.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 69.40 0.00 0.00 100.00 Total 21,580 129,996 11,600 80,160 19,500 31,000 17,500 311,336 6.93 41.75 3.73 25.75 6.26 9.96 5.62 100.00

The enumerators reported that the interview schedule of markets should have been given to the enumerators at the beginning of the survey. The data is reliable due to respondent cooperation and two weeks is a considerable time span for such a survey. There was only one enumerator on the first day of the survey, which might have led to some under-counting. In addition, due to laxity of the enumerator originally allocated to cover the market, there was no enumeration on the first Saturday afternoon and the following Sunday morning. 4.2.6 KAKA

Kaka retail market was started by farmers and traders who were selling fresh crop produce delivered from Kisii country. The bus stage and market are named after the oldest bar and restaurant in the vicinity of the stage. It was not possible to establish when the market was started. The market does not have any facilities or amenities as it is situated at the bus terminus for buses from and to Kisii. The traders sell produce from their own farms, procure produce from farmers by prior arrangement, or purchase from farmers when the produce reach the bus terminus. The farm produce sold includes bananas, sugarcane, sweet potatoes and traditional vegetables (e.g. sagaa and nightshade). All the food comes from Kisii country. There is no food from other markets in Nairobi. The volume of business in the market is quite low. The total volume of business per day consists of about 300 bunches of bananas and 20 sacks of traditional vegetables, while sugarcane and sweet potatoes are not traded every day. The traders complained of the poor conditions of access roads where they get the fresh produce from. 4.2.7 DANDORA

Dandora estate has three main open-air markets: 41, Paradise and Terminus. Market 41 is adjacent to the City Council market and derived its name from Route 41 bus stage in Dandora Phase 4. Market 41 started after the construction of the City Council market. Paradise lies in the open space between Dandora Phase 3 and Phase 4 next to Tom Mboya primary school. Paradise derives its name from a nearby bar by the same name. It is also known as Catholic because of its proximity to Dandora Catholic Church. Paradise initially occupied a large area but has since shrunk as plots are given out to private developers. Terminus is situated at the Dandora bus terminus and is a cluster of stalls and open spaces by the roadside.

47

All the three markets started in the early eighties as construction of houses in Dandora gained momentum and population increased. As is common with most open-air markets, they started with one or two people spreading their wares in open spaces and gradually grew as more traders moved in. The main produce sold in the markets was leafy vegetables and fruits. The main sources of produce to Dandora are wholesale markets within Nairobi e.g. Korogocho, Wakulima and Gikomba. A few traders travel to rural markets, e.g. to Kagio (in Kirinyaga district) and Thika, to purchase produce. Other traders buy leafy vegetables from farms neighbouring Dandora. The main sources of fresh crop produce grown within Nairobi were Mowlem, Mrenyo, Maili Saba, Quarry and Silanga, which are all within two kilometres from the markets. The traders were not willing to reveal that some of their produce was from wastewater farms in Nairobi, as it would make some customers to shy away from their produce. There are also instances when traders buy from wholesalers who bring produce to Dandora. The markets do not have management committees and traders do not pay any levies to the City Council. The common feature in these markets is the phenomenon of space owners. Regardless of whether the space is open or covered with makeshift structures, individuals who might be present or absentee landlords own the spaces. Rent payable to the landlords range from Shs 200 to 500 per month depending on the size and development therein. The markets do not have any facilities or amenities e.g. water, toilets, security, storage, lighting or garbage disposal. The road network to Dandora is good following the recent rehabilitation of roads in the area. The traders who buy from rural markets stay overnight and thus incur expenses e.g. accommodation and transport. For those who buy from farmers in Nairobi, the traders harvest, say, kale and then buy the harvested produce at the agreed price per unit of measurement e.g. bundles of kale of Shs 50, Shs 30 or Shs 10. These farms depend on irrigation mostly from wastewater and are small in size. However, these farms are presently being allocated to private developers and therefore the size and number of farms is dwindling. Traders who buy from farmers in Nairobi use head-load to transport the produce although there is occasional use of pushcarts. Dandora are primarily retail markets and there are therefore no brokers. During enumeration, kilograms per unit were not easy to determine especially for leafy vegetables which were reported in bunches (e.g. kale) and number (e.g. vegetables). Transport costs for some items like potatoes were inclusive of cost of purchase. Most traders buy tomatoes from suppliers at points like Korogocho or Gikomba markets but have the produce delivered at no extra cost. The normal arrangement is for the trader to pay half the purchase price at the point of purchase and the balance after delivery. Some wholesalers also deliver fresh produce directly to the markets. The respondents were generally cooperative although some fatigue crept in as the survey progressed. This was manifested by enquiries like: Why do you visit us every day? Are we going to be given loans? Are two weeks not over yet? In many respects, the survey was a success. There were no incidents of refusal. Although respondent fatigue crept in towards the end, this did not affect the accuracy of the responses. The only problem encountered was in identification of respondents at the beginning of the survey. It was, however, resolved that the survey only covers those traders buying directly from suppliers and Nairobi farmers. This was to avoid counting food already covered in other markets included in the survey. Average cost per unit could be different for the same produce on the same day depending on source. In the case of tomato e.g. Kamongo variety, there are grades ranging from 1 to 5. The units of purchase were also different e.g. spinach could be purchased by traders in bundles of Shs 30 or Shs 50. 4.2.8 DOONHOLM MARKET

Doonholm was previously a dairy farm known as Doonholm Estate, and named after Glasgows Doonholm Estate where its owner J.K. Watson hailed from. Doonholm market had very little business at the time of the survey due to road construction. Most of the traders had moved to other markets due to lack of space. The few who remained buy their goods from other markets in Nairobi e.g. Gikomba and Retail market. Data
48

collection was therefore suspended on the second day of the survey, as the Nairobi markets that provided the food to Doonholm retailers were included in the survey. 4.2.9 NYAMAKIMA MARKET

The area in which the shops are located (Nyamakima) got its name from a bar and restaurant by the same name at the then Nyahururu-Nakuru bus terminus. Nyama is Kiswahili word for meat while kima is minced meat/ ground beef. Nyamakima market was started in the early sixties by Asians and a few African traders. It started mainly with potatoes, vegetables and onions. One of the stores is still known as Duka ya Viazi (potato shop). The specialisation with sales of cereals and dry grain legumes took place around 1973. The shops are housed in permanent premises. The market does not have a management committee and each trader controls the operations of his/her shop. Congestion is common during offloading of cereals. The situation is made worse by retailers of fresh crop produce who display their goods on the road, thus making the space available to transporters even narrower. Every trader ensures security of his own store. Most of them have installed burglar-proof grille doors. The main business conducted is wholesale and retail of dry cereals and grain legumes e.g. maize, muthokoi, beans (several varieties), rice (several varieties), njugu, njahi, green grams, groundnuts, kunde, njugu mawe, wheat, millet and peas. These products have diverse origins e.g. beans come from Busia, Namanga, Tanzania and Meru. Maize originates from Kitale and Eldoret. Rice comes from Mwea (Kirinyaga district) while the rest is imported. Njugu and kunde come from Ukambani, mainly Kitui; while peas, green grams and groundnuts come from Tanzania. Other cereals like muthokoi are easily obtained from millers at Gikomba. There is fresh produce business conducted in the street that usually starts in the afternoon. There are no restrictions on entry as long as one acquires a shop and pays City Council licences. Most of the produce to this market does not come from farmers directly but from rural cereal stores where farmers sell their produce. These rural stores eventually sell to wholesalers who deliver the cereals to Nyamakima. Brokers do not have a significant role in this market. More than 80% of the selected respondents were interviewed. The few who did not respond claimed that they were new in the business, while others thought that the information collected might jeopardise future operations of their businesses. Others were reluctant to provide such information. Most respondents said the questionnaire was too cumbersome. The questionnaire occupied a big space at the shop counter, and a smaller one should have been used. The information collected in the survey is very reliable.

49

CHAPTER 5: DELIVERIES OF FRESH AND DRY CROP PRODUCE TO NAIROBI MARKETS

Data on deliveries of fresh crop produce was collected from Wakulima, Gikomba, Retail, Toi, Ngaara, City Park, Mutindwa, Korogocho, Githurai, Kawangware, Kangemi, Fig Tree, Kaka and Dandora markets. City Market was excluded from the survey as most of the fresh crop produce (fruits and vegetables) is bought from other markets in Nairobi (mainly Wakulima and Gikomba). The analysis covers the suppliers of crop produce (by gender), the commodities delivered (by gender of wholesaler and value of food delivered), source of produce, transport used, quantities delivered to each market and by whom, and inter-market trade. The data on inter-market trade has high under-coverage since enumerators in City Council markets did not record food deliveries whose cess had been levied in other City Council markets.

5.1
5.1.1 All Markets

ALL MARKETS EXCLUDING NYAMAKIMA

DISTRIBUTION OF WHOLESALERS BY SEX

Table 5.1 shows the distribution of wholesalers by market and sex. Since the table excludes the types of food delivered, a single visit by a trader is counted once regardless of the number of different types of food delivered. Overall, male suppliers comprised 74.0% and female suppliers 26.0% of the total. It is only in Fig Tree and Dandora where there were more females than males. In Fig Tree, females constituted 53.5% of the traders, compared with 85.0% in Dandora. This is mainly because enumerators in Fig Tree and Dandora markets solicited information from retailers rather than suppliers. The males (excluding Fig Tree and Dandora) were 81.2%, compared with 74.0% when the two retail markets are included. Table 5.1 also shows the mean value of produce delivered by market and sex of wholesaler. Overall, males had a higher value of produce per delivery compared to females. However, the positions are reversed when Fig Tree and Dandora retail markets are excluded from the mean value of deliveries. Dandora had the lowest value of produce per trader (retailer in this case) at Shs 982, followed by Fig Tree (Shs 1,230), and Mutindwa (Shs 2,805). The mean value of stocks for males in Fig Tree and Dandora were far much higher than those for females. The daily turnover by retailers in Fig Tree and Dandora were very low. In addition, the mean value of produce on display in the two markets could be lower than daily sales as traders were not replenishing their stocks on a daily basis. Tables 5.2 (a-f) shows the distribution of wholesalers by sex and type of food delivered. Unlike Table 5.1, Tables 5.2 (a-f) counts the number of different food commodities delivered. For example, a wholesaler who delivers potatoes and bananas is counted twice, first for delivery of potatoes and second for delivery of bananas. In case of cereals (mainly green maize), males outnumbered females in a ratio of 3.24 to 1. In Wakulima, all wholesalers of green maize were males. Males outnumbered females in delivery of green maize (ratio of 7.41:1), while the reverse was true for dry maize (0.77 to 1) and rice (0.50 to 1). The male wholesalers of starchy roots and tubers (mainly potatoes) outnumbered females in a ratio of 3.17 to 1. The main starchy roots and tuber (potatoes) had a ratio of 3.51 to 1. Males outnumbered females in the delivery of potatoes, while the reverse was true for sweet potatoes (0.72 to 1). In Wakulima, the ratio of male suppliers of starchy roots and tubers to females was 4.11:1. In the case of grain legumes, the number of male wholesalers was almost equal to that of females. However, the ratio of male suppliers of grain legumes (green peas and French beans) to females in Wakulima was 58 males for one female. The ratio of male to female suppliers of leafy vegetables was 1.11:1, although there were no females that were reported as having supplied vegetables to Wakulima market. In the case of other vegetables (tomatoes, carrots, onions, pumpkins, cucumber, brinjals, capsicum, chilli, karela, okra, garlic, kojet, dudi, lavaya, ginger

50

and green bullet), males outnumbered females by a ratio of 5.06 to 1. In the case of fruits, males outnumbered females by a ratio of 3.21 to 1. All Markets excluding Fig Tree and Dandora In case of cereals (mainly green maize), the males outnumbered females in a ratio of 4.21 to 1. In Wakulima, all wholesalers of green maize were males. Males outnumbered females in delivery of green maize (ratio of 9.62 to 1), while the reverse was true for dry maize (0.77 to 1) and rice (0.71 to 1). The male wholesalers of starchy roots and tubers (mainly potatoes) outnumbered females in a ratio of 3.56 to 1. The main starchy roots and tuber (potatoes) had a ratio of 3.91. Males outnumbered females in the delivery of potatoes, while the reverse was true for sweet potatoes (0.87 to 1). In the case of grain legumes, male wholesalers outnumbered females in a ratio of 4.83 to 1. The ratio of male to female suppliers of leafy vegetables was 8.23 to 1, although there were no females that were reported as having supplied leafy vegetables to Wakulima. In the case of other vegetables, males outnumbered females by a ratio of 6.53 to 1. In the case of fruits, males outnumbered females by a ratio of 3.29 to 1. 5.1.2 All Markets Tables 5.3 (a-f) shows the value of food delivered by sex of wholesaler. This is in contrast with Tables 5.2 (af) which presented a count of the number of wholesalers. The ratio of value of food delivered by males is compared with that delivered by females in each market and for every crop variety. Where the ratio of males to females computed over value of food (Table 5.3) exceed that of females computed over number of food deliveries (the corresponding Table 5.2), this implies that males delivered higher average value of the commodity for each delivery. A comparison of Table 5.3(a) and 5.2(a) shows that males delivered about double the value of green maize (the main cereal in the surveyed markets) delivered by females. Overall, males delivered about 1.24 times the value of cereals delivered by females for each visit. In the case of starchy roots and tubers, male wholesalers supplied slightly more than females for each visit. The ratio was almost the same for potatoes and sweet potatoes. In the case of grain legumes the value of delivery by males exceeded that of females almost five times, while in the case of leafy vegetables, the ratio was almost nine times. However, in the case of other vegetables and fruits, females delivered more value of produce per visit than males. All Markets excluding Fig Tree and Dandora A comparison of Tables 5.3(a) and 5.2(a) shows that males delivered green maize 1.53 times that delivered by females for every visit. Overall, males delivered almost the same value of cereals as that delivered by females. In the case of starchy roots and tubers, male wholesalers supplied almost the same as females for each visit. The ratio was also almost the same for potatoes. In the case of grain legumes, the value of delivery by males exceeded that of females by 23.0%, while in the case of vegetables, males delivered 35.6% more than females. However, in the case of other vegetables, women delivered more per visit (0.48 to 1). In the case of fruits, females delivered more value per visit than males (0.79 to 1). 5.1.3 DISTRIBUTION OF WHOLESALERS BY SEX AND SOURCE OF FOOD DISTRIBUTION OF WHOLESALERS BY SEX AND VALUE OF FOOD

Table 5.4 shows the distribution of wholesalers by sex and source of food. The table counts the number of food commodities rather than visits by traders, since a trader could have delivered commodities from different locations but within one visit. Most of the deliveries of French beans were rejected grades from the

51

Airport, and did not therefore indicate the original source. However, French beans for export are normally procured from Meru, Kirinyaga and Nyandarua. Overall, males constituted 69.2% of commodity deliveries, compared with 30.8% for females. Among the main food sources with a minimum of 100 deliveries - the highest ratio of males was recorded in Rift Valley (88.4%), followed by Nyanza (85.4%), Eastern (76.3%), Central (75.9%), and other East Africa Uganda and Tanzania - (54.1%). As shown in Table 5.5, overall, males constituted 77.5% of value of commodity deliveries, compared with 25.5% for females. Among the main food sources with a minimum of 100 deliveries - the highest ratio of males was recorded in Rift Valley (89.3%), followed by Nyanza (83.1%), Central (81.9%), Eastern (80.4%), and other East Africa (48.6%). Table 5.5 also shows the value of each commodity delivered by sex. The mean values of deliveries by commodity were lowest in Nairobi and areas adjacent to Nairobi e.g. Kiambu, and highest for imports from Tanzania and Uganda. The provinces where males delivered higher value per commodity visit than females were Nairobi, Central, Eastern, Rift Valley and Western province. However, female wholesalers from Coast, Nyanza, and the rest of East Africa (Tanzania and Uganda) had higher values of deliveries of commodities per visit. The value of commodities per visit has implications on transport costs per shilling of commodity, in addition to the fact that a traders personal costs (e.g. food and accommodation) may be unrelated to value of food delivery. One would expect efficiency gains in larger deliveries, especially from the more distant sources of food. 5.1.4 Cereals Tables 5.6 (a-g) shows the sources of food commodities sold in the markets covered by the survey. The tables exclude deliveries of produce that were identified as emanating from other markets in Nairobi. The results for Nairobi therefore refer to produce from urban agriculture, as inter-market flows have been excluded from the analysis. However, this may lead to slight under-estimation of food inflows as some of the food reported as coming from other Nairobi markets may actually refer to markets that were not included in the survey. Table 5.6a shows 70.4% of cereals (mainly green maize) came from Central province (mainly Nyandarua) followed by Rift Valley (15.5%). The main cereal by value was green maize (74.1%), followed by dry maize (14.4%), rice (8.5%) and sorghum (3.1%). In the case of green maize, the main districts were Nyandarua (80.9%) in Central province and Nakuru (14.4%) in Rift Valley province. The only source of rice was Kirinyaga district. The main sources of dry maize were Eastern province (in Makueni only) at 21.1%, Rift Valley (26.2%) and Uganda (28.2%). The districts with the highest supply of dry maize were Makueni (21.1%), Kakamega (14.6%), and Uasin Gishu (14.4%), which is considered as the maize granary of Kenya. All the sorghum captured in the survey was delivered from Makueni district in Eastern province. Starchy Roots and Tubers Table 5.6b shows that the main sources of starchy roots and tubers were Central province (83.0%) and Rift Valley (14.1%). The main producing districts were Nyandarua (81.8%), Bomet (8.2%) and Narok (4.4%). Potatoes accounted for 97.9% of the value of starchy roots and tubers. The main sources of potatoes were Central province (84.3%) and Rift Valley (14.4%). The main potato producing districts were Nyandarua (83.5%), Bomet (8.4%) and Narok (4.5%). The main sources of sweet potatoes were Western province (53.9%), Nyanza (29.5%) and Uganda (11.8%). Kisii (25.7%) and Bungoma (45.6%) jointly accounted for 71.4% of deliveries of sweet potatoes. SOURCES OF FOOD

52

All the deliveries of arrowroots were from Central (79.7%) mainly Maragwa and Muranga districts - and Uganda (20.3%). All the cassava and yams deliveries recorded were from Muranga and Maragwa. Grain Legumes The main grain legumes were green peas (50.7%), followed by beans (31.3%), dry kunde (9.8%) and dengu (7.7%). The main sources of grain legumes were Central province (39.6%), Eastern (20.9%), Rift Valley (19.3%) and Uganda (17.7%). The main producing districts were Nyandarua (32.1%), Makueni (20.4%) and Nakuru (18.3%). The main sources of green peas were Nyandarua (63.3%) and Nakuru (36.0%). The main sources of beans were Uganda (56.5%), Thika (18.8%), Makueni (10.0%) and Kisii (7.6%). The only sources of kunde were Makueni (97.9%) and Kakamega (2.1%), while the only source of dengu was Makueni district (100.0%). Leafy Vegetables6 The main leafy vegetables were cabbages (64.4% of value), kale (29.2%), spinach (2.9%) and nightshade (1.4%). The main sources of leafy vegetables were Central (73.5%) and Rift Valley (23.3%). The main sources of leafy vegetables by district were Kiambu (28.8%), Nyandarua (22.9%), Nyeri (13.4%) and Nakuru (22.3%). The main sources of cabbages were Central province (63.6%) and Rift Valley (35.8%), while the main producing districts were Nyandarua (35.6%), Nyeri (20.5%) and Nakuru (34.7%). The main source of kale was Central province (98.5%), mainly from Kiambu (77.0%) and Thika (20.7%). The main sources of spinach were Central (85.2%) and Nairobi province (13.1%), while Kiambu contributed 78.7% of total spinach deliveries. All the supply of coriander leaves (dania) and lettuce was from Kiambu. The traditional vegetables were specific to particular communities (and areas). For example, virtually all supply of nightshade (managu) was from Kisii, while kunde leaves were either from Kakamega (48.0%), Kisumu (22.6%), Kiambu (16.4%) or Nairobi (13.0%). Almost all the pumpkin leaves were from Nairobi, while terere, kahurura, and saget were from Kiambu. There were also some traditional vegetables whose main source was the Kisii country e.g. sagaa. The only deliveries that were from farmers within Nairobi province were in the category of leafy vegetables, where the total value from all the markets was only Shs 37,871. The main commodities were spinach, kale, cabbages and kunde leaves. Other Vegetables The main food commodity in the category of other vegetables was tomato (55.9%), followed by onions (29.0%) and carrots (11.0%). The main sources of other vegetables were Kirinyaga (44.7%), Nyandarua (11.8%) and Tanzania (23.3%). The main suppliers of tomatoes were Kirinyaga (79.8%), Nyandarua (5.4%), Thika (5.3%) and Nyeri (5.0%). The main suppliers of onions were Tanzania (78.7%), Kajiado (12.9%) and Nyandarua (4.6%). The main suppliers of carrots were Nyandarua (67.6%) and Narok (26.0%). Among the other vegetables were minor suppliers of pumpkins, cucumber, capsicum and garlic. The main suppliers of pumpkins were Meru (39.5%), Bomet (37.9%) and Machakos (12.8%). The main suppliers of cucumber were Thika (69.2%) and Maragwa (27.5%). All the capsicum was from Central province, mainly

During the debriefing of enumerators at the end of the fieldwork, some enumerators claimed that the trainers mixed up mchicha (pigweed) and terere (amaranthus), and identified amaranthus as mchicha and pigweed as terere. This is not likely to affect the quality of data since the respondents knew the names of the vegetables by their African/Kiswahili names and the enumerators recorded local names during enumeration.
6

53

Thika (12.4%) and Nyeri (83.3%). All the garlic was from Meru (49.2%) and Bomet (50.8%). Thika supplied all the karela (bitter gourd) and green bullet, while all ginger was from Uganda. Fruits The main fruits delivered to the markets were bananas (56.2% of total value), oranges (17.2%), pineapples (6.8%), avocados (6.1%) and mangoes (6.0%). The main sources of fruits were Eastern province (25.1%), Central province (20.5%), Nyanza (14.6%), Coast (10.9%) and the rest of East Africa (28.3%). The main districts were Meru (18.8%), Kisii (14.4%) and Thika (9.8%), while Tanzania contributed 19.7% of total value. The main sources of bananas were Eastern (31.2%), Nyanza (23.6%), Coast (12.3%), and the rest of East Africa (22.8%). The main districts that supplied bananas were Meru (28.1%), Kisii (23.5%), Taita Taveta (12.3%) and Kirinyaga (7.0%), while Uganda contributed 15.0% and Tanzania 7.7%. The results do not distinguish between ripe and green bananas since all bananas are delivered while green. The main sources of oranges were Tanzania (89.2%) and Coast province (8.5%). An estimated 98.0% of pineapples were delivered from Thika, while 93.1% of avocados were from Central province (mainly Thika and Maragwa). The main sources of mangoes were Eastern province (67.1%) and Coast (23.0%). Nuts and Seeds All groundnuts were from Homa Bay (45.5%) and Migori (54.5%). All the supplies of coconuts and dafu were from Coast, with coconut from Mombasa and dafu from Kilifi. Deliveries by Broad Commodity Groups Table 5.7 shows the total value of deliveries by broad food categories. The table shows that the survey captured inflows of food worth about Shs 80 million, excluding inter-market flows. The table also excludes the main market for cereals and dry grain legumes (Nyamakima). The main food category was roots and tubers (39.4% of value), followed by other vegetables (26.2%), fruits (18.2%), leafy vegetables (7.2%), cereals (6.2%), grain legumes (2.9%), and nuts and seeds (0.1%). Overall, Central province contributed 64.1%, followed by the rest of East Africa (12.1%), Rift Valley (11.2%), Eastern (6.8%), Nyanza (3.1%), Coast (2.1%) and Western province (0.6%). The contribution of Nairobi province was insignificant. The districts/countries with the highest contribution were Nyandarua (41.6%) and Kirinyaga (13.2%), while Tanzania contributed 9.6%. Table 5.8 shows the relative shares of deliveries of crop produce for the surveyed markets. Overall, the main market was Wakulima with 57.1% of the total value of produce delivered, followed by Gikomba (13.5%) and Korogocho (10.8%). The low share of Korogocho relative to Wakulima was not surprising as Korogocho has two main market days in a week (Wednesdays and Saturdays), compared with seven days in Wakulima. The shares of the markets in total food deliveries should be interpreted with caution, as the survey coverage is expected to be higher in markets that were not enumerated by City Council staff. 5.1.5 TYPES OF TRANSPORT

Table 5.9 shows the types of transport used to deliver food to the markets. The main type of transport used was lorry (48.2%), followed by pickup (20.3%), matatu (14.2%), pushcart (9.1%), head-load (5.3%) and bus (2.7%). For the purpose of the survey, head-load meant human carrier rather than carrying loads on ones head. Other than for small retail markets (e.g. Dandora), the responses on head-load and pushcarts mainly refer to the mode of transport of delivering crop produce from a bus or lorry depot to the market. For example, a trader in Gikomba who bought bananas at Kaka (transported by bus from Kisii) and transported them by pushcart was to report the mode of transport as pushcart rather than bus. This is because such respondents may not be aware of the modes of transport used to deliver the food to Nairobi.

54

The market with the highest incidence of lorry was Wakulima (81.4%), while the least were Mutindwa (9.1%), Fig Tree (0.8%) and Dandora (0.4%). The highest incidence of pickup was reported in City Park (61.4%), followed by Korogocho (60.0%) and Githurai (55.6%). The highest incidence of matatu was reported in Fig Tree (80.2%), followed by Mutindwa (31.8%). The highest incidence of bus was reported in Kaka (47.8%), followed by Ngaara (29.2%) and Retail Market (26.5%). Table 5.10 shows the distribution of modes of transport by source of food. The main type of transport used was lorry (51.9%), followed by pickup (19.6%), matatu (13.4%), pushcart (6.6%), head-load (5.6%) and bus (2.7%). The highest incidence of use of lorry was Tanzania (96.1%), while the lowest was Coast province (41.7%). The highest incidence of pickup was in Central province (25.9%), while the highest incidence of matatu was also Central province (18.2%). The district with the highest incidence of matatu was Kiambu, mainly because of its proximity to Nairobi. Table 5.11 shows the contributions of cost of food, transport costs, and other costs to the landed value of food in Nairobi. The cost of food refers to the purchase at source, and not in Nairobi. Overall, the cost of food was 68.1%, compared with 22.0% for transport costs, and 10.0% for other costs (including packaging, market access charged by the City Council and market management committees, and other transaction costs). The contribution of transport costs to the total is fairly uniform. Ideally, the proportion of transport costs should increase with distance to food source. However, exorbitant charges and low volumes of food transported explain the relatively high share of transport costs over short distances. 5.1.6 DISTRIBUTION OF WHOLESALERS BY WHETHER TRADED IN OWN PRODUCE Table 5.12 shows the distribution of wholesalers by whether traded in own produce. The table shows that, overall, only 4.5% of the traders dealt in own produce. The highest incidence of trading in own produce was for other vegetables (8.4%), followed by leafy vegetables (6.8%); and none for grain legumes and nuts and seeds.

5.2

FOOD DELIVERED TO NYAMAKIMA

The reference period for food deliveries to Nyamakima was one month, while the reference period for other markets was 14 days. Tables 5.13a and 5.13b show that food worth close to Shs 114 million was purchased by traders in Nyamakima for resale. This excludes the traders who did not respond for various reasons, i.e. the data was not weighted to accommodate nonresponse. The responses shows that the types of food purchased by the traders were maize (dry and muthokoi), rice, millet, wheat, beans, dengu, njugu, njahi, kunde, dry peas and groundnuts. Beans represented 45.3% of the total value, followed by rice (13.6%), groundnuts (9.6%), dry peas (7.9%), dengu (7.7%), njahi (6.5%), dry maize (4.3%), njugu (3.1%), kunde (1.6%), millet (0.2%) and wheat (0.0%). The main sources of beans were Kajiado (68.9% of total weight), followed by Busia (14.2%). The two sources of rice were imports (70.6%) and Kirinyaga (29.4%). The sources of imported rice were Pakistan and Vietnam. The main sources of groundnuts were Tanzania (85.3%) and Meru (12.6%). The main sources of dry peas were Tanzania (61.4%) and Garissa (34.5%). The main sources of dengu were Kitui (76.3%) and Busia (16.4%). The main sources of njahi were Taita Taveta (47.8%), Kajiado (38.3%) and Tanzania (9.4%). The main sources of njugu were Kitui (69.6%), followed by Tanzania (17.8%) and Kajiado (12.3%). The main sources of kunde were Machakos (58.2%) and Kitui (39.1%). The only source of millet was Tanzania, while the only source of wheat was Narok. The relative contribution of each source was also computed over value of produce to take into account differences in varieties and prices. Overall, 35.2% of the value of food deliveries to Nyamakima came from Kajiado, followed by Tanzania (18.3%), Kitui (8.7%), imports from outside East Africa (7.5%), and Busia (7.3%). The overall contribution of imports (including East Africa) was 25.92%.

55

5.3

TOTAL DELIVERIES OF FOOD TO ALL SURVEYED MARKETS

Table 5.14 shows the value of crop produce supplied to all markets covered in the survey, including Nyamakima. Since the survey covered 14 consecutive days in all markets except Nyamakima (where the reference period was a month), the table has converted the data for Nyamakima to half a month equivalent. The highest contribution in terms of value was for grain legumes (31.6%), roots and tubers (22.9%), other vegetables (15.8%), cereals (10.9%), fruits (10.6%), leafy vegetables (4.2%), and nuts and seeds (4.0%). The main sources of cereals were Kirinyaga (27.0%) mainly due to rice deliveries, Nyandarua (20.0%) mainly from green maize, Trans Nzoia (10.0%), and imports from outside East Africa (27.7%) mainly on account of rice imports. The main sources of roots and tubers were Nyandarua (81.8%), Bomet (8.2%) and Narok (4.4%). The main sources of grain legumes were Kajiado (46.2%), Kitui (11.4%), Busia (9.4%) and Tanzania (13.2%). The main sources of leafy vegetables were Kiambu (28.8%), Nyandarua (22.9%) and Nakuru (22.3%). The main sources of other vegetables were Kirinyaga (43.2%) boosted by deliveries of tomatoes, Nyandarua (11.4%) and Tanzania (25.6%). The sources of fruits were diverse, although the main producing areas were Meru (18.9%), Kisii (14.4%) mainly on account of bananas, Tanzania (19.7%), Thika (9.7%) and Taita Taveta (8.2%). The main sources of nuts and seeds were Meru (13.9%) and Tanzania (83.0%). Overall, the main sources of food inflows to Nairobi were Central province (40.2%), Eastern (10.0%), Rift Valley (22.4%), imports from the rest of East Africa (15.2%), and other imports (3.1%). The main districts in Central were Nyandarua (24.3%) mainly potatoes and vegetables (e.g. cabbages and carrots), and Kirinyaga (10.5%) mainly tomatoes and rice. The district with the highest contribution in Rift Valley was Kajiado (15.2%) mainly beans, while Tanzania alone had an overall contribution of 13.7% (mainly onions, oranges, beans, dry peas and groundnuts). Total imports were 18.32%, comprising of Tanzania (13.7%), Uganda (1.5%) and the rest of the world (3.1%). Rice was the main import from the rest of the world. The 10.0% contribution from Eastern province was mainly on account of grain legumes (beans, dengu and kunde from Makueni district) and fruits (mainly bananas from Meru).

5.4

QUANTITIES OF FRESH AND DRY FOOD DELIVERIES

Table 5.15 shows the estimated quantities of food delivered to the surveyed markets and Nyamakima for two weeks, and is reported in kilograms. The highest deliveries were for English potatoes (4,994,489 kg), followed by bananas (1,118,998 kg), beans (1,062,887 kg), tomatoes (598,025 kg), onions (581,303 kg), cabbage (565,926 kg), carrots (377,118 kg), maize grain (347,790 kg), green maize (243,273 kg) and rice (234,281 kg). The weight of green maize reported excludes an estimated 50% non-edible matter, while non-edible matter for bananas was estimated at 20%.

5.5

SURVEY OF FOOD PROCESSING FIRMS

Out of a selected forty food processing firms, only 15 responded. Out of the 15 responding firms, one was dealing with chicken (Kenchic Ltd) and the other with slaughter of pigs and sale of pig products (Farmers Choice Ltd). The data for pigs is reported in Chapter 7 and that of chicken is reported in Chapter 8. This section only reports the aggregate results for the 13 firms that sell maize flour, wheat flour, bread and milk. The data is for the whole of calendar year 2001. The responding firms were five bakeries (Broadway Bakery Ltd, Akiyda 2000 Ltd, Mini Bakeries Nairobi Ltd, Oswal Bakery Ltd and Kenblest Ltd), two dairies (Mt Kenya Dairy and Brookside Dairy Ltd), four maize millers (Kabansora Millers Ltd, Premier Flour Mills Ltd, Kenya Flour Mills and National Unga Industries), and two wheat and maize millers (Pembe Flour Mills Limited and Unga Group Ltd). All purchases of milk and maize inputs were from local resources, while wheat was both local and imports. Most of the firms that responded were in Nairobi or close to Nairobi, and are therefore expected to sell high proportions of their output within Nairobi. As shown in Table 5.16, the output of the 13 firms that was sold in Nairobi was 38,571 metric tons of maize flour, 37,440 metric tons of wheat flour, 15,993 metric tons of bread, and 3,240 metric tons of milk. The data were not weighted to compensate for nonresponse, as most of the nonresponding firms were located far from Nairobi, and are therefore expected to have lower sales in Nairobi compared with those that responded.
56

CHAPTER 6: COMMERCIAL INFLOWS OF MEAT AND MEAT PRODUCTS 6.1 SURVEY COVERAGE

The survey covered abattoirs in the following areas: Dagoretti, Kiamaiko, Njiru, Kiserian, Ongata Rongai, Kitengela, Mlolongo (camels), Ndumbuini (pigs) and Farmers Choice (pigs). There was only one abattoir (Mlolongo) that deals with the slaughter of camels and sale of camel meat products. All the abattoirs are owned by individuals, partnerships and cooperative societies. The livestock slaughtered do not normally belong to the abattoir. The common system is for an individual to purchase livestock from wholesalers and use the abattoir facilities at a fee. The fees include payment to the owners of the abattoir (abattoir fee), slaughter fee, meat inspection fee (paid to the government), and loading fee (to vehicles that carry livestock products). Only Dagoretti abattoirs and New Dandora in Njiru have refrigeration facilities. Refrigeration facilities are normally in low demand as most traders sell all their meat on the day of slaughter. For animals that are not slaughtered on the day of arrival, the traders pay a fee for security of their animals. 6.1.1 DAGORETTI

There are five abattoirs in Dagoretti, namely, Mumu, Nyongara, New Dagoretti, Nyonjoro and Thiani. Thiani abattoir is in Nairobi, while the rest are located in the same vicinity but are within Kiambu district. All the abattoirs in Dagoretti deal with slaughter of cattle and sale of cattle products only. All the abattoirs in Dagoretti were covered in the survey. The abattoirs reported the average number of livestock slaughtered for each day of the week, except Sundays. This information was used to estimate the number slaughtered per month. The sources of livestock in the abattoirs were reported in terms of percentage from each main source, namely, Moyale (20%), Garissa (10%), Kajiado (10%), Baringo (10%) and Migori (50%). These percentages were used to split the total livestock slaughtered by source. In addition, the respondents reported that about 80% of the livestock slaughtered are destined for Nairobi market, as they do not keep records of such information. 6.1.2 NDUMBUINI PIG SLAUGHTERHOUSE

Ndumbuini pig slaughterhouse is located near Ndumbuini shopping center, about 12 kilometers from the city center. The slaughterhouse started operations in the early seventies, and initially slaughtered pigs from the nearby Uthiru and Kangemi areas for consumption in the neighboring areas. In 1982, the abattoir was expanded to cater for the increasing demand for pork. The abattoir is a sole proprietorship and earns its revenue from abattoir fee. The clerk employed by the business also collects inspection fee on behalf of the veterinary officer assigned to the abattoir. The proprietor has hired security guards and cleaners. There is no committee to manage the abattoir as the owner is in charge of managing the business. The levies per pig are Kiambu County Council cess (Shs 30), meat inspection (Shs 25), slaughter cost (Shs 45) and abattoir fee (Shs 100). The abattoir has clean piped water and a water reserve in case of temporary shortages. There are three pit latrines which are cleaned twice a day. No fee is charged for use of toilet. There is a septic tank to accommodate all waste from pig slaughter. The septic tank is emptied every two months. The access road is in very poor condition, especially during the rainy season. There is adequate parking. The only fenced part of the abattoir is the pigsty. The abattoir is clean and well ventilated. There is a caf in the premises that sells tea and simple snacks. The main sources of pigs are Kiambu, Homa Bay, Migori, Bungoma, Kitale and Kakamega. Homa Bay is the largest supplier, while supplies from Kiambu district are low due to disease outbreak in the district in year 2001 that led to mass killing and disposal of pigs. It is estimated that 45% of the pig supplies come from Homa Bay; 15% from Migori; 30% from Bungoma, Kitale and Kakamega; and 10% from Kiambu. The pigs in most demand are sucking pigs, especially for the tourism industry in Mombasa (mainly for Italian, German and Japanese consumers). There are no brokers in the abattoir.
57

6.1.3

FARMERS CHOICE

Farmers Choice is a private company specializing in the slaughter of pigs and sale of pig products. The company provides extension services to pig breeders. It also has its own breeding farm. The firm collects pigs from farmers. However, if a farmer delivers pigs to the slaughterhouse, the firm compensates transport costs at a rate that depends on the distance to the source of pigs. The firm is the major supplier of sausages and pork in the country. The company has a modern slaughterhouse, and therefore has modern facilities for slaughter and hygienic preservation of pig products. The slaughterhouse receives an estimated 55% of pigs slaughtered from the firms own stock. Other than own stock, the areas that supply pigs were reported as Central province (55%), Eldoret in Uasin Gishu district (20%), and other areas (25%). The firm reported the number of pigs slaughtered in a normal month (2,042 pigs), and the corresponding prices and quantities of pork and sausages that the pigs would produce. The firm also reported the relative proportions of pig meat pork - (35%) and pork sausages (48%) that are sold in Nairobi. The value of the pork and pork sausages sold in Nairobi was used to impute the proportion of pigs slaughtered (38.5% of 2,042) that produce the products sold in Nairobi. However, it was not possible to allocate the sources of pigs by district, and the total number slaughtered was therefore classified as other (local). 6.1.4 KIAMAIKO

The market started as a livestock yard for sale of goats to Nairobi residents for home consumption. Later on, kiosks for slaughter of goats and roasting of meat started coming up. The butchers netted low profit margins as they were buying livestock from brokers rather than directly from livestock wholesalers. The butchers started buying livestock directly from wholesalers, and the role of brokers in the market ceased since then. As time went by, standard abattoirs were introduced, which met the official requirements for hygiene (clean water, meat inspection, staff uniform, etc) and mode of slaughter. The abattoirs operate daily, including Sundays and public holidays. There are 12 abattoirs in Kiamaiko, namely, ABM, Al-Mumin, B.K. Star, Burka, Karamas, Moyale, Mwangaza, Sakuu, Shukuru A, Shukuru B, Tula and Yaa 99. All the abattoirs deal with slaughter of goats and sale of goat products, except Yaa 99 which deal exclusively with sheep. However, Shukuru B deals with both goats and sheep. All the abattoirs in Kiamaiko were covered in the survey. The respondents only reported the total number of goats and sheep slaughtered and the proportions from each source. These were Isiolo (20%), Garissa (45%), Marsabit (15%) and Moyale (20%). A reported 95% of goat products are sold within Nairobi area. The fees charged per goat include veterinary inspection fee (Shs 25) and abattoir fee (Shs 25), while the trader pays Shs 10 directly to the slaughterers. 6.1.5 KAJIADO

The survey intended to cover abattoirs in Athi River/Kitengela (Bissil, Kispan, Kitengela, Isinya and Olowasa), Ongata Rongai (Olekasasi abattoir) and Kiserian (Mandina and Keekonyokie abattoirs). However, the survey did not cover the abattoir in Ongata Rongai run by Ngong Butchers Cooperative Society as its meat products are rarely sold within Nairobi area. The cattle slaughtered in Bissil abattoir mainly comes from Bissil livestock market. The abattoir started in late nineties. The abattoir is jointly owned by two individuals. The water used in the abattoir is procured from a borehole. The number of cattle slaughtered per day was reported as 7-8, and this number (7.5) was used to estimate number slaughtered in a month. All the livestock slaughtered in the abattoir is sold in Nairobi. Kispan abattoir obtains most of the cattle for slaughter from Kajiado district, although it receives about a third of its supply from Tanzania. The abattoir slaughters a reported 23 cows per day (15 from Kenya and 8
58

from Tanzania), which was used to estimate the number slaughtered per month (26 days as it excludes Sundays). The water is supplied from a borehole. The abattoir supplies most of its meat to Burma market in Nairobi. Kitengela slaughterhouse is owned by an individual. It started in the seventies. Almost all the livestock slaughtered comes from Kajiado district. The abattoir receives water from reticulation mains of the City Council of Nairobi. The abattoir receives about 20 cows per day, half of which are sold in Nairobi. About 10 goats and 30 sheep are slaughtered each day. Only about 10% of the goats and sheep slaughtered are sold in Nairobi. Isinya abattoir obtains about 90% of cattle slaughtered from Bissil area of Kajiado, while the remaining 10% comes from other areas of Kajiado. It was started in 1992. Isinya abattoir slaughters about 20 cows per day, 15 of which are sold within Nairobi. Olowasa abattoir started in 1992 and is owned by an individual. It obtains most cattle from Kajiado district. The abattoir slaughters about 20 cows per day, 18 of which are sold in Nairobi. It slaughters about 5 goats per day, but all the goat products are consumed within Kajiado and none is transported to Nairobi. Most of the cattle meat from the abattoir is sold to Burma market in Nairobi. Olekasasi abattoir in Ongata Rongai town is named after a village where the founder members of the abattoir hail from. Most of the livestock is from Kajiado district and Emali in Makueni district. The number of animals and their prices mainly depend on the season. For example, during August-September when there is little pasture in the rangelands, the inflow of livestock is normally high and at low prices. During NovemberDecember and April-June, livestock inflows decline as there is normally sufficient pasture for livestock. The meat from the abattoir is mainly sold in Burma market. Olekasasi abattoir only reported slaughter of cattle during the reference month. Mandina abattoir in Kiserian town mainly gets livestock from Kajiado, Narok and Migori districts. Mandina abattoir deals with both cattle and goats. Keekonyokie abattoir in Kiserian receives livestock from Kajiado, Narok, Migori and Tanzania. The livestock from Tanzania is mainly bought at Shompole market at the Kenya-Tanzania border. Keekonyokie abattoir deals mainly with cattle but also reported a small number of goats slaughtered during the reference month. Keekonyokie abattoir has brokers who purchase livestock from wholesalers for sale to butchers. Mandina and Keekonyokie have similar charge regimes for the traders using their abattoirs. In the case of cattle, the fees per cow were abattoir fee (Shs 100), slaughter fee (Shs 50), inspection fee (Shs 100) and council cess (Shs 70). In the case of goats and sheep, the fees per animal were abattoir fee (Shs 20) and slaughter fee (Shs 20). 6.1.6 MLOLONGO CAMEL SLAUGHTERHOUSE

Mlolongo camel slaughterhouse is located in Mlolongo shopping center within Machakos district, about 15 kilometers from the City center. The name mlolongo is Kiswahili word for a queue. The town was named after the long queues formed by trucks on Mombasa road waiting their turn at the weighbridge. The abattoir was started in year 2000 by an individual who still manages the market. The proprietor has hired guards, cleaners and clerks. The abattoir is housed in permanent premises. It has piped water, electricity and pit latrines. Waste from the slaughterhouse is directed to a septic tank, which is regularly emptied. The abattoir is fenced with permanent wall. There is adequate security and loading zone. The road to the abattoir is impassable during the rainy season. Charges for slaughter were: Shs 100 for meat inspection, Shs 50 in slaughter costs, and Shs 100 abattoir fee. There are no brokers in the abattoir. The abattoir reported that the sources of camels were Isiolo (35%) and Garissa (65%).

59

6.1.7

NJIRU

There are three abattoirs in Njiru in the eastern side of the city, namely, Hurlingham, Kayole and New Dandora. All the three abattoirs deal with slaughter of cattle and sale of cattle products. Hurlingham abattoir reported the main sources of livestock as Garissa (45%), Moyale (35%), Migori (10%) and Isiolo (10%). Kayole and New Dandora abattoirs reported the main sources of livestock as Garissa (55%), Moyale (35%) and Migori (10%). The three abattoirs reported that about 90% of the livestock products are sold within Nairobi. The survey covered 30 abattoirs: five within Dagoretti market, 12 in Kiamaiko, five in Athi River/Kitengela, one in Ongata Rongai, two in Kiserian, three in Njiru, one in Ndumbuini, and Farmers Choice.

6.2

ANALYTICAL CLASSIFICATION OF ABATTOIRS

The abattoirs were zoned by geographical location. The twelve abattoirs in Kiamaiko (ABM, Al-Mumin, B.K. Star, Burka, Karamas, Moyale, Mwangaza, Sakuu, Shukuru A, Shukuru B, Tula and Yaa 99) were put in one category. The second category consisted of the five abattoirs in Dagoretti (Mumu, Nyongara, New Dagoretti, Nyonjoro and Thiani), Ndumbuini pig slaughterhouse, and Farmers Choice. The three abattoirs in Njiru area (Hurlingham, Kayole and New Dandora) were lumped together. The fourth category consisted of the abattoirs located in Kajiado district, i.e. the five abattoirs in Athi River/Kitengela (Bissil, Kispan, Kitengela, Isinya and Olowasa), Olekasasi abattoir in Ongata Rongai, two abattoirs in Kiserian (Mandina and Keekonyokie abattoirs), and Mlolongo camel slaughterhouse located within Machakos district. The results below are based on the survey of abattoirs (Form UNHABITAT/III) due to overlap with information on livestock (other than poultry) collected using Form UNHABITAT/IV.

6.3

NUMBER OF ANIMALS SLAUGHTERED

Tables 6.1a and 6.1b show the number of animals slaughtered in each abattoir and the number of animals whose meat products were sold in Nairobi. The number of animals slaughtered in the abattoirs during the month of November 2001 was 25,692 cattle, 120 camels, 32,970 goats, 4,140 sheep and 2,354 pigs. Out of this, the number of animals whose meat products were sold in Nairobi was 21,977 cattle (85.5% of total number of cattle slaughtered), 120 camels (100.0%), 29,471 goats (89.4%), 3,438 sheep (83.0%) and 1,083 pigs (46.0%). Out of the total number of cattle slaughtered, 24.1% came from Eastern province (mainly Moyale), 29.1% from North Eastern province, 22.5% from Nyanza province and 23.5% from Rift Valley. The main districts that supplied cattle to the abattoirs were Garissa (29.1%), Moyale (23.6%), Migori (22.5%) and Kajiado (19.6%). Camels slaughtered were from Isiolo (35.0%) and Garissa (65.0%). Out of the total number of goats slaughtered, 50.1% came from Eastern province, 41.0% from North Eastern province and 8.9% from Rift Valley. The districts that supplied goats to the abattoirs were Garissa (41.0%), Isiolo (18.2%), Moyale (18.2%), Marsabit (13.7%) and Kajiado (8.9%). Out of the total number of sheep slaughtered, 32.5% came from Eastern province, 44.6% from North Eastern province, and 22.9% from Rift Valley. The districts that supplied sheep to the abattoirs were Marsabit (32.5%), Wajir (32.5%), Kajiado (22.9%) and Garissa (12.2%). It is estimated that 45% of the pig supplies to Ndumbuini slaughterhouse come from Homa Bay; 15% from Migori; 30% from Bungoma, Kitale and Kakamega; and 10% from Kiambu. Farmers Choice receives an estimated 55% of pigs slaughtered from the firms own stock. Other than own stock, the areas that supply pigs were reported as Central province (55%), Eldoret in Uasin Gishu (20%), and other areas (25%).

60

Table 6.2 shows market shares for each abattoir and by type of animal slaughtered. In the case of cattle, the market was distributed between Dagoretti (34.6%), Njiru (47.5%) and Kajiado (17.9%). Camels were only slaughtered in an abattoir classified under Kajiado. In the case of goats, the market was distributed between Kiamaiko (91.1%) and Kajiado (8.9%). In the case of sheep, the market was shared between Kiamaiko (81.2%) and Kajiado (18.8%). Pigs were slaughtered in two abattoirs classified under Dagoretti.

6.4

NUMBER OF ANIMALS SOLD IN NAIROBI

The number of animals whose meat products were sold in Nairobi was 21,977 cattle (85.5% of number slaughtered), 120 camels (100.0%), 29,471 goats (89.4%), 3,438 sheep (83.0%), and 1,083 pigs (46.0%). The surveyed abattoirs reported varying proportions of cattle sold in Nairobi. The distribution of sources of livestock slaughtered and sources of livestock sold in Nairobi were therefore not identical. Out of the total number of cattle sold in Nairobi, 24.6% came from Eastern province (mainly Moyale), 30.2% from North Eastern province, 21.6% from Nyanza province and 22.7% from Rift Valley. The main districts that supplied meat products to Nairobi were Garissa (30.2%), Moyale (24.0%), Migori (21.6%) and Kajiado (19.0%). All the camels slaughtered were sold in the Nairobi area. Out of the total number of goats sold in Nairobi, 53.2% came from Eastern province, 43.6% from North Eastern province and 3.2% from Rift Valley. The districts that supplied meat products to Nairobi were Garissa (43.6%), Moyale (19.4%), Isiolo (19.4%), Marsabit (14.5%) and Kajiado (3.2%). Out of the total number of sheep sold in Nairobi, 39.1% came from Eastern province, 53.8% from North Eastern province and 7.2% from Rift Valley. The districts that supplied sheep to Nairobi were Marsabit (39.1%), Wajir (39.1%), Garissa (14.7%) and Kajiado (7.2%). It is estimated that 45% of the pig supplies to Ndumbuini slaughterhouse come from Homa Bay; 15% from Migori; 30% from Bungoma, Kitale and Kakamega; and 10% from Kiambu. An estimated 38.5% of pig products from Farmers Choice were sold in Nairobi.

6.5

LIVESTOCK SLAUGHTERED AND SOLD IN NAIROBI BY ABATTOIR

Table 6.2 shows the number of animals slaughtered in each surveyed abattoir. Out of the total number of cattle slaughtered, 47.5% were in Njiru, 34.6% in Dagoretti and 17.9% in Kajiado. No cattle were slaughtered in Kiamaiko. All the 120 camels slaughtered were in Kajiado (Mlolongo slaughterhouse). Out of 32,970 goats slaughtered, 91.1% were in Kiamaiko and 8.9% in Kajiado. There were no goats slaughtered in Dagoretti and Njiru. Out of 4,140 sheep slaughtered, 81.2% were in Kiamaiko and 18.8% were in Kajiado. There were no sheep slaughtered in Dagoretti and Njiru. Pigs were only slaughtered in Dagoretti (Ndumbuini) and Farmers Choice.

6.6

SOURCES OF LIVESTOCK SLAUGHTERED IN EACH ABATTOIR

Tables 6.3a and 6.3b show the sources of livestock for each abattoir. Kiamaiko abattoirs only reported slaughter of goats and sheep. The goats slaughtered in Kiamaiko abattoirs were from Isiolo (20.0%), Marsabit (15.0%), Moyale (20.0%) and Garissa (45.0%). The sheep were from Marsabit (40.0%), Garissa (15.0%), Wajir (40.0%) and Kajiado (5.0%). Dagoretti abattoirs only reported slaughter of cattle and pigs. The cattle slaughtered in Dagoretti abattoirs were from Moyale (20.0%), Garissa (10.0%), Migori (50.0%), Kajiado (10.0%) and Baringo (10.0%). It is estimated that 45.0% of pig supplies to Ndumbuini slaughterhouse come from Homa Bay; 15.0% from Migori; 30.0% from Bungoma, Kitale and Kakamega; and 10.0% from Kiambu.
61

Njiru abattoirs only reported slaughter of cattle. The sources of the animals were reported as Garissa (53.9%), Moyale (35.0%), Migori (10.0%) and Isiolo (1.1%). Kajiado abattoirs reported slaughter of cattle, camels, goats and sheep. The main source of cattle was Kajiado (90.4%), followed by Tanzania (4.5%), Narok (2.5%) and Migori (2.3%). The camels were from Isiolo (35.0%) and Garissa (65.0%). All the goats and sheep were reported as coming from Kajiado.

6.7

COSTS OF ANIMALS SOLD IN NAIROBI

Tables 6.4a and 6.4b show the cost of animals sold in Nairobi. This was obtained by allocating the costs reported to the number of livestock whose meat products were sold in the Nairobi markets. The costs are based on prices that livestock fetches in the abattoir, and therefore includes transportation costs and movement permits. The reported costs are therefore higher than the returns to livestock farmers where the animals come from. In addition, the prices were only estimates as different sizes and varieties of the same animal (e.g. cow) attract different prices. The animals are owned by many people who use the abattoirs for a fee, and should not therefore be interpreted as an indicator of cash transactions within the abattoirs. The data shows that, out of the total cost of livestock slaughtered (excluding Farmers Choice), 29.5% accrue to livestock from Eastern province, 33.0% on livestock from North Eastern, 19.1% on livestock from Nyanza, 16.7% on livestock from Rift Valley, 0.4% on livestock from Tanzania, and 0.1% on livestock from Western province. Costs accruing to cost of cattle was shared almost equally between Eastern (25.5%), North Eastern (31.1%), Nyanza (23.1%) and Rift Valley provinces (19.7%). The cost of camels was shared between Eastern (35.0%) and North Eastern (65.0%) provinces. The cost of goats was mainly shared between Eastern (53.3%), North Eastern (43.6%) and Rift Valley (3.2%). The cost of sheep was shared between Eastern (39.1%), North Eastern (53.8%) and Rift Valley (7.2%). Tables 6.5a and 6.5b show the animal costs, abattoir fee, slaughter costs and inspection fees for the livestock consumed in Nairobi. The analysis has not included refrigeration costs, loading costs, and other costs. In case of cattle, the market shares for livestock slaughtered (computed on the basis of animal costs) were Dagoretti (35.3%), Njiru (51.1%) and Kajiado (13.6%). All the camels were slaughtered in one abattoir classified under Kajiado. In case of goats, the market was distributed between Kiamaiko (96.8%) and Kajiado (3.2%). In case of sheep, the market was distributed between Kiamaiko (97.7%) and Kajiado (2.3%). All the pigs were slaughtered in an abattoir classified under Dagoretti. The proprietors of the abattoirs do not own the livestock slaughtered in their abattoirs. The only revenue that accrues to the proprietors is the abattoir fee. Slaughter costs are paid to slaughterers, and inspection fees are paid to the Government meat inspectors. Out of the total abattoir fee of Shs 1,366,250, Shs 425,000 (31.12%) was earned from cattle and Shs 732,850 (53.64%) was earned from goats. The costs related to animal slaughter are mainly slaughter costs and meat inspection fees.

6.8

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The animals slaughtered in the abattoirs do not normally belong to the proprietors of the abattoirs. The abattoirs charge a fixed abattoir fee for each animal slaughtered, depending on the type of animal (e.g. cow). In addition, there is some apparent specialization, especially in the case of Kiamaiko (goats), Dagoretti (cattle), Njiru (cattle), Kajiado (cattle), Ndumbuini (pigs), Farmers Choice (pigs), and Mlolongo (camels). There are meat inspectors in all the abattoirs. The sources of cattle slaughtered were mainly Eastern province (24.1%), North Eastern (29.1%), Nyanza (22.5%) and Rift Valley (23.5%). The main districts were Garissa, Moyale, Migori, and Kajiado. Most of the goats and sheep came from Eastern and North Eastern provinces, while almost half of the pigs came from Homa Bay. The supply of pigs from Kiambu were low due to disease outbreak in the district in year 2001 that led to mass killing and disposal of pigs.

62

6.9

RELIABILITY OF THE RESULTS

The survey avoided the use of administrative records of animals slaughtered in the abattoirs. This was mainly because some Government officials and management of a few abattoirs intimated at the beginning of the survey that the official statistics might be unreliable because they are revenue-based (returns for meat inspection fees collected). Most of the abattoirs reported the number of animals slaughtered in terms of average number per day and working days per week. This information was used to estimate number slaughtered. The distribution of number slaughtered by source of animals was reported in terms of percentage from each source, and may therefore not be very reliable. In addition, the data collected could have omitted deliveries from districts that contribute small proportions of livestock slaughtered. The number sold in Nairobi was also the respondents impression and was reported in terms of percentage of number slaughtered or a particular estimate of the total based on rough ideas of the buyers who frequent the abattoir. The main problem encountered in collecting reliable statistics was the lack of knowledge of the total number of animals slaughtered. The abattoirs are normally used by individuals who bring in livestock and pay a fixed abattoir fee for each animal type slaughtered. The price of livestock (especially cattle) differs by abattoir as different abattoirs have different grades of livestock. Since the management of the abattoir do not own the livestock slaughtered, the price data were largely estimates. Finally, the survey of abattoirs was conducted at the same time as that of commercial inflows of fresh and dry crop produce, fish and chicken. Due to overloading of enumerators, it was not possible to make callbacks on time. Some of the data on abattoirs was collected in January and February 2002, although the respondents were required to provide data for November 2001. Where respondents relied on memory recall, data collected in January and February 2002 may be affected by recall loss.

63

CHAPTER 7: COMMERCIAL INFLOWS OF CHICKEN AND FISH 7.1 SURVEY COVERAGE

The main markets that purchase fish in Nairobi are City Market and Gikomba, while Toi market in Kibera also handles a small volume of fish inflows to Nairobi. The survey covered all the three markets. The data covers 14 consecutive days. There were no deliveries of fish on Sundays although the day was included as an enumeration day. In the case of chicken deliveries, City Market, Kariakor and Maziwa (Jogoo Road opposite City Stadium) were the main targets for the survey and covered 14 consecutive days. Other minor markets for chicken inflows where the survey covered 14 consecutive days were Gikomba, Githurai and Toi. Respondents in Kariobangi North were shops that deal with chicken and solicited information for a one-month reference period. However, the analysis does not weight the chicken deliveries for Kariobangi North to a 14-day reference period. 7.1.1 CITY MARKET

City Market is located in the Central Business District and is bordered by Koinange Street, Muindi Mbingu Street, Tubman Road and Banda Street. It is enclosed with a concrete wall with several entrances. It has a gate along Koinange Street, a second gate along Tubman Road, a third gate along Banda Street, and four gates along Muindi Mbingu Street. The market was started in 1936 by the forerunner of the Nairobi City Council. At the beginning, the main business in the market was fruits, vegetables, curios, hotels and butcheries. The market is owned and managed by the City Council. The City Council rents out the stalls to traders, manages all entry points, and collects cess on commodities brought into the market for sale. The City Council maintains the market e.g. cleaning the market, 24-hour security, water, electricity, and cleaning and maintaining common facilities (mainly toilets). Cleanliness of the common areas and general sanitation of the market is also the responsibility of the City Council. There are six toilets, three for women and three for men. All the passageways within the market are tarmacked. The market has a permanent stonewall surrounding the market. The City Council provides each trader with a garbage bin, and garbage is disposed at a common area outside the market. The stalls are properly lighted, but there is minimal use of electricity by traders. There is a store for cleaning materials for City Council workers. Parking is available but is not adequate. Conflicts and disputes among traders or suppliers are arbitrated by the City Council Inspectorate. The market has a management committee of traders operating in the market. The committee liaises with the City Council to ensure that the City Council charges are not exorbitant, and that the City Council provides services to the market. The committee also assists in settling disputes that may arise between a trader and the City Council. The committee charges each trader a small fee (Shs 20 per month). The main types of food sold in the market are fish, chicken and meat (e.g. pork and beef). There are also small quantities of fresh foods purchased from other markets mainly Wakulima and Gikomba - e.g. fruits, vegetables, carrots and potatoes. Other businesses are curios and other ornamental items, forex bureau, a supermarket, food kiosks, and wholesale and retail of flowers. Most of the fresh produce is delivered daily to stall owners (except on Sunday) beginning 7.30 a.m. when the market opens, while flowers are delivered around 5 a.m. The deliveries stop around 11.30 a.m. The market closes at 6 p.m. daily, except on Saturday and Sunday when it closes at 3.30 p.m. and 12 noon, respectively. There are no brokers dealing with edible commodities. The main sources of chicken broilers were Makuyu (Muranga), Kiambu, Ngong, Kikuyu, Naivasha, Nakuru, Kericho and Kitale, while Machakos and Kericho were the main sources of traditional breeds. Chicken supplies are either in standard bags of approximately 100 chicken and small bags of around 30-40 chicken. The City Council levies for a standard bag are Shs 1,000, while smaller containers and bags are charged at Shs 20 per chicken. The collection of levies is not efficient and the City Council may be losing a lot of money due
64

to collusion between the City Council officials, traders and suppliers. This factor could have led to underenumeration of chicken deliveries into the market. The problem is compounded by the many entrances that lead into the market. In case of new chicken suppliers, brokers come between them and the traders. Seasoned suppliers do not normally encounter this problem since they already have established customers among the traders. The chickens are slaughtered before delivery to the market, and are inspected on delivery. Officials from the fisheries department inspect fish deliveries. 7.1.2 GIKOMBA MARKET (FISH)

The present day fish stalls were meant to be small restaurants to serve traders and their clients. Even presently, fish is sold outside the stalls on tables and crates. The majority of the stalls serve food, while others deal in offal (matumbo) and beef. Gikomba market management committee has a sub-committee to deal with the affairs of the fish section. The main roles and responsibilities of the sub-committee are: (a) To maintain cleanliness in all areas of the market. A cleaner is paid by the traders to do general cleaning and disposal of garbage. A bin for garbage disposal is provided by the City Council. A public health officer is also attached to the market to enforce cleanliness. (b) To arbitrate in disputes arising out of business transactions. Arbitration fees and fines can be levied in some cases. (c) To liaise with the authorities in matters pertaining to the fish business. The relevant authorities are the fisheries department and the public health department. For one to engage in fish business, the fisheries department issues an annual licence at a fee of Shs 350. A health certificate is also compulsory. (d) To authorise new fish wholesalers to supply fish to the market. A new supplier registers with the committee at a fee of Shs 500. The City Council collects levies in the form of stall rentals and cess from all traders who deliver fish (both fresh and dry) to the market. The stalls go for Shs 350 per month and cess depends on the quantity of fish delivered. The City Council provides water free of charge. The rents are inclusive of electricity but for some time, the stalls have been without lights after the City Council failed to pay electricity bills and power was disconnected. The toilets belong to the City Council and are located within the market. The toilets are not adequate and there is always a queue of users waiting their turn. A standard fee of Shs 5 is charged on every visit to the toilet. The access road to the market is presently under rehabilitation. The feeder roads are however in very poor state, and motorists have to meander along potholes and congested traffic to reach the market. Security is provided by watchmen employed by the committee. Each trader with a stall or open ground pays Shs 100 per month towards security. There are no storage facilities and goods are left in the open, hence the need for adequate security. The dominant fish species were tilapia followed by Nile perch. The fish were from Lake Victoria (Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania); while the supply of dry fish was low in the season the survey was conducted. There were no fish deliveries from Naivasha as there has been a temporary ban on fishing in Lake Naivasha effective from February 2001 that was still in force during the survey period. Fish is normally delivered to brokers who act as wholesalers. Each parcel or basket comes from source with a label or tag indicating the name of the recipient (the broker). After wholesaling, the broker remits proceeds of sale to the supplier. There is normally high level of trust between a supplier and his/her broker. Consignments are entrusted to transporters or other persons who deliver fish to the brokers. Likewise proceeds from sale are normally entrusted to the same person to take back to the supplier the following day.
65

The brokers charge commission, which ranges from Shs 1 for a piece costing Shs 25 wholesale price to Shs 5 for a piece costing Shs 150. Roughly the commissions charged by brokers were as follows: fish of Shs 25-30 wholesale value is charged one shilling, Shs 35-40 is charged Shs 2, Shs 45-50 is charged Shs 3, Shs 55-80 is charged Shs 4, and Shs 85 and above is charged Shs 5. 7.1.3 KARIAKOR (CITY CHICKEN AND EGGS DEALERS) MARKET

The City Chicken and Eggs Dealers market was started in the early twenties. The colonial authorities used the premises as a prison, called carrier-corps, which was later corrupted to Kariakor. After independence, the building was passed to the City Council, who lent it out to chicken traders from all over Kenya. A committee of traders started managing the market, including organizing for sources of chicken (mainly from the Kamba and Kalenjin countries). As a former prison, almost all the basic amenities required by human beings are available e.g. water taps, bathrooms and washbasins. The structure was built in a place accessible from many roads, and a bus stop was located next to it even when it was a prison. As a former prison, the walls of the building are long and secure, and there are sufficient windows. In the early years, chicken was slaughtered under trees, as there was no chicken abattoir. After independence, a large room in the structure was selected for chicken slaughter, although health authorities were not inspecting the slaughtered chicken. Later, the Government appointed full-time meat inspectors to inspect all chicken slaughtered. The committee elected by traders protects the interests of the over 100 traders. The department of cooperatives supervises the election of the committee since the traders operate as a cooperative. The traders have put mesh wires inside the premises and dust-proof mesh in the windows. The premises are clean, while the slaughterers have medical certificates and wear white coat and cap. The slaughterers charge two shillings for every chicken slaughtered, and an additional Shs 2 is paid to Government as inspection fee. 7.1.4 MAZIWA

Maziwa settlement was established in 1960 by jobless relatives of Kenya Railway workers, who established a marketplace largely for the sale of milk, leading to the settlements name. The chicken market was started by some traders from the nearby Burma market in 1990. Others claim that it derives its name maziwa (Kiswahili for milk) from a Kenya Cooperative Creameries depot which used to operate where the market is currently located along Jogoo Road. Both descriptions of the origin of the market are plausible. The market grew rapidly, and the traders consequently decided to form a committee. The committee is responsible for admitting new traders. The committee does not levy any charges. The City Council once introduced a daily fee per trader, but the traders refused to pay citing low volume of business. Business is conducted on stalls built of temporary materials. There are no toilet and water facilities in the market. The traders buy water from kiosks across the road. They use a toilet nearby at Shs 5 per visit. There is no fence or electricity. Each trader pays Shs 100 per month for security services organised by the committee. Customers park their cars along Jogoo road since there is no parking space in the market. The main commodities traded are chicken (local and grade) and groceries. The traders buy chicken from traders from rural areas or travel to the rural areas to purchase the chicken. The main sources of local chicken were the Kamba districts of Makueni, Machakos, Kitui and Mwingi; while grade chickens are mainly from Kiambu and a small proportion from Kenchic. There is a slaughterhouse where freelance slaughters charge Shs 10 per chicken, while meat inspectors charge Shs 2 per chicken.

66

7.2
7.2.1

CHICKEN INFLOWS TO NAIROBI

SOURCES OF CHICKEN

Tables 7.1a, 7.1b and 7.1c shows the sources of chicken inflows to Nairobi markets by type of chicken (grade or local breeds) for City Market, Kariakor, Maziwa and other markets covered. The markets classified under other were Gikomba, Githurai, Toi and Kariobangi North. The information for Kariobangi North was solicited from dealers who trade in chicken, and covered the estimated deliveries for one month. All the other markets used a 14-day reference period. Among the markets covered, City Market commanded 37.3% of the chicken inflows, compared with Kariakor (17.0%), Maziwa (36.9%) and other markets (8.9%). The main sources of chicken inflows to Nairobi were Central province (49.2%), followed by Eastern province (29.0%), Rift Valley (18.3%) and Nairobi (3.1%). The district with the highest contribution in Central province was Kiambu (35.7% of the total deliveries) followed by Thika (7.4%). The contributions of Eastern province by district were Kitui (4.8%), Mwingi (4.7%), Machakos (8.7%) and Makueni (10.8%). Of the 38,074 chicken delivered to the listed markets, 63.7% were grade chicken while 36.3% were local breeds. The total deliveries of grade chicken to the surveyed markets were 24,264, with 51.8% delivered to City Market, 12.1% to Kariakor, 33.3% to Maziwa, and 2.9% to other markets. The total deliveries of local chicken to the surveyed markets were 13,810, with 11.7% delivered to City Market, 25.6% to Kariakor, 43.2% to Maziwa, and 19.4% to other markets. A reported 88.6% of chicken deliveries to City Market were grade breeds (mainly ex-layers and broilers), while 11.4% were local breeds. The sources of grade chicken to City Market were Nairobi (8.0%), Central province (47.6%), Eastern (1.4%) and Rift Valley (43.0%). The districts that reported the highest deliveries of grade chicken were Kiambu (33.7%) and Nakuru (25.4%). The sources of local chicken to City Market were Central province (19.8%), Eastern (35.2%) and Rift Valley (45.1%). The districts that reported the highest deliveries of local chicken were Muranga (13.0%), Machakos (35.2%) and Kericho (35.8%). Overall, the sources of chicken to City Market regardless of variety were Nairobi (7.0%), Central province (44.5%), Eastern (5.3%) and Rift Valley (43.2%). The districts that reported the highest deliveries of chicken were Kiambu (30.6%) and Nakuru (22.5%). A reported 45.2% of chicken deliveries to Kariakor market were grade breeds (mainly ex-layers and broilers), while 54.8% were local breeds. The sources of grade chicken to Kariakor market were Nairobi (5.6%), Central province (87.3%) and Rift Valley (7.1%). The districts that reported the highest deliveries of grade chicken were Kiambu (59.2%), Thika (11.0%), Muranga (17.1%) and Kajiado (4.1%). The sources of local chicken to Kariakor market were Central province (0.5%), Eastern (84.2%) and Rift Valley (15.3%). The districts that reported the highest deliveries of local chicken were Kitui (13.8%), Mwingi (24.2%), Machakos (10.8%), Makueni (35.4%) and Bomet (12.2%). Overall, the sources of chicken to Kariakor market regardless of variety were Nairobi (2.6%), Central province (39.8%), Eastern (46.1%) and Rift Valley (11.6%). The districts that reported the highest deliveries of chicken were Kiambu (26.8%), Mwingi (13.3%) and Makueni (19.4%). A reported 57.5% of chicken deliveries to Maziwa market were grade breeds (mainly ex-layers and broilers), while 42.5% were local breeds. The sources of grade chicken to Maziwa market were Central province (95.0%), Eastern (3.7%) and Rift Valley (1.2%). The districts that reported deliveries of grade chicken were Kiambu (77.2%), Thika (17.9%), Machakos (3.7%) and Nakuru (1.2%). The sources of local chicken to Maziwa market were Central province (7.5%), Eastern (92.0%) and Nyanza (0.5%). The districts that reported the highest deliveries of local chicken to Maziwa market were Kitui (22.4%), Mwingi (10.6%), Machakos (13.4%) and Makueni (45.5%).

67

Overall, the sources of chicken to Maziwa market regardless of variety were Central province (57.8%), Eastern (41.2%), Nyanza (0.2%) and Rift Valley (0.7%). The districts that reported the highest deliveries of chicken were Kiambu (47.6%), Thika (10.3%), Kitui (9.5%), Mwingi (4.5%), Machakos (7.8%) and Makueni (19.3%). A reported 20.7% of chicken deliveries to other markets were grade breeds (mainly ex-layers and broilers), while 79.3% were local breeds. The only source of grade chicken to other markets was Central province (100.0%), shared between Kiambu (28.6%) and Thika (71.4%). The sources of local chicken to other markets were Central province (39.2%), Eastern (57.1%), and Nyanza (3.7%). The districts that reported the highest deliveries of local chicken were Kiambu (24.3%), Kirinyaga (14.9%), Mwingi (11.2%), Machakos (40.3%) and Makueni (5.6%). Overall, the sources of chicken to other markets regardless of variety were Central province (51.8%), Eastern (45.3%) and Nyanza (3.0%). The districts that reported the highest deliveries of chicken were Kiambu (25.1%), Thika (14.8%), Kirinyaga (11.8%), Mwingi (8.9%) and Machakos (32.0%). Table 7.1d shows the distribution of chicken inflows from each source to all the surveyed markets. The grade chickens from Nairobi are distributed among City Market (85.8%) and Kariakor (14.2%). There were no deliveries of local breeds from Nairobi area. Grade chicken from Central province was shared between City Market (35.4%), Kariakor (15.1%), Maziwa (45.4%) and other markets (4.1%). Grade chickens from Rift Valley were distributed between City Market (94.6%), Kariakor (3.6%) and Maziwa (1.8%). Only a small proportion of grade chicken delivered to Nairobi markets originated from Eastern province. Overall, the total deliveries of grade chicken were distributed between City Market (51.8%), Kariakor (12.1%), Maziwa (33.3%) and other markets (2.9%). Local chicken from Central province was shared between City Market (17.4%), Kariakor (1.0%), Maziwa (24.5%) and other markets (57.1%). Local chicken from Eastern province were distributed between City Market (5.4%), Kariakor (28.2%), Maziwa (51.9%) and other markets (14.5%). Overall, the total deliveries of local chicken were distributed between City Market (37.3%), Kariakor (17.0%), Maziwa (36.9%) and other markets (8.9%). The chickens from Nairobi regardless of variety were distributed among City Market (85.8%) and Kariakor (14.2%). Chicken from Central province was shared between City Market (33.6%), Kariakor (13.7%), Maziwa (43.3%) and other markets (9.3%). Chicken from Eastern province were distributed between City Market (6.8%), Kariakor (27.0%), Maziwa (52.4%) and other markets (13.8%). Chicken from Rift Valley were distributed between City Market (87.8%), Kariakor (10.7%) and Maziwa (1.4%). Overall, the total deliveries of chicken were distributed between City Market (37.3%), Kariakor (17.0%), Maziwa (36.9%) and other markets (8.9%). 7.2.2 REVENUE EARNED FROM SALE OF CHICKEN

Tables 7.2a and 7.2b shows the revenue earned by farmers from the sale of chicken. The price of chicken collected in the survey referred to farm-gate price rather than the price of chicken in the surveyed markets. It does not therefore include transport costs, traders margins, and other transaction costs (e.g. cess collected by the City Council). Overall, farmers earned Shs 5.69 million from the chicken delivered to the surveyed markets during the survey period. Out of this, Shs 3.32 million (58.4%) was for grade chicken, while Shs 2.36 million (41.6%) was for local breeds. The bulk of proceeds for grade chicken were earned by farmers in Central province (Shs 2.27 million, 68.4%), followed by Rift Valley (Shs 0.81 million, 24.3%). Out of Shs 2.36 million for local breeds, Shs 1.91 million (80.8%) was earned by farmers in Eastern province, followed by Central province (9.6%) and Rift Valley (8.8%). Overall, the highest earnings by farmers from sale of chicken was realised in Central province (Shs 2.50 million, 44.0%), Eastern province (Shs 1.99 million, 35.0%) and Rift Valley (Shs 1.02 million, 17.9%). There was no one-to-one correspondence between number and revenue from grade and local breeds as the average cost of grade breeds was Shs 136.95 compared with Shs 171.21 for local breeds, giving an overall average of Shs 149.38.

68

7.2.3

TYPES OF WHOLESALERS OF CHICKEN

Table 7.3a shows the distribution of wholesalers of grade chicken by whether they delivered own produce or had purchased the chicken from other sources. Out of 9 traders who delivered chicken from Nairobi, a reported 4 traders (44.4%) sold their own stock and 5 (55.6%) sold stock purchased from other farmers and other sales outlets (e.g. rural markets). Of the 113 chicken wholesalers who obtained their stock from Central province, 53 (46.9%) sold own stock and 60 (53.1%) sold stock from other sources. Of the 4 traders who had obtained stock from Eastern province, 2 (50.0%) sold own produce, while 2 (50.0%) sold stock from other sources. Out of 31 who sold chicken from Rift Valley, 28 (90.3%) sold own stock while 3 (9.7%) sold stock from other sources. Overall, out of 157 wholesalers of grade chicken, 87 (55.4%) sold own stock and 70 (44.6%) sold stock from other sources. Table 7.3b shows the distribution of wholesalers of local chicken by whether they delivered own produce or had purchased the chicken from other sources. There were no traders who delivered chicken from Nairobi. Of the 15 chicken wholesalers who obtained their stock from Central province, 5 (33.3%) sold own stock and 10 (66.7%) sold stock from other sources. Of the 168 traders who had obtained stock from Eastern province, 9 (5.4%) sold own produce while 159 (94.6%) sold stock from other sources. Out of 12 who sold chicken from Rift Valley, 3 (25%) sold own stock while 9 (75%) sold stock from other sources. Overall, out of 197 wholesalers of local chicken, 17 (8.6%) sold own stock and 180 (91.4%) sold stock from other sources. Table 7.4a shows the distribution of wholesalers of grade chicken by sex of wholesaler. All the nine wholesalers of grade chicken obtained from Nairobi were male. Out of 115 wholesalers who obtained grade chicken from Central province, 91 (79.1%) were male and 24 (20.9%) were female. Out of 4 wholesalers who delivered grade chicken from Eastern province, 3 (75.0%) were male and 1 (25.0%) was female. Out of 29 traders who obtained grade chicken from Rift Valley, 14 (48.3%) were male and 15 (51.7%) were female. Overall, out of 157 wholesalers of grade chicken, 117 (74.5%) were male and 40 (25.5%) were female. Table 7.4b shows the distribution of wholesalers of local chicken by sex of wholesaler. Out of 16 wholesalers who obtained local chicken from Central province, 13 (81.3%) were male and 3 (18.8%) were female. Out of 170 wholesalers who delivered local chicken from Eastern province, 129 (75.9%) were male and 41 (24.1%) were female. Out of 15 traders who obtained local chicken from Rift Valley, 12 (80.0%) were male and 3 (20.0%) were female. Overall, out of 203 wholesalers of local chicken, 156 (76.8%) were male and 47 (23.2%) were female. Table 7.4c shows the distribution of wholesalers of both grade and local chicken by sex of wholesaler. All the nine wholesalers of chicken obtained in Nairobi were male. Out of 131 wholesalers who obtained chicken from Central province, 104 (79.4%) were male and 27 (20.6%) were female. Out of 174 wholesalers who delivered chicken from Eastern province, 132 (75.9%) were male and 42 (24.1%) were female. Out of 44 traders who obtained chicken from Rift Valley, 26 (59.1%) were male and 18 (40.9%) were female. Overall, out of 360 wholesalers of chicken, 273 (75.8%) were male and 87 (24.2%) were female.

7.3
7.3.1

FISH INFLOWS TO NAIROBI

SOURCES OF FISH

The survey covered Gikomba, Toi and City Market. The sources of fish were Coast province (Mombasa and Tana River districts), Machakos district (Masinga), Kisumu district, Siaya (Siaya and Bondo districts), Homa Bay (Homa Bay, Suba and Rachuonyo districts), Migori district, Kajiado district (Magadi), Busia, Tanzania and Uganda. The fish reported as coming from Busia refers to the Kenyan side of the border. Although most fish from Uganda passes through Busia, it was recorded under Uganda, as Busia was only a transit point. Tables 7.5(a-d) shows the quantities and costs of purchasing fish from the sources the wholesalers obtained fish from. Table 7.5a shows the quantities and costs of fish delivered to Gikomba market. Out of 88,947 kg of fish delivered to Gikomba fish stalls, 86,115 kg (96.82%) were tilapia, followed by dagaa (omena in Dholuo) at

69

1,150 kg (1.29%), odol at 882 kg (0.99%), and kamongo at 800 kg (0.90%). There were no deliveries of Nile perch (mbuta in dholuo), crabs and sea fish to Gikomba during the survey period. The sources of tilapia delivered to Gikomba fish stalls were Uganda (48.0%), followed by Tanzania (29.7%), Busia (7.8%), Machakos (6.4%), Migori (4.4%) and Homa Bay (3.7%). A reported 77.7% of tilapia deliveries were imported from Tanzania and Uganda. The deliveries of dagaa were from Siaya (26.1%) and Homa Bay (73.9%). All deliveries of odol were from Kajiado, while all deliveries of Kamongo were from Coast. Overall, the deliveries of fish to Gikomba regardless of fish variety were mainly from Uganda (46.5% of total weight), Tanzania (28.8%) and Busia (7.5%). An estimated 77.4% of cost of fish delivered to Gikomba went to Tanzania and Uganda. Table 7.5b shows the quantities and costs of fish delivered to Toi market. Out of 8,168 kg of fish delivered to Toi market, 6,283 kg (76.9%) were dagaa, while 1,885 kg (23.1%) were Nile perch. There were no deliveries of tilapia, crabs, odol, kamongo and sea fish to Toi market during the survey period. The sources of dagaa delivered to Toi market were Homa Bay (65.4%), followed by Siaya (26.9%) and Kisumu (7.6%). There were no imports of fish delivered to Toi market. The deliveries of Nile perch were from Homa Bay (99.2%), while the balance of 0.8% was from Kisumu and Siaya. Overall, the deliveries of fish to Toi market regardless of fish variety were mainly from Homa Bay (73.2%), Siaya (20.8%) and Kisumu district (5.9%). All the fish deliveries regardless of variety were from Kisumu, Siaya and Homa Bay. Table 7.5c shows the quantities and costs of fish delivered to City Market. Out of 24,580 kg of fish delivered to City Market, 12,959 kg (52.7%) were tilapia, followed by Nile perch at 10,686 kg (43.5%), crabs at 817 kg (3.3%), and sea fish at 118 kg (0.5%). There were no deliveries of dagaa, odol and kamongo to City Market during the survey period. The sources of tilapia were Kisumu (81.4%), followed by Siaya (13.4%) and Homa Bay (4.8%). The deliveries of Nile perch were mainly from Kisumu (90.8%), Siaya (3.7%) and Homa Bay (4.1%). All deliveries of crabs and sea fish were from Coast. Overall, the deliveries of fish to City Market regardless of fish variety were mainly from Kisumu (82.4%), Siaya (8.7%) and Homa Bay (4.3%). Table 7.5d shows the quantities and costs of fish delivered to Gikomba, Toi and City Market combined. Out of 121,694 kg of fish delivered to the three markets, 99,074 kg (81.41%) were tilapia, followed by Nile perch at 12,571 kg (10.33%), dagaa at 7,433 kg (6.11%), odol at 882 kg (0.72%), crabs at 817 kg (0.67%), kamongo at 800 kg (0.66%), and sea fish at 118 kg (0.10%). The main sources of tilapia were Uganda (41.7% of weight), followed by Tanzania (25.8%), Kisumu (10.6%) and Busia (6.8%). A reported 67.5% of tilapia deliveries were imported from Tanzania and Uganda. The deliveries of Nile perch were mainly from Kisumu (77.2%) and Homa Bay (18.3%). The deliveries of dagaa were from Homa Bay (66.8%), Siaya (26.8%) and Kisumu (6.5%). All deliveries of crabs, kamongo and sea fish were from Coast, while all deliveries of odol were from Kajiado. Overall, the deliveries of fish to the three markets regardless of fish variety were mainly from Uganda (34.0%), Tanzania (21.0%), Kisumu (17.0%), Homa Bay (9.1%) and Busia (5.7%). An estimated 52.5% of cost of fish delivered to the three markets went to Tanzania and Uganda. 7.3.2 TYPES OF TRANSPORT USED

Tables 7.6a and 7.6b show the types of transport used to deliver fish to the surveyed markets. A reported 45.2% of fish deliveries to Gikomba were by lorry, followed by bus (37.1%) and pickups (17.7%). All the fish deliveries to Gikomba from Coast, Siaya, Homa Bay and Migori were transported by bus, while all the fish from Machakos was transported by pickups. The deliveries from Kajiado were by bus and lorry in equal proportions. Most of the fish deliveries from Busia were by bus (77.8%); all the fish deliveries from Tanzania were by lorry; while most of the fish deliveries from Uganda were also by lorry. A reported 80.0% of the fish deliveries to Toi market were by bus and 20.0% by lorry. All the fish deliveries to Toi market were from Kisumu, Siaya and Homa Bay. Most of the fish deliveries to City Market were by lorry (82.4%) compared with 17.6% that was delivered by bus. Overall, 68.6% of the deliveries were by lorry,
70

26.7% by bus, and 4.7% by pickups. Pickups were only used for transporting fish from Machakos (Masinga) to Gikomba market. Fish is packed in baskets and mainly transported at night when the temperatures are expected to be lower than during daytime.

7.4
7.4.1

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

CHICKEN

Among the three main chicken markets covered in the survey, only Kariakor and Maziwa have both abattoirs and meat inspectors. In City Market, chickens are slaughtered before delivery to the market, and inspected by meat inspectors on delivery to the market. The markets that reported the highest number of chicken deliveries were City Market and Maziwa. The main sources of chicken were Central and Eastern provinces. A reported 63.7% of chicken delivered were grade breeds, while 36.3% were local breeds. Most of the chickens delivered to City Market were grade breeds (broilers and ex-layers). The chicken deliveries to Kariakor and Maziwa were both grade and local breeds in almost equal proportions. The largest source of grade chicken was Central province, while the largest source of local breeds was Eastern province (Machakos, Makueni, Kitui and Mwingi). Most of the traders dealt with chicken purchased from farmers rather than own stock, and most of the chicken wholesalers were male. Out of 197 chicken wholesalers covered in the survey, 8.6% sold own stock, while 91.4% sold stock from other sources. A reported 74.5% of wholesalers of grade chicken were males and 25.5% were females. A reported 76.8% of wholesalers of local chicken were males and 23.2% were females. It was reported that some chicken die on the way due to congestion and lack of fresh air. There are some traders in Nairobi who buy the dead chicken at throwaway prices. The dead chickens are not inspected by public health authorities since the sale of dead chicken for human consumption is not officially sanctioned. In aggregate, the surveyed markets reported deliveries of 24,264 grade chicken and 13,810 local breeds, making a total of 38,074 chickens over the two week period. In addition, Kenchic reported sales of 146,682 chickens to Nairobi in a month. The combined sales to Nairobi from the surveyed markets, including Kenchic, were therefore equivalent to 222,830 chickens per month. 7.4.2 FISH

The City Council levies cess on fish deliveries in the markets covered by the survey, namely, City Market, Gikomba and Toi. Out of the weight of total fish delivered to the three markets, 81.4% were tilapia, 10.3% were Nile perch, 6.1% were dagaa (omena), and small quantities of odol, crabs, kamongo and sea-fish. There were no tilapia deliveries in Toi market, and there were no deliveries of Nile perch in Gikomba. The main sources of tilapia were Uganda, Tanzania and Kisumu. The deliveries of Nile perch were mainly from Kisumu and Homa Bay. Overall, the deliveries of fish to the three markets regardless of fish variety were mainly from Uganda (34.0% of weight), Tanzania (21.0%), Kisumu (17.0%), Homa Bay (9.1%) and Busia (5.7%). An estimated 52.5% of cost of fish delivered to the three markets went to Tanzania and Uganda. There were no fish deliveries from Naivasha as there has been a temporary ban on fishing in Lake Naivasha effective from February 2001 that was still in force during the survey period. The survey data on fish did not include gender analysis of wholesalers. In some markets, fish is delivered by trusted intermediaries between suppliers in rural areas and brokers (wholesalers) in the markets. It might therefore be misleading to associate some fish deliveries with the transporters.

7.5

RELIABILITY OF THE RESULTS

Independent enumerators conducted data collection on chicken deliveries to Maziwa and City Chicken and Eggs Dealers market (Kariakor). However, in the City Council markets, namely, City Market and Toi, data collection was the responsibility of City Council staff in charge of cess collection. Casual empiricism
71

(eyeballing) gives the impression that Kariakor and City Market have higher volumes of business than was captured in the survey. In the case of Kariakor, there may have been laxity in data collection that led to under-enumeration. However, there may have been under-enumeration in the City Council markets, especially in City Market. The fish markets enumerated were mainly Gikomba and City Market. Similarly, the volume of fish deliveries recorded for City Market appears less than expected, especially in comparison with that recorded in Gikomba. In addition, the sources of fish delivered in City Market did not include Tanzania and Uganda. It is possible that source of fish in some cases reported where the wholesaler bought the fish from (or where bulking took place), rather than where the fish delivery originated. It is common knowledge that administrative records that are revenue-based tend to under-report data. This is not normally the case for household-based poverty studies and child anthropometrics. This factor could have affected under-enumeration in the City Council markets. The survey could not rely on official statistics of poultry slaughtered, since there is a fixed inspection fee per chicken.

72

CHAPTER 8: SUMMARY OF THE MAIN FINDINGS

8.1 COVERAGE

The survey covered almost all the markets for fresh produce. Although the main market for cereals and dry grain legumes (Nyamakima) was covered, dry crop produce has many smaller outlets due to its longer storability and shelf life. The survey also covered all established abattoirs in Nairobi and its environs. The delivery of milk to Nairobi through the informal milk marketing system was not included in the survey. The coverage for chicken is unlikely to be complete because there are numerous small outlets and markets that were not covered in the survey. The survey did not cover eggs although enumerators in Guthurai market covered eggs on their own initiative. The survey covered the main markets where fish deliveries pass through before sale to a host of retail outlets. There was no response from the supermarkets in Nairobi. Only 15 out of the selected 40 food processing firms responded.

8.2

OVERALL RELIABILITY OF THE RESULTS

The survey collected data on quantities, prices and costs of crop and animal produce. The data on quantities, prices, and kilograms per unit of measurement were used to convert food costs to weight in kilograms, for the purpose of estimating calorie supply by the use of food-to-energy conversion factors (Platt, 1962; West, 1988; Murphy et al, 1991; Sehmi, 1993). The commodities were weighed after removing the non-edible matter so that the ratio of edible matter could be computed. The age profile of the Nairobi population was used to compute adult equivalent population. Assuming a person of 0-7 years is 0.5 of an adult in food requirements, and that of 8-12 is 0.8 of an adult, the Nairobi population in 1999 was converted to adult equivalents by applying a factor of 0.885, and a population growth factor of 10.1% in the period 1999-2001. Adult equivalence scales take into account the age structure of the population. However, the use of fixed food weight-to-energy conversion factors might be inappropriate due to changing food quality and food preparation methods. Calorie availability also needs to be adjusted for leakage due to plate waste, loss in cooking and other food preparation, and feeding of animals. Nutrient intake is also affected by other variables e.g. (a) non-nutrient food attributes - freshness of food products purchased, their cleanliness, their storability or shelf-life, and so forth; (b) privately-provided inputs - time and care to prepare food including cleaning, cooking, boiling water and refrigeration which ensures that food does not get contaminated or spoilt; (c) publicly-provided inputs - sewerage, water, electricity, and nutritional information; and (d) health status especially gut parasites - which can influence the degree of absorption of nutrients. The computation of calorie and protein availability only included major types of food delivered. It excludes deliveries of French beans, lettuce, terere (amaranthus), kahurura, saget, sagaa, saragwe, mabaki, cauliflower, cucumber, brinjals, capsicum, chilli, karela (bitter gourd), okra, garlic, kojet (courgette), dudi, lavaya, ginger, green bullet, sugarcane, water melon, lemons/lime, passion fruit, apples, grapes, tangerine, coconut and madafu7. As shown in Tables 8.1a and 8.1b, the deliveries of fresh and dry crop produce were equivalent to 397.79 kilocalories and 14.24 protein units per adult equivalent per day. When meat products are included, the total The demand for traditional crops, especially vegetables, was low. One of the outcomes of the agricultural extension messages of the sixties and the seventies was the structural shift in production systems and consumer demand from traditional ground-hugging crops (e.g. sweet potatoes and traditional legumes and vegetables) to cash crops (e.g. tea and coffee) and new seed varieties (e.g. hybrid maize). The traditional crops tended to provide their own canopy and mulch that assisted in regeneration of the soil. The new crop varieties are more dependent on imported inputs or inputs with high import content e.g. fertilizers and pesticides. The unique definition of food security in terms of maize availability threatens the viability of food production systems that has resulted in intermittent food insecurity. The degree of concentration of particular foods in food budget (or nutrient supply) can be computed using the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (Hirschman, 1964). The index (H) is given by i si2, where si is the budget (or nutrient) share of the ith food item.
7

73

food intake was equivalent to 470.17 kilocalories and 25.35 protein units. The reported sales of maize flour, wheat flour, bread and milk by food processing firms was equivalent to 402.09 kilocalories and 12.91 protein units. Overall, the food covered in the entire survey was equivalent to 872.26 kilocalories and 38.26 protein units per adult equivalent. The normal body requirement is about 2,200 kilocalories and 42 protein units. The high mean protein availability per adult equivalent implies high coverage for protein-intensive foods (or equivalently expensive calories) e.g. grain legumes, vegetables, meat, milk and eggs. The shortfall in calories is mainly attributed to poor response by food processing firms, which mainly deal with cereals and cereal products (e.g. maize meal, wheat flour and bread). Cereals normally supply half of a bodys energy requirements. The computation of energy availability was only based on commercial inflows, but did not include output of urban agriculture that was not sold in the markets. One of the objectives of the survey was to assess the adequacy or shortfall of food supplies to Nairobi. However, the coverage of outputs of food processing firms (especially for maize flour, wheat flour and rice) was poor. In addition, no attempt was made to add up the estimated commercial food inflows and output of urban agriculture that was not sold through the markets covered in the survey. Finally, the data collected was based on short reference periods, and it is therefore difficult to estimate annual food inflows based on the data collected due to seasonality of food inflows. 8.3 8.3.1 COMMERCIAL FOOD INFLOWS MARKETS FOR FRESH PRODUCE

The markets for fresh produce fall under two main categories: markets where the City Council maintains permanent offices for collecting cess, and markets that do not have City Council offices. Both categories of markets have management committees of traders; although there are governance issues in the way the committees are elected and the way they conduct their affairs (especially downward accountability to their members). Generally, the infrastructure (e.g. roads, parking and offloading zones) and amenities (e.g. toilets) were poor. In some City Council markets (e.g. Ngaara and City Market), traders get some return for the cess paid to the City Council in the form of services and general infrastructure within the markets. In some markets like Toi in Kibera, there were no services rendered by the City Council despite the fact that all deliveries of produce were levied. In most of the Council markets, security was adequate. However, the levying of cess on food deliveries is legally a source of revenue for the City Council (just like land rates and business licensing), and is not therefore viewed by the City Council as cost recovery for services provided in the markets. There were also instances of collusion between wholesalers and the City Council personnel to evade the cess, and levying of cess without issuing receipts. In the non-Council markets, the management committees organize for common services (e.g. security, cleaning and garbage collection) and protect the interests of traders from outside interests (e.g. land grabbers). Water and use of toilets is normally at a fee. The state of infrastructure in the independent markets was generally poorer than in the City Council markets. The role of brokers in the markets was prevalent in all the wholesale markets. The brokers determine the prices of some types of produce. In the case of tomatoes, there are also brokers in the supplying areas e.g. Kirinyaga. The brokers decide whom to sell to, especially during periods of low supply of particular produce. There are two main ways in which brokers in Nairobi markets earn their income: a fixed brokerage fee for the quantity delivered by the wholesaler, and a markup between the actual sale price and an agreed price paid to the supplier. Within most of the markets, the passageways were very narrow. Congestion was common in all markets mainly due to human traffic and use of pushcarts within the markets. In some markets, some retailers occupy the passageways to display and sell their produce. The pushcarts are also used to transport crop produce between markets and to final consumers (e.g. hotels), thus creating congestion in the streets.

74

It was only in one market (City Park market) where fresh produce is washed before sale. In most of the markets, the leftovers (e.g. maize combs and vegetable leaves) are sold to households for feeding livestock or as compost for urban agriculture. 8.3.2 MARKETS FOR DRY PRODUCE

In Nyamakima, there was heavy congestion on the narrow road, which is lined by the shops that sell dry crop produce. Retailers of fresh produce who use the same street to display and sell their produce make the congestion worse. It was not possible to establish the source of maize that makes muthokoi because the source reported was millers in Nairobi. The survey shows that some of the commercial food inflows were imported from other East African countries (Uganda and Tanzania) and a few countries in Asia (e.g. rice from Pakistan and Vietnam) and Europe (e.g. minji - dry peas - from Denmark and Norway). Along the Kenya-Uganda border, Ugandans purchase soft drinks and alcohol from Kenya, while Kenyans purchase a wide variety of goods from Uganda e.g. foodstuffs, clothes and private healthcare services. The reliance on food from the neighbouring countries could be caused by differences in costs of agricultural inputs. It is also possible that there is a psychological overhang emanating from the myth that Kenya is relatively more developed. Such a myth can cause currency misalignment such that the exchange rates may not reflect purchasing power parities. 8.3.3 QUANTITIES OF FRESH AND DRY FOOD DELIVERIES

The estimated quantities of food delivered to the surveyed markets and Nyamakima for two weeks were highest for English potatoes (4,994,489 kg), followed by bananas (1,118,998 kg), beans (1,062,887), tomatoes (598,025 kg), onions (581,303 kg), cabbages (565,926 kg), carrots (377,118 kg), maize grain (347,790 kg) and green maize (243,273 kg). The weight of green maize reported excludes an estimated 50% non-edible matter, while non-edible matter for bananas was estimated at 20%. 8.3.4 SURVEY OF FOOD PROCESSING FIRMS

Out of a selected forty food processing firms, only 15 responded. Out of the 15 responding firms, one was dealing with chicken and the other with slaughter of pigs and sale of pig products. The data is for the whole of calendar year 2001. The responding firms were five bakeries, two dairies, four maize millers, and two wheat and maize millers. The output of the 13 firms that was sold in Nairobi was 38,571 metric tons of maize flour, 37,440 metric tons of wheat flour, 15,993 metric tons of bread, and 3,240 metric tons of milk. The data were not weighted to compensate for nonresponse, as most of the nonresponding firms were located far from Nairobi, and are therefore expected to have lower sales in Nairobi compared with those that responded. 8.3.5 LIVESTOCK

There is relative specialisation among the abattoirs e.g. Kiamaiko (goats), Ndumbuini and Farmers Choice (pigs), Mlolongo (camels) and Dagoretti (cattle). All the abattoirs fulfilled the requirements of sanitation and hygiene. It was, however, not possible to establish the standards of hygiene as livestock products move from the abattoirs all the way to the consumers. The transportation of offal (heart and lungs, kidneys, liver and alimentary canal) from abattoirs is normally in bags and is not subjected to official regulations for meat containers. 8.3.6 CHICKEN AND FISH

In all the markets, slaughtered chickens are inspected. In City Market, the chickens are inspected on delivery as they are slaughtered elsewhere. Chickens that die on the way before delivery to the markets are sold at throwaway prices. There is no particular location where the dead chickens are sold, and it was not possible to establish the final consumers for the same.

75

The majority of the fish were from Lake Victoria, with minor deliveries from Lake Magadi (Kajiado) and Masinga Dam (Machakos). There were no fish deliveries from Lake Naivasha due to a temporary ban on fishing from the lake. 8.3.7 MOVEMENT OF FOOD FROM SOURCE TO NAIROBI MARKETS

The wholesalers complained of poor access roads to the main food producing areas. In some areas, transportation of food to the main roads in the wet season is by use of human carriers. Wholesalers are also forced to spend more time on the way, thus increasing their transport costs and endangering their lives en route. Cases of banditry and rape of female traders in transit were also reported. However, the issue of transport went beyond the quality of the roads to the type of road network. In several food producing areas e.g. Kwale, there are no direct routes to Nairobi, and traders complained of long distances to Nairobi by road. It appears that the national road network was designed to connect various layers of the provincial administration starting from the chief upwards and a network of poorly maintained access roads within a location to connect various hamlets. The roads only connect food deficit and surplus areas by default, thus increasing the distances from food sources to Nairobi. 8.4 URBAN AGRICULTURE

Urban agriculture in Nairobi is either rain-fed or irrigated agriculture. In the areas near the boundaries of the city, urban agriculture does not significantly differ from that undertaken in the neighboring districts. However, farming undertaken on the banks of polluted rivers is mainly undertaken for subsistence and only small quantities find their way into the market. The latter farmers are also small-scale producers who use the food to feed their families and sell what is left to finance their cash outlays. As in many local authorities in Kenya, Nairobi has a dual administration, with a provincial commissioner and a mayor within the same geographical jurisdiction. The central government treats Nairobi as a province in terms of administration and representation of ministries by departmental heads. The City Council by-laws prohibit farming in public streets and treats livestock keeping as general nuisance. Among live animals, the by-laws only expressly authorize the keeping of lizards/geckos. The ministry of agriculture has a Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension (PDALE) in charge of Nairobi province. Nairobi is further divided into divisions, each with agriculture extension staffs. However, the government extension personnel are oriented towards service delivery in rural settings. There are therefore no homegrown extension models for urban farmers. Urban agriculture is under threat since some farmers are tilling unoccupied land that is slowly giving way to residential estates. The contribution of urban slums to agriculture is mainly in the form of polluting the rivers that irrigate the farms. Urban agriculture is widely viewed as favorable to the quality of the environment. At the more elementary level, plants convert carbon dioxide to oxygen, while humans do the exact opposite. Urban agriculture assists to provide carbon sinks for pollution from automobiles, factories, and human respiration and perspiration. In the markets covered by the survey, the waste was sold to feed animals in Nairobi and its environs, thus assisting in cleaning the city. The fact that there is urban agriculture that partly depends on polluted river water also assists to focus policy on contamination of water sources in Nairobi.

8.5

LESSONS LEARNT

The two components of the activity urban agriculture and commercial inflows of food to Nairobi were to be completed in two months. However, the exercise took almost six months. Due to shortage of time, urban agriculture relied on secondary data from the ministry of agriculture annual reports, and no effort was made at collecting primary data.

76

The only component that involved primary data collection was commercial food inflows covering both crop and livestock. The resources allocated to the activity were inadequate. For example, three retail markets (Mutindwa, Kaka and Dandora) were each assigned one enumerator; only Wakulima and City Market had three enumerators each; while the rest of the markets had two enumerators each. A higher number of enumerators would have increased overall response from the markets. For example, in Wakulima, most of the wholesalers arrive almost at the same time, and are always in a hurry to offload produce. In City Market, there were only three enumerators covering all the 15 gates. In Korogocho, there are different offloading zones for each major commodity delivered to the market. Ideally, there should have been two enumerators in each of the smaller markets (e.g. Mutindwa and Dandora), about six each in Wakulima and City Market, and three each in Gikomba, Githurai and Korogocho. Some of the enumerators did a splendid job. The enumerators who were already operating in the assigned markets as traders did not encounter problems of respondent cooperation. In general, most of the enumerators reported taking excessive personal risk by starting work at 5 a.m. This was because there were no resources for hiring accommodation for them next to the markets. However, most of the enumerators were residents near the markets they were assigned, although some were residing almost a kilometer away from the markets.

8.6

THE WAY AHEAD

The implementation of the survey was preceded by development of survey instruments (questionnaires and enumerators reference manual) and a host of decisions on coverage (e.g. markets and food processing firms), requisite survey personnel, field implementation, and a restrictive resource envelope for the entire exercise. The design of the entire exercise did not have the benefit of experiences from previous surveys in Kenya or other countries. In the process, there were problems that were not anticipated. The survey is therefore useful, both for the information collected and for lessons learnt after the event which may be useful for similar exercises. There were also inherent problems in the survey design as the main purpose was to derive aggregate food supply, rather than distributional implications at the household level. The study was intended to cover all the food consumed in Nairobi, and therefore sought to combine survey of commercial food inflows and output of urban agriculture that was not sold in the surveyed markets. However, due to resource constraints, the number of enumerators in the major wholesale markets was inadequate. There is therefore a possibility that there was under-enumeration in some markets. Other than for the survey of food processing firms which had a one-year reference period, information on commercial food inflows was either for a two-week or one-month reference period. Future surveys could be undertaken for two weeks, but repeated after every three months for one year to capture seasonal variation. In addition, the resources should be adequate so that there are sufficient enumerators especially for the major wholesale markets. The survey should aim for complete coverage as any attempt to sample respondents would give the enumerators undue discretion that is likely to be misused. The short reference period (two weeks) for each round of the survey is to avoid respondent fatigue that was already evident as the data collection progressed. The data on urban agriculture can be improved by providing support to the office of the Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Development. The data on urban agriculture should also be purged to net out the output that is sold outside Nairobi and that sold in the markets in Nairobi (as the latter will have been captured by the survey of commercial food inflows). The data on commercial food inflows and urban agriculture would only provide an indication of aggregate food supply rather than access at household and individual levels. The differences in access could be captured through an Urban Household Budget Survey that utilizes a probability sample based on the national sample frame maintained by the Central Bureau of Statistics, with a detailed list of consumption items. Ideally, the Urban Household Budget Survey should also coincide with the survey of commercial food inflows, i.e. be conducted for two weeks four times a year to capture seasonal variations in food consumption. In addition, the survey should use the diary method in which respondents are visited at the beginning of the reference period, and asked to record all their household purchases for the following two weeks. The diaries should be picked and checked by enumerators at weekly rests.
77

The results of the Urban Household Budget Survey can then be weighted (blown up) to derive consumption aggregates that can be compared with the results of the survey of commercial food inflows and purged data on urban agriculture. The Urban Household Budget Survey could also contain a module on child nutrition (anthropometrics) so as to gather information on the impact of a households food access to the nutritional welfare of the under-fives in the responding households.

78

REFERENCES
Aldington, Tim, Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture: Some thoughts on the issue, in: P. Groppo (ed.), Land Reform, Land Settlement and Cooperatives, FAO, Rome, 1997 Atayese, M.O., A.I. Eigbadon, K.A. Oluwa and J.K. Adesodun, Heavy Metal Contamination of Amaranthus Grown along Major Highways in Lagos, Nigeria, African Crop Science Journal, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2009 Barlow, A.R., English-Kikuyu Dictionary, edited by T.G. Benson, Oxford University Press, Nairobi, 1975 Benson, T.G. (ed.), Kikuyu-English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, Nairobi, 1964 Cornish, G.A., and N.C. Kielen, Wastewater Irrigation - Hazard of Lifeline? Empirical Results from Nairobi, Kenya and Kumasi, Ghana, In: C.A. Scott, N.I. Faruqui and L. Raschid-Sally (eds.), Wastewater Use in Irrigated Agriculture: Confronting the Livelihood and Environmental Realities, CAB International in association With International Water Management Institute and International Research Development Centre, 2004 Curtin, Philip, Medical Knowledge and Urban Planning in Tropical Africa, American Historical Review, 90 (3), 1985 Dennery, P., Urban Food Producers Decision-Making: A Case Study of Kibera, City of Nairobi, Kenya, African Urban Quarterly, 11(2, 3), Nairobi, 1996 Dennery, P.R., Inside Urban Agriculture: An Exploration of Food Producer Decision Making in a Nairobi Slum, M.Sc. Thesis, Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 1995 Echenberg, Myron, Black Death, White Medicine: Bubonic Plague and the Politics of Public Health in Colonial Senegal, 1914-1945, Heinemann, 2002 Fafchamps, M., Introduction: Markets in Sub-Saharan Africa, World Development, 25(5), 1997 Foeken, D.W.J., S.O. Owuor and W. Klaver, Crop cultivation in Nakuru town, Kenya: Practice and potential, African Studies Centre working paper 50, Leiden, Netherlands, 2002 Foeken, D.W.J., and S.O. Owuor, Urban Farmers in Nakuru, Kenya, African Studies Center Working Paper No. 45/2000, Leiden, Netherlands, 2000 Foeken, D.W.J., and A. Mboganie-Mwangi, Does Access to Land Have a Positive Impact on the Food Situation of the Urban Poor? A Case Study in Nairobi, Eastern Africa Social Science Research Review, vol. 14, no. 1, 1998 Foeken, Dick, and A.M. Mwangi, Farming in the City of Nairobi, African Studies Center Working Paper No. 30/1998, Leiden, Netherlands, 1998 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture: A briefing guide for the successful implementation of Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture in Developing Countries and Countries of Transition, Rome, July 2001 Freeman, D.B., Survival Strategy or Business Training Ground? The significance of urban agriculture to the advancement of women in African cities, African Studies Review, Vol. 36, No. 3, December 1993 Freeman, Donald B., A City of Farmers: Informal Urban Agriculture in the Open Spaces of Nairobi, Kenya, McGillQueens University Press, Montreal and Kingston, Canada, 1991 Frenkel, Stephen, and John Western, Pretext or Prophylaxis? Racial Segregation and Malarial Mosquitoes in a British Tropical Colony: Sierra Leone, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 78, No. 2, June 1988
79

Goerg, Odile, From Hill Station (Freetown) to Downtown Conakry (First Ward): Comparing French and British Approaches to Segregation in Colonial Cities at the Beginning of the Twentieth Century, Canadian Journal of African Studies, 32(1), 1998 Hide, Jon, Improving Irrigation in Peri-urban Areas: Findings from Detailed Farm Studies in Nairobi, Paper presented at the workshop on Informal Peri-Urban Irrigation: Opportunities and Constraints, Kumasi, Ghana, March 7-9, 2001 Hide, J.M., J. Kimani and J. Kimani Thuo, Informal Irrigation in the Peri-Urban Zone of Nairobi, Kenya: An Analysis of Farmer Activity and Productivity, Report OD/TN 104, HR Wallingford Ltd, April 2001 Hide, J.M., and J. Kimani, Informal Irrigation in the Peri-Urban Zone of Nairobi, Kenya: Findings from an Initial Questionnaire Survey, Report OD/TN 98, HR Wallingford Ltd, 2000 Hirschman, Albert O., The Paternity of an Index, American Economic Review, 54(5), September 1964 Jayne, T.S., and S. Jones, Food Marketing and Pricing Policy in Eastern and Southern Africa: A Survey, World Development, 25(9), 1997 Karanja, N., M. Njenga, G. Prain, E. Kangethe, G. Kironchi, C. Githuku, P. Kinyari and G.K. Mutua, Assessment of Environmental and Public Health Hazards in Wastewater Used for Urban Agriculture in Nairobi, Kenya, Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems, 12, 2010 Kenya, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Nairobi Province Annual Reports, 1997-2000 Kenya, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, The National Agricultural and Livestock Extension Programme (NALEP), Draft final report, 1999 Kenya, Ministry of Local Government, Report by the Independent Probe Committee on Financial and Management Problems of Nairobi City Council (Chairman: Professor S.K. Ongeri), 1983 Kingoriah, G.K., Policy Impacts on Urban Land Use Patterns in Nairobi, Kenya: 1899-1979, Ph.D. thesis, Indiana State University, 1980 Lado, C., Informal Urban Agriculture in Nairobi, Kenya: Problem or Resource in Development and Land Use Planning? Land Use Policy, 7(3), July 1990 Lamba, Davinder, Nairobis Environment: A Review of Conditions and Issues, Mazingira Institute, Nairobi, 1994 Lee-Smith, D., and Davinder Lamba, Social Transformation in a Post-Colonial City: The Case of Nairobi, in: M. Polese and R. Stren (eds.), The Social Sustainability of Cities: Diversity and Management of Change, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Canada, 2000 Lee-Smith, D., and D. Lamba, Good Governance and Urban Development in Nairobi, Mazingira Institute, Nairobi, Kenya, 1998 Lee-Smith, D., and D. Lamba, Urban Farming in Africa, Ecodecision, December 1997 Lee-Smith, D., and P.A. Memon, Urban Agriculture in Kenya, in: A.G. Egziabher et al, Cities Feeding People: An Examination of Urban Agriculture in East Africa, International Development Research Center, Ottawa, Canada, 1994 Lee-Smith, D., and Pyar Ali Memon, Urban Agriculture in Kenya, Canadian Journal of African Studies, Vol. 27 No. 1, 1993

80

Lee-Smith, D., M. Manundu, D. Lamba and P.K. Kuria, Urban Food Production and the Cooking Fuel Situation in Urban Kenya: Results of a 1985 National Survey, Mazingira Institute, Nairobi, Kenya, 1987 Lopez, R.A., A.O. Adelaja and M.S. Andrews, The Effects of Sub-urbanization on Agriculture, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 70(2), May 1988 Maundu, P.M. et al, Traditional Food Plants of Kenya, National Museums of Kenya, Nairobi, 1999 Makokha, Anselimo O., Leonard R. Mghweno, Happy S. Magoha, Amina Nakajugo and John M. Wekesa, Environmental lead pollution and contamination in food around Lake Victoria, Kisumu, Kenya, African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 2 (10), October 2008 Makita, Kohei, Urban and peri-urban agriculture and its zoonotic risks in Kampala, Uganda, PhD thesis, The University of Edinburgh, 2009 Maxwell, Don, The Political Economy of Urban Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa, World Development, 27(11), November, 1999 Maxwell, Daniel, C. Levin and J. Csete, Does Urban Agriculture Help Prevent Malnutrition? Evidence from Kampala, Food Consumption and Nutrition Division Discussion Paper No. 45, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C., 1998 Maxwell, Don, The Political Economy of Urban Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa, Food Consumption and Nutrition Division Discussion Paper No. 41, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C., 1998 Maxwell, Daniel G., Highest and Best Use? Access to Urban Land for Semi-Subsistence Food Production, Land Use Policy, 13(3), 1996 Maxwell, Daniel G., Alternative Food Security Strategy: A Household Analysis of Urban Agriculture in Kampala, World Development, 23(10), 1995 Maxwell, D., Land Access and Household Logic: Urban farming in Kampala, Makerere Institute of Social Research Paper, Makerere University, 1993 Maxwell, D., and S. Zziwa, Urban farming in Africa: the case of Kampala, Uganda, ACTS Press, Nairobi, 1992 Mbiba, B., and A.N. Kinyungu, The Challenge of Urban and Peri-Urban Transformations in Nairobi: Contradictions, Conflicts and Opportunities Under Globalization, in: Beacon Mbiba (ed.), Review of Urban and Peri-Urban Transformations and Livelihoods in East and Southern Africa, Urban and Peri-Urban Research Network (Peri-NET), London, 2001 Mbwesa, D.N., A Study of Some Socioeconomic Factors Influencing Roadside Farming in Kikuyu and Limuru Divisions, Kiambu District, M.A. thesis, Department of Geography, Kenyatta University, 1988 Memon, P.A., Wholesaling in Kenya 1830-1940, Ph.D. thesis, University of Western Ontario, Canada, 1974 Memon, P.A., Some Geographical Aspects of the History of Urban Development in Kenya, in: B.A. Ogot (editor), Economic and Social History of East Africa, East Africa Literature Bureau, Nairobi, Kenya, 1975 Municipal Development Programme for Eastern and Southern Africa (MDP-ESA), Proceedings of the MDP/IDRC Workshop on the Political Economy of Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture in Eastern and Southern Africa, Harare, Zimbabwe, 28 February to 2 March, 2001 Murphy, S.P., S.W. Weinberg-Andersson, C. Neumann, K. Mulligan and D.H. Calloway, Development of Research Nutrient Databases: An Example Using Foods Consumed in Rural Kenya, Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 4, 1991
81

Mutisya, D.N., and C. Lado, Some Socioeconomic Factors Behind Roadside Farming in Kiambu District, Kenya, Journal of Eastern African Research and Development, 21, 1991 Mwangi, A.M., and D. Foeken, Urban Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition in Low Income Areas of the City of Nairobi, Kenya, African Urban Quarterly, 11(2, 3), Nairobi, 1996 Mwangi, A.M., The Role of Urban Agriculture for Food Security in Low Income Areas in Nairobi, Report No. 54/1995, Food and Nutrition Studies Programme, African Studies Center, Leiden, 1995 Njambi, A.K., The Political Economy of Urban Agriculture in Eastern and Southern Africa: The Case of Kenya, In: Municipal Development Programme Regional Office for Eastern and Southern Africa, The Political Economy of Urban and Per-Urban Agriculture in Eastern and Southern Africa: Proceedings of the MDP/IDRC Workshop Held in Harare, Zimbabwe, 2001 Omore, A., S. Arimi, E. Kangethe, J. McDermott, S. Staal, E. Ouma, J. Odhiambo, A. Mwangi, G. Aboge, E. Koroti and R. Koech, Assessing and Managing Milk-borne Health Risks for the Benefit of Consumers in Kenya, Smallholder Dairy (R&D) Project, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, January 2002 Omore, A., H. Muriuki, M. Kenyanjui, M. Owango and S. Staal, The Kenyan Dairy Sub-Sector: A Rapid Appraisal, MOA/KARI/ILRI Smallholder Dairy (Research & Development) Project Report funded by British Department for International Development (DFID), January 1999 Platt, B.S., Tables of Representative Values of Foods Commonly Used in Tropical Countries, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, 1962 Ruel, M.T., L. Haddad and J.L. Garret, Some Urban Facts of Life: Implications for Research and Policy, Food Consumption and Nutrition Division Discussion Paper No. 64, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C., 1999 Ruel, M.T., L. Haddad and J.L. Garret, Some Urban Facts of Life: Implications for Research and Policy, World Development, 27(11), November 1999 Ruel, M., J. Garrett, P. Engle, L. Haddad, D. Maxwell, P. Menon, S. Morris and A. Oshaug, Urban Challenges to Nutrition Security: A review of food security, health and care in cities, Washington D.C., International Food Policy Research Institute, 1997 Sehmi, Jaswant K., National Food Composition Tables and Planning of Satisfactory Diets in Kenya, National Public Health Laboratories, Ministry of Health, Nairobi, Kenya, 1993 Shackleton, Charlie M., Margaret W. Pasquini and Axel W. Drescher (editors), African Indigenous Vegetables in Urban Agriculture, Earthscan, London, 2009 Smiley, Sarah L., The City of Three Colors: Segregation in Colonial Dar es Salaam, 1891-1961, Historical Geography, Volume 37, 2009 Staal, S., C. Delgado, and C. Nicholson, Smallholder Dairy under Transaction Costs in East Africa, World Development, 25(5), 1997 Stallings, C.C., and M. L. McGilliard, Lead factors for total mixed ration formulation, Journal of Dairy Science, 67(4), April 1984 Thornton, W.L.M., L. Silberman and P.R. Anderson, Nairobi: Master Plan for a Colonial Capital, HMSO, London, UK, 1948 Tumbo-Oeri, A.G., Lead and Cadmium Levels in Some Leafy Vegetables Sold in Nairobi Vegetable Markets, East African Medical Journal, 65(6), January 1988
82

West, C.E., F. Pepping and C.R. Temalilwa (eds.), The Composition of Foods Commonly Eaten in East Africa, Wageningen Agricultural University, the Netherlands, 1988

83

STATISTICAL ANNEX
TABLES FOR CHAPTER FIVE Table 5.1: Table 5.2a: Table 5.2b: Table 5.2c: Table 5.2d: Table 5.2e: Table 5.2f: Table 5.3a: Table 5.3b: Shs Table 5.3c: Table 5.3d: Table 5.3e: Table 5.3f: Table 5.4: Table 5.5: Table 5.6a: Table 5.6b: Table 5.6c: Table 5.6d: Table 5.6e: Table 5.6f: Table 5.6g: Table 5.7: Table 5.8: Table 5.9: Table 5.10: Table 5.11: Table 5.12: Table 5.13a: Table 5.13b: Table 5.14: Table 5.15: Table 5.16: Distribution of Wholesalers by Market and Sex Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Cereals) Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Starchy Roots and Tubers) Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Grain legumes) Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Leafy Vegetables) Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Other vegetables) Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Fruits) Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Cereals) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Starchy roots and tubers) Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Grain legumes) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Leafy Vegetables) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Other vegetables) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Fruits) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and Source of Food Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex, Source and Value of Food Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Cereals) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Starchy Roots and Tubers) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Grain legumes) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Leafy Vegetables) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Other Vegetables) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Fruits) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Nuts and Seeds) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (All commodities) - Shs Value of Food Supplied to the Markets (All commodities) - Shs Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Transport Mode of Transport by Source of Food (excluding inter-market trade) Transport Costs and Cost of Food per Wholesaler by Area (Shs) Distribution of Wholesalers by Whether Traded in Own Produce Quantity and Cost of Foods Delivered to Nyamakima Quantity and Cost of Foods Delivered to Nyamakima (%) Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (All commodities) - Shs Quantities of Food Delivered to the Markets in Two Weeks (kg) Quantities of Food from Food Processing Firms (metric tons) TABLES FOR CHAPTER SIX Table 6.1a: Table 6.1b: Table 6.2: Table 6.3a: Table 6.3b: Table 6.4a: Table 6.4b: Table 6.5a: Table 6.5b: Livestock Slaughtered and Sold to Nairobi by Source Livestock Slaughtered and Sold to Nairobi by Source (%) Livestock Slaughtered and Sold in Nairobi by Abattoir Livestock Slaughtered and Sold in Nairobi by Abattoir and Source Livestock Slaughtered and Sold in Nairobi by Abattoir and Source (%) Costs of Animals Sold in Nairobi by Abattoir and Source (Shs) Costs of Animals Sold in Nairobi by Abattoir and Source (%) Breakdown of Costs of Animals Sold in Nairobi (Shs) Breakdown of Costs of Animals Sold in Nairobi (%) TABLES FOR CHAPTER SEVEN Table 7.1a: Sources of Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Chicken Variety Table 7.1b: Sources of Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Chicken Variety (%)

84

Table 7.1c: Table 7.1d: Table 7.2a: Table 7.2b: Table 7.3a: Table 7.3b: Table 7.4a: Table 7.4b: Table 7.4c: Table 7.5a: Table 7.5b: Table 7.5c: Table 7.5d: Table 7.6a: Table 7.6b:

Sources of Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Chicken Variety (%) Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Source and Chicken Variety (%) Farm Gate Costs of Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Chicken Variety Farm Gate Costs of Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Chicken Variety (%) Types of Wholesalers of Grade Chicken Inflows by Source Types of Wholesalers of Local Chicken Inflows by Source Distribution of Wholesalers of Grade Chicken by Sex of Wholesaler Distribution of Wholesalers of Local Chicken by Sex of Wholesaler Distribution of Wholesalers of Chicken by Sex of Wholesaler Quantities (Kg) and Costs (Shs) of Fish Delivered to Gikomba Market Quantities (Kg) and Costs (Shs) of Fish Delivered to Toi Market Quantities (Kg) and Costs (Shs) of Fish Delivered to City Market Quantities (Kg) and Costs (Shs) of Fish Delivered to Gikomba, Toi and City Market Types of Transport Used to Transport Fish to Gikomba, Toi and City Market Types of Transport Used to Transport Fish to Gikomba, Toi and City Market (%) TABLES FOR CHAPTER EIGHT

Table 8.1a: Estimated Calorie and Protein Availability per Adult Equivalent Table 8.1b: Calorie and Protein Availability per Adult Equivalent: Food Processing Firms

85

Table 5.1: Distribution of Wholesalers by Market and Sex Male 1,107 289 30 17 45 52 10 410 313 94 187 166 29 33 2,782 2,583 Number Female 226 114 19 14 15 10 6 74 50 40 25 191 5 187 976 598 Total 1,333 403 49 31 60 62 16 484 363 134 212 357 34 220 3,758 3,181 Male 83.0 71.7 61.2 54.8 75.0 83.9 62.5 84.7 86.2 70.1 88.2 46.5 85.3 15.0 74.0 81.2 Number (%) Female Total 17.0 100.0 28.3 100.0 38.8 100.0 45.2 100.0 25.0 100.0 16.1 100.0 37.5 100.0 15.3 100.0 13.8 100.0 29.9 100.0 11.8 100.0 53.5 100.0 14.7 100.0 85.0 100.0 26.0 100.0 18.8 100.0 Cost of food per delivery (Shs) Male Female Total 32,257 47,601 34,858 29,067 22,044 27,080 43,095 26,592 36,696 22,042 17,306 19,903 7,823 7,803 7,818 6,190 47,695 12,884 3,134 2,257 2,805 17,132 22,452 17,945 16,310 19,505 16,750 17,652 14,408 16,684 11,331 5,035 10,589 1,839 700 1,230 26,226 36,468 27,732 3,213 588 982 22,847 18,843 21,807 24,448 30,346 25,557

Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora TOTAL TOTAL (excluding Fig Tree/Dandora)

Table 5.2a: Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Cereals) Maize (dry) Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 0 0 3 7 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0
86

Maize (green) 41 0 21 8 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0

Rice 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 0

Millet 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sorghum 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Wheat 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 41 0 30 17 0 0 3 3 2 5 0 0

Maize (dry) Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total TOTAL Ratio (male/female) TOTAL* Ratio (male/female) * excluding Fig Tree/Dandora Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 1 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 13 23 0.77 10 13 0.77

Maize (green) 0 0 35 2 17 2 3 0 6 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 126 17 143 7.41 125 13 9.62

Rice 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 6 0 0 0 1 7 14 21 0.50 5 7 0.71

Millet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 n.a. 1 0 n.a.

Sorghum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 2.00 2 1 2.00

Wheat 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.a. 0 0 n.a.

Total 1 0 36 3 19 3 4 2 7 1 3 10 0 0 0 1 146 45 191 3.24 143 34 4.21

87

Table 5.2b: Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Starchy Roots and Tubers) Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total Ratio (male/female) TOTAL* Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Potatoes 675 167 26 13 0 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 0 1 24 8 50 5 16 7 23 3 11 20 0 0 2 8 831 237 3.51 818 209 Sweet potatoes 0 0 7 14 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 3 0 0 0 5 3 1 6 21 29 0.72 20 23
88

Arrow roots 5 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 1.00 7 7

Cassava 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 n.a. 5 0

Yams 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 n.a. 1 0

Total 686 167 33 31 0 0 1 3 2 1 1 3 0 1 24 8 50 5 23 14 26 3 11 20 5 3 3 14 865 273 3.17 851 239

Ratio (male/female) * excluding Fig Tree/Dandora

Potatoes 3.91

Sweet potatoes 0.87

Arrow roots 1.00

Cassava n.a.

Yams n.a.

Total 3.56

Table 5.2c: Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Grain legumes) Beans Dengu Njugu Njahi Wakulima Male 0 0 0 0 Female 0 0 0 0 Gikomba Male 6 4 0 0 Female 5 0 0 0 Retail Male 0 0 0 0 Female 0 0 0 0 Toi Male 0 0 0 0 Female 0 0 0 0 Ngaara Male 0 0 0 0 Female 0 0 0 0 City park Male 0 0 0 0 Female 0 0 0 0 Mutindwa Male 0 0 0 0 Female 0 0 0 0 Korogocho Male 12 0 0 0 Female 1 0 0 0 Githurai Male 3 0 0 0 Female 1 0 0 0 Kawangware Male 0 0 0 0 Female 0 0 0 0 Kangemi Male 0 0 0 0 Female 0 0 0 0 Fig tree Male 7 2 2 4 Female 36 11 8 11 Kaka Male 0 0 0 0 Female 0 0 0 0 Dandora Male 0 0 0 0 Female 0 0 0 0 Total Male 28 6 2 4
89

Peas (green) 43 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 3 13 0 0 0 0 46

F. beans 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15

Kunde (dry) 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

Peas (dry) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 58 1 14 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 1 3 1 0 4 0 1 18 79 0 0 0 0 105

Female Ratio (male/female) TOTAL* Male Female

Ratio (male/female) * excluding Fig Tree/Dandora

Cabbages Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total Ratio (male/female) TOTAL* Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male 70 0 35 10 0 0 1 1 0 0 13 0 2 0 33 7 31 3 23 1 21 0 17 20 0 0 4 9 250 51 4.90 229 Kale 43 0 8 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 94 17 48 6 6 4 56 2 68 94 0 0 7 129 331 256 1.29 256

Beans 43 0.65 21 7 3.00

Dengu 11 0.55 4 0 n.a.

Njugu 8 0.25 0 0 n.a.

Njahi 11 0.36 0 0 n.a.

Peas (green) 22 2.09 43 9 4.78

F. beans 0 n.a. 15 0 n.a.

Kunde (dry) 2 2.00 4 2 2.00

Peas (dry) 0 n.a. 0 0 n.a.

Total 97 1.08 87 18 4.83

Table 5.2d: Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Leafy Vegetables)
Spinach 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 8 0 3 3 22 6 53 59 0 0 3 75 99 144 0.69 43 Dania 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 16 1 0 0 0 0 23 2 11.50 7 Managu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 23 14 2 0 4 19 29 0.66 14 Mchicha 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 41 1 41 0.02 0 Kunde 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 14 0 0 1 54 6 69 0.09 1 P. leaves 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 33 1 34 0.03 0 Lettuce 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 n.a. 8 Terere 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 30 0 0 0 1 5 31 0.16 0 Kahurura 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 0 0 0 0 2 8 0.25 0 Saget 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 35 0 0 0 0 10 35 0.29 0 Sagaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 9 0 n.a. 9 Saragwe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 5 1 5.00 5 Mabaki 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.00 0 Cauliflower 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 n.a. 4 Total 119 0 49 12 0 0 2 3 1 0 24 0 2 2 131 24 87 9 33 9 101 8 186 286 27 3 17 346 779 702 1.11 576

90

Cabbages Female Ratio (male/female) 22 10.41

Kale 33 7.76

Spinach 10 4.30

Dania 1 7.00

Managu 2 7.00

Mchicha 0 n.a.

Kunde 1 1.00

P. leaves 0 n.a.

Lettuce 0 n.a.

Terere 0 n.a.

Kahurura 0 n.a.

Saget 0 n.a.

Sagaa 0 n.a.

Saragwe 1 5.00

Mabaki 0 n.a.

Cauliflower 0 n.a.

Total 70 8.23

* excluding Fig Tree/Dandora Table 5.2e: Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Other vegetables)
Tomatoes Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total Ratio (male/female) TOTAL* Ratio (male/female) Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 34 18 96 7 0 0 7 1 0 0 4 0 1 1 166 18 87 6 5 1 57 1 5 2 0 0 23 39 485 94 5.16 457 53 8.62 Carrots 117 0 8 4 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 2 3 1 3 7 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 141 17 8.29 138 17 8.12 Onions 50 19 5 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 3 1 0 5 2 0 1 4 0 4 3 5 1 0 0 4 1 82 33 2.48 73 31 2.35 Pumpkins 13 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 18 7 2.57 18 6 3.00 Cucumber 15 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 18 1 18.00 17 1 17.00 Brinjals 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 9.00 9 1 9.00 Capsicum 14 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 21 3 7.00 19 3 6.33 Chilli 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 n.a. 0 0 n.a. Karela 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 n.a. 0 0 n.a. Okra 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 n.a. 7 0 n.a. Garlic 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 n.a. 5 0 n.a. Kojet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1.00 0 1 0.00 Dudi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1.00 0 1 0.00 Lavaya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 n.a. 0 0 n.a. Ginger 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 n.a. 1 0 n.a. Green bullet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 n.a. 0 0 n.a. Total 261 38 116 18 1 0 9 3 5 1 7 3 3 1 172 27 89 10 13 5 68 8 29 4 0 0 27 40 800 158 5.06 744 114 6.53

* excluding Fig Tree/Dandora

91

Table 5.2f: Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Food and Sex (Fruits)

Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total Ratio (male/female) TOTAL* Ratio (male/female) Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Bananas 32 2 36 8 23 18 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 8 15 20 14 14 2 7 4 1 2 29 2 0 4 174 72 2.42 173 66 2.62 Oranges 20 19 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 3 1 6 1 4 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 23 1.78 41 23 1.78 Pineapples 29 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 34 4 1 2 1 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 77 9 8.56 66 9 7.33 Avocados 9 1 18 16 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 3 8 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 24 2.92 70 24 2.92 Papaws 3 0 2 5 6 1 0 1 23 9 6 0 2 0 0 3 1 2 5 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 49 25 1.96 48 23 2.09 Mangoes 33 9 6 3 0 0 0 1 10 0 8 2 2 0 10 3 2 0 1 4 5 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 79 24 3.29 77 23 3.35 Sugarcane 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 n.a. 29 0 n.a. W. melon 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 2 6.50 13 2 6.50 Lemon 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 n.a. 17 0 n.a. Passion 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 n.a. 21 0 n.a. Apples 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 n.a. 2 0 n.a. Grapes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 n.a. 1 0 n.a. Tangerine 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 n.a. 1 0 n.a. Total 184 33 64 33 29 19 4 2 39 10 23 2 8 2 54 26 71 22 33 13 21 6 13 3 29 2 2 6 574 179 3.21 559 170 3.29

* excluding Fig Tree/Dandora

92

Table 5.3a: Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Cereals) Shs Maize (dry) Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total TOTAL Ratio (male/female) Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 0 0 135,000 290,040 0 0 52,920 78,480 0 0 0 0 450 0 1,200 4,900 38,000 0 28,600 24,000 42,000 19,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 298,170 416,920 715,090 0.72 Maize (green) 1,824,000 0 391,500 127,000 0 0 33,000 37,800 0 0 0 0 0 0 644,334 31,000 380,750 36,000 58,000 0 81,760 0 600 3,350 0 0 0 0 3,413,944 235,150 3,649,094 14.52
93

Rice 0 0 73,080 208,800 0 0 0 0 27,000 87,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21,000 0 0 0 0 300 916 0 0 0 495 100,380 318,211 418,591 0.32

Millet 0 0 5,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,200 0 5,200 n.a.

Sorghum 0 0 151,200 13,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 151,200 13,000 164,200 11.63

Wheat 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.a.

Total 1,824,000 0 755,980 638,840 0 0 85,920 116,280 27,000 87,000 0 0 450 0 645,534 35,900 418,750 57,000 86,600 24,000 123,760 19,500 900 4,266 0 0 0 495 3,968,894 983,281 4,952,175 4.04

TOTAL* Ratio (male/female) VALUE PER VISIT VALUE PER VISIT* * excluding Fig Tree/Dandora

Male Female Male Female Ratio Male Female Ratio

Maize (dry) 298,170 416,920 0.72 29,817 32,071 0.93 29,817 32,071 0.93

Maize (green) 3,413,344 231,800 14.73 27,095 13,832 1.96 27,307 17,831 1.53

Rice 100,080 316,800 0.32 14,340 22,729 0.63 20,016 45,257 0.44

Millet 5,200 0 n.a. 5,200 5,200

Sorghum 151,200 13,000 11.63 75,600 13,000 5.82 75,600 13,000 5.82

Wheat 0 0 n.a.

Total 3,967,994 978,520 4.06 27,184 21,851 1.24 27,748 28,780 0.96

Table 5.3b: Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Starchy roots and tubers) Shs Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Potatoes 21,013,700 5,277,600 779,150 358,700 0 0 44,000 54,000 48,000 0 40,300 401,700 0 3,100 534,250 175,900 1,137,230 112,840 329,000 76,100 366,940 Sweet potatoes 0 0 131,200 192,600 0 0 0 1,800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35,500 66,040 10,100
94

Arrow roots 23,400 0 0 54,100 0 0 0 0 0 300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,200 22,400 0

Cassava 21,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Yams 750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 21,058,850 5,277,600 910,350 605,400 0 0 44,000 55,800 48,000 300 40,300 401,700 0 3,100 534,250 175,900 1,137,230 112,840 374,700 164,540 377,040

Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total TOTAL Ratio (male/female) TOTAL* Ratio (male/female) VALUE PER VISIT VALUE PER VISIT* * excluding Fig Tree/Dandora

Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Ratio Male Female Ratio

Potatoes 23,600 25,750 36,660 0 0 11,875 5,750 24,330,195 6,525,950 30,856,145 3.73 24,292,570 6,483,540 3.75 29,278 27,536 1.06 29,698 31,022 0.96

Sweet potatoes 0 0 0 56,700 47,800 700 6,250 234,200 314,490 548,690 0.74 233,500 308,240 0.76 11,152 10,844 1.03 11,675 13,402 0.87

Arrow roots 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33,600 76,800 110,400 0.44 33,600 76,800 0.44 4,800 10,971 0.44 4,800 10,971 0.44

Cassava 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21,000 0 21,000 n.a. 21,000 0 n.a. 4,200 4,200

Yams 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 750 n.a. 750 0 n.a. 750 750

Total 23,600 25,750 36,660 56,700 47,800 12,575 12,000 24,619,745 6,917,240 31,536,985 3.56 24,581,420 6,868,580 3.58 28,462 25,338 1.12 28,885 28,739 1.01

Table 5.3c: Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Grain legumes) - Shs Beans Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 0 0 356,500 189,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dengu 0 0 190,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Njugu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Njahi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
95

Peas (green) 1,052,500 28,800 0 24,500 0 0 0 0 0 0

F. beans 159,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kunde (dry) 0 0 205,000 19,800 0 0 0 0 0 0

Peas (dry) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 1,211,500 28,800 751,500 233,600 0 0 0 0 0 0

Beans City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total TOTAL Ratio (male/female) TOTAL* Ratio (male/female) VALUE PER VISIT Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 0 0 0 0 48,400 3,600 113,400 44,000 0 0 0 0 850 5,694 0 0 0 0 519,150 242,594 761,744 2.14 518,300 236,900 2.19 18,541 5,642 3.29 24,681 33,843 0.73

Male Female Ratio VALUE PER VISIT* Male Female Ratio * excluding Fig Tree/Dandora

Dengu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 320 1,800 0 0 0 0 190,320 1,800 192,120 105.73 190,000 0 n.a. 31,720 164 193.84 47,500

Njugu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 420 1,960 0 0 0 0 420 1,960 2,380 0.21 0 0 n.a. 210 245 0.86

Njahi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 600 2,180 0 0 0 0 600 2,180 2,780 0.28 0 0 n.a. 150 198 0.76

Peas (green) 0 0 0 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 40,320 0 2,100 3,000 9,170 0 0 0 0 1,055,500 109,890 1,165,390 9.61 1,052,500 100,720 10.45 22,946 4,995 4.59 24,477 11,191 2.19

F. beans 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 159,000 0 159,000 n.a. 159,000 0 n.a. 10,600 10,600

Kunde (dry) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 205,000 19,800 224,800 10.35 205,000 19,800 10.35 51,250 9,900 5.18 51,250 9,900 5.18

Peas (dry) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.a. 0 0 n.a.

Total 0 0 0 5,000 48,400 3,600 113,400 44,000 0 40,320 0 2,100 5,190 20,804 0 0 0 0 2,129,990 378,224 2,508,214 5.63 2,124,800 357,420 5.94 20,286 3,899 5.20 24,423 19,857 1.23

96

Table 5.3d: Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Leafy Vegetables) Shs
Cabbages Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total TOTAL Ratio (male/Fem) TOTAL* Ratio (male/Fem) VALUE PER VISIT VALUE PER VISIT* Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Female Ratio Male Female Ratio 1,614,940 0 483,550 102,850 0 0 2,400 13,200 0 0 48,960 0 8,500 0 310,220 38,900 484,650 66,000 303,600 15,000 146,530 0 48,600 10,755 0 0 3,872 1,159 3,455,822 247,864 3,703,686 13.94 3,403,350 235,950 14.42 13,823 4,860 2.84 14,862 10,725 1.39 Kale 274,000 0 33,360 6,000 0 0 1,500 11,000 0 0 0 0 0 400 506,850 98,110 362,150 47,400 45,000 24,400 173,120 2,950 59,673 21,468 0 0 822 16,481 1,456,475 228,209 1,684,684 6.38 1,395,980 190,260 7.34 4,400 891 4.94 5,453 5,765 0.95 Spinach 900 0 27,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 18,400 0 26,800 0 10,280 8,400 18,340 3,470 31,880 14,450 0 0 182 3,639 134,382 30,359 164,741 4.43 102,320 12,270 8.34 1,357 211 6.44 2,380 1,227 1.94 Dania 8,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,000 4,000 3,600 0 8,750 200 0 0 0 0 29,350 4,200 33,550 6.99 20,600 4,000 5.15 1,276 2,100 0.61 2,943 4,000 0.74 Managu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 655 2,585 69,600 6,800 0 190 70,255 9,575 79,830 7.34 69,600 6,800 10.24 3,698 330 11.20 4,971 3,400 1.46 Mchicha 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 670 20 670 690 0.03 0 0 n.a. 20 16 1.22 Kunde 0 0 8,500 4,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,525 1,690 0 0 300 5,374 10,325 11,064 21,389 0.93 8,500 4,000 2.13 1,721 160 10.73 8,500 4,000 2.13 P. leaves 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 20 695 20 745 765 0.03 0 0 n.a. 20 22 0.91 2,469 Lettuce 16,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,745 0 0 0 0 0 22,495 0 22,495 n.a. 19,750 0 n.a. 1,730 Terere 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,050 3,585 0 0 0 10 1,050 3,595 4,645 0.29 0 0 n.a. 210 116 1.81 Kahurura 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 270 970 0 0 0 0 270 970 1,240 0.28 0 0 n.a. 135 121 1.11 Saget 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,510 7,300 0 0 0 0 2,510 7,300 9,810 0.34 0 0 n.a. 251 209 1.20 1,358 Sagaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,220 0 0 0 12,220 0 12,220 n.a. 12,220 0 n.a. 1,358 Saragwe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,040 240 0 0 20,040 240 20,280 83.50 20,040 240 83.50 4,008 240 16.70 4,008 240 16.70 Mabaki 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 0.00 0 0 n.a. 50 1,500 Cauliflower 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 200 0 0 0 0 0 6,200 0 6,200 n.a. 6,000 0 n.a. 1,240 Total 1,913,840 0 553,010 112,850 0 0 3,900 24,200 15,000 0 66,710 0 8,500 800 835,470 137,010 873,600 113,400 359,880 51,800 341,590 6,420 157,858 63,102 86,860 7,040 5,216 28,218 5,221,434 544,840 5,766,274 9.58 5,058,360 453,520 11.15 6,703 776 8.64 8,782 6,479 1.36

* excluding Fig Tree/Dandora

97

Table 5.3e: Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Other vegetables) - Shs
Tomatoes Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total TOTAL Ratio (male/Fem) TOTAL* Ratio (male/Fem) VALUE PER VISIT Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem Male Fem 1,935,600 810,000 2,244,400 147,800 0 0 136,200 20,000 0 0 16,000 0 4,800 2,400 3,377,600 339,900 1,432,700 98,100 140,700 22,500 1,072,900 19,800 29,800 4,200 0 0 42,150 62,950 10,432,850 1,527,650 11,960,500 6.83 10,360,900 1,460,500 7.09 21,511 16,252 1.32 Carrots 2,119,300 0 71,950 35,750 0 0 1,200 8,000 0 0 0 0 720 0 21,000 13,700 52,500 75,000 4,000 23,750 15,000 6,600 2,800 0 0 0 0 0 2,288,470 162,800 2,451,270 14.06 2,285,670 162,800 14.04 16,230 9,576 1.69 Onions 2,310,200 3,176,000 139,000 39,200 1,200 0 0 4,000 0 0 7,000 4,500 1,350 0 497,500 181,200 0 120,000 150,500 0 22,500 18,800 26,100 2,000 0 0 44,300 850 3,199,650 3,546,550 6,746,200 0.90 3,129,250 3,543,700 0.88 39,020 107,471 0.36 Pumpkins 74,100 0 5,000 25,700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23,500 55,000 0 0 0 240 0 0 0 0 102,600 80,940 183,540 1.27 102,600 80,700 1.27 5,700 11,563 0.49 Cucumber 161,800 0 0 0 0 0 1,500 0 3,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 0 0 0 0 0 167,300 64 167,364 2,614.06 166,800 64 2,606.25 9,294 64 145.23 Brinjals 32,700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 330 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32,700 330 33,030 99.09 32,700 330 99.09 3,633 330 11.01 Capsicum 99,000 18,000 39,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 300 0 0 0 0 0 450 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 139,200 18,750 157,950 7.42 138,200 18,750 7.37 6,629 6,250 1.06 Chilli 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,300 0 0 0 0 0 1,300 0 1,300 n.a. 0 0 n.a. 650 Karela 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,500 0 0 0 0 0 2,500 0 2,500 n.a. 0 0 n.a. 2,500 Okra 54,800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 0 0 0 0 0 55,300 0 55,300 n.a. 54,800 0 n.a. 6,913 Garlic 93,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 95,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,000 0 0 0 0 0 191,800 0 191,800 n.a. 188,800 0 n.a. 27,400 Kojet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 240 0 0 0 0 0 0 400 0 0 0 0 0 400 240 640 1.67 0 240 0.00 400 240 1.67 Dudi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 0 0 0 0 0 500 70 570 7.14 0 70 0.00 500 70 7.14 Lavaya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,350 0 0 0 0 0 1,350 0 1,350 n.a. 0 0 n.a. 675 Ginger 52,800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,600 0 0 0 0 0 58,400 0 58,400 n.a. 52,800 0 n.a. 19,467 Green bullet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,500 0 0 0 0 0 2,500 0 2,500 n.a. 0 0 n.a. 2,500 Total 6,933,900 4,004,000 2,499,550 248,450 1,200 0 138,900 32,000 98,700 300 23,000 4,500 6,870 2,400 3,896,100 535,954 1,485,200 293,100 318,700 101,250 1,110,400 45,200 77,850 6,440 0 0 86,450 63,800 16,676,820 5,337,394 22,014,214 3.12 16,512,520 5,267,154 3.13 20,846 33,781 0.62

Male Fem Male Female Ratio

98

Tomatoes VALUE PER VISIT* Male Female Ratio 22,672 27,557 0.82

Carrots 16,563 9,576 1.73

Onions 42,866 114,313 0.37

Pumpkins 5,700 13,450 0.42

Cucumber 9,812 64 153.31

Brinjals 3,633 330 11.01

Capsicum 7,274 6,250 1.16

Chilli

Karela

Okra 7,829

Garlic 37,760

Kojet

Dudi

Lavaya

Ginger 52,800

Green bullet

Total 22,194 46,203 0.48

240

70

* excluding Fig Tree/Dandora Table 5.3f: Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and value of food Delivered (Fruits) Shs
Bananas Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total TOTAL Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 517,090 38,475 2,657,200 491,200 1,193,850 494,850 2,000 0 2,900 0 0 0 320 1,600 462,300 706,200 266,880 217,400 308,500 22,000 30,480 19,560 2,400 1,512 617,000 127,500 0 5,150 6,060,920 2,125,447 8,186,367 Oranges 841,440 1,309,000 16,000 0 0 0 92,000 0 0 0 4,200 0 400 640 159,000 21,000 300,500 48,000 79,100 48,000 17,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,509,840 1,426,640 2,936,480 Pineapples 504,103 0 0 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 600 2,400 0 0 0 0 2,268 379,900 27,500 5,000 29,600 10,000 0 32,200 0 0 0 0 0 933,603 60,968 994,571 Avocados 81,300 4,000 221,170 131,150 0 0 8,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 331,450 16,600 51,000 5,500 6,650 27,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 699,570 185,150 884,720 Papaws 8,500 0 9,200 19,100 97,800 10,400 0 2,000 45,360 18,350 23,700 0 2,200 0 0 8,120 36,000 56,500 75,500 4,000 0 700 3,200 0 0 0 0 317 301,460 119,487 420,947 Mangoes 224,700 76,800 22,200 31,400 0 0 0 12,000 55,300 0 123,000 64,750 2,000 0 109,650 18,900 42,700 0 13,500 62,900 87,750 1,600 0 900 0 0 1,800 0 682,600 269,250 951,850 Sugarcane 62,320 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,920 0 0 0 2,000 0 0 0 27,000 0 20,690 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113,930 0 113,930 W. melon 24,500 10,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 21,590 0 29,150 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75,240 10,750 85,990 Lemon 153,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 156,750 0 156,750 Passion 345,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 345,900 0 345,900 Apples 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,200 0 0 0 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,200 0 5,200 Grapes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 600 0 600 Tangerine 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,600 0 1,600 Total 2,763,753 1,439,025 2,925,770 673,850 1,291,650 505,250 102,000 14,000 129,600 18,950 184,370 64,750 6,520 2,240 1,064,400 773,088 1,076,980 354,900 519,450 194,400 166,120 21,860 37,800 2,412 617,000 127,500 1,800 5,467 10,887,213 4,197,692 15,084,905

99

Bananas Ratio (male/female) TOTAL* Ratio (male/female) VALUE PER VISIT VALUE PER VISIT* 2.85 Male Female Male Female Ratio Male Female Ratio 6,058,520 2,118,785 2.86 34,833 29,520 1.18 35,020 32,103 1.09

Oranges 1.06 1,509,840 1,426,640 1.06 36,825 62,028 0.59 36,825 62,028 0.59

Pineapples 15.31 901,403 60,968 14.78 12,125 6,774 1.79 13,658 6,774 2.02

Avocados 3.78 699,570 185,150 3.78 9,994 7,715 1.30 9,994 7,715 1.30

Papaws 2.52 298,260 119,170 2.50 6,152 4,779 1.29 6,214 5,181 1.20

Mangoes 2.54 680,800 268,350 2.54 8,641 11,219 0.77 8,842 11,667 0.76

Sugarcane n.a. 113,930 0 n.a. 3,929

W. melon 7.00 75,240 10,750 7.00 5,788 5,375 1.08 5,788 5,375 1.08

Lemon n.a. 156,750 0 n.a. 9,221

Passion n.a. 345,900 0 n.a. 16,471

Apples n.a. 5,200 0 n.a. 2,600

Grapes n.a. 600 0 n.a. 600

Tangerine n.a. 1,600 0 n.a. 1,600

Total 2.59 10,847,613 4,189,813 2.59 18,967 23,451 0.81 19,405 24,646 0.79

3,929

9,221

16,471

2,600

600

1,600

* excluding Fig Tree/Dandora Table 5.4: Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex and Source of Food Male Nairobi Central Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern 134 2,319 490 216 394 24 46 1,039 110 59 19 8 1 10 20 1 209
100

Number Female 502 738 317 34 92 1 29 259 6 13 4 0 1 0 8 0 65

Total 636 3,057 807 250 486 25 75 1,298 116 72 23 8 2 10 28 1 274

Male 21.1 75.9 60.7 86.4 81.1 96.0 61.3 80.0 94.8 81.9 82.6 100.0 50.0 100.0 71.4 100.0 76.3

% Female 78.9 24.1 39.3 13.6 18.9 4.0 38.7 20.0 5.2 18.1 17.4 0.0 50.0 0.0 28.6 0.0 23.7

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Male Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL * Eleven cases did not indicate the source of food. 34 6 38 11 107 13 0 2 170 165 1 1 1 2 304 31 2 3 111 86 0 2 64 5 11 6 2 3 66 46 20 3,274

Number Female 13 1 7 8 33 2 1 0 29 24 3 0 2 0 40 3 0 0 15 15 2 1 4 0 15 8 0 7 56 42 14 1,458

Total 47 7 45 19 140 15 1 2 199 189 4 1 3 2 344 34 2 3 126 101 2 3 68 5 26 14 2 10 122 88 34 4,732

N. Eastern Nyanza

Male 72.3 85.7 84.4 57.9 76.4 86.7 0.0 100.0 85.4 87.3 25.0 100.0 33.3 100.0 88.4 91.2 100.0 100.0 88.1 85.1 0.0 66.7 94.1 100.0 42.3 42.9 100.0 30.0 54.1 52.3 58.8 69.2

% Female 27.7 14.3 15.6 42.1 23.6 13.3 100.0 0.0 14.6 12.7 75.0 0.0 66.7 0.0 11.6 8.8 0.0 0.0 11.9 14.9 100.0 33.3 5.9 0.0 57.7 57.1 0.0 70.0 45.9 47.7 41.2 30.8

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

101

Table 5.5: Distribution of Wholesalers by Sex, Source and Value of Food

Nairobi Central Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Male 739,231 41,983,031 1,709,468 2,376,093 8,415,490 265,400 574,510 27,072,820 1,569,250 989,320 166,030 112,640 1,500 80,350 625,800 3,000 4,393,850 287,800 96,700 296,150 150,900 2,824,100 738,200 0 20,000 2,077,300 2,054,400 3,600 5,000 6,000 8,300 7,961,684 815,200 9,000 56,000 Value (Shs) Female 362,803 9,301,071 288,787 326,108 2,154,512 1,600 257,274 6,176,540 96,250 649,100 75,500 0 1,200 0 572,400 0 1,068,800 129,050 20,000 62,000 43,400 689,350 35,000 90,000 0 422,625 391,075 21,250 0 10,300 0 949,180 75,400 0 0 Total 1,102,034 51,284,102 1,998,255 2,702,201 10,570,002 267,000 831,784 33,249,360 1,665,500 1,638,420 241,530 112,640 2,700 80,350 1,198,200 3,000 5,462,650 416,850 116,700 358,150 194,300 3,513,450 773,200 90,000 20,000 2,499,925 2,445,475 24,850 5,000 16,300 8,300 8,910,864 890,600 9,000 56,000 Male 67.1 81.9 85.5 87.9 79.6 99.4 69.1 81.4 94.2 60.4 68.7 100.0 55.6 100.0 52.2 100.0 80.4 69.0 82.9 82.7 77.7 80.4 95.5 0.0 100.0 83.1 84.0 14.5 100.0 36.8 100.0 89.3 91.5 100.0 100.0 Value (%) Female 32.9 18.1 14.5 12.1 20.4 0.6 30.9 18.6 5.8 39.6 31.3 0.0 44.4 0.0 47.8 0.0 19.6 31.0 17.1 17.3 22.3 19.6 4.5 100.0 0.0 16.9 16.0 85.5 0.0 63.2 0.0 10.7 8.5 0.0 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Value/deliveries (Shs) Male Female Total 5,517 723 1,733 18,104 12,603 16,776 3,489 911 2,476 11,000 9,591 10,809 21,359 23,419 21,749 11,058 1,600 10,680 12,489 8,872 11,090 26,057 23,848 25,616 14,266 16,042 14,358 16,768 49,931 22,756 8,738 18,875 10,501 14,080 n.a. 14,080 1,500 1,200 1,350 8,035 n.a. 8,035 31,290 71,550 42,793 3,000 n.a. 3,000 21,023 16,443 19,937 8,465 9,927 8,869 16,117 20,000 16,671 7,793 8,857 7,959 13,718 5,425 10,226 26,393 20,889 25,096 56,785 17,500 51,547 n.a. 90,000 90,000 10,000 n.a. 10,000 12,219 14,573 12,562 12,451 16,295 12,939 3,600 7,083 6,213 5,000 n.a. 5,000 6,000 5,150 5,433 4,150 n.a. 4,150 26,190 23,730 25,904 26,297 25,133 26,194 4,500 n.a. 4,500 18,667 n.a. 18,667 Value (Male/female) 7.6 1.4 3.8 1.1 0.9 6.9 1.4 1.1 0.9 0.3 0.5 n.a. 1.3 n.a. 0.4 n.a. 1.3 0.9 0.8 0.9 2.5 1.3 3.2 n.a. n.a. 0.8 0.8 0.5 n.a. 1.2 n.a. 1.1 1.0 n.a. n.a.

N. Eastern Nyanza

102

Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL

Male 2,502,474 1,875,650 0 74,000 2,586,800 42,560 206,820 120,300 15,200 71,320 5,078,590 3,681,800 1,396,790 63,449,826

Value (Shs) Female 337,500 276,100 59,500 28,080 172,600 0 252,042 124,690 0 127,352 5,376,750 4,772,500 604,250 18,382,371

Total 2,839,974 2,151,750 59,500 102,080 2,759,400 42,560 458,862 244,990 15,200 198,672 10,455,340 8,454,300 2,001,040 81,832,196

Male 88.1 87.2 0.0 72.5 93.7 100.0 45.1 49.1 100.0 35.9 48.6 43.5 69.8 77.5

Value (%) Female 11.9 12.8 100.0 27.5 6.3 0.0 54.9 50.9 0.0 64.1 51.4 56.5 30.2 22.5

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Value/deliveries (Shs) Male Female Total 22,545 22,500 22,539 21,810 18,407 21,304 n.a. 29,750 29,750 37,000 28,080 34,027 40,419 43,150 40,579 8,512 n.a. 8,512 18,802 16,803 17,649 20,050 15,586 17,499 7,600 n.a. 7,600 23,773 18,193 19,867 76,948 96,013 85,700 80,039 113,631 96,072 69,840 43,161 58,854 19,380 12,608 17,293

Value (Male/female) 1.0 1.2 n.a. 1.3 0.9 n.a. 1.1 1.3 n.a. 1.3 0.8 0.7 1.6 1.5

Table 5.6a: Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Cereals) Shs
Maize (dry) Province Nairobi Central District Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta 0 43,740 0 3,040 0 0 6,100 34,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,008,200 1,650 0 0 0 0 2,953,050 53,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 417,375 0 0 417,375 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,469,315 1,650 3,040 417,375 0 6,100 2,987,650 53,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 6.2 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.9 4.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 82.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 80.9 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.0 70.4 0.0 0.1 8.5 0.0 0.1 60.6 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Maize (green) Value (Shs) Rice Millet Sorghum Wheat Total Maize (dry) Maize (green) Value (%) Rice Millet Sorghum Wheat Total

103

Maize (dry) Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa 0 150,000 0 0 0 0 0 150,000 0 0 27,000 27,000 0 0 0 0 185,580 6,000 0 0 0 18,000 59,500 102,080 0 0 103,320 0 0 103,320 200,000

Maize (green) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26,000 26,000 0 0 0 0 577,094 0 0 0 526,934 31,000 0 0 0 19,160 37,800 0 0 37,800 0

Value (Shs) Rice Millet Sorghum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 151,200 0 0 0 0 0 151,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Wheat 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 0 301,200 0 0 0 0 0 301,200 0 0 53,000 53,000 0 0 0 0 762,674 6,000 0 0 526,934 49,000 59,500 102,080 0 19,160 141,120 0 0 141,120 200,000

Maize (dry) 0.0 21.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.1 0.0 0.0 3.8 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.2 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 8.4 14.4 0.0 0.0 14.6 0.0 0.0 14.6 28.2

Maize (green) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0

Value (%) Rice Millet Sorghum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Wheat n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Total 0.0 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 10.7 1.0 1.2 2.1 0.0 0.4 2.9 0.0 0.0 2.9 4.1

N. Eastern Nyanza

104

Maize (dry) Tanzania Uganda TOTAL % 0 200,000 709,640 14.4

Maize (green) 0 0 3,649,094 74.1

Value (Shs) Rice Millet Sorghum 0 0 417,375 8.5 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 151,200 3.1

Wheat 0 0 0 0.0

Total 0 200,000 4,927,309 100.0

Maize (dry) 0.0 28.2 100.0

Maize (green) 0.0 0.0 100.0

Value (%) Rice Millet Sorghum 0.0 0.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.0 0.0 100.0

Wheat n.a. n.a. n.a.

Total 0.0 4.1 100.0

Table 5.6b: Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Starchy Roots and Tubers) Shs
Potatoes Province Nairobi Central District Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi 0 25,958,320 194,640 0 48,000 0 0 25,715,680 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 393,100 0 0 0 0 393,100 0 0 0 25,300 1,800 0 10,000 0 0 13,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88,000 300 10,200 0 15,900 61,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21,000 0 0 0 14,000 7,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 0 0 750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26,093,370 196,740 10,200 58,000 30,650 68,600 25,729,180 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 393,100 0 0 0 0 393,100 0 0 0.0 84.3 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 83.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 0.3 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 79.7 0.3 9.2 0.0 14.4 55.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.0 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.2 81.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 Sweet potatoes Value (Shs) Arrow Cassava roots Yams Total Potatoes Sweet potatoes Value (%) Arrow roots Cassava Yams Total

105

Potatoes N. Eastern Nyanza Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,438,850 0 0 0 468,100 1,377,550 0 0 2,593,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30,790,270 97.9

Sweet potatoes 0 157,100 137,050 17,250 0 2,800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 287,340 243,190 0 44,150 63,000 0 63,000 532,740 1.7

Value (Shs) Arrow Cassava roots 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,400 0 0 22,400 110,400 0.4 0 0 21,000 0.1

Yams 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0.0

Total 0 157,100 137,050 17,250 0 2,800 0 4,438,850 0 0 0 468,100 1,377,550 0 0 2,593,200 0 287,340 243,190 0 44,150 85,400 0 85,400 31,455,160 100.0

Potatoes 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 4.5 0.0 0.0 8.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Sweet potatoes 0.0 29.5 25.7 3.2 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.9 45.6 0.0 8.3 11.8 0.0 11.8 100.0

Value (%) Arrow roots 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.3 0.0 20.3 100.0

Cassava 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Yams 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Total 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 4.4 0.0 0.0 8.2 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.3 100.0

106

Table 5.6c: Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Grain legumes) Shs Beans VALUE Province Nairobi Central District Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori 0 162,300 0 134,400 0 0 27,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 72,000 0 0 0 0 0 72,000 0 0 54,300 54,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175,000 0 0 0 0 0 175,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
107

Dengu

Njugu

Njahi

Peas (green) 0 742,190 7,800 0 0 0 0 734,390 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

F. beans 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kunde (dry) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 220,000 0 0 0 0 0 220,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Peas (dry) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 0 904,490 7,800 134,400 0 0 27,900 734,390 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 477,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 467,000 0 0 54,300 54,300 0 0 0

N. Eastern Nyanza

Beans Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL % VALUE (%) Nairobi Central Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa 0 23,000 23,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 405,000 0 405,000 716,600 31.3 0.0 22.6 0.0 18.8 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dengu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175,000 7.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Njugu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Njahi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
108

Peas (green) 0 418,200 0 0 0 418,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,160,390 50.7 0.0 64.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 63.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

F. beans 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,000 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kunde (dry) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,800 0 0 4,800 0 0 0 224,800 9.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Peas (dry) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Total 0 441,200 23,000 0 0 418,200 0 0 0 0 0 4,800 0 0 4,800 405,000 0 405,000 2,286,790 100.0 0.0 39.6 0.3 5.9 0.0 0.0 1.2 32.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL

N. Eastern Nyanza

Beans 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 7.6 7.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.5 0.0 56.5 100.0

Dengu 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Njugu n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Njahi n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
109

Peas (green) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

F. beans 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kunde (dry) 0.0 0.0 97.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 97.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Peas (dry) n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Total 0.0 0.0 20.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 20.4 0.0 0.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.3 1.0 0.0 0.0 18.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 17.7 0.0 17.7 100.0

Table 5.6d: Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Leafy Vegetables) Shs
Cabbages VALUE Province Nairobi Central District Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma 2,500 2,354,415 152,435 0 0 114,600 12,600 1,317,930 756,850 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19,100 0 0 0 0 19,100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,324,540 0 0 40,000 1,284,540 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,685 1,650,881 1,291,171 346,950 0 0 0 360 12,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,200 0 9,000 0 0 7,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 21,431 139,590 129,040 10,000 0 0 0 550 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,000 0 0 0 0 2,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 900 900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33,550 33,550 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 210 3,070 3,070 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 76,400 76,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,310 2,910 2,910 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,000 0 4,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,500 0 715 50 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,495 22,495 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 180 4,465 4,465 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 1,170 1,170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 150 9,610 9,610 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,220 12,220 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15,000 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,280 5,280 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,200 6,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37,871 4,228,455 1,656,215 356,950 0 114,600 12,600 1,318,840 769,250 15,000 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 21,100 0 0 0 0 21,100 0 0 0 97,900 93,900 4,000 0 0 0 1,341,640 900 9,000 40,000 1,284,540 7,200 0 0 0 0 8,500 0 Kale Spinach Dania Managu Mchicha Kunde P. leaves Lettuce Terere Kahurura Saget Sagaa Saragwe Mabaki Cauliflower Total

N. Eastern Nyanza

110

Cabbages Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL % VALUE (%) Nairobi Central Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet 0 0 0 0 0 3,700,555 64.4 0.1 63.6 4.1 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.3 35.6 20.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 35.8 0.0 0.0 1.1 34.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kale 0 0 0 0 0 1,676,766 29.2 0.6 98.5 77.0 20.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

Spinach 0 0 0 0 0 163,921 2.9 13.1 85.2 78.7 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dania 0 0 0 0 0 33,550 0.6 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Managu 0 0 0 0 0 79,680 1.4 0.3 3.9 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 95.9 95.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Mchicha 0 0 0 0 0 670 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kunde 0 8,500 0 0 0 17,720 0.3 13.0 16.4 16.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.6 0.0 22.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

P. leaves 0 0 0 0 0 765 0.0 93.5 6.5 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Lettuce 0 0 0 0 0 22,495 0.4 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Terere 0 0 0 0 0 4,645 0.1 3.9 96.1 96.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kahurura 0 0 0 0 0 1,190 0.0 1.7 98.3 98.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Saget 0 0 0 0 0 9,760 0.2 1.5 98.5 98.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Sagaa 0 0 0 0 0 12,220 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Saragwe 0 0 0 0 0 20,280 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 74.0 74.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.0 26.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Mabaki 0 0 0 0 0 50 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Cauliflower 0 0 0 0 0 6,200 0.1 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 0 8,500 0 0 0 5,750,466 100.0 0.7 73.5 28.8 6.2 0.0 2.0 0.2 22.9 13.4 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.3 0.0 0.2 0.7 22.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

N. Eastern Nyanza

111

Cabbages Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kale 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Spinach 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Dania 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Managu 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Mchicha 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kunde 0.0 48.0 0.0 0.0 48.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

P. leaves 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Lettuce 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Terere 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kahurura 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Saget 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Sagaa 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Saragwe 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Mabaki 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Cauliflower 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Total 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Table 5.6e: Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Other Vegetables) Shs
Tomatoes VALUE Province Nairobi Central District Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii 0 11,190,700 12,400 614,050 9,325,850 0 20,000 634,200 584,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 305,500 32,800 116,700 0 86,400 69,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,643,270 46,000 720 0 0 0 1,555,300 41,250 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,500 0 0 0 0 12,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 387,200 0 23,500 0 0 0 277,000 86,700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15,040 240 0 10,600 0 0 0 4,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99,000 0 0 3,000 23,500 72,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 161,864 0 115,800 0 0 46,064 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,500 0 0 0 1,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,530 0 2,200 0 0 330 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30,500 0 0 0 0 30,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 151,650 5,500 18,850 0 450 450 0 126,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,500 0 2,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 0 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54,800 0 0 0 0 54,800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 93,600 0 0 0 0 93,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 640 400 0 0 0 240 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 500 0 0 0 0 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 750 0 750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 600 0 0 0 0 600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,500 0 2,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13,559,714 65,040 781,370 9,336,450 450 67,154 2,466,500 842,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 598,500 32,800 116,700 3,000 111,400 334,600 0 0 0 0 0 Carrots Onions Pumpkins Cucumber Brinjals Capsicum Chilli Karela Okra Garlic Kojet Dudi Lavaya Ginger Green bullet Total

N. Eastern Nyanza

112

Tomatoes Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL % VALUE (%) Nairobi Central Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu 0 0 0 0 158,800 49,000 0 16,000 93,800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38,400 38,400 0 11,693,400 55.9 0.0 95.7 0.1 5.3 79.8 0.0 0.2 5.4 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.3

Carrots 0 0 0 0 645,100 0 0 0 47,100 598,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,300,870 11.0 0.0 71.4 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 67.6 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0

Onions 0 0 0 0 903,500 783,500 0 0 0 120,000 0 0 0 0 1,200 0 1,200 0 4,766,500 4,766,500 0 6,058,400 29.0 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pumpkins 0 0 0 0 69,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 183,540 0.9 0.0 8.2 0.1 0.0 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.9 0.0

Cucumber 0 0 0 0 500 0 0 0 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,500 0 3,500 167,364 0.8 0.0 96.7 0.0 69.2 0.0 0.0 27.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0

Brinjals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33,030 0.2 0.0 7.7 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 92.3 0.0

Capsicum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 151,650 0.7 0.0 100.0 3.6 12.4 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 83.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Chilli 0 0 0 0 800 0 0 0 800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,300 0.0 0.0 38.5 38.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Karela 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,500 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Okra 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55,300 0.3 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 99.1 0.0

Garlic 0 0 0 0 96,700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 96,700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 190,300 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.2 0.0

Kojet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 640 0.0 0.0 100.0 62.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dudi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 570 0.0 0.0 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 87.7 0.0

Lavaya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,350 0.0 0.0 55.6 0.0 55.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 44.4 0.0

Ginger 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58,400 0 58,400 58,400 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Green bullet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,500 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 0 0 0 0 1,874,900 832,500 0 16,000 142,200 718,000 0 0 166,200 0 1,200 0 1,200 0 4,866,800 4,804,900 61,900 20,901,114 100.0 0.0 64.9 0.3 3.7 44.7 0.0 0.3 11.8 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.2

113

Tomatoes Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL 1.0 0.0 0.7 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 100.0

Carrots 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 26.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Onions 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.9 12.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 78.7 78.7 0.0 100.0

Pumpkins 0.0 1.6 12.8 39.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Cucumber 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 2.1 100.0

Brinjals 0.0 0.0 0.0 92.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Capsicum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Chilli 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 61.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 61.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Karela 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Okra 0.0 0.0 0.0 99.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Garlic 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kojet 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Dudi 0.0 0.0 0.0 87.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Lavaya 0.0 0.0 0.0 44.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Ginger 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0

Green bullet 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Total 0.6 0.0 0.5 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 4.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.3 23.0 0.3 100.0

N. Eastern Nyanza

114

Table 5.6f: Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Fruits) Shs
Bananas VALUE Province Nairobi Central District Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru 0 810,490 0 3,450 571,300 19,500 216,240 0 0 1,007,400 0 0 0 0 1,007,400 0 2,543,500 158,000 0 0 0 2,295,500 0 90,000 0 1,929,095 1,917,195 3,600 0 0 8,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,600 0 0 0 0 0 1,600 0 213,640 4,200 112,640 0 46,800 50,000 0 54,000 54,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 994,571 19,500 975,071 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 823,420 27,050 363,670 6,400 100,800 325,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61,300 0 0 0 0 61,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175,847 0 4,000 169,727 0 2,120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 182,800 165,050 0 0 2,000 15,750 0 0 0 54,600 54,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30,000 0 30,000 0 0 0 0 0 199,250 174,750 0 1,200 0 20,300 3,000 579,850 0 0 322,950 80,900 176,000 0 0 20,000 7,500 0 0 0 7,500 0 28,200 28,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113,930 113,930 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38,400 36,900 0 1,500 0 0 0 12,000 7,000 0 0 0 0 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14,000 0 0 0 0 0 250 0 0 250 0 0 0 0 120,500 0 0 0 0 120,500 0 24,000 0 0 24,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,400 0 0 0 0 0 145,300 0 40,050 0 0 105,250 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188,600 0 0 0 0 188,600 0 0 0 12,000 12,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,200 4,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,981,478 46,550 1,416,241 747,677 120,300 649,110 1,600 0 1,583,390 220,050 112,640 2,700 46,800 1,198,200 3,000 3,646,050 384,050 0 346,950 82,900 2,737,150 5,000 90,000 20,000 2,117,125 2,097,725 3,600 0 7,500 8,300 51,600 28,200 0 0 0 Oranges Pineapples Avocados Papaws Mangoes Sugarcane W. melon Lemon Passion Apples Grapes Tangerine Total

N. Eastern Nyanza

115

Bananas Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL % VALUE (%) Nairobi Central Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka 0 0 0 0 0 14,000 0 14,000 0 1,858,050 630,900 1,227,150 8,162,535 56.2 0.0 9.9 0.0 0.0 7.0 0.2 2.6 0.0 0.0 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.3 0.0 31.2 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.1 0.0 1.1

Oranges 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,231,000 2,231,000 0 2,500,240 17.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 8.5 0.2 4.5 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 2.2 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pineapples 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 994,571 6.8 0.0 100.0 2.0 98.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Avocados 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 884,720 6.1 0.0 93.1 3.1 41.1 0.7 11.4 36.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0

Papaws 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 413,247 2.8 0.0 42.6 0.0 1.0 41.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 44.2 39.9 0.0 0.0 0.5 3.8 0.0 0.0

Mangoes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 864,800 6.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.0 20.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 2.3 0.3 67.1 0.0 0.0 37.3 9.4 20.4 0.0 0.0

Sugarcane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113,930 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

W. melon 0 0 0 0 14,000 0 0 0 0 21,590 0 21,590 85,990 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 44.7 42.9 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 8.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.8 0.0

Lemon 0 0 0 0 9,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 154,150 1.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 78.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 78.2 0.0 15.6 0.0 0.0 15.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Passion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 345,900 2.4 0.0 42.0 0.0 11.6 0.0 0.0 30.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.5 0.0 0.0

Apples 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,200 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Grapes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Tangerine 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Total 0 0 0 0 23,400 14,000 0 14,000 0 4,110,640 2,861,900 1,248,740 14,524,283 100.0 0.0 20.5 0.3 9.8 5.1 0.8 4.5 0.0 0.0 10.9 1.5 0.8 0.0 0.3 8.2 0.0 25.1 2.6 0.0 2.4 0.6 18.8 0.0 0.6

116

Bananas N. Eastern Nyanza Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL 0.0 23.6 23.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 22.8 7.7 15.0 100.0

Oranges 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 89.2 89.2 0.0 100.0

Pineapples 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Avocados 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Papaws 0.0 13.2 13.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Mangoes 2.3 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 3.3 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Sugarcane 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

W. melon 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.1 0.0 25.1 100.0

Lemon 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Passion 0.0 3.5 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Apples 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Grapes n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Tangerine n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Total 0.1 14.6 14.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 28.3 19.7 8.6 100.0

117

Table 5.6g: Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (Nuts and Seeds) Shs Groundnuts Province Coast Nyanza Homa Bay Migori Total % District Kilifi Mombasa 0 0 0 11,000 5,000 6,000 11,000 21.6 33,550 0 33,550 0 0 0 33,550 65.7 6,480 6,480 0 0 0 0 6,480 12.7 40,030 6,480 33,550 11,000 5,000 6,000 51,030 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 45.5 54.5 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 78.4 12.7 65.7 21.6 9.8 11.8 100.0 Value (Shs) Coconut Dafu Total Groundnuts Value (%) Coconut Dafu Total

Table 5.7: Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (All commodities) Shs
Cereals Province Nairobi Central District Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni 0 3,469,315 1,650 3,040 417,375 0 6,100 2,987,650 53,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 301,200 0 0 0 0 0 301,200 0 26,093,370 196,740 10,200 58,000 30,650 68,600 25,729,180 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 393,100 0 0 0 0 393,100 0 0 904,490 7,800 134,400 0 0 27,900 734,390 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 477,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 467,000 37,871 4,228,455 1,656,215 356,950 0 114,600 12,600 1,318,840 769,250 15,000 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 21,100 0 0 0 0 21,100 0 0 13,559,714 65,040 781,370 9,336,450 450 67,154 2,466,500 842,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 598,500 32,800 116,700 3,000 111,400 334,600 0 0 2,981,478 46,550 1,416,241 747,677 120,300 649,110 1,600 0 1,583,390 220,050 112,640 2,700 46,800 1,198,200 3,000 3,646,050 384,050 0 346,950 82,900 2,737,150 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40,030 6,480 0 0 33,550 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37,871 51,236,822 1,973,995 2,702,201 10,559,502 266,000 831,464 33,238,160 1,665,500 1,638,420 241,530 112,640 2,700 80,350 1,198,200 3,000 5,436,950 416,850 116,700 349,950 194,300 3,495,950 773,200 0.0 70.4 0.0 0.1 8.5 0.0 0.1 60.6 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0 83.0 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.2 81.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 39.6 0.3 5.9 0.0 0.0 1.2 32.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 20.4 0.7 73.5 28.8 6.2 0.0 2.0 0.2 22.9 13.4 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 64.9 0.3 3.7 44.7 0.0 0.3 11.8 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.5 1.6 0.0 0.0 20.5 0.3 9.8 5.1 0.8 4.5 0.0 0.0 10.9 1.5 0.8 0.0 0.3 8.2 0.0 25.1 2.6 0.0 2.4 0.6 18.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 78.4 12.7 0.0 0.0 65.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 64.1 2.5 3.4 13.2 0.3 1.0 41.6 2.1 2.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.0 6.8 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.2 4.4 1.0 Roots and Tubers Grain Legumes Value (Shs) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables Fruits Nuts and Seeds Total Cereals Roots and Tubers Grain Legumes Value (%) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables Fruits Nuts and Seeds Total

118

Cereals Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL % 0 0 53,000 53,000 0 0 0 0 762,674 6,000 0 0 526,934 49,000 59,500 102,080 0 19,160 141,120 0 0 141,120 200,000 0 200,000 4,927,309 6.2

Roots and Tubers 0 0 157,100 137,050 17,250 0 2,800 0 4,438,850 0 0 0 468,100 1,377,550 0 0 2,593,200 0 287,340 243,190 0 44,150 85,400 0 85,400 31,455,160 39.4

Grain Legumes 0 0 54,300 54,300 0 0 0 0 441,200 23,000 0 0 418,200 0 0 0 0 0 4,800 0 0 4,800 405,000 0 405,000 2,286,790 2.9

Value (Shs) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables 0 0 97,900 93,900 4,000 0 0 0 1,341,640 900 9,000 40,000 1,284,540 7,200 0 0 0 0 8,500 0 0 8,500 0 0 0 5,750,466 7.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,874,900 832,500 0 16,000 142,200 718,000 0 0 166,200 0 1,200 0 1,200 0 4,866,800 4,804,900 61,900 20,901,114 26.2

Fruits 90,000 20,000 2,117,125 2,097,725 3,600 0 7,500 8,300 51,600 28,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23,400 14,000 0 14,000 0 4,110,640 2,861,900 1,248,740 14,524,283 18.2

Nuts and Seeds 0 0 11,000 0 0 5,000 6,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51,030 0.1

Total 90,000 20,000 2,490,425 2,435,975 24,850 5,000 16,300 8,300 8,910,864 890,600 9,000 56,000 2,839,974 2,151,750 59,500 102,080 2,759,400 42,560 456,960 243,190 15,200 198,570 9,667,840 7,666,800 2,001,040 79,896,152 100.0

Cereals 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 10.7 1.0 1.2 2.1 0.0 0.4 2.9 0.0 0.0 2.9 4.1 0.0 4.1 100.0

Roots and Tubers 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 4.4 0.0 0.0 8.2 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.3 100.0

Grain Legumes 0.0 0.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.3 1.0 0.0 0.0 18.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 17.7 0.0 17.7 100.0

Value (%) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.3 0.0 0.2 0.7 22.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 4.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 3.4 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.3 23.0 0.3 100.0

Fruits 0.6 0.1 14.6 14.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 28.3 19.7 8.6 100.0

Nuts and Seeds 0.0 0.0 21.6 0.0 0.0 9.8 11.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Total 0.1 0.0 3.1 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.2 1.1 0.0 0.1 3.6 2.7 0.1 0.1 3.5 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.0 0.2 12.1 9.6 2.5 100.0

N. Eastern Nyanza

Table 5.8: Value of Food Supplied to the Markets (All commodities) Shs
Cereals Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa 1,824,000 1,371,620 0 202,200 114,000 0 0 Roots and Tubers 26,336,450 1,515,750 0 99,800 48,300 442,000 3,100 Grain Legumes 1,099,300 955,600 0 0 0 0 0 Value (Shs) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables 1,913,840 665,860 0 28,100 15,000 66,710 8,800 10,259,900 2,698,500 1,200 170,900 99,000 7,000 7,920 Fruits 4,194,578 3,573,520 1,796,900 74,000 148,550 247,720 2,400 Nuts and Seeds 10,800 0 0 0 33,750 6,480 0 Total 45,638,868 10,780,850 1,798,100 575,000 458,600 769,910 22,220 Cereals 37.0 27.8 0.0 4.1 2.3 0.0 0.0 Roots and Tubers 83.7 4.8 0.0 0.3 0.2 1.4 0.0 Grain Legumes 47.9 41.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Value (%) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables 33.3 11.6 0.0 0.5 0.3 1.2 0.2 49.1 12.9 0.0 0.8 0.5 0.0 0.0 Fruits 28.9 24.6 12.4 0.5 1.0 1.7 0.0 Nuts and Seeds 21.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.1 12.7 0.0 Total 57.1 13.5 2.3 0.7 0.6 1.0 0.0

119

Cereals Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total % 681,434 475,750 110,600 143,260 3,950 0 495 4,927,309 6.2

Roots and Tubers 690,650 1,250,070 530,240 384,540 49,760 104,500 0 31,455,160 39.4

Grain Legumes 27,900 157,400 40,320 2,100 12,170 0 0 2,294,790 2.9

Value (Shs) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables 972,480 987,000 411,680 348,010 220,610 93,900 18,476 5,750,466 7.2 4,425,954 1,650,800 353,450 1,101,800 74,190 0 50,500 20,901,114 26.2

Fruits 1,793,738 1,083,380 702,550 126,180 35,500 744,500 767 14,524,283 18.2

Nuts and Seeds 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51,030 0.1

Total 8,592,156 5,604,400 2,148,840 2,105,890 396,180 942,900 70,238 79,904,152 100.0

Cereals 13.8 9.7 2.2 2.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 100.0

Roots and Tubers 2.2 4.0 1.7 1.2 0.2 0.3 0.0 100.0

Grain Legumes 1.2 6.9 1.8 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.0 100.0

Value (%) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables 16.9 17.2 7.2 6.1 3.8 1.6 0.3 100.0 21.2 7.9 1.7 5.3 0.4 0.0 0.2 100.0

Fruits 12.3 7.5 4.8 0.9 0.2 5.1 0.0 100.0

Nuts and Seeds 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Total 10.8 7.0 2.7 2.6 0.5 1.2 0.1 100.0

Table 5.9: Distribution of Wholesalers by Type of Transport

Head-load Market Wakulima Gikomba Retail Toi Ngaara City park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig tree Kaka Dandora Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 247 250 Push-cart 250 35 1 0 1 5 6 4 0 0 0 94 0 37 433 Bicycle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Number Bus Matatu 0 4 13 4 21 5 0 7 22 3 9 0 33 6 127 0 17 5 0 6 0 7 9 14 1 13 531 0 72 675 % Pickup 46 112 2 11 5 43 7 311 205 39 67 22 0 92 962 Lorry 1,296 258 28 18 39 17 2 187 127 110 162 5 36 2 2,287 Car 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 7 Total 1592 426 49 33 72 70 22 518 369 153 251 662 69 456 4742 Head-load 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 54.2 5.3 Push-cart 15.7 8.2 2.0 0.0 1.4 7.1 27.3 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.2 0.0 8.1 9.1 Bicycle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bus 0.0 0.9 26.5 12.1 29.2 7.1 0.0 1.4 6.0 2.0 3.6 0.0 47.8 1.3 2.7 Matatu 0.0 4.0 10.2 0.0 8.3 0.0 31.8 1.7 3.8 0.7 5.2 80.2 0.0 15.8 14.2 Pickup 2.9 26.3 4.1 33.3 6.9 61.4 31.8 60.0 55.6 25.5 26.7 3.3 0.0 20.2 20.3 Lorry 81.4 60.6 57.1 54.5 54.2 24.3 9.1 36.1 34.4 71.9 64.5 0.8 52.2 0.4 48.2 Car 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

120

Table 5.10: Mode of Transport by Source of Food (excluding inter-market trade)

Headload Province Nairobi Central District Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado 242 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 133 45 17 6 9 15 28 13 19 3 0 1 3 12 0 58 1 0 8 1 48 0 0 0 4 3 1 0 0 0 40 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 3 1 14 1 7 0 0 13 5 0 1 3 4 0 20 8 0 1 1 10 0 0 0 47 45 0 1 1 0 2 2 8 555 442 13 18 4 5 69 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 1 2 5 0 0 0 10 10 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 790 166 197 358 0 22 24 23 10 8 0 0 1 1 0 24 3 5 0 6 10 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 23 6 4 1,539 147 21 86 10 25 1,175 75 30 7 8 0 3 11 1 160 35 2 33 8 66 15 1 1 133 127 3 0 1 2 277 25 5 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 288 3,045 803 250 482 24 74 1,297 115 72 23 8 2 10 28 1 271 47 7 43 19 139 15 1 2 196 186 4 1 3 2 344 34 84.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.7 4.4 5.6 6.8 1.2 37.5 20.3 2.2 11.3 26.4 13.0 0.0 50.0 30.0 42.9 0.0 21.4 2.1 0.0 18.6 5.3 34.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 1.6 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.6 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.4 0.4 2.9 4.2 9.5 0.0 0.0 18.1 21.7 0.0 50.0 30.0 14.3 0.0 7.4 17.0 0.0 2.3 5.3 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.0 24.2 0.0 100.0 33.3 0.0 0.6 5.9 2.8 18.2 55.0 5.2 3.7 16.7 6.8 5.3 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 10.5 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.1 5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.3 25.9 20.7 78.8 74.3 0.0 29.7 1.9 20.0 13.9 34.8 0.0 0.0 10.0 3.6 0.0 8.9 6.4 71.4 0.0 31.6 7.2 0.0 0.0 50.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 33.3 0.0 6.7 17.6 1.4 50.5 18.3 8.4 17.8 41.7 33.8 90.6 65.2 41.7 30.4 100.0 0.0 30.0 39.3 100.0 59.0 74.5 28.6 76.7 42.1 47.5 100.0 100.0 50.0 67.9 68.3 75.0 0.0 33.3 100.0 80.5 73.5 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Pushcart Bicycle Number Bus Matatu Pickup Lorry Car Total Headload Pushcart Bicycle Bus % Matatu Pickup Lorry Car Total

N. Eastern Nyanza

121

Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa Tanzania Uganda TOTAL

Headload 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 242

Pushcart 0 0 20 16 0 0 1 2 2 0 1 1 3 0 3 287

Bicycle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Number Bus Matatu 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 8 0 8 117 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 584

Pickup 1 1 14 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 2 1 855

Lorry 1 2 90 84 2 3 67 3 20 12 0 8 96 74 22 2,260

Car 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

Total 2 3 126 101 2 3 68 5 24 13 2 9 111 77 34 4,353

Headload 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.6

Pushcart 0.0 0.0 15.9 15.8 0.0 0.0 1.5 40.0 8.3 0.0 50.0 11.1 2.7 0.0 8.8 6.6

Bicycle 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Bus 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 0.0 50.0 0.0 7.2 0.0 23.5 2.7

% Matatu 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 1.3 0.0 13.4

Pickup 50.0 33.3 11.1 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 7.7 0.0 0.0 2.7 2.6 2.9 19.6

Lorry 50.0 66.7 71.4 83.2 100.0 100.0 98.5 60.0 83.3 92.3 0.0 88.9 86.5 96.1 64.7 51.9

Car 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 5.11: Transport Costs and Cost of Food per Wholesaler by Area (Shs) Cost of Food Province Nairobi Central District Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale 1,733 16,776 2,476 10,809 21,749 10,680 11,090 25,616 14,358 22,756 10,501 14,080 74 5,424 894 2,314 4,869 2,367 2,496 9,292 5,229 7,564 2,782 14,268 22 2,528 259 865 2,038 749 1,203 4,656 1,389 2,838 628 4,653
122

Value (Shs) Cost of transport Other Costs

Total 1,829 24,728 3,629 13,988 28,656 13,796 14,789 39,564 20,976 33,158 13,911 33,001

Cost of Food 94.7 67.8 68.2 77.3 75.9 77.4 75.0 64.7 68.4 68.6 75.5 42.7

Value (%) Cost of transport 4.0 21.9 24.6 16.5 17.0 17.2 16.9 23.5 24.9 22.8 20.0 43.2

Other Costs 1.2 10.2 7.1 6.2 7.1 5.4 8.1 11.8 6.6 8.6 4.5 14.1

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi Garissa Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega East Africa

N. Eastern Nyanza

Cost of Food 1,350 8,035 42,793 3,000 19,937 8,869 16,671 7,959 10,226 25,096 51,547 90,000 10000.00 12562.44 12,939 6,213 5,000 5,433 4,150 25,904 26,194 4,500 18,667 22,539 21,304 29,750 34,027 40,579 8,512 17,649 17,499 7,600 19,867 85,700

Value (Shs) Cost of transport Other Costs 1,275 410 4,322 1,296 11,453 4,947 0 400 5,945 1,968 1,458 609 10,429 5,451 9,311 2,057 4,131 1,111 6,031 2,313 8,973 2,063 11,000 3,850 850.00 800.00 4167.43 1603.70 4,306 1,661 2,318 870 200 400 1,167 300 1,250 225 8,397 3,987 12,728 7,809 1,500 550 8,000 1,133 7,098 3,082 7,735 3,299 5,250 1,225 10,000 1,433 10,159 5,378 4,390 1,483 5,394 2,233 6,721 3,132 3,950 515 3,826 1,319 30,927 14,469
123

Total 3,035 13,653 59,193 3,400 27,850 10,936 32,551 19,327 15,468 33,441 62,583 104,850 11650.00 18333.57 18,906 9,400 5,600 6,900 5,625 38,287 46,731 6,550 27,800 32,719 32,339 36,225 45,460 56,116 14,385 25,276 27,352 12,065 25,012 131,095

Cost of Food 44.5 58.9 72.3 88.2 71.6 81.1 51.2 41.2 66.1 75.0 82.4 85.8 85.8 68.5 68.4 66.1 89.3 78.7 73.8 67.7 56.1 68.7 67.1 68.9 65.9 82.1 74.8 72.3 59.2 69.8 64.0 63.0 79.4 65.4

Value (%) Cost of transport 42.0 31.7 19.3 0.0 21.3 13.3 32.0 48.2 26.7 18.0 14.3 10.5 7.3 22.7 22.8 24.7 3.6 16.9 22.2 21.9 27.2 22.9 28.8 21.7 23.9 14.5 22.0 18.1 30.5 21.3 24.6 32.7 15.3 23.6

Other Costs 13.5 9.5 8.4 11.8 7.1 5.6 16.7 10.6 7.2 6.9 3.3 3.7 6.9 8.7 8.8 9.3 7.1 4.3 4.0 10.4 16.7 8.4 4.1 9.4 10.2 3.4 3.2 9.6 10.3 8.8 11.5 4.3 5.3 11.0

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Tanzania Uganda TOTAL

Cost of Food 96,072 58,854 17,278

Value (Shs) Cost of transport Other Costs 32,506 16,204 26,838 9,978 5,576 2,532

Total 144,782 95,670 25,386

Cost of Food 66.4 61.5 68.1

Value (%) Cost of transport 22.5 28.1 22.0

Other Costs 11.2 10.4 10.0

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 5.12: Distribution of Wholesalers by Whether Traded in Own Produce

Cereals Nairobi Central Coast Eastern N. Eastern Nyanza R. Valley Western East Africa TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL (%) Own Other Own Other Own Other Own Other Own Other Own Other Own Other Own Other Own Other Own Other Own Other 0 0 2 124 0 0 5 0 4 1 38 0 3 0 2 3 176 179 1.7 98.3 Roots and Tubers 0 0 6 919 0 0 10 0 17 0 135 1 16 0 6 7 1,103 1,110 0.6 99.4 Grain Legumes 0 0 0 57 0 0 10 0 4 0 18 0 1 0 2 0 92 92 0.0 100.0 Number Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables 12 276 80 921 1 0 4 0 31 2 61 0 1 0 0 94 1,295 1,389 6.8 93.2 0 0 64 617 0 7 51 0 0 0 79 0 1 1 42 72 790 862 8.4 91.6 Fruits 0 0 10 242 60 10 177 2 138 0 10 0 1 0 62 20 692 712 2.8 97.2 Nuts and Seeds 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 13 0.0 100.0 Total 12 276 162 2,880 0 72 17 257 0 2 0 196 3 341 1 23 1 114 196 4,161 4,357 4.5 95.5 Cereals 0 0 21,600 3,447,715 0 0 301,200 0 53,000 12,000 750,674 0 141,120 0 200,000 33,600 4,893,709 4,927,309 0.7 99.3 Roots and Tubers 0 0 53,500 26,039,870 0 0 393,100 0 157,100 0 4,438,850 13,500 273,840 0 85,400 67,000 31,388,160 31,455,160 0.2 99.8 Grain Legumes 0 0 0 904,490 0 0 477,000 0 54,300 0 441,200 0 4,800 0 405,000 0 2,286,790 2,286,790 0.0 100.0 Value (Shs) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables 19,295 18,576 72,276 4,156,179 15,000 0 21,100 0 97,900 3,900 1,337,740 0 8,500 0 0 95,471 5,654,995 5,750,466 1.7 98.3 0 0 1,038,320 12,521,394 0 47,500 551,000 0 0 0 1,874,900 0 1,200 52,800 5,548,000 1,138,620 20,496,494 21,635,114 5.3 94.7 Fruits 0 0 98,400 2,883,078 1,583,390 107,700 3,564,050 20,000 2,117,125 0 51,600 0 14,000 0 4,110,640 206,100 14,343,883 14,549,983 1.4 98.6 Nuts and Seeds 0 0 0 0 40,030 0 0 0 11,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51,030 51,030 0.0 100.0 Total 19,295 18,576 1,284,096 49,952,726 0 1,638,420 155,200 5,307,450 0 20,000 0 2,490,425 15,900 8,894,964 13,500 443,460 52,800 10,349,040 1,540,791 79,115,061 80,655,852 1.9 98.1

124

Table 5.13a: Quantity and Cost of Foods Delivered to Nyamakima Maize (dry) QUANTITY (KG) Kiambu Kirinyaga Nyandarua Taita Taveta Kitui Machakos Meru Garissa Mandera Kisumu Kajiado Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Busia Millers Imports Tanzania Uganda TOTAL VALUE (SHS) Kiambu Kirinyaga Nyandarua Taita Taveta Kitui Machakos Meru Garissa Mandera Kisumu Kajiado Nakuru 4,500 0 0 0 0 0 1,620 0 0 0 0 2,700 0 356,400 72,000 18,000 74,970 0 0 0 530,190 40,000 0 0 0 0 0 24,000 0 0 0 0 24,000 Rice 0 133,800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 320,950 0 0 454,750 0 7,237,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Millet 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11,700 0 11,700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wheat 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Beans 0 0 3,510 0 0 0 149,850 0 4,500 0 1,407,600 4,150 0 0 0 290,520 0 0 183,240 0 2,043,370 0 0 148,200 0 0 0 3,371,000 0 95,000 0 36,580,950 130,000 Dengu 0 16,300 0 0 217,350 0 4,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46,800 0 0 0 0 284,950 0 521,800 0 0 6,694,000 0 175,000 0 0 0 0 0 Njugu 0 0 0 0 144,650 0 0 0 0 0 25,650 0 0 0 0 270 0 0 37,000 180 207,750 0 0 0 0 2,485,700 0 0 0 0 0 412,000 0 Njahi 0 0 0 117,000 0 0 11,250 0 0 0 93,700 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,950 0 244,900 0 0 0 3,340,000 0 0 374,000 0 0 0 2,990,000 0 Kunde 0 0 0 0 36,270 54,000 2,520 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92,790 0 0 0 0 741,000 1,080,000 55,200 0 0 0 0 0 Peas (dry) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 109,350 4,500 0 1,350 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,200 194,590 0 316,990 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,042,000 130,000 0 28,500 0 Groundnuts 0 0 0 0 0 0 43,400 0 0 800 0 0 0 0 0 200 0 0 293,100 6,000 343,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,539,500 0 0 38,200 0 0 40,000 7,759,000 148,200 3,340,000 9,920,700 1,080,000 5,538,700 3,042,000 225,000 38,200 40,011,450 154,000 Total

125

Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Busia Millers Imports Tanzania Uganda TOTAL %

Maize (dry) 0 2,876,000 605,000 180,000 1,159,700 0 0 0 4,908,700 4.3

Rice 0 0 0 0 0 8,277,000 0 0 15,514,200 13.6

Millet 0 0 0 0 0 0 171,000 0 171,000 0.2

Wheat 18,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18,000 0.0

Beans 0 0 0 6,780,000 0 0 4,450,500 0 51,555,650 45.3

Dengu 0 0 0 1,350,000 0 0 0 0 8,740,800 7.7

Njugu 0 0 0 9,000 0 0 641,000 6,000 3,553,700 3.1

Njahi 0 0 0 0 0 0 724,000 0 7,428,000 6.5

Kunde 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,876,200 1.6

Peas (dry) 0 0 0 0 0 205,000 5,630,700 0 9,036,200 7.9

Groundnuts 0 0 0 8,000 0 0 9,192,100 196,000 10,973,800 9.6

Total 18,000 2,876,000 605,000 8,327,000 1,159,700 8,482,000 20,809,300 202,000 113,776,250 100.0

Table 5.13b: Quantity and Cost of Foods Delivered to Nyamakima (%)

Maize (dry) QUANTITY (%) Kiambu Kirinyaga Nyandarua Taita Taveta Kitui Machakos Meru Garissa Mandera Kisumu Kajiado Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Busia Millers Imports Tanzania Uganda TOTAL VALUE (%) Kiambu 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 67.2 13.6 3.4 14.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.8 Rice 0.0 29.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.6 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 Millet 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 Wheat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 Beans 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 68.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.2 0.0 0.0 9.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 Dengu 0.0 5.7 0.0 0.0 76.3 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 Njugu 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 69.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 17.8 0.1 100.0 0.0 Njahi 0.0 0.0 0.0 47.8 0.0 0.0 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 38.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.0 100.0 0.0 Kunde 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 39.1 58.2 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 Peas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.5 1.4 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 61.4 0.0 100.0 0.0 Groundnuts 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.6 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 85.3 1.7 100.0 0.0 0.0 Total

126

Kirinyaga Nyandarua Taita Taveta Kitui Machakos Meru Garissa Mandera Kisumu Kajiado Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Busia Millers Imports Tanzania Uganda TOTAL

Maize (dry) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 58.6 12.3 3.7 23.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Rice 46.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.4 0.0 0.0 100.0

Millet 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0

Wheat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Beans 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.0 0.2 0.0 71.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.2 0.0 0.0 8.6 0.0 100.0

Dengu 6.0 0.0 0.0 76.6 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Njugu 0.0 0.0 0.0 69.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 18.0 0.2 100.0

Njahi 0.0 0.0 45.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.7 0.0 100.0

Kunde 0.0 0.0 0.0 39.5 57.6 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Peas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.7 1.4 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 62.3 0.0 100.0

Groundnuts 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 83.8 1.8 100.0

Total 6.8 0.1 2.9 8.7 0.9 4.9 2.7 0.2 0.0 35.2 0.1 0.0 2.5 0.5 7.3 1.0 7.5 18.3 0.2 100.0

127

Table 5.14: Distribution of Wholesalers by Source and Value of Food (All commodities) Shs
Cereals Province Nairobi Central District Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Coast Kilifi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Eastern Embu Isiolo Kitui Machakos Meru Makueni Tharaka Nithi N. Eastern Garissa Mandera Nyanza Kisii Kisumu Homa Bay Migori Nyamira R. Valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia 0 7,107,915 21,650 3,040 4,035,975 0 6,100 2,987,650 53,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 313,200 0 0 0 0 12,000 301,200 0 0 0 0 53,000 53,000 0 0 0 0 2,524,174 6,000 0 0 538,934 58,000 1,497,500 0 26,093,370 196,740 10,200 58,000 30,650 68,600 25,729,180 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 393,100 0 0 0 0 393,100 0 0 0 0 0 157,100 137,050 17,250 0 2,800 0 4,438,850 0 0 0 468,100 1,377,550 0 0 1,239,490 7,800 134,400 260,900 0 27,900 808,490 0 1,670,000 0 0 0 0 1,670,000 0 7,964,950 0 0 4,960,350 540,000 1,997,600 467,000 0 1,633,500 1,521,000 112,500 54,300 54,300 0 0 0 0 20,511,925 20,028,725 0 0 483,200 0 0 37,871 4,228,455 1,656,215 356,950 0 114,600 12,600 1,318,840 769,250 15,000 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 21,100 0 0 0 0 21,100 0 0 0 0 0 97,900 93,900 4,000 0 0 0 1,341,640 900 9,000 40,000 1,284,540 7,200 0 0 13,559,714 65,040 781,370 9,336,450 450 67,154 2,466,500 842,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 598,500 32,800 116,700 3,000 111,400 334,600 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,874,900 832,500 0 16,000 142,200 718,000 0 0 2,981,478 46,550 1,416,241 747,677 120,300 649,110 1,600 0 1,583,390 220,050 112,640 2,700 46,800 1,198,200 3,000 3,671,750 384,050 0 355,150 82,900 2,754,650 5,000 90,000 20,000 20,000 0 2,117,125 2,097,725 3,600 0 7,500 8,300 51,600 28,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40,030 6,480 0 0 33,550 0 0 769,750 0 0 0 0 769,750 0 0 0 0 0 30,100 0 19,100 5,000 6,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37,871 55,210,422 1,993,995 2,702,201 14,439,002 266,000 831,464 33,312,260 1,665,500 3,308,420 241,530 112,640 2,700 80,350 2,868,200 3,000 13,732,350 416,850 116,700 5,318,500 734,300 6,282,800 773,200 90,000 1,653,500 1,541,000 112,500 2,509,525 2,435,975 43,950 5,000 16,300 8,300 30,743,089 20,896,325 9,000 56,000 2,916,974 2,160,750 1,497,500 0.0 47.6 0.1 0.0 27.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.4 10.0 0.0 83.0 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.2 81.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 4.4 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.1 1.9 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 18.4 0.0 0.0 11.4 1.2 4.6 1.1 0.0 3.8 3.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 47.3 46.2 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.7 73.5 28.8 6.2 0.0 2.0 0.2 22.9 13.4 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.3 0.0 0.2 0.7 22.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 62.7 0.3 3.6 43.2 0.0 0.3 11.4 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 3.8 0.0 0.1 0.7 3.3 0.0 0.0 20.5 0.3 9.7 5.1 0.8 4.5 0.0 0.0 10.9 1.5 0.8 0.0 0.3 8.2 0.0 25.2 2.6 0.0 2.4 0.6 18.9 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 14.6 14.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 13.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.2 1.5 2.0 10.5 0.2 0.6 24.3 1.2 2.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 2.1 0.0 10.0 0.3 0.1 3.9 0.5 4.6 0.6 0.1 1.2 1.1 0.1 1.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.4 15.2 0.0 0.0 2.1 1.6 1.1 Roots and Tubers Grain Legumes Value (Shs) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables Fruits Nuts and Seeds Total Cereals Roots and Tubers Grain Legumes Value (%) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables Fruits Nuts and Seeds Total

128

Cereals Uasin Gishu Bomet Baringo Western Bungoma Busia Kakamega Millers East Africa Tanzania Uganda Other imports TOTAL % 404,580 0 19,160 231,120 0 90,000 141,120 275,500 285,500 85,500 200,000 4,138,500 14,928,909 10.9

Roots and Tubers 0 2,593,200 0 287,340 243,190 0 44,150 0 85,400 0 85,400 0 31,455,160 22.9

Grain Legumes 0 0 0 4,074,300 0 4,069,500 4,800 0 6,131,100 5,723,100 408,000 102,500 43,382,065 31.6

Value (Shs) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables 0 0 0 8,500 0 0 8,500 0 0 0 0 0 5,750,466 4.2 0 166,200 0 1,200 0 1,200 0 0 5,600,800 5,538,900 61,900 0 21,635,114 15.8

Fruits 0 0 23,400 14,000 0 14,000 0 0 4,110,640 2,861,900 1,248,740 0 14,549,983 10.6

Nuts and Seeds 0 0 0 4,000 0 4,000 0 0 4,694,050 4,596,050 98,000 0 5,537,930 4.0

Total 404,580 2,759,400 42,560 4,620,460 243,190 4,178,700 198,570 275,500 20,907,490 18,805,450 2,102,040 4,241,000 137,239,627 100.0

Cereals 2.7 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.0 0.6 0.9 1.8 1.9 0.6 1.3 27.7 100.0

Roots and Tubers 0.0 8.2 0.0 0.9 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 100.0

Grain Legumes 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 14.1 13.2 0.9 0.2 100.0

Value (%) Leafy Other Vegetables Vegetables 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.9 25.6 0.3 0.0 100.0

Fruits 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 28.3 19.7 8.6 0.0 100.0

Nuts and Seeds 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 84.8 83.0 1.8 0.0 100.0

Total 0.3 2.0 0.0 3.4 0.2 3.0 0.1 0.2 15.2 13.7 1.5 3.1 100.0

129

Table 5.15: Quantities of Food Delivered to the Markets in Two Weeks (kg) Commodity Maize grain Green maize Rice Millet Sorghum Wheat English potatoes Sweet potatoes Arrow roots Cassava Yams Beans Dengu Njugu Njahi Miji French beans Kunde Peas dry Cabbage Quantity 347,790 243,273 234,281 6,030 20,700 450 4,994,489 104,719 12,090 3,900 0 1,062,887 149,278 103,915 122,506 211,837 15,900 59,745 158,495 565,926 Commodity Kale Spinach Dania Managu Mchicha Cow pea leaves Pumpkin leaves Tomatoes Carrots Onions Pumpkin leaves Bananas Oranges Pineapples Avocados Papaws Mangoes Groundnuts Coconuts Eggs Quantity 187,187 16,474 2,237 7,983 69 2,139 77 598,025 377,118 581,303 14,118 1,118,998 167,799 99,457 176,944 42,095 158,642 172,540 2,220 1,630

Table 5.16: Quantities of Food from Food Processing Firms (metric tons) Maize flour Wheat flour Bread Milk Production 63,698 83,664 26,287 4,720 Sales in Nairobi 38,571 37,440 15,993 3,240 % 60.55 44.75 60.84 68.64

130

Table 6.1a: Livestock Slaughtered and Sold to Nairobi by Source Cattle 0 0 6,198 134 0 12 6,052 7,468 7,468 0 5,775 0 5,775 6,043 5,038 115 0 890 0 0 0 0 208 25,692 Total Slaughtered Camels Goats Sheep 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 16,518 1,344 42 6,006 0 0 4,506 1,344 0 0 0 0 6,006 0 78 13,512 1,848 78 13,512 504 0 0 1,344 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,940 948 0 2,940 948 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 32,970 4,140 Pigs 31 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 140 48 31 0 0 31 0 62 31 31 2,042 0 2,354 Total 31 31 24,102 6,182 5,850 12 12,058 22,906 21,562 1,344 5,963 140 5,823 9,962 8,926 115 31 890 62 31 31 2,042 208 65,276 Cattle 0 0 5,396 121 0 7 5,269 6,632 6,632 0 4,753 0 4,753 4,996 4,181 104 0 712 0 0 0 0 199 21,977 85.5 Number Sold in Nairobi Camels Goats Sheep Pigs 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 29 42 15,693 1,344 0 42 5,706 0 0 0 4,281 1,344 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,706 0 0 78 12,837 1,848 0 78 12,837 504 0 0 0 1,344 0 0 0 0 178 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 46 0 941 246 29 0 941 246 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 787 0 0 0 0 120 29,471 3,438 1,083 100.0 89.4 83.0 46.0 Total 29 29 22,475 5,869 5,625 7 10,975 21,395 20,051 1,344 4,931 133 4,798 6,213 5,368 104 29 712 59 29 29 787 199 56,089 85.9

Central Kiambu Eastern Isiolo Marsabit Makueni Moyale N. Eastern Garissa Wajir Nyanza Homa Bay Migori R. Valley Kajiado Narok Trans Nzoia Baringo Western Bungoma Kakamega Other (local) Tanzania TOTAL Per cent consumed in Nairobi

131

Table 6.1b: Livestock Slaughtered and Sold to Nairobi by Source (%) Cattle 0.0 0.0 24.1 0.5 0.0 0.0 23.6 29.1 29.1 0.0 22.5 0.0 22.5 23.5 19.6 0.4 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 100.0 Camels 0.0 0.0 35.0 35.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 65.0 65.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Total Slaughtered Goats Sheep 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.1 32.5 18.2 0.0 13.7 32.5 0.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 41.0 44.6 41.0 12.2 0.0 32.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.9 8.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 22.9 22.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Pigs 1.3 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 5.9 2.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 2.6 1.3 1.3 86.7 0.0 100.0 Total 0.0 0.0 36.9 9.5 9.0 0.0 18.5 35.1 33.0 2.1 9.1 0.2 8.9 15.3 13.7 0.2 0.0 1.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.3 100.0 Cattle 0.0 0.0 24.6 0.5 0.0 0.0 24.0 30.2 30.2 0.0 21.6 0.0 21.6 22.7 19.0 0.5 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 100.0 Number Sold in Nairobi Camels Goats Sheep Pigs 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 35.0 53.2 39.1 0.0 35.0 19.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.5 39.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.4 0.0 0.0 65.0 43.6 53.8 0.0 65.0 43.6 14.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 39.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.2 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 7.2 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.2 2.7 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 5.4 2.7 2.7 72.7 0.0 100.0 Total 0.1 0.1 40.1 10.5 10.0 0.0 19.6 38.1 35.7 2.4 8.8 0.2 8.6 11.1 9.6 0.2 0.1 1.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.4 0.4 100.0

Central Kiambu Eastern Isiolo Marsabit Makueni Moyale N. Eastern Garissa Wajir Nyanza Homa Bay Migori R. Valley Kajiado Narok Trans Nzoia Baringo Western Bungoma Kakamega Other (local) Tanzania TOTAL

132

Table 6.2: Livestock Slaughtered and Sold in Nairobi by Abattoir Cattle Camels Total Slaughtered Goats 30,030 0 0 2,940 32,970 91.1 0.0 0.0 8.9 100.0 95.0 n.a. n.a. 32.0 89.4 Sheep 3,360 0 0 780 4,140 81.2 0.0 0.0 18.8 100.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. 10.0 83.0 Pigs 0 2,354 0 0 2,354 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 n.a. 46.0 n.a. n.a. 46.0 Total 33,390 11,254 12,204 8,428 65,276 51.2 17.2 18.7 12.9 100.0 95.5 72.9 90.0 59.5 85.9 Cattle 0 7,120 10,984 3,873 21,977 0.0 32.4 50.0 17.6 100.0 Number Sold in Nairobi Camels Goats Sheep Pigs 0 0 0 120 120 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 28,530 0 0 941 29,471 96.8 0.0 0.0 3.2 100.0 3,360 0 0 78 3,438 97.7 0.0 0.0 2.3 100.0 0 1,083 0 0 1,083 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Total 31,890 8,203 10,984 5,012 56,089 56.9 14.6 19.6 8.9 100.0

Kiamaiko 0 0 Dagoretti 8,900 0 Njiru 12,204 0 Kajiado 4,588 120 TOTAL 25,692 120 PERCENT OF TOTAL Kiamaiko 0.0 0.0 Dagoretti 34.6 0.0 Njiru 47.5 0.0 Kajiado 17.9 100.0 TOTAL 100.0 100.0 PERCENT SOLD IN NAIROBI Kiamaiko n.a. n.a. Dagoretti 80.0 n.a. Njiru 90.0 n.a. Kajiado 84.4 100.0 TOTAL 85.5 100.0

133

Table 6.3a: Livestock Slaughtered and Sold in Nairobi by Abattoir and Source Cattle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,900 0 1,780 890 0 4,450 890 0 890 0 0 0 12,204 134 4,272 6,578 1,220 4,588 0 12 0 105 4,148 115 208 Camels 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 42 0 78 0 0 0 0 Total Slaughtered Goats Sheep 30,030 3,360 6,006 0 4,506 1,344 6,006 0 13,512 504 0 1,344 0 168 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,940 780 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,940 780 0 0 0 0 Pigs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,354 31 0 0 140 48 0 31 0 31 31 2,042 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
134

Kiamaiko Isiolo Marsabit Moyale Garissa Wajir Kajiado Dagoretti Kiambu Moyale Garissa Homa Bay Migori Kajiado Trans Nzoia Baringo Bungoma Kakamega Other (local) Njiru Isiolo Moyale Garissa Migori Kajiado Isiolo Makueni Garissa Migori Kajiado Narok Tanzania

Total 33,390 6,006 5,850 6,006 14,016 1,344 168 11,254 31 1,780 890 140 4,498 890 31 890 31 31 2,042 12,204 134 4,272 6,578 1,220 8,428 42 12 78 105 7,868 115 208

Cattle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,120 0 1,424 712 0 3,560 712 0 712 0 0 0 10,984 121 3,845 5,920 1,098 3,873 0 7 0 95 3,469 104 199

Number Sold in Nairobi Camels Goats Sheep Pigs 0 28,530 3,360 0 0 5,706 0 0 0 4,281 1,344 0 0 5,706 0 0 0 12,837 504 0 0 0 1,344 0 0 0 168 0 0 0 0 1,083 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 787 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 941 78 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 941 78 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 31,890 5,706 5,625 5,706 13,341 1,344 168 8,203 29 1,424 712 133 3,606 712 29 712 29 29 787 10,984 121 3,845 5,920 1,098 5,012 42 7 78 95 4,488 104 199

Table 6.3b: Livestock Slaughtered and Sold in Nairobi by Abattoir and Source (%) Total Slaughtered Cattle Camels Goats Sheep Pigs Kiamaiko n.a. n.a. 100.0 100.0 n.a. Isiolo n.a. n.a. 20.0 0.0 n.a. Marsabit n.a. n.a. 15.0 40.0 n.a. Moyale n.a. n.a. 20.0 0.0 n.a. Garissa n.a. n.a. 45.0 15.0 n.a. Wajir n.a. n.a. 0.0 40.0 n.a. Kajiado n.a. n.a. 0.0 5.0 n.a. Dagoretti 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 Kiambu 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.3 Moyale 20.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.0 Garissa 10.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.0 Homa Bay 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.9 Migori 50.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 2.0 Kajiado 10.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.0 Trans Nzoia 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.3 Baringo 10.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.0 Bungoma 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.3 Kakamega 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.3 Other (local) 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 86.7 Njiru 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Isiolo 1.1 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Moyale 35.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Garissa 53.9 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Migori 10.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Kajiado 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. Isiolo 0.0 35.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. Makueni 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. Garissa 0.0 65.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. Migori 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. Kajiado 90.4 0.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. Narok 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. Tanzania 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.a.
135

Total 100.0 18.0 17.5 18.0 42.0 4.0 0.5 100.0 0.3 15.8 7.9 1.2 40.0 7.9 0.3 7.9 0.3 0.3 18.1 100.0 1.1 35.0 53.9 10.0 100.0 0.5 0.1 0.9 1.2 93.4 1.4 2.5

Cattle n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 0.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 50.0 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 1.1 35.0 53.9 10.0 100.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 2.4 89.6 2.7 5.1

Number Sold in Nairobi Camels Goats Sheep n.a. 100.0 100.0 n.a. 20.0 0.0 n.a. 15.0 40.0 n.a. 20.0 0.0 n.a. 45.0 15.0 n.a. 0.0 40.0 n.a. 0.0 5.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 100.0 100.0 35.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 65.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Pigs n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 12.3 4.2 0.0 2.7 0.0 2.7 2.7 72.7 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

Total 100.0 17.9 17.6 17.9 41.8 4.2 0.5 100.0 0.4 17.4 8.7 1.6 44.0 8.7 0.4 8.7 0.4 0.4 9.6 100.0 1.1 35.0 53.9 10.0 100.0 0.8 0.1 1.6 1.9 89.5 2.1 4.0

Table 6.4a: Costs of Animals Sold in Nairobi by Abattoir and Source (Shs) Cattle Kiamaiko Eastern N. Eastern R. Valley Dagoretti Central Eastern N. Eastern Nyanza R. Valley Western Other (local) Njiru Eastern N. Eastern Nyanza Kajiado Eastern N. Eastern Nyanza R. Valley Tanzania TOTAL Central Eastern N. Eastern Nyanza R. Valley Western Other (local) Tanzania 0 0 0 0 113,920,000 0 22,784,000 11,392,000 56,960,000 22,784,000 0 0 164,760,000 59,483,103 88,806,299 16,470,598 43,875,467 75,118 0 1,205,623 40,903,596 1,691,130 322,555,467 0 82,342,221 100,198,299 74,636,220 63,687,596 0 0 1,691,130 Camels 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,400,000 840,000 1,560,000 0 0 0 2,400,000 0 840,000 1,560,000 0 0 0 0 0 Goats 57,060,000 31,385,850 25,674,150 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,876,800 0 0 0 1,876,800 0 58,936,800 0 31,385,850 25,674,150 0 1,876,800 0 0 0 Sheep 6,048,000 2,419,200 3,326,400 302,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 140,400 0 0 0 140,400 0 6,188,400 0 2,419,200 3,326,400 0 442,800 0 0 0 Pigs 0 0 0 0 1,776,000 176,462 0 0 1,070,154 176,462 352,923 4,722,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,498,000 176,462 0 0 1,070,154 176,462 352,923 4,722,000 0 Total 63,108,000 33,805,050 29,000,550 302,400 115,696,000 176,462 22,784,000 11,392,000 58,030,154 22,960,462 352,923 4,722,000 164,760,000 59,483,103 88,806,299 16,470,598 48,292,667 915,118 1,560,000 1,205,623 42,920,796 1,691,130 396,578,667 176,462 116,987,271 130,758,848 75,706,374 66,183,658 352,923 4,722,000 1,691,130

136

Table 6.4b: Costs of Animals Sold in Nairobi by Abattoir and Source (%) Cattle Kiamaiko Eastern N. Eastern R. Valley Dagoretti Central Eastern N. Eastern Nyanza R. Valley Western Other (local) Njiru Eastern N. Eastern Nyanza Kajiado Eastern N. Eastern Nyanza R. Valley Tanzania TOTAL Central Eastern N. Eastern Nyanza R. Valley Western Other (local) Tanzania n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 0.0 20.0 10.0 50.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 36.1 53.9 10.0 100.0 0.2 0.0 2.7 93.2 3.9 100.0 0.0 25.5 31.1 23.1 19.7 0.0 0.0 0.5 Camels n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 35.0 65.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 35.0 65.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Goats 100.0 55.0 45.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 53.3 43.6 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sheep 100.0 40.0 55.0 5.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 39.1 53.8 0.0 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pigs n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 9.9 0.0 0.0 60.3 9.9 19.9 265.9 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 16.5 2.7 5.4 72.7 0.0 Total 100.0 53.6 46.0 0.5 100.0 0.2 19.7 9.8 50.2 19.8 0.3 4.1 100.0 36.1 53.9 10.0 100.0 1.9 3.2 2.5 88.9 3.5 100.0 0.0 29.5 33.0 19.1 16.7 0.1 1.2 0.4

137

Table 6.5a: Breakdown of Costs of Animals Sold in Nairobi (Shs) Animal cost Kiamaiko Dagoretti Njiru Kajiado Abattoir fee Kiamaiko Dagoretti Njiru Kajiado Slaughter costs Kiamaiko Dagoretti Njiru Kajiado Inspection fee Kiamaiko Dagoretti Njiru Kajiado TOTAL Kiamaiko Dagoretti Njiru Kajiado Cattle 322,555,467 0 113,920,000 164,760,000 43,875,467 425,200 0 0 0 425,200 3,786,370 0 1,424,000 2,196,800 165,570 2,197,700 0 712,000 1,098,400 387,300 152,418,428 0 23,211,200 90,582,425 38,624,803 Camels 2,400,000 0 0 0 2,400,000 12,000 0 0 0 12,000 6,000 0 0 0 6,000 12,000 0 0 0 12,000 850,500 0 0 0 850,500 Goats 58,936,800 57,060,000 0 0 1,876,800 732,850 713,250 0 0 19,600 301,990 285,300 0 0 16,690 746,500 713,250 0 0 33,250 13,700,700 11,754,360 0 0 1,946,340 Sheep 6,188,400 6,048,000 0 0 140,400 87,900 84,000 0 0 3,900 34,770 33,600 0 0 1,170 85,950 84,000 0 0 1,950 2,647,260 2,499,840 0 0 147,420 Pigs 6,498,000 0 6,498,000 0 0 108,300 0 108,300 0 0 52,670 0 52,670 0 0 27,075 0 27,075 0 0 3,492,113 0 3,492,113 0 0 Total 396,578,667 63,108,000 120,418,000 164,760,000 48,292,667 1,366,250 797,250 108,300 0 460,700 4,181,800 318,900 1,476,670 2,196,800 189,430 3,069,225 797,250 739,075 1,098,400 434,500 173,109,002 14,254,200 26,703,313 90,582,425 41,569,063

138

Table 6.5b: Breakdown of Costs of Animals Sold in Nairobi (%) Animal cost Kiamaiko Dagoretti Njiru Kajiado Abattoir fee Kiamaiko Dagoretti Njiru Kajiado Slaughter costs Kiamaiko Dagoretti Njiru Kajiado Inspection fee Kiamaiko Dagoretti Njiru Kajiado TOTAL Kiamaiko Dagoretti Njiru Kajiado Cattle 100.0 0.0 35.3 51.1 13.6 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 37.6 58.0 4.4 100.0 0.0 32.4 50.0 17.6 100.0 0.0 15.2 59.4 25.3 Camels 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Goats 100.0 96.8 0.0 0.0 3.2 100.0 97.3 0.0 0.0 2.7 100.0 94.5 0.0 0.0 5.5 100.0 95.5 0.0 0.0 4.5 100.0 85.8 0.0 0.0 14.2 Sheep 100.0 97.7 0.0 0.0 2.3 100.0 95.6 0.0 0.0 4.4 100.0 96.6 0.0 0.0 3.4 100.0 97.7 0.0 0.0 2.3 100.0 94.4 0.0 0.0 5.6 Pigs 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 Total 100.0 15.9 30.4 41.5 12.2 100.0 58.4 7.9 0.0 33.7 100.0 7.6 35.3 52.5 4.5 100.0 26.0 24.1 35.8 14.2 100.0 8.2 15.4 52.3 24.0

139

Table 7.1a: Sources of Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Chicken Variety

PROVINCE Nairobi Central DISTRICT Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Murang'a Maragwa Nyeri Eastern Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Nyanza Kisii Rift valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Bomet TOTAL City Market Grade Local Total 1,000 0 1,000 5987 320 6307 4,230 110 4,340 560 0 560 0 0 0 340 210 550 857 0 857 0 0 0 180 570 750 0 0 0 0 0 0 180 570 750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5400 730 6130 1,160 150 1,310 0 580 580 0 0 0 3,190 0 3,190 0 0 0 1,050 0 1,050 0 0 0 12,567 1,620 14,187 Grade 165 2553 1,731 322 0 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 207 120 0 0 87 0 0 0 2,925 Kariakor Local Total 0 165 18 2571 0 1,731 0 322 0 0 10 510 0 0 8 8 2980 2980 488 488 857 857 381 381 1,254 1,254 0 0 0 0 542 749 0 120 0 0 14 14 0 87 95 95 0 0 433 433 3,540 6,465 Grade 0 7672 6,230 1,442 0 0 0 0 300 0 0 300 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 8,072 Maziwa Local 0 450 450 0 0 0 0 0 5490 1,339 632 802 2,717 30 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,970 Total 0 8122 6,680 1,442 0 0 0 0 5790 1,339 632 1,102 2,717 30 30 100 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 14,042 Grade 0 700 200 500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 700 Other Local 0 1050 650 0 400 0 0 0 1530 0 300 1,080 150 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,680 Total 0 1750 850 500 400 0 0 0 1530 0 300 1,080 150 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,380 Grade 1,165 16,912 12,391 2,824 0 840 857 0 480 0 0 480 0 0 0 5,707 1,280 0 0 3,377 0 1,050 0 24,264 TOTAL Local 0 1,838 1,210 0 400 220 0 8 10,570 1,827 1,789 2,833 4,121 130 130 1,272 150 580 14 0 95 0 433 13,810 Total 1,165 18,750 13,601 2,824 400 1,060 857 8 11,050 1,827 1,789 3,313 4,121 130 130 6,979 1,430 580 14 3,377 95 1,050 433 38,074

NOTE: Other markets are Gikomba, Toi, Githurai and Kariobangi.

140

Table 7.1b: Sources of Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Chicken Variety (%)

PROVINCE Nairobi Central DISTRICT Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyeri Eastern Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Nyanza Kisii Rift valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Bomet TOTAL City Market Grade Local 100.0 0.0 94.9 5.1 97.5 2.5 100.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. 61.8 38.2 100.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. 24.0 76.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 24.0 76.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 88.1 11.9 88.5 11.5 0.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. 100.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. 100.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. 88.6 11.4 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. n.a. 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. 100.0 Grade 100.0 99.3 100.0 100.0 n.a. 98.0 n.a. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. 27.6 100.0 n.a. 0.0 100.0 0.0 n.a. 0.0 45.2 Kariakor Local 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 n.a. 2.0 n.a. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. 72.4 0.0 n.a. 100.0 0.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 54.8 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. 100.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 100.0 Grade n.a. 94.5 93.3 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.2 0.0 0.0 27.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 57.5 Maziwa Local n.a. 5.5 6.7 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 94.8 100.0 100.0 72.8 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 42.5 Total n.a. 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 Grade n.a. 40.0 23.5 100.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 20.7 Other Local n.a. 60.0 76.5 0.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 n.a. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 79.3 Total n.a. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 n.a. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 Grade 100.0 90.2 91.1 100.0 0.0 79.2 100.0 0.0 4.3 0.0 0.0 14.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 81.8 89.5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 63.7 TOTAL Local 0.0 9.8 8.9 0.0 100.0 20.8 0.0 100.0 95.7 100.0 100.0 85.5 100.0 100.0 100.0 18.2 10.5 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 36.3 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

NOTE: Other markets are Gikomba, Toi, Githurai and Kariobangi.

141

Table 7.1c: Sources of Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Chicken Variety (%)

PROVINCE Nairobi Central DISTRICT Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyeri Eastern Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Nyanza Kisii Rift valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Bomet TOTAL City Market Grade Local Total 8.0 0.0 7.0 47.6 19.8 44.5 33.7 6.8 30.6 4.5 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 13.0 3.9 6.8 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 35.2 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 35.2 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.0 45.1 43.2 9.2 9.3 9.2 0.0 35.8 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.4 0.0 22.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.4 0.0 7.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Grade 5.6 87.3 59.2 11.0 0.0 17.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.1 4.1 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Kariakor Local 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.2 84.2 13.8 24.2 10.8 35.4 0.0 0.0 15.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 2.7 0.0 12.2 100.0 Total 2.6 39.8 26.8 5.0 0.0 7.9 0.0 0.1 46.1 7.5 13.3 5.9 19.4 0.0 0.0 11.6 1.9 0.0 0.2 1.3 1.5 0.0 6.7 100.0 Grade 0.0 95.0 77.2 17.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Maziwa Local 0.0 7.5 7.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 92.0 22.4 10.6 13.4 45.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Total 0.0 57.8 47.6 10.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 41.2 9.5 4.5 7.8 19.3 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Grade 0.0 100.0 28.6 71.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Other Local 0.0 39.2 24.3 0.0 14.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.1 0.0 11.2 40.3 5.6 3.7 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Total 0.0 51.8 25.1 14.8 11.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 45.3 0.0 8.9 32.0 4.4 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Grade 4.8 69.7 51.1 11.6 0.0 3.5 3.5 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.5 5.3 0.0 0.0 13.9 0.0 4.3 0.0 100.0 TOTAL Local 0.0 13.3 8.8 0.0 2.9 1.6 0.0 0.1 76.5 13.2 13.0 20.5 29.8 0.9 0.9 9.2 1.1 4.2 0.1 0.0 0.7 0.0 3.1 100.0 Total 3.1 49.2 35.7 7.4 1.1 2.8 2.3 0.0 29.0 4.8 4.7 8.7 10.8 0.3 0.3 18.3 3.8 1.5 0.0 8.9 0.2 2.8 1.1 100.0

NOTE: Other markets are Gikomba, Toi, Githurai and Kariobangi.

142

Table 7.1d: Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Source and Chicken Variety (%)
PROVINCE Nairobi Central DISTRICT Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyeri Eastern Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Nyanza Kisii Rift valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Bomet TOTAL City Market Grade Local 85.8 n.a. 35.4 17.4 34.1 9.1 19.8 n.a. n.a. 0.0 40.5 95.5 100.0 n.a. n.a. 0.0 37.5 5.4 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 37.5 20.1 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 94.6 57.4 90.6 100.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. 0.0 94.5 n.a. n.a. 0.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. 0.0 51.8 11.7 Total 85.8 33.6 31.9 19.8 0.0 51.9 100.0 0.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 22.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 87.8 91.6 100.0 0.0 94.5 0.0 100.0 0.0 37.3 Grade 14.2 15.1 14.0 11.4 n.a. 59.5 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. n.a. 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 3.6 9.4 n.a. n.a. 2.6 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 12.1 Kariakor Local n.a. 1.0 0.0 n.a. 0.0 4.5 n.a. 100.0 28.2 26.7 47.9 13.4 30.4 0.0 0.0 42.6 0.0 0.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. 100.0 25.6 Total 14.2 13.7 12.7 11.4 0.0 48.1 0.0 100.0 27.0 26.7 47.9 11.5 30.4 0.0 0.0 10.7 8.4 0.0 100.0 2.6 100.0 0.0 100.0 17.0 Grade 0.0 45.4 50.3 51.1 n.a. 0.0 0.0 n.a. 62.5 n.a. n.a. 62.5 n.a. n.a. n.a. 1.8 0.0 n.a. n.a. 3.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 33.3 Maziwa Local n.a. 24.5 37.2 n.a. 0.0 0.0 n.a. 0.0 51.9 73.3 35.3 28.3 65.9 23.1 23.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 43.2 Total 0.0 43.3 49.1 51.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 52.4 73.3 35.3 33.3 65.9 23.1 23.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.9 Grade 0.0 4.1 1.6 17.7 n.a. 0.0 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. n.a. 0.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 0.0 0.0 n.a. n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 2.9 Other Local n.a. 57.1 53.7 n.a. 100.0 0.0 n.a. 0.0 14.5 0.0 16.8 38.1 3.6 76.9 76.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 19.4 Total 0.0 9.3 6.2 17.7 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.8 0.0 16.8 32.6 3.6 76.9 76.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.9 Grade 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. n.a. 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 100.0 n.a. n.a. 100.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. 100.0 TOTAL Local n.a. 100.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. 100.0 100.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

NOTE: Other markets are Gikomba, Toi, Githurai and Kariobangi.

143

Table 7.2a: Farm Gate Costs of Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Chicken Variety
PROVINCE Nairobi Central DISTRICT Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyeri Eastern Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Nyanza Kisii Rift valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Bomet TOTAL TOTAL (%) Grade 137,700 835,360 611,080 70,500 0 47,400 106,380 0 25,800 0 0 25,800 0 0 0 768,800 191,200 0 0 441,100 0 136,500 0 1,767,660 87.4 City Market Local Total 0 137,700 45,800 881,160 18,300 629,380 0 70,500 0 0 27,500 74,900 0 106,380 0 0 76,600 102,400 0 0 0 0 76,600 102,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 133,400 902,200 27,000 218,200 106,400 106,400 0 0 0 441,100 0 0 0 136,500 0 0 255,800 2,023,460 12.6 100.0 Grade 24,750 304,990 203,130 41,860 0 60,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26,250 13,200 0 0 13,050 0 0 0 355,990 38.5 Kariakor Local 0 2,760 0 0 0 1,400 0 1,360 490,150 79,930 140,870 57,220 212,130 0 0 75,530 0 0 2,100 0 12,985 0 60,445 568,440 61.5 Total 24,750 307,750 203,130 41,860 0 61,400 0 1,360 490,150 79,930 140,870 57,220 212,130 0 0 101,780 13,200 0 2,100 13,050 12,985 0 60,445 924,430 100.0 Grade 0 1,033,360 842,500 190,860 0 0 0 0 54,000 0 0 54,000 0 0 0 13,000 0 0 0 13,000 0 0 0 1,100,360 48.7 Maziwa Local 0 63,000 63,000 0 0 0 0 0 1,088,220 255,820 131,330 161,860 539,210 7,200 7,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,158,420 51.3 Total 0 1,096,360 905,500 190,860 0 0 0 0 1,142,220 255,820 131,330 215,860 539,210 7,200 7,200 13,000 0 0 0 13,000 0 0 0 2,258,780 100.0 Grade 0 99,000 24,000 75,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99,000 20.6 Other Local 0 116,000 56,000 0 60,000 0 0 0 255,700 0 32,000 202,400 21,300 10,000 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 381,700 79.4 Total 0 215,000 80,000 75,000 60,000 0 0 0 255,700 0 32,000 202,400 21,300 10,000 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 480,700 100.0 Grade 162,450 2,272,710 1,680,710 378,220 0 107,400 106,380 0 79,800 0 0 79,800 0 0 0 808,050 204,400 0 0 467,150 0 136,500 0 3,323,010 58.4 TOTAL Local 0 227,560 137,300 0 60,000 28,900 0 1,360 1,910,670 335,750 304,200 498,080 772,640 17,200 17,200 208,930 27,000 106,400 2,100 0 12,985 0 60,445 2,364,360 41.6 Total 162,450 2,500,270 1,818,010 378,220 60,000 136,300 106,380 1,360 1,990,470 335,750 304,200 577,880 772,640 17,200 17,200 1,016,980 231,400 106,400 2,100 467,150 12,985 136,500 60,445 5,687,370 100.0

NOTE: Other markets are Gikomba, Toi, Githurai and Kariobangi.

144

Table 7.2b: Farm Gate Costs of Chicken Inflows to Nairobi by Chicken Variety (%)
PROVINCE Nairobi Central DISTRICT Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyeri Eastern Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Nyanza Kisii Rift valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Bomet TOTAL City Market Grade Local Total 7.8 0.0 6.8 47.3 17.9 43.5 34.6 7.2 31.1 4.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 10.8 3.7 6.0 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 29.9 5.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 29.9 5.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.5 52.2 44.6 10.8 10.6 10.8 0.0 41.6 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 21.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.7 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Grade 7.0 85.7 57.1 11.8 0.0 16.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.4 3.7 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Kariakor Local 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 86.2 14.1 24.8 10.1 37.3 0.0 0.0 13.3 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 2.3 0.0 10.6 100.0 Total 2.7 33.3 22.0 4.5 0.0 6.6 0.0 0.1 53.0 8.6 15.2 6.2 22.9 0.0 0.0 11.0 1.4 0.0 0.2 1.4 1.4 0.0 6.5 100.0 Grade 0.0 93.9 76.6 17.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.9 0.0 0.0 4.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Maziwa Local 0.0 5.4 5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 93.9 22.1 11.3 14.0 46.5 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Total 0.0 48.5 40.1 8.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.6 11.3 5.8 9.6 23.9 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Grade 0.0 100.0 24.2 75.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Other Local 0.0 30.4 14.7 0.0 15.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 67.0 0.0 8.4 53.0 5.6 2.6 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Total 0.0 44.7 16.6 15.6 12.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.2 0.0 6.7 42.1 4.4 2.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Grade 4.9 68.4 50.6 11.4 0.0 3.2 3.2 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.3 6.2 0.0 0.0 14.1 0.0 4.1 0.0 100.0 TOTAL Local 0.0 9.6 5.8 0.0 2.5 1.2 0.0 0.1 80.8 14.2 12.9 21.1 32.7 0.7 0.7 8.8 1.1 4.5 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 2.6 100.0 Total 2.9 44.0 32.0 6.7 1.1 2.4 1.9 0.0 35.0 5.9 5.3 10.2 13.6 0.3 0.3 17.9 4.1 1.9 0.0 8.2 0.2 2.4 1.1 100.0

NOTE: Other markets are Gikomba, Toi, Githurai and Kariobangi.

145

Table 7.3a: Types of Wholesalers of Grade Chicken Inflows by Source

PROVINCE Nairobi Central DISTRICT Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyeri Eastern Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Nyanza Kisii Rift valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Bomet TOTAL City Market Own Other Total stock 4 4 8 53 4 57 38 3 41 4 1 5 0 0 0 4 0 4 7 0 7 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 28 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 20 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 87 9 96 Own stock Kariakor Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 19 14 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 22 Total 1 19 14 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 22 Own stock 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Maziwa Other 0 35 30 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 37 Total 0 35 30 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 37 Own stock 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Other 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Total 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Own stock 4 53 38 4 0 4 7 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 28 5 0 0 20 0 3 0 87 TOTAL Other 5 60 48 10 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 70 Total 9 113 86 14 0 6 7 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 31 6 0 0 22 0 3 0 157 TOTAL (%) Own Other stock 44.4 55.6 46.9 53.1 44.2 55.8 28.6 71.4 66.7 100.0 50.0 50.0 33.3 0.0 50.0 50.0

90.3 83.3 90.9 100.0 55.4

9.7 16.7 9.1 0.0 44.6

NOTE: Other markets are Gikomba, Toi, Githurai and Kariobangi

146

Table 7.3b: Types of Wholesalers of Local Chicken Inflows by Source

PROVINCE Nairobi Central DISTRICT Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyeri Eastern Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Nyanza Kisii Rift valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Bomet TOTAL City Market Own Other Total stock 0 0 0 5 0 5 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 6 1 0 1 2 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 4 21 Own stock Kariakor Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 41 8 9 7 17 0 0 6 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 49 Total 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 41 8 9 7 17 0 0 6 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 49 Own stock 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Maziwa Other 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 108 21 11 19 57 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 112 Total 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 108 21 11 19 57 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 112 Own stock 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Other 0 5 4 0 1 0 0 0 9 0 2 6 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Total 0 5 4 0 1 0 0 0 9 0 2 6 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Own stock 0 5 2 0 0 3 0 0 9 0 0 9 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 17 TOTAL Other 0 10 7 0 1 1 0 1 159 29 22 33 75 2 2 9 0 3 1 0 2 0 3 180 Total 0 15 9 0 1 4 0 1 168 29 22 42 75 2 2 12 1 5 1 0 2 0 3 197 TOTAL (%) Own Other stock 33.3 22.2 0.0 75.0 0.0 5.4 0.0 0.0 21.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 100.0 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.6 66.7 77.8 100.0 25.0 100.0 94.6 100.0 100.0 78.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 75.0 0.0 60.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 91.4

NOTE: Other markets are Gikomba, Toi, Githurai and Kariobangi.

147

Table 7.4a: Distribution of Wholesalers of Grade Chicken by Sex of Wholesaler

PROVINCE Nairobi Central DISTRICT Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyeri Eastern Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Nyanza Kisii Rift valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Bomet TOTAL Male 8 44 32 3 0 4 5 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 12 4 0 0 6 0 2 0 67 City Market Female Total 0 8 15 59 11 43 2 5 0 0 0 4 2 7 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 27 0 4 0 0 0 0 14 20 0 0 1 3 0 0 30 97 Male 1 17 12 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 Kariakor Female 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Total 1 19 14 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 Male 0 28 23 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 29 Maziwa Female 0 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Total 0 35 30 5 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 37 Male 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Other Female 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Male 9 91 68 12 0 6 5 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 14 5 0 0 7 0 2 0 117 TOTAL Female 0 24 20 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 14 0 1 0 40 Total 9 115 88 14 0 6 7 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 29 5 0 0 21 0 3 0 157 TOTAL (%) Male Female 100.0 0.0 79.1 20.9 77.3 22.7 85.7 14.3 100.0 71.4 75.0 75.0 0.0 28.6 25.0 25.0

48.3 100.0 33.3 66.7 74.5

51.7 0.0 66.7 33.3 25.5

NOTE: Other markets are Gikomba, Toi, Githurai and Kariobangi.

148

Table 7.4b: Distribution of Wholesalers of Local Chicken by Sex of Wholesaler

PROVINCE Nairobi Central DISTRICT Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyeri Eastern Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Nyanza Kisii Rift valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Bomet TOTAL Male 0 6 2 0 0 4 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 19 City Market Female Total 0 0 0 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 0 1 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 22 Male 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 30 7 8 4 11 0 0 9 0 0 1 0 2 0 6 41 Kariakor Female 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 2 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 Total 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 43 8 10 8 17 0 0 9 0 0 1 0 2 0 6 54 Male 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 82 16 9 12 45 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 Maziwa Female 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 26 5 2 7 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 Total 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 108 21 11 19 57 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 112 Male 0 4 3 0 1 0 0 0 7 0 2 5 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 Other Female 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Total 0 5 4 0 1 0 0 0 9 0 2 6 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Male 0 13 6 0 1 5 0 1 129 23 19 31 56 2 2 12 1 2 1 0 2 0 6 156 TOTAL Female 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 41 6 4 12 19 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 47 Total 0 16 9 0 1 5 0 1 170 29 23 43 75 2 2 15 1 5 1 0 2 0 6 203 TOTAL (%) Male Female 81.3 66.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 75.9 79.3 82.6 72.1 74.7 100.0 100.0 80.0 100.0 40.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 76.8 18.8 33.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.1 20.7 17.4 27.9 25.3 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.2

NOTE: Other markets are Gikomba, Toi, Githurai and Kariobangi.

149

Table 7.4c: Distribution of Wholesalers of Chicken by Sex of Wholesaler

PROVINCE Nairobi Central DISTRICT Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyaga Muranga Maragwa Nyeri Eastern Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Nyanza Kisii Rift valley Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Bomet TOTAL Male 8 50 34 3 0 8 5 0 13 0 0 13 0 0 0 15 5 2 0 6 0 2 0 86 City Market Female Total 0 8 15 65 11 45 2 5 0 0 0 8 2 7 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 33 0 5 3 5 0 0 14 20 0 0 1 3 0 0 33 119 Male 1 19 12 3 0 3 0 1 30 7 8 4 11 0 0 10 1 0 1 0 2 0 6 60 Kariakor Female 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 2 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Total 1 21 14 3 0 3 0 1 43 8 10 8 17 0 0 10 1 0 1 0 2 0 6 75 Male 0 29 24 5 0 0 0 0 82 16 9 12 45 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 113 Maziwa Female 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 27 5 2 8 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 Total 0 38 33 5 0 0 0 0 109 21 11 20 57 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 149 Male 0 6 4 1 1 0 0 0 7 0 2 5 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 Other Female 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Total 0 7 5 1 1 0 0 0 9 0 2 6 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 Male 9 104 74 12 1 11 5 1 132 23 19 34 56 2 2 26 6 2 1 7 2 2 6 273 TOTAL Female 0 27 23 2 0 0 2 0 42 6 4 13 19 0 0 18 0 3 0 14 0 1 0 87 Total 9 131 97 14 1 11 7 1 174 29 23 47 75 2 2 44 6 5 1 21 2 3 6 360 TOTAL (%) Male Female 100.0 0.0 79.4 20.6 76.3 23.7 85.7 14.3 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 71.4 28.6 100.0 0.0 75.9 24.1 79.3 20.7 82.6 17.4 72.3 27.7 74.7 25.3 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 59.1 40.9 100.0 0.0 40.0 60.0 100.0 0.0 33.3 66.7 100.0 0.0 66.7 33.3 100.0 0.0 75.8 24.2

NOTE: Other markets are Gikomba, Toi, Githurai and Kariobangi.

150

Table 7.5a: Quantities (Kg) and Costs (Shs) of Fish Delivered to Gikomba Market
Tilapia Coast Machakos Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Migori Kajiado Busia Tanzania Uganda Total Coast Machakos Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Migori Kajiado Busia Tanzania Uganda Total 0 5,533 0 0 3,154 3,800 0 6,703 25,584 41,341 86,115 0 55,330 0 174,950 234,600 0 434,090 1,571,210 2,171,520 4,641,700 Nileperch 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dagaa 0 0 0 300 850 0 0 0 0 0 1,150 0 0 13,500 78,750 0 0 0 0 0 92,250 QUANTITY Crabs Odol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 882 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 882 COSTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49,740 0 0 0 49,740 Kamongo 800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 800 48,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48,000 seafish 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 800 5,533 0 300 4,004 3,800 882 6,703 25,584 41,341 88,947 48,000 55,330 13,500 253,700 234,600 49,740 434,090 1,571,210 2,171,520 4,831,690 Tilapia 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 3.7 4.4 0.0 7.8 29.7 48.0 100.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 3.8 5.1 0.0 9.4 33.8 46.8 100.0 Nileperch n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Dagaa 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.1 73.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.6 85.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 QUANTITY (%) Crabs Odol n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 100.0 COSTS (%) n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 100.0 Kamongo 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 seafish n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Total 0.9 6.2 0.0 0.3 4.5 4.3 1.0 7.5 28.8 46.5 100.0 1.0 1.1 0.0 0.3 5.3 4.9 1.0 9.0 32.5 44.9 100.0

NOTE: Siaya comprises Siaya and Bondo districts; Homa Bay comprises Homa Bay, Suba and Rachuonyo districts.

151

Table 7.5b: Quantities (Kg) and Costs (Shs) of Fish Delivered to Toi Market
Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Total Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Total Tilapia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Nileperch 4 11 1,870 1,885 14,400 25,600 28,050 68,050 Dagaa 480 1,691 4,112 6,283 24,000 128,000 239,500 391,500 QUANTITY Crabs Odol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COSTS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kamongo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 seafish 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 484 1,702 5,982 8,168 38,400 153,600 267,550 459,550 Tilapia n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Nileperch 0.2 0.6 99.2 100.0 21.2 37.6 41.2 100.0 QUANTITY (%) Dagaa Crabs Odol Kamongo 7.6 n.a. n.a. n.a. 26.9 n.a. n.a. n.a. 65.4 n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. COSTS (%) 6.1 n.a. n.a. n.a. 32.7 n.a. n.a. n.a. 61.2 n.a. n.a. n.a. 100.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. seafish n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Total 5.9 20.8 73.2 100.0 8.4 33.4 58.2 100.0

NOTE: Siaya comprises Siaya and Bondo districts; Homa Bay comprises Homa Bay, Suba and Rachuonyo districts. Table 7.5c: Quantities (Kg) and Costs (Shs) of Fish Delivered to City Market
Coast Machakos Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Migori Kajiado Busia Total Coast Machakos Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Migori Kajiado Busia Total Tilapia 0 10,543 1,740 627 0 50 12,959 0 804,270 134,400 45,130 0 4,000 987,800 Nileperch 0 9,700 391 435 30 130 10,686 0 726,515 27,970 31,440 1,200 7,800 794,925 Dagaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 QUANTITY Crabs Odol 817 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Kamongo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 seafish 118 0 0 0 0 0 118 3,375 0 0 0 0 0 3,375 Total 935 20,242 2,131 1,062 30 180 24,580 52,275 1,530,785 162,370 76,570 1,200 11,800 1,835,000 Tilapia 0.0 0.0 81.4 13.4 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.4 100.0 0.0 0.0 81.4 13.6 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.4 100.0 Nileperch 0.0 0.0 90.8 3.7 4.1 0.3 0.0 1.2 100.0 0.0 0.0 91.4 3.5 4.0 0.2 0.0 1.0 100.0 Dagaa n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. QUANTITY (%) Crabs Odol 100.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. COSTS (%) 100.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 0.0 n.a. 100.0 n.a. Kamongo n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. seafish 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Total 3.8 0.0 82.4 8.7 4.3 0.1 0.0 0.7 100.0 2.8 0.0 83.4 8.8 4.2 0.1 0.0 0.6 100.0

0 0 817 0 COSTS 48,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 48,900 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTE: Siaya comprises Siaya and Bondo districts; Homa Bay comprises Homa Bay, Suba and Rachuonyo districts.

152

Table 7.5d: Quantities (Kg) and Costs (Shs) of Fish Delivered to Gikomba, Toi and City Market
Coast Machakos Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Migori Kajiado Busia Tanzania Uganda Total Coast Machakos Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Migori Kajiado Busia Tanzania Uganda Total Tilapia 0 5,533 10,543 1,740 3,781 3,800 0 6,753 25,584 41,341 99,074 0 55,330 804,270 134,400 220,080 234,600 0 438,090 1,571,210 2,171,520 5,629,500 Nileperch 0 0 9,704 402 2,305 30 0 130 0 0 12,571 0 0 740,915 53,570 59,490 1,200 0 7,800 0 0 862,975 Dagaa 0 0 480 1,991 4,962 0 0 0 0 0 7,433 0 0 24,000 141,500 318,250 0 0 0 0 0 483,750 QUANTITY Crabs Odol 817 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 882 0 0 0 0 0 0 817 882 COSTS 48,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49,740 0 0 0 0 0 0 48,900 49,740 Kamongo 800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 800 48,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48,000 seafish 118 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 118 3,375 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,375 Total 1,735 5,533 20,726 4,133 11,048 3,830 882 6,883 25,584 41,341 121,694 100,275 55,330 1,569,185 329,470 597,820 235,800 49,740 445,890 1,571,210 2,171,520 7,126,240 Tilapia 0.0 5.6 10.6 1.8 3.8 3.8 0.0 6.8 25.8 41.7 100.0 0.0 1.0 14.3 2.4 3.9 4.2 0.0 7.8 27.9 38.6 100.0 Nileperch 0.0 0.0 77.2 3.2 18.3 0.2 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 85.9 6.2 6.9 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 100.0 Dagaa 0.0 0.0 6.5 26.8 66.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 29.3 65.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 QUANTITY (%) Crabs Odol 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 COSTS (%) 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 Kamongo 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 seafish 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Total 1.4 4.5 17.0 3.4 9.1 3.1 0.7 5.7 21.0 34.0 100.0 1.4 0.8 22.0 4.6 8.4 3.3 0.7 6.3 22.0 30.5 100.0

NOTE: Siaya comprises Siaya and Bondo districts; Homa Bay comprises Homa Bay, Suba and Rachuonyo districts.

153

Table 7.6a: Types of Transport Used to Transport Fish to Gikomba, Toi and City Market Bus Gikomba Coast Machakos Siaya Homa Bay Migori Kajiado Busia Tanzania Uganda Toi Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay City Market Coast Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Migori Busia TOTAL Coast Machakos Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Migori Kajiado Busia Tanzania Uganda 23 1 0 1 6 5 1 7 0 2 12 1 6 5 28 0 15 6 7 0 0 63 1 0 16 13 18 5 1 7 0 2 Pickup 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lorry 28 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 12 13 3 1 0 2 131 10 106 8 4 1 2 162 10 0 107 8 6 1 1 4 12 13 Total 62 1 11 1 6 5 2 9 12 15 15 2 6 7 159 10 121 14 11 1 2 236 11 11 123 21 24 6 2 11 12 15

154

Table 7.6b: Types of Transport Used to Transport Fish to Gikomba, Toi and City Market (%) Bus Gikomba Coast Machakos Siaya Homa Bay Migori Kajiado Busia Tanzania Uganda Toi Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay City Market Coast Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Migori Busia TOTAL Coast Machakos Kisumu Siaya Homa Bay Migori Kajiado Busia Tanzania Uganda
155

Pickup 37.1 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 50.0 77.8 0.0 13.3 80.0 50.0 100.0 71.4 17.6 0.0 12.4 42.9 63.6 0.0 0.0 26.7 9.1 0.0 13.0 61.9 75.0 83.3 50.0 63.6 0.0 13.3 17.7 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Lorry 45.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 22.2 100.0 86.7 20.0 50.0 0.0 28.6 82.4 100.0 87.6 57.1 36.4 100.0 100.0 68.6 90.9 0.0 87.0 38.1 25.0 16.7 50.0 36.4 100.0 86.7

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table 8.1a: Estimated Calorie and Protein Availability per Adult Equivalent Number CALORIES Cereals Beans Fruits Vegetables Roots and Tubers Nuts Meat TOTAL 70.36 100.48 54.76 27.12 129.75 15.33 72.38 470.17 PROTEINS 1.96 6.78 0.70 1.35 3.19 0.27 11.11 25.35 CALORIES 14.97 21.37 11.65 5.77 27.60 3.26 15.39 100.00 % PROTEINS 7.73 26.73 2.75 5.31 12.60 1.07 43.82 100.00

Table 8.1b: Calorie and Protein Availability per Adult Equivalent: Food Processing Firms Number CALORIES Maize flour Wheat flour Bread Milk Total AGGREGATE TOTAL 188.64 157.09 54.73 1.61 402.09 872.26 PROTEINS 4.76 6.38 1.61 0.15 12.91 38.26 CALORIES 46.92 39.07 13.61 0.40 100.00 % PROTEINS 36.90 49.44 12.51 1.15 100.00

156

SURVEY INSTRUMENTS AND ENUMERATORS REFERENCE MANUAL

BACKGROUND 1. UN-HABITAT was originally established in 1978 as main outcome of the United Nations Conference on human settlements (Habitat I) held in Vancouver, Canada, in 1976. It was also the secretariat for the second United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II), held in Istanbul, Turkey, in June 1996. Known as the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat) since 1978, UNHABITAT was elevated in status to become the United Nations Human Settlements Programme on 1 January 2002. UN-HABITAT is the agency of the United Nations charged with coordinating and harmonising human settlements activities within the United Nations system, facilitating the global exchange of information on shelter and sustainable human settlements development, and assisting countries with policy and technical advice in solving their human settlements problems. 2. UN-HABITATs mission is to contribute to the improvement of the quality, liveability and economic and cultural utility of human settlements all over the world, be they cities, towns or villages; ensuring adequate shelter for all people; and universal access to safe and reliable infrastructure and services. 3. The Habitats main programme activities at present include: Campaign for improved security of tenure in land and housing; Campaign on the promotion of good urban governance and effective management; Research and monitoring of trends in human settlements development; Promotion of urban environmental planning and management, including slum upgrading in cities; Research on and monitoring of urban economic development, employment generation, poverty reduction, municipal finance and urban service investment systems; Disaster management and reconstruction; Water supply programmes for cities; Training and capacity building for human settlements development and management; Gender mainstreaming in human settlements development and management; and The programme on safer cities.

4. Habitats Research, Monitoring and Coordination Division (Urban Secretariat) consists of three branches, namely, the Monitoring Systems Branch; the Policy Analysis, Synthesis and Dialogue Branch; and the Urban Economy and Finance Branch. The Urban Economy and Finance Branch provides an economic perspective to human settlements programmes by focusing attention on the dynamics of the urban economy, its relationship to the national and global economy, and how these affect or are affected by the quality of local governance and national economic management. The study on urban agriculture and food inflows to Nairobi falls under the Urban Economy and Finance Branch. 5. As a result of worsening poverty within urban areas, many low income households are increasingly turning to urban agriculture for the production of food for own consumption and for income generation. Higher income households are also turning to urban agriculture as a way of augmenting declining salaries within the formal sector. At the same time, due to spiralling costs of transportation, many low income households that were previously dependent upon direct food remittances from their rural homes can no longer afford this. For this reason, rural-to-urban food flows are increasingly dependent on organised transportation and marketing networks. These emerging dynamics have in turn given rise to new policy issues that need to be addressed by urban planners and managers. These issues may be put in the form of questions as follows: i. How should cities respond to the phenomenon of urban agriculture, in the light of its increasing importance in the fight against urban poverty and especially given that this type of land use has not traditionally been accepted as a typical urban land use?

157

ii. iii.

How should urban planners and managers address peri-urban land use conflicts, so as to manage the urban-rural transition in ways that respond to both agricultural and non-agricultural needs? What approaches should planners adopt in order to facilitate the inflow of food into cities and its marketing therein?

6. As a city expands in area, the zones defined as urban and peri-urban also increase. The periurban zone is in a state of rapid change, with the land that earlier met the definition of peri-urban becoming urban and truly rural land becoming peri-urban. The distinction between the two areas becomes more of land use within each than administrative boundaries. BROAD RESEARCH AGENDA 7. Urban agriculture has been described as farming and related activities that take place within official urban boundaries. This has to be seen within the context of the panoply of laws and regulations regarding land use and tenurial rights, use of water, the environment, etc, that have been established and are operated by urban or municipal authorities. Urban agriculture takes place within certain boundaries which may extend quite far from an urban centre, while peri-urban agriculture takes place beyond that often geographically precise boundary, although its own outer boundary may be less well defined8. 8. Urban agriculture has received a sharper focus as a complement to rural agriculture in the food supply to urban areas. Globally, urban agriculture produces 15% of all food consumed in urban areas and this percentage is projected to double by 2020. This growth in urban agriculture may be attributed to effects of economic structural adjustment programmes such as retrenchments, extension of urban areas into previously rural agricultural settlements, urban poverty, and shortage of income opportunities. The low and very low-income earners benefit considerably from urban agriculture. They save on the cost of purchasing food, and may even earn some income from selling part of the output, in addition to enjoying higher nutritional levels. Studies carried out in Nairobi, Harare and Kampala reveal that women constitute the majority of participants in urban agriculture. 9. Urban food security has become an important issue on which governments, community-based organisations (CBOs), nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) and agencies of the United Nations are placing a lot of emphasis. The focus is on urban residents being able to obtain an adequate food supply as and when they need it and at prices they can afford. City residents depend on food surpluses from elsewhere, and in some cases from foreign countries. Distant food sources pose some problems to cities depending on them. Transportation, distribution and marketing costs can make food increasingly unaffordable (urban food prices are 10-30% higher than rural prices) especially to the urban poor, so that they are unable to meet the minimum standards of food consumption. Conversion of peri-urban farmlands into non-agricultural uses (industrial and residential) exacerbates the problem. The urban poor are usually near nutritional deprivation due to severely limited ability to grow any of their food requirements, as compared to their rural counterparts. Urban people produce only a small fraction of what they consume. With no land for own food production and no buying power to secure adequate supply, the urban poor increasingly find it difficult to adjust to higher urban food prices, yet they are becoming the urban majority. There is need for policies that address the issue of food production nearer to where the people live, i.e. urban and peri-urban areas. This should address the issues of land tenure and by-laws on land use for agricultural purposes within and around urban settlements, as well as food supply and distribution infrastructure and networks. The latter has a direct influence on the cost of bringing food where it is needed. 10. UN-HABITAT has, in consultation with FAO and IDRC, recently started exploring issues of urban food security. On the part of UN-HABITAT, the present interest is to clearly define, from a human settlement perspective, the issues that are relevant to feeding cities. It is envisaged that UN-HABITAT can contribute empirical and policy knowledge in the following areas:
8

The practice and land-use implications of urban and peri-urban agriculture; Rural-to-urban food flows, as part of rural-urban linkages;

Tim Aldington, Urban and peri-urban agriculture: some thoughts on the issue, in: P. Groppo (ed.), Land Reform, Land Settlement and Cooperatives, FAO, Rome, 1997.
158

Physical infrastructure, including transport for food produce and urban food markets; and Urban regulations and controls concerning food marketing and distribution.

As part of this exploratory set of activities, UN-HABITAT is starting a research project titled Urban Policy Implications of Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture and Rural-to-Urban Food Flows in Nairobi. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 11. (a) To determine the relative contribution of (i) urban agriculture, (ii) peri-urban agriculture, and (iii) rural-to-urban food inflows to the overall food needs of Nairobi City and to poverty reduction. (b) To determine, within the context of urban planning, the policy implications arising from the findings of the research, focusing on: (i) agricultural land use within the city, (ii) management of peri-urban land-use conflicts, and (iii) adequacy of the infrastructure necessary for facilitating rural-tourban food flows and of food markets within the city. (c) To develop, on the basis of lessons learnt from the research on Nairobi, generic urban planning policy guidelines on: (i) the integration of urban agriculture in city planning and management, (ii) the management of peri-urban use of land for agriculture, and (iii) how to improve the transport infrastructure and urban market facilities necessary for feeding cities. METHODOLOGY 12. A significant amount of research has already been carried out on urban and peri-urban agriculture in Nairobi. The kinds of land-use pressures created by urban and peri-urban agriculture have also been identified in a number of studies. Further review of the literature on this topic will enable us to arrive at a realistic estimate of the relative importance of urban and peri-urban agriculture and their contribution to the food needs of the city. It will also help to explore their urban planning and management policy implications. However, no studies have been carried out on inflows of food into Nairobi from the rural hinterland. Its food catchments area (its ecological footprint in this respect) is therefore not clear. The ruralurban transport requirements are also not known by city planners. In addition, hardly any research on the physical location and operational characteristics of food markets within Nairobi has been carried out. All of this information is necessary for city planners and managers if they are to make informed policy decisions on how to facilitate the rural-to-urban transportation of food, as well as plan and manage food markets effectively. 13. A number of studies on urban and peri-urban agriculture in Nairobi and elsewhere in Kenya have been carried out. The Government of Kenya, through the Provincial Director of Agriculture and Livestock Extension (PDALE) for Nairobi, also collects a lot of data and information on urban and periurban agriculture, which is published in annual reports. So, further literature review will constitute the main means of collecting information and data on the practice of urban and peri-urban agriculture in Nairobi. Of particular importance will be to find out: i. ii. iii. iv. v. Who practices urban and peri-urban agriculture (by socioeconomic class and gender, among other criteria)? Where in the city is urban and peri-urban agriculture practised, on what kind of land and under what tenurial arrangements? What crops are grown and what livestock is raised? What quantities of both crops and livestock are produced and what proportion of the total food needs of the city is satisfied by produce from urban and peri-urban agriculture? How much of the produce is for own consumption and how much is for sale?

14. With respect to rural-to-urban food flows, virtually no information exists, as no studies focusing on Nairobi have been carried out on the subject. Consequently, original empirical information and data collection will have to be carried out. Data and information collection will be in two stages. First, a reconnaissance of the city will be carried out in order to determine the number and location of food markets
159

within the city, the main food items imported into the city from rural areas, the means of transport used to bring food into and distribute it within the city, and the structure of the intra-city food distribution chain/network. Second, a number of quantitative surveys will be carried out, namely, (i) a survey of food transporters responsible for bringing food produce from rural areas into each of the city markets, focusing on the types and quantities of food brought into the city, the geographical origin of the produce and the temporal (seasonal) characteristics of supply; (ii) a sample survey of retail establishments, focusing on types and quantities of foodstuffs sold to the city residents by area of residence; and (iii) a survey of food processing companies, restaurants, supermarkets and slaughterhouses to establish the types, sources and quantities of food coming directly from the farms to the establishments. 15. This manual is designed to guide enumerators and supervisors during the data collection phase of the survey of food inflows to Nairobi. In addition, the manual defines main concepts used in the survey and presents procedures to be followed in completing each section of the questionnaire. 16. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) The following questionnaires will be administered in this survey: Survey of Wholesalers of Fresh Crop Produce (Form UNHABITAT /I) Survey of Wholesalers of Dry Crop Produce (Form UNHABITAT /II) Survey of Abattoirs in Nairobi and its Environs Supplying Meat to Nairobi (Form UNHABITAT /III) Survey of Livestock Wholesalers Including Poultry (Form UNHABITAT /IV) Survey of Wholesalers of Fish and Other Marine Products (Form UNHABITAT /V) Survey of Supermarkets and Hotels (Form UNHABITAT /VI) Survey of Food Processing Firms (Form UNHABITAT /VII) PRINCIPLES OF INTERVIEWING 17. This section of the manual gives a summary of some important points to be kept in mind when conducting personal interviews during the survey. Interviewing is a Specialised Art 18. Interviewing involves two people - interviewer and the respondent. Interviewing facilitates obtaining of information from someone by asking an organised set of questions designed for a purpose. Interviewing differs from ordinary conversation in several respects: (a) The interviewer and the respondent are strangers to each other. One of the main tasks is therefore to gain the confidence of the respondent so that he/she is at ease and willing to answer the questions asked. (b) Unlike normal conversation, one person is asking all the questions and the other person answering them all. You must refrain from giving your opinion until you have completed the interview. You must not react in any way to what the respondent tells you. Never show disapproval but probe in a manner that should not offend the respondent. At all times throughout the interview you must remain neutral. However, you should show interest in the answers by nodding your head or saying something like I see or Yes. (c) There is a strict sequence of questions that must be asked. You must always be in control of the situation. This means you must maintain the interest of the respondent throughout the interview. The enumerator should prepare (head-tune) the respondent when starting to ask questions on a particular record type, i.e. state the type of information being solicited, so as to ease communication with the respondent.
160

Role of the Enumerator 19. The interviewer or enumerator plays a central role in this survey, and the ultimate outcome of the survey depends on how (s)he conducts the interviews. In general, the responsibility of the enumerator will include: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Training 20. Your training as an enumerator is crucial to the success of the survey field operations. The training will be conducted by John T. Mukui and the UN-HABITAT contact person for the survey (Ms Rose Ngaara-Muraya). In addition, this manual will be a useful guide to the enumerators during the survey period. The list of markets and abattoirs that you will cover will be given to you in advance. You will be required to deliver the letters of introduction to designated market masters personally. Gaining Access to the Respondent 21. Although you and the respondent are strangers to each other, you must approach the respondent and in a very short time, gain his/her confidence and cooperation so that he/she will answer all the questions. First impressions of your appearance and the things you say and do are of vital importance in gaining the respondents cooperation. Therefore, you must be sure that your appearance and behaviour are acceptable to the respondent and also to other people in the area in which you will be interviewing. On meeting the respondent, the first thing you should do is introduce yourself stating your name, the agency you are working for, and what you want of the respondent. A good introduction may be something like: Good morning Sir/Madam. I am Faith Wanjiru Thinguri and I am here on behalf of the United Nations Human Settlements Programme or UN-HABITAT. My visit this morning is part of the survey of the sources of food that is consumed in Nairobi. You are one of the many wholesalers (or abattoirs, supermarkets, hotels, livestock wholesalers, fish wholesalers, food processing firms) chosen in the area for this study. The information I get from you will be confidential. The information will be pooled together and be used to obtain knowledge on sources of food consumed in Nairobi and in the areas close to Nairobi. This information will then be used in formulating policy for planning purposes and other aspects of socioeconomic development. Confidentiality 22. All information collected from the traders is strictly confidential. No individual report is to be released to anyone other than the survey personnel. Because some of the questions to be asked are personal, the interview should not be conducted in the presence of visitors unless the respondent, having first learnt the nature of the survey, has no objection. Also, you should never mention other interviews or show completed questionnaires to other enumerators or supervisors in front of a respondent or any other persons. Locating the respondents within the survey area assigned to him/her; Conducting the interviews; Checking the completed questionnaires to ensure that all questions were asked and the responses were neatly and legibly recorded; Returning to the respondents for appointments, or to finish uncompleted interviews; Preparing debriefing notes for the supervisor on the problems encountered; and Forwarding to the supervisor all questionnaires (completed, spoilt, uncompleted).

161

Neutrality 23. Apart from confidentiality, most people are polite, especially to strangers, and they tend to give answers that they think will please the interviewer. It is therefore extremely important that you remain absolutely neutral towards the subject matter of the interview. Do not show surprise, approval, or disapproval of the respondents answer by your tone of voice or facial expression. Probing 24. It is possible that the respondents answer to a question is not satisfactory. From what is required, his/her answer may be incomplete or irrelevant, or sometimes he/she may be unable to answer the question as put to him/her. If this happens, asking some additional questions is required to obtain a complete answer to the original question. Asking additional questions to obtain a complete answer is called probing. The probes must be worded so that they are neutral and do not lead the respondent in a particular direction. Remember that the quality of data to be collected depends very much on the enumerators ability to probe correctly. In probing you should ensure that the meaning of the question is not changed. Recording Answers 25. Each answer must be recorded in the correct cell in the questionnaire. Before leaving the respondent, you should check to see that all required questions have been answered. If the question requires a numerical answer, be sure to enter the appropriate number or zero if the answer is None. If a column is left blank for questions requiring numerical answers or numerical codes, it is impossible to tell whether or not the question was asked or answered. No answer and 0 have very different meanings when the survey is analysed. All numerical answers must be right justified in the space provided. Leading zeros can be inserted to avoid recording errors. All numerical entries equal to or above one thousand should contain commas in the appropriate places e.g. ten thousand should be recorded as 10,000 and not 10000. Always visit the respondent with the correct forms. Never rely on taking answers in a notebook for transfer later. This is a bad habit and only complicates your work. Record what the respondent says, not your own interpretation/summary. Nonetheless, if a respondent gives an answer that contradicts an earlier response, confirm the true position by probing. 26. All interviewers will use blue ball-pens to complete all questionnaires. Supervisors will do their work using red ball pens. Enumerators should not use pencils in filling the questionnaires. Any data edit during data entry will be recorded using green ball pens. Making Appointments 27. You should always try to arrange beforehand for a suitable time for interviewing the respondent. You should never try to force the respondent to attend at a time that would obviously be inconvenient to him/her. Once a time has been set for an interview, it is important that you keep the appointment. Being late for appointments inconvenience respondents and results in unpleasant situations. Handling Reluctant Respondents 28. Actual refusals are rare and for most enumerators there will be no refusals. If refusals come often, then there is something wrong with the way you are introducing yourself or explaining the purpose of the survey. If the enumerator continues to have problems, he/she should contact his/her supervisor at once. The person who says he does not have time for the interview is usually trying to put you off. Ordinarily a statement such as this wont take very long or I can ask you some questions while you are working will start the ball rolling and soon he/she will give you his entire attention. Always be honest. Never tell a respondent that the interview will take only ten minutes if you believe forty minutes will be needed. If he really does not have the time, make an appointment for a return visit. A good enumerator is proud of his ability to meet people with ease and friendliness and to secure their cooperation.
162

Callback Procedures 29. It is important that you attempt to interview the owner of the business or the person in charge of day-to-day operations, but occasionally you may need to make a second visit if the owner or manager is not present. Most of the questions that are contained in the questionnaire can only be answered by the owner or manager. Do not try to complete the questionnaire by interviewing children or other persons who are not familiar with the business. Enumerator Review of Questionnaires 30. As soon as possible after leaving the respondent, the enumerator must check over the questionnaire carefully to see that all the answers are complete. In some cases it may be necessary to revisit the respondent for more complete information and this is the time to do it. Under the pressure to complete an interview, some enumerators become lazy in checking over each questionnaire while the interview is fresh in their minds. This part of the job should never be overlooked. Experience has shown that most of the problems involving completed questionnaires could have been eliminated by the enumerator if he/she had made a check of the questionnaire before handing it over to the supervisor. The enumerator should therefore plan his workload to include some time for checking the questionnaire. Supervisors Review 31. On the first day of fieldwork, it will be necessary for supervisors to edit the completed questionnaires the same day to ensure that training was properly understood and remedial action taken. A supervisor should go through the filled questionnaire with the enumerator during fieldwork so that revisits can be arranged to fill gaps and clarify any issues. Language 32. Interview the respondent in the language in which he/she feels most comfortable. If he/she prefers English, do the interview in English. If the respondent is most comfortable in Kiswahili, then speak Kiswahili. If he/she speaks only another language you understand, then you can do the interview in that language. If the respondent speaks only a language you do not understand, then you must raise this problem with your supervisor. In translating and probing, be sure you do not give the answer you expect. Translating Difficult Concepts 33. When translating certain words, it is essential that the question be framed in such a way that it would mean the same as in the English phrasing of the questionnaire. There may be particular difficulty with the word work. In many languages, when a person is asked, Do you work? it means Are you employed by someone else for pay? Try to avoid this type of misunderstanding when you are asking questions in other languages. Ending the Interview 34. Once all the information has been obtained the interview should be brought to a close without undue extension. Even if the respondent is very friendly, you should always avoid overstaying your welcome. You should always acknowledge and thank the respondent for his/her time and willingness to provide you with the data. After completing the interview, thank the respondent for his/her time and cooperation. A respondent that you have favourably impressed will be willing to give additional information when his/her business is selected for another survey.

163

INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE QUESTIONNAIRE General Instructions 35. To keep the respondents mind focused, introduce each section of the questionnaire before asking specific questions listed below the section heading. For example, the section on types of fresh crop produce in Form UNHABITAT/I could be introduced by drawing the respondents attention with, say: I want to ask you a few questions concerning the types of fresh crop produce you have brought to this market. Filling the Identification Particulars 36. All the schedules have a common identification section at the top. You will be provided with a list of markets. For this section: (i) Write your name, name of market/street, name of trader, sex of trader, type of transport used by the wholesaler, and vehicle registration number in the upper left-hand corner of the form. If more than one trader has carried the consignment of goods in one carrier, enter only the names of one of them. If the traders did not accompany their goods, put down the name of the transporter or agent. Enter at least two names in full in the space provided to allow identification of the person in case of callbacks or re-interview. Record the sex of the trader or transporter. Do not ask for the sex of the respondent but use your physical observation of the respondent to know whether (s)he is a man or a woman. Record 1 for males and 2 for females. The codes for type of transport used to bring food to the market are provided at the bottom of the Form. (ii) Write the name of the market, name of trader, and enter the market and respondent codes. The codes to be used for the markets will be provided to you in advance. Enter the market code in Columns 1 and 2. The respondent (trader) code will be a serial number for each market beginning 1 until the end of the survey. Enter the trader number in Columns 3 to 5. If the trader is number 3, enter 003. If you write 3 in Column 4, this will be taken as trader 030. Avoid this problem by filling columns with leading zeros e.g. 003 or 014 for trader numbers 3 and 14, respectively. The code for date will be the actual date in November 2001 when the survey will be conducted. For example, if the survey is conducted on 15 November, enter 15 on the date code in the space provided. (iii) The Column labelled RT (Record Type) is used in data entry to identify the questionnaire Form. For example, the Record Type for Form UNHABITAT/I is pre-marked 1 to indicate that the information is for inflows of fresh crop produce to Nairobi. (iv) Enter the date of the interview i.e. day, month, year (dd/mm/yy), final interview status, and name of supervisor in the upper right-hand corner of the Form. Enter the final interview status using the codes given below. 37. a) 01. 02. 03. 04. 05. 06. 07. 08. 09. 10. 11. 12. The market codes are: Fresh Crop Produce Wakulima Gikomba (Open) Retail Market Toi Kibera City Market Ngaara City Park/Highridge Mutindwa Korogocho (Soko Mjinga) Githurai Kawangware Kangemi
164

13. 14. 15. 16. b) 17. 02. 09. 04. 18. 10. 14. 12. 11. c) 05. 19. 02. d) 20. 05. 02. 21. 22. 10. e) 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. f) 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. g) 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. h) 35.

Fig Tree Kaka Dandora Doonholm Dry Crop Produce Nyamakima Gikomba (Quarry Road) Korogocho (Soko Mjinga) Toi - Kibera OTC/Athusi Githurai Kaka Kangemi Kawangware Fish Wholesalers City Market Burma Gikomba (Stalls) Chicken Wholesalers Kariakor (City Chicken and Eggs Dealers Cooperative) City Market Gikomba (Open) Kariobangi North Maziwa (Jogoo Road) Githurai Abattoirs Kiamaiko Dagoretti Dandora Kayole Kiserian Ongata Rongai Athi River/Kitengela Ndumbuini (pigs) Livestock wholesalers Kiamaiko Dagoretti Dandora Kayole Kiserian Ongata Rongai Athi River/Kitengela Supermarkets Uchumi Nakumatt Tusker Mattresses Ukwala Jack and Jill Hotels Kinangop
165

36. 37. i) 38. 39. 40.

Hilton Intercontinental Food processing firms Kenchic (chicken) Farmers Choice (pigs) Unga Limited MARKETS FOR CROP PRODUCE, FISH AND CHICKEN

NAME OF MARKET Wakulima Gikomba Retail market Toi-Kibera City Market Ngaara City Park Mutindwa Korogocho Githurai Kawangware Kangemi Fig Tree Kaka Dandora Doonholm Nyamakima OTC/Athusi Burma Kariakor Kariobangi North Maziwa-Jogoo Road TOTAL Fresh foods X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily]

TYPE OF FOOD PURCHASED Dry foods Fish X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily]

Chicken X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily]

X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Daily] X [Monthly] X [Monthly] X [Daily]

X [Daily]

X [Daily] X [Monthly] X [Daily] 16 9 3 6

38. The reference period for the survey mainly depends on the type of food sold in a particular outlet. For example, data on fresh crop produce, fish and chicken will be collected daily for two weeks. Data on dry crop produce will be collected daily for two weeks, except in Nyamakima and OTC/Athusi since sales in the latter two outlets are undertaken by wholesalers in permanent premises. The reference period for livestock slaughtered will be the month of October 2001. The recall period for dry crop produce in Nyamakima and OTC/Athusi will be one month. 39. At the end of the interview, indicate the interview status relevant to the interview. Final interview status can fall under the following categories: CODE 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. INTERVIEW STATUS Completed Partial Refusal: trader refused to be interviewed; shows resistance after repeated attempts Temporarily closed Permanently closed Other (specify)

166

SURVEY OF WHOLESALERS OF FRESH FARM PRODUCE (FORM UNHABITAT/I) 40. The questionnaire is designed to capture information from wholesalers bringing in fresh crop produce into the City of Nairobi. It will be administered on all wholesalers bringing in fresh crop produce to the markets listed above. The purpose of the survey is mainly to solicit information on sources of food consumed in Nairobi. The information on inflows of fresh crop produce will be collected using Form UNHABITAT/I of the questionnaire. 41. The survey will cover two weeks (14 days), from Tuesday 13 November 2001 to Monday 26 November 2001, both days inclusive. The data will be on the produce brought in by all traders in a particular day. Each visit by a trader will constitute one response (one page of the questionnaire). Form UNHABITAT/I will be used to record information on the food delivery to the market, and not the total produce carried in the vehicle. 42. If a trader brings in food that is not fresh crop produce, use the relevant questionnaire to record the information. For example, if a trader brings in maize grain to any of the abovementioned markets, record the information for the dry crop produce in Form UNHABITAT/II and note in both Forms UNHABITAT/I and UNHABITAT/II that there are two forms for the trader. IDENTIFICATION PARTICULARS (RED TAPE INFORMATION) 43. Write your name, name of market, name of trader, code for sex of trader, code for type of transport used by the wholesaler, and vehicle registration number in the upper left-hand corner of the Form. If more than one trader has carried the consignment of goods in one carrier, enter only the names of one of them. If the traders did not accompany their goods, put down the name of the transporter or agent. Enter at least two names in full in the space provided to allow identification of the person in case of callbacks or reinterview. Record the sex of the trader or transporter. Do not ask for the sex of the respondent but use your physical observation of the respondent to know whether (s)he is a man or a woman. Record 1 for male and 2 for female. The codes for type of transport used to bring food to the market are provided at the bottom of the Form. 44. Write the name of the market, name of trader, and enter the market and respondent codes in the boxes provided. The codes to be used for the markets will be provided to you in advance. Enter the market code in Columns 1 and 2 and respondent code in Columns 3 to 5. The respondent (trader) code will be a serial number for each market beginning 1 until the end of the survey. Enter the trader number in Columns 3 to 5. If the trader is number 3, enter 003. If you write 3 in Column 4, this will be taken as trader 030. Avoid this problem by filling columns with leading zeros e.g. 003 or 014 for trader numbers 3 and 14, respectively. The code for date will be the actual date in November 2001 when the survey will be conducted. For example, if the survey is conducted on 15 November 2001, enter 15 on the date code in the space provided. 45. The Column labelled RT (Record Type) is used in data entry to identify the questionnaire Form. For example, the Record Type for Form UNHABITAT/I is pre-marked 1 to indicate that the information is for inflows of fresh crop produce to Nairobi. 46. Enter the date of the interview i.e. day, month, year (dd/mm/yy), final interview status, and name of supervisor in the upper right-hand corner of the Form. Enter the final interview status using the codes at the bottom of the questionnaire. TYPES OF FRESH CROP PRODUCE (Columns A1 to A8) Crop (Column A1) 47. Enter the name of the crop in the space provided. A list of food items is appended to this manual. However, the list may not be exhaustive.

167

Crop Code (Column A2) 48. This is the code that will be used to identify each crop. If the list of codes for the crops is not provided, leave the column blank. Crop Variety (Column A3) 49. Enter the variety in the space provided. Begin a line for each crop variety. Information on crop variety will be coded during data entry. Crop Variety Code (Column A4) 50. This is the code that will be used to identify each crop variety. If the list of codes for the crops is not provided, leave the column blank. Unit of Measurement (Column A5) 51. Under each item, indicate the unit of measurement as given by the wholesaler. The codes for the unit of measurement are given at the bottom of the questionnaire. The purpose of giving the units of measurement is to be able to convert the data collected for each crop variety into a standard unit e.g. kilos. If and only if the enumerator is unable to identify the correct code, then enter code 8 for other and specify the unit reported as used in the transaction of the item. Unit Code (Column A6) 52. Whenever possible all quantities should be converted to standard units, i.e. kilograms. If the item quantities are given in non-standard units, the enumerator should, with the help of the respondent, convert them into standard units. Units Delivered (Column A7) 53. potatoes. Enter the quantity delivered for each of the specified units in Column A7 e.g. 100 bags of Irish

SOURCE OF PRODUCE DELIVERED (Columns A9 to A15) 54. The main purpose of the survey is to collect information on the sources of food consumed in Nairobi. The information on sources of produce for each crop variety is therefore completely essential. Write down the names of the division (Column A9) and district (Column A10) where the trader obtained each crop variety for sale to Nairobi. If a trader answers that he obtained his produce from, say, Kinangop or Wangige, write down the information as given in Column A9 and do not ask the division or district the area is located in (unless you do not know the district the place is located). If a particular crop variety is from outside Kenya, enter only the name of the country in the space provided for district (Column A10) and leave Column A9 blank. Leave the area code (Column A11) blank. It will be coded during data entry. If the trader purchased food from within Nairobi, enter the area as Nairobi and not where the food originally came from. 55. Write down the type of seller of each crop variety in Column A13 and enter the code for type of seller in Column A14. For example, a crop variety bought from traders in Nairobi (Column A13) should be coded 8 in Column A14. For produce bought from other markets in Nairobi, write down the name of the market the produce was bought from in Column A15. 56. After completing Columns A1 to A8, you might encounter a situation where a trader obtained a particular crop variety from more than one source. It would be a mistake to enter only one source for the produce. You should probe the amount from each source, and record information on source of produce delivered (Columns A9 to A15) and Cost of Produce Delivered (Columns A16 to A22) for each source. You can later transfer the information to a new questionnaire with various crop varieties split by source.

168

COST OF PRODUCE DELIVERED (Columns A16 to A22) 57. The purpose of this section is to obtain information on the cost of produce relative to other costs incurred by the wholesaler, e.g. transport costs, packaging costs, market access costs, and other costs. Market access costs include cess charged by the Nairobi City Council and community associations managing (informal) food markets. 58. Transport costs include imputed value of own transport (petrol, oil, grease, and wear and tear) and purchased transport services (road, rail and other inland transport fares). The enumerator should record the estimates of cost of own transport as given by the respondent, but should not inquire on costs of individual items that constitute cost of own transport e.g. diesel, grease, and wear and tear. 59. Enter the average cost per unit (Column A16) and full value in Shillings (Column A17), irrespective of whether the goods were bought in cash or on credit. The average cost per unit and value should be recorded in full Kenya shillings. The value of produce should be the actual purchase cost of an item, and not the value the trader expects to receive on sale of the produce. 60. The average cost of produce delivered from outside Kenya should be converted to Kenya shillings using the exchange rate that the trader used. If such a trader gives a price in Kenya shillings, record the answer and do not probe its equivalent in the currency the trader used to purchase the food items. If the food is from the traders own produce the average cost should be the one prevailing in the area the food was obtained from. 61. The units delivered (Column A7) may be the same as units purchased by the trader if he/she sells all his/her produce in one market and in a single visit. When a trader sells his/her produce in more than one market or in the same market in several visits, information on cost of produce should refer to the quantities delivered by the wholesaler to that particular market at the time of the interview. Care should be taken to apportion the costs to the goods delivered to the particular market at the time of the survey, rather than total purchases by the wholesaler. In case the quantities delivered to the market at the time of the interview are different from those of purchases by the wholesaler, do the relevant calculations in the notebook provided. The notebook should give sufficient reference to the interview the calculations refer to e.g. name of trader, respondent code, and date of interview. The notebook should be handed over to your supervisor at the end of the survey. In case of other costs (Column A21), please indicate what the costs refer to in the box at the bottom right-hand side of the questionnaire. Be specific on which line item (crop, crop variety) the details refer to. 62. Total cost (Column A22) is the sum of cost of purchase (Column A17), transport costs (Column A18), packaging costs (Column A19), market access costs (Column A20), and other costs (Column A21).

169

SURVEY OF WHOLESALERS OF DRY CROP PRODUCE (FORM UNHABITAT/II) 63. The questionnaire is designed to capture information from wholesalers selling dry crop produce in the City of Nairobi. It will be administered on all wholesalers of dry crop produce for sale either on retail or wholesale basis. The purpose of the survey is mainly to solicit information on sources of food consumed in Nairobi. The information on inflows of dry crop produce will be collected using Form UNHABITAT/II of the questionnaire. 64. A survey that involves consecutive visits to the same respondent is said to be bounded if the recall is based on the period since my last visit. Unbounded recall over a long period can lead to telescoping error (mis-dating), with consequent over- or under-reporting. The reference period for dry foods will be for the month of October 2001. 65. The data will be on the produce bought by the trader during the month of October 2001. Form UNHABITAT/II will be used to record information on dry foods purchased by the trader and not on the sales during the reference period. 66. If a trader brings in food that is not dry farm produce, use the relevant questionnaire to record the information. For example, if a trader brings in vegetables to any of the above-mentioned markets, record the information for the fresh crop produce in Form UNHABITAT/I and note in both Forms UNHABITAT/I and UNHABITAT/II that there are two forms for the trader. IDENTIFICATION PARTICULARS (RED TAPE INFORMATION) 67. Write your name, name of market, name of street, name of shop, name of trader, code for sex of trader, and code for type of transport used to deliver food to the wholesaler in the upper left-hand corner of the Form. Enter at least two names in full in the space provided for name of trader to allow identification of the person in case of callbacks or re-interview. Record the sex of the wholesaler. Do not ask for the sex of the respondent but use your physical observation of the respondent to know whether (s)he is a man or a woman. Record 1 for male and 2 for female. The codes for type of transport used to bring food to the shop are provided at the bottom of the Form. 68. Write the name of the market, name of the shop, and enter the market and shop codes in the boxes provided. The codes to be used for the markets will be provided to you in advance. Enter the market code in Columns 1 and 2 and respondent codes in Columns 3 to 5. The respondent (trader) code will be a serial number for each market beginning 1 until the end of the survey. Enter the trader number in Columns 3 to 5. If the trader is number 3, enter 003. If you write 3 in Column 4, this will be taken as trader 030. Avoid this problem by filling columns with leading zeros e.g. 003 or 014 for trader numbers 3 and 14, respectively. The code for date will be the actual date in November 2001 when the survey will be conducted. For example, if the survey is conducted on 15 November, enter 15 on the date code in the space provided. 69. The Column labelled RT (Record Type) is used in data entry to identify the questionnaire Form. For example, the Record Type for Form UNHABITAT/II is pre-marked 2 to indicate that the information is for inflows of dry crop produce to Nairobi. 70. Enter the date of the interview i.e. day, month, year (dd/mm/yy), final interview status, and name of supervisor in the upper right-hand corner of the Form. Enter the final interview status using the codes at the bottom of the questionnaire. TYPES OF DRY CROP PRODUCE (Columns B1 to B8) Crop (Column B1) 71. Enter the name of the crop in the space provided. A list of food items is appended to this manual. However, the list may not be exhaustive.

170

Crop Code (Column B2) 72. This is the code that will be used to identify each crop. If the list of codes for the crops is not provided, leave the column blank. Crop Variety (Column B3) 73. Enter the crop variety in the space provided. Begin a line for each crop variety. Information on crop variety will be coded during data entry. Crop Variety Code (Column B4) 74. This is the code that will be used to identify each crop. If the list of codes for the crops is not provided, leave the column blank. Unit of Measurement (Column B5) 75. Under each item, indicate the unit of measurement as given by the wholesaler. The codes for the unit of measurement are given at the bottom of the questionnaire. The purpose of giving the units of measurement is to be able to convert the data collected for each crop variety into a common unit e.g. kilos. If and only if the enumerator is unable to identify the correct code, then enter code 8 for other and specify the unit reported as used in the transaction of the item. Unit Code (Column B6) 76. Whenever possible all quantities should be converted to standard units, i.e. kilograms. If the item quantities are given in non-standard units, the enumerator should, with the help of the respondent, convert them into standard units. Units Purchased (Column B7) 77. Enter the quantity purchased for each of the specified units in Column B7 e.g. 100 bags of maize grain. SOURCE OF PRODUCE PURCHASED (Columns B9 to B15) 78. The main purpose of the survey is to collect information on the sources of food consumed in Nairobi. The information on sources of produce for each crop variety is therefore completely essential. Write down the names of the division (Column B9) and district (Column B10) where the trader obtained each crop variety from for sale in Nairobi. If a trader answers that he obtained his produce from, say, Kinangop or Wangige, write down the information as given in Column B9 and do not ask the division or district the area is located in (unless you do not know the district the place is located). If a particular crop variety is from outside Kenya, enter only the name of the country in the space provided for district (Column B10) and leave Column B9 blank. Leave the area code (Column B11) blank. It will be coded during data entry. If the trader purchased food from within Nairobi, enter the area as Nairobi and not where the food originally came from. 79. Write down the type of seller of each crop variety in Column B13 and enter the code for type of seller in Column B14. For example, a crop variety bought from traders in Nairobi (Column B13) should be coded 8 in Column B14. For produce bought from other markets in Nairobi, write down the name of the market the produce was bought from in Column B15. 80. After completing Columns B1 to B8, you might encounter a situation where a trader obtained a particular crop variety from more than one source. It would be a mistake to enter only one source for the produce. You should probe the amount from each source, and record information on source of produce purchased (Columns B9 to B14) and Cost of produce purchased (Columns B16 to B22) for each source. You can later transfer the information to a new questionnaire with various crop varieties split by source.

171

COST OF PRODUCE PURCHASED (Columns B16 to B22) 81. The purpose of this section is to obtain information on the cost of produce relative to other costs incurred by the wholesaler e.g. transport costs, packaging costs, market access costs (if any), and other costs. Market access costs include cess charged by the Nairobi City Council and community associations managing (informal) food markets. 82. Transport costs include imputed value of own transport (petrol, oil, grease, and wear and tear) and purchased transport services (road, rail and inland transport fares). The enumerator should record the estimates of cost of own transport as given by the respondent, but should not inquire on costs of individual items that constitute cost of own transport e.g. diesel, grease, and wear and tear. Record transport costs only if they are not reflected in the cost of food items purchased by the trader. 83. Enter the average cost per unit (Column B16) and full value in Shillings (Column B17), irrespective of whether the goods were bought in cash or on credit. The average cost per unit and value should be recorded in full Kenya shillings. The value of produce should be the actual purchase cost of an item, and not the value the trader expects to receive on sale of the produce. 84. The average cost of produce delivered from outside Kenya should be converted to Kenya shillings using the exchange rate that the trader used. If such a trader gives a price in Kenya shillings, record the answer and do not probe its equivalent in the currency the trader used to purchase the food items. If the food is from the traders own produce, the price should be the one prevailing in the area the food was obtained from. In case of other costs (Column B21), please indicate what the costs refer to in the box at the bottom right-hand side of the questionnaire. Be specific on which line item (crop, crop variety) the details refer to. 85. Total cost (Column B22) is the sum of cost of purchase (Column B17), transport costs (Column B18), packaging costs (Column B19), market access costs (Column B20) and other costs (Column B21).

172

SURVEY OF ABATTOIRS IN NAIROBI AND ITS ENVIRONS (FORM UNHABITAT/III) 86. The questionnaire is designed to capture information from abattoirs that provide meat to the City of Nairobi. The questionnaire will be administered on all abattoirs that slaughter livestock for sale in Nairobi either on retail or wholesale basis. The purpose of the survey is mainly to solicit information on sources of meat consumed in Nairobi. The information will be collected using Form UNHABITAT/III of the questionnaire. 87. A survey that involves consecutive visits to the same respondent is said to be bounded if the recall is based on the period since my last visit. Unbounded recall over a long period can lead to telescoping error (mis-dating), with consequent over- or under-reporting. The reference period for livestock and livestock products will be for the month of October 2001. The data will be on the number of animals slaughtered in the abattoir during the month of October 2001. IDENTIFICATION PARTICULARS (RED TAPE INFORMATION) 88. Write your name, name of abattoir, and name of respondent (the person who provides the information) in the upper left-hand corner of the Form. Enter at least two names for the name of respondent in full in the space provided to allow identification of the person in case of callbacks or re-interview. 89. Write the name of the abattoir, name of trader, and enter the abattoir and respondent codes in the boxes provided. The codes to be used for the abattoirs will be provided to you in advance. Enter the abattoir code in Columns 1 and 2 and respondent code in Columns 3 to 5. The respondent (trader) code will be a serial number for each market beginning 1 until the end of the survey. Enter the trader number in Columns 3 to 5. If the trader is number 3, enter 003. If you write 3 in Column 4, this will be taken as trader 030. Avoid this problem by filling columns with leading zeros e.g. 003 or 014 for trader numbers 3 and 14, respectively. 90. The Column labelled RT (Record Type) is used in data entry to identify the questionnaire Form. For example, the Record Type for Form UNHABITAT/III is pre-marked 3 to indicate that the information is for abattoirs that supply meat to Nairobi. 91. Enter the date of the interview i.e. day, month, year (dd/mm/yy), final interview status, and name of supervisor in the upper right-hand corner of the Form. Enter the final interview status using the codes at the bottom of the questionnaire. TYPES OF LIVESTOCK (Columns C1 to C6) Animal (Column C1) 92. Enter the livestock species in the space provided.

Animal Code (Column C2) 93. This is the code that will be used to identify each animal. If the list of codes for the animals is not provided, leave the column blank. Animal Variety (Column C3) 94. Write down the animal variety in Column C3. Begin a line for each animal variety. Information on animal variety will be coded during data entry.

173

Animal Variety Code (Column C4) 95. This is the code that will be used to identify each animal. If the list of codes for the animals is not provided, leave the column blank. Write down the number of animals slaughtered in Column C5 and the number sold within the City of Nairobi as meat in Column C6. SOURCE OF THE ANIMALS SLAUGHTERED (Columns C7 to C12) 96. The main purpose of the survey is to collect information on the sources of food consumed in Nairobi. The information on sources of the animals by each animal variety is therefore completely essential. Write down the names of the division (Column C7) and district (Column C8) where the traders obtained each animal variety from for slaughter in the abattoirs selling meat in Nairobi. If a trader answers that he obtained his animals from, say, Kinangop or Wangige, write down the information as given in Column C7 and do not ask the division or district the area is located in (unless you do not know the district the place is located). If a particular animal variety is from outside Kenya, enter only the name of the country in the space provided for the district (Column C8) and leave the division (Column C7) blank. Leave the area code (Column C9) blank. It will be coded during data entry. If the trader purchased animals from within Nairobi, enter the area as Nairobi and not where the animals originally came from. 97. Write down the type of seller in the area the livestock was obtained from in Column C11, and the code for type of seller in Column C12. For example, an animal variety bought from traders in Nairobi (Column C11) should be coded 6 in Column C12. 98. After completing Columns C1 to C6, you might encounter a situation where an abattoir obtained a particular animal variety from more than one source. It would be a mistake to enter only one source for the animal variety. You should probe the number of animals from each source, and record information on source of livestock slaughtered (Columns C7 to C12) and Cost of livestock slaughtered (Columns C13 to C21) for each source. You can later transfer the information to a new questionnaire with various animal varieties split by source. COST OF THE ANIMALS SLAUGHTERED (Columns C13 to C21) 99. The purpose of this section is to obtain information on the cost of the animals relative to other costs e.g. abattoir fees, slaughter costs, inspection fees, meat loading costs, and refrigeration costs. All the information on costs refers to the total number of animals slaughtered in the abattoir and not specifically for those animals whose meat is sold in Nairobi. Abattoir fee is paid to the owner or management of the abattoir. Slaughter costs are paid to freelance slaughterers. The meat inspection fee is paid to meat inspectors as revenue to the central Government. Meat loading fee is paid to meat loaders (popularly known as kuua). The enumerator should find out if there are refrigeration facilities in the abattoir before asking for information on refrigeration costs. 100. Enter the average cost per animal (Column C13) and full value in Shillings (Column C14), irrespective of whether the animals were bought in cash or on credit. The average cost per animal refers to its cost before slaughter, and therefore includes the cost of the animal and other incidental costs incurred in bringing it to the abattoir (e.g. transport costs). The average cost per animal and value should be recorded in full Kenya shillings. The value of the animals should be the actual purchase price of an animal, and not the value the trader expects to receive on sale of the livestock or livestock products. If the animals are from the traders own stock, the price should be the one prevailing in the area the animals were obtained from. In case of other costs (Column C20), please indicate what the costs refer to in the box at the bottom right-hand side of the questionnaire. Be specific on which line item (animal, animal variety) the details refer to. 101. Total cost (Column C21) is the sum of cost of purchase (Column C14), abattoir fee (Column C15), slaughter costs (Column C16), inspection fee (Column C17), meat loading costs (Column C18), refrigeration costs (Column C19), and other costs (Column C20).

174

SURVEY OF LIVESTOCK WHOLESALERS INCLUDING POULTRY - (FORM UNHABITAT/IV) 102. The questionnaire is designed to capture information from livestock wholesalers who bring in livestock for slaughter to abattoirs that provide meat to the City of Nairobi. The questionnaire will be administered on wholesalers who bring in livestock for sale in Nairobi either on retail or wholesale basis. The purpose of the survey is mainly to solicit information on the sources of livestock to abattoirs in Nairobi and its immediate environs. The information will be collected using Form UNHABITAT/IV of the questionnaire. 103. The respondents will mainly consist of two groups: all chicken wholesalers and a sample of livestock wholesalers selected using the information on sources of livestock identified in responses to Form UNHABITAT/III of the questionnaire (Survey of Abattoirs in Nairobi and its Environs). For each source of a livestock species identified in an abattoir, two livestock wholesalers should be interviewed. For example, if goats for slaughter in Kiamaiko come from Isiolo and Garissa, the enumerator is required to interview two goat wholesalers from each of the sources. The livestock wholesaler will be interviewed on his/her latest trip to bring in livestock to the particular abattoir. The information on the sample of livestock wholesalers will be used in analyzing and validating data from the survey of abattoirs (especially on sources of different types of livestock), but will not be used to estimate total livestock consumed in Nairobi. IDENTIFICATION PARTICULARS (RED TAPE INFORMATION) 104. Write your name, name of abattoir, name of livestock wholesaler, code for sex of livestock wholesaler, and code for type of transport used by the wholesaler to transport livestock in the upper lefthand corner of the Form. If more than one trader has carried the consignment of animals in one carrier, enter only the names of one of them. If the traders did not accompany their goods, put down the name of the transporter or agent. Enter at least two names in full in the space provided to allow identification of the person in case of callbacks or re-interview. Record the sex of the trader or transporter. Do not ask for the sex of the respondent but use your physical observation of the respondent to know whether (s)he is a man or a woman. Record 1 for male and 2 for female. 105. Write the name of the abattoir, name of livestock wholesaler, and enter the abattoir and respondent codes in the boxes provided. The codes to be used for the abattoirs will be provided to you in advance. Enter the abattoir code in Columns 1 and 2 and respondent code in Columns 3 to 5. The respondent (trader) code will be a serial number for each abattoir beginning 1 until the end of the survey. Enter the trader number in Columns 3 to 5. If the trader is number 3, enter 003. If you write 3 in Column 4, this will be taken as trader 030. Avoid this problem by filling columns with leading zeros e.g. 003 or 014 for trader numbers 3 and 14, respectively. 106. The Column labelled RT (Record Type) is used in data entry to identify the questionnaire Form. For example, the Record Type for Form UNHABITAT/IV is pre-marked 4 to indicate that the information is for wholesalers who deliver livestock to abattoirs that supply meat to Nairobi. 107. Enter the date of the interview i.e. day, month, year (dd/mm/yy), final interview status, and name of supervisor in the upper right-hand corner of the Form. Enter the final interview status using the codes at the bottom of the questionnaire. Type of transport (code 9) 108. Unlike crop produce, livestock can trek or fly. A code has therefore been added to include trekking as type of transport. TYPES OF LIVESTOCK (Columns D1 to D5) Animal (Column D1)

175

109.

Enter the livestock species in the space provided.

Animal Code (Column D2) 110. This is the code that will be used to identify each animal. If the list of codes for the animals is not provided, leave the column blank. Animal Variety (Column D3) 111. Write down the animal variety in Column D3. Begin a line for each animal variety. Information on animal variety will be coded during data entry. Animal Variety Code (Column D4) 112. This is the code that will be used to identify each animal. If the list of codes for the animals is not provided, leave the column blank. Write down the number of animals delivered in Column D5. SOURCE OF THE ANIMALS DELIVERED (Columns D6 to D11) 113. The main purpose of the survey is to collect information on the sources of livestock consumed in Nairobi. The information on sources of the animals by each animal variety is therefore completely essential. Write down the names of the division (Column D6) and district (Column D7) where the traders obtained each animal variety from for slaughter in the abattoirs selling meat in Nairobi. If a trader answers that he obtained his animals from, say, Kinangop or Wangige, write down the information as given in Column D6 and do not ask the division or district the area is located in (unless you do not know the district the place is located). If a particular animal variety is from outside Kenya, enter only the name of the country in the space provided for the district (Column D7) and leave the division (Column D6) blank. Leave the area code (Column D8) blank. It will be coded during data entry. If the trader purchased animals from within Nairobi, enter the area as Nairobi and not where the animals originally came from. 114. Write down the type of seller in the area the livestock was obtained from in Column D10, and the code for type of seller in Column D11. For example, an animal variety bought from traders in Nairobi (Column D10) should be coded 5 in Column D11. 115. After completing Columns D1 to D5, you might encounter a situation where a trader obtained a particular animal variety from more than one source. It would be a mistake to enter only one source for the animal variety. You should probe the number of animals from each source, and record information on source of livestock delivered (Columns D6 to D11) and Cost of livestock delivered (Columns D12 to D17) for each source. You can later transfer the information to a new questionnaire with various animal varieties split by source. COST OF THE ANIMALS DELIVERED (Columns D12 to D17) 116. The purpose of this section is to obtain information on the cost of the animals relative to other costs incurred by the traders e.g. animal loading costs (where the animals were purchased from), transport costs, and other costs (including hired employees and transit costs). All the information on costs refers to the total number of animals delivered to the abattoir and not specifically to all the animals the livestock trader brought to Nairobi in the latest trip. 117. Enter the average cost per animal (Column D12) and full value in Shillings (Column D13), irrespective of whether the animals were bought in cash or on credit. The average cost per animal refers to its cost at the place where it was originally procured from, and does not include the costs incurred in bringing the animal to Nairobi (e.g. transport and loading costs). The average cost per animal and value should be recorded in full Kenya shillings. The value of the animals should be the actual purchase price of an animal, and not the value the trader expects to receive on sale of the livestock or livestock products. If the animals are from the traders own stock, the price should be the one prevailing in the area the animals were obtained from. In case of other costs (Column D16), please indicate what the costs refer to in the box at the bottom
176

right-hand side of the questionnaire. Be specific on which line item (animal, animal variety) the details refer to. 118. Total cost (Column D17) is the sum of cost of purchase (Column D13), animal loading costs (Column D14), transport costs (Column D15), and other costs (Column D16).

177

SURVEY OF WHOLESALERS OF FISH AND OTHER MARINE PRODUCTS (FORM UNHABITAT/V) 119. The questionnaire is designed to capture information from fish wholesalers who bring in fish for sale in Nairobi either on retail or wholesale basis. The purpose of the survey is mainly to solicit information on the sources of fish sold in Nairobi. The information will be collected using Form UNHABITAT/V of the questionnaire. The survey will cover two weeks (14 days), from Tuesday 13 November 2001 to Monday 26 November 2001, both days inclusive. Each visit by a fish wholesaler will constitute one response (one page of Form UNHABITAT/V of the questionnaire). IDENTIFICATION PARTICULARS (RED TAPE INFORMATION) 120. Write your name, name of market, name of trader, code for sex of trader, and code for type of transport used by the wholesaler in the upper left-hand corner of the Form. If more than one trader has carried the consignment of fish in one carrier, enter only the names of one of them. If the traders did not accompany their goods, put down the name of the transporter or agent. Enter at least two names in full in the space provided to allow identification of the person in case of callbacks or re-interview. Record the sex of the trader or transporter. Do not ask for the sex of the respondent but use your physical observation of the respondent to know whether (s)he is a man or a woman. Record 1 for male and 2 for female. 121. Write the name of the market, name of fish wholesaler, and enter the market and respondent codes in the boxes provided. The codes to be used for the markets will be provided to you in advance. Enter the market code in Columns 1 and 2 and respondent codes in Columns 3 to 5. The respondent (trader) code will be a serial number for each market beginning 1 until the end of the survey. Enter the trader number in Columns 3 to 5. If the trader is number 3, enter 003. If you write 3 in Column 4, this will be taken as trader 030. Avoid this problem by filling columns with leading zeros e.g. 003 or 014 for trader numbers 3 and 14, respectively. 122. The Column labelled RT (Record Type) is used in data entry to identify the questionnaire Form. For example, the Record Type for Form UNHABITAT/V is pre-marked 5 to indicate that the information is for wholesalers who bring in fish and other marine products to Nairobi. 123. Enter the date of the interview i.e. day, month, year (dd/mm/yy), final interview status, and name of supervisor in the upper right-hand corner of the Form. Enter the final interview status using the codes at the bottom of the questionnaire. TYPES OF FISH AND OTHER MARINE PRODUCTS (Columns E1 to E3) Fish/marine product (Column E1) 124. Enter the type of fish/marine product (e.g. omena, tilapia and crabs) in the space provided.

Fish/marine product code (Column E2) 125. This is the code that will be used to identify each type of fish and other marine product. If the list of codes for the fish and other marine products is not provided, leave the column blank. Kilograms Delivered (Column E3) 126. Indicate the amount of fish or other marine product delivered in kilograms.

SOURCE OF FISH AND OTHER MARINE PRODUCTS DELIVERED (Columns E4 to E9) 127. The main purpose of the survey is to collect information on the sources of fish consumed in Nairobi. The information on sources of fish and other marine products is therefore completely essential. Write down the names of the division (Column E4) and district (Column E5) where the traders obtained
178

each fish variety. If a particular fish variety is from outside Kenya, enter only the name of the country in the space provided for the district (Column E5) and leave the division (Column E4) blank. Leave the area code (Column E6) blank. It will be coded during data entry. If the trader purchased fish from within Nairobi, enter the area as Nairobi and not where the fish originally came from. 128. Write down the type of seller in the area the fish was obtained from in Column E8, and the code for type of seller in Column E9. For example, a fish variety bought from traders in Nairobi (Column E8) should be coded 4 in Column E9. COST OF THE FISH AND OTHER MARINE PRODUCTS DELIVERED (Columns E10 to E15) 129. The purpose of this section is to obtain information on the cost of fish/marine product relative to other costs incurred by the traders e.g. transport costs, refrigeration costs, and other costs. All the information on costs refers to the fish delivered to the market and not specifically to all the fish the fish trader brought to Nairobi in the latest trip. 130. Enter the average cost per kilogram (Column E10) and full value in Shillings (Column E11), irrespective of whether the fish was bought in cash or on credit. The average cost per unit and value should be recorded in full Kenya shillings. The value of the fish should be the actual purchase price of the fish, and not the value the trader expects to receive on sale of the fish. In case of other costs (Column E14), please indicate what the costs refer to in the box at the bottom right-hand side of the questionnaire. Be specific on which line item (type of fish) the details refer to. 131. Total cost (Column E15) is the sum of cost of purchase (Column E11), transport costs (Column E12), refrigeration costs (Column E13), and other costs (Column E14).

179

SURVEY OF SUPERMARKETS AND HOTELS (FORM UNHABITAT/VI) 132. The questionnaire is designed to capture information from selected supermarkets and hotels within the City of Nairobi. It will be administered on hotels and supermarkets (which sell unprocessed crop and animal products). The information on purchases of unprocessed crop and animal products by supermarkets and hotels will be collected using Form UNHABITAT/VI of the questionnaire. Form UNHABITAT/VI will be used to record information on purchases by the supermarkets and hotels and not on their sales during the reference period. 133. A survey that involves consecutive visits to the same respondent is said to be bounded if the recall is based on the period since my last visit. Unbounded recall over a long period can lead to telescoping error (mis-dating), with consequent over- or under-reporting. The reference period for the survey will be for the month of October 2001. IDENTIFICATION PARTICULARS (RED TAPE INFORMATION) 134. Write your name, name of supermarket/hotel, name of the street the supermarket or hotel is located, and the name of the respondent (the person providing the information) in the upper left-hand corner of the form. 135. Write the name of the supermarket/hotel and enter the supermarket/hotel code in the boxes provided. The codes to be used for the supermarkets/hotels will be provided to you in advance. Enter the establishment (supermarket/ hotel) code in Columns 1 and 2. 135. The Column labelled RT (Record Type) is used in data entry to identify the questionnaire Form. For example, the Record Type for Form UNHABITAT/VI is pre-marked 6 to indicate that the information is for supermarkets and hotels in Nairobi. 137. Enter the date of the interview i.e. day, month, year (dd/mm/yy), final interview status, and name of supervisor in the upper right-hand corner of the Form. Enter the final interview status using the codes at the bottom of the questionnaire. TYPES OF CROP/MEAT/MEAT PRODUCTS (Columns F1 to F8) Crop/Meat/Meat product (Column F1) 138. Enter the name of the crop/meat/meat product in the space provided. A list of food items is appended to this manual. However, the list may not be exhaustive. Crop/Meat/Meat Product Code (Column F2) 139. This is the code that will be used to identify each crop/meat/meat product. If the list of codes for the crop/meat/meat product is not provided, leave the column blank. Crop/Meat/Meat product Variety (Column F3) 140. Enter the variety in the space provided. Begin a line for each crop/meat/meat product variety. Information on variety will be coded during data entry. Crop/Meat/Meat product Variety Code (Column F4) 141. This is the code that will be used to identify each crop/meat/meat product. If the list of codes for the crop/meat/meat product is not provided, leave the column blank.

180

Unit of Measurement (Column F5) 142. Under each item, indicate the unit of measurement as given by the supermarket/hotel. The codes for the unit of measurement are given at the bottom of the questionnaire. The purpose of giving the units of measurement is to be able to convert the data collected for each crop/meat/meat product variety into a common unit e.g. kilos. If and only if the enumerator is unable to identify the correct code, then enter code 9 for other and specify the unit reported as used in the transaction of the item. Unit Code (Column F6) 143. Whenever possible all quantities should be converted to standard units, i.e. kilograms. If the item quantities are given in non-standard units, the enumerator should, with the help of respondents, convert them into standard units. Units Purchased (Column F7) 144. Enter the quantity purchased for each of the specified units in Column F7 e.g. 100 kilograms of maize grain. SOURCE OF PRODUCE PURCHASED (Columns F9 to F15) 145. The main purpose of the survey is to collect information on the sources of food consumed in Nairobi. The information on sources of produce for each crop/meat/meat product variety is therefore completely essential. Write down the names of the division (Column F9) and district (Column F10) where the supermarket/hotel obtained each crop/meat/meat product variety. If a trader answers that he obtained his produce from, say, Kinangop or Wangige, write down the information as given in Column F9 and do not ask the division or district the area is located in (unless you do not know the district the place is located). If a particular crop/meat/meat product variety is from outside Kenya, enter only the name of the country in the space provided for district (Column F10) and leave Column F9 blank. Leave the area code (Column F11) blank. It will be coded during data entry. If the trader purchased food from within Nairobi, enter the area as Nairobi and not where the food originally came from. 146. Write down the type of seller of each crop/meat/meat product variety in Column F13 and enter the code for type of seller in Column F14. For example, a crop/meat/meat product variety bought from traders in Nairobi (Column F13) should be coded 7 in Column F14. For produce bought from other markets in Nairobi, write down the name of the market the produce was bought from in Column F15. COST OF CROP/MEAT/MEAT PRODUCTS PURCHASED (Columns F16 to F22) 147. The purpose of this section is to obtain information on the cost of crop/meat/meat product relative to other costs incurred by the supermarket/hotel e.g. transport costs, packaging costs, refrigeration costs, and other costs. The reported transport, packaging and refrigeration costs should only relate to the itemised crop/meat/meat products purchased. 148. Transport costs include imputed value of own transport (petrol, oil, grease, and wear and tear) and purchased transport services (road, rail and inland transport fares). The enumerator should record the estimates of cost of own transport as given by the respondent, but should not inquire on costs of individual items that constitute cost of own transport e.g. diesel, grease, and wear and tear. Record transport costs only if it is not reflected in the cost of food items purchased by the trader. 149. Enter the average cost per unit (Column F16) and full value in Shillings (Column F17), irrespective of whether the goods were bought in cash or on credit. The average cost per unit and value should be recorded in full Kenya shillings. The value of produce should be the actual purchase price of an item, and not the value the supermarket/hotel expects to receive on sale of the produce. 150. The average cost of produce delivered from outside Kenya should be converted to Kenya shillings using the exchange rate that the trader used. If a food item is from the supermarket/hotels own
181

produce, the price should be the one prevailing in the area the food item was obtained from. In case of other costs (Column F21), please indicate what the costs refer to in the box at the bottom right-hand side of the questionnaire. Be specific on which line item (crop/meat/meat product, variety) the details refer to. 151. Total cost (Column F22) is the sum of cost of purchase (Column F17), transport costs (Column F18), packaging costs (Column F19), refrigeration costs (Column F20), and other costs (Column F21).

182

SURVEY OF FOOD PROCESSING FIRMS (FORM UNHABITAT/VII) 152. The questionnaire is designed to capture information from food processing firms in the City of Nairobi. The purpose of the survey is mainly to solicit information on sources of food consumed in Nairobi. The information from food processing firms will be collected using Form UNHABITAT/VII of the questionnaire. 153. A survey that involves consecutive visits to the same respondent is said to be bounded if the recall is based on the period since my last visit. Unbounded recall over a long period can lead to telescoping error (mis-dating), with consequent over- or under-reporting. The reference period for the survey will be for the month of October 2001. 154. The data will be on the crop and animal produce bought by the processing firm during the month of October 2001. The Form will also collect information on the sale of outputs from the firm during the reference period (October 2001). IDENTIFICATION PARTICULARS (RED TAPE INFORMATION) 155. Write your name, name of firm, and name of street in the upper left-hand corner of the form.

156. Write the name of the firm and the firm code in the boxes provided. The codes to be used for the firms will be provided to you in advance. Enter the firm code in Columns 1 and 2. 157. The Column labelled RT (Record Type) is used in data entry to identify the questionnaire Form. For example, the Record Type for Form UNHABITAT/VII is pre-marked 7 to indicate that the information is for food processing firms in Nairobi. 158. The Column labelled RT (Record Type) is used in data entry to identify the questionnaire Form. For example, the Record Type for Form UNHABITAT/VI is pre-marked 7 to indicate that the information is for food processing firms. 159. Enter the date of the interview i.e. day, month, year (dd/mm/yy), final interview status, and name of supervisor in the upper right-hand corner of the Form. Enter the final interview status using the codes at the bottom of the questionnaire. TYPES OF UNPROCESSED FOOD INPUTS (Columns G1 to G6) Item (Column G1) 160. This column is supposed to capture information on unprocessed crop, and animal and animal products that the firm uses as inputs to the production process. Enter the name of the item in the space provided. A list of items appears at the bottom of the Form. However, the list may not be exhaustive. Item Code (Column G2) 161. This is the code that will be used to identify each item. If the list of codes for the items is not provided, leave the column blank. Unit of Measurement (Column G3) 162. Under each item, indicate the unit of measurement as given by the firm. The codes for the unit of measurement are given at the bottom of the questionnaire. The purpose of giving the units of measurement is to be able to convert the data collected for each food variety into a single unit e.g. kilos. If and only if the enumerator is unable to identify the correct code, then enter code 5 for other and specify the unit reported as used in the transaction of the item.

183

Unit Code (Column G4) 163. Whenever possible all quantities should be converted to standard units, i.e. kilograms. If the item quantities are given in non-standard units, the enumerator should, with the help of respondents, convert them into standard units. Units Purchased (Column G5) 164. Enter the quantity purchased for each of the specified units in Column G5.

SOURCE OF ITEMS PURCHASED (Columns G7 to G11) 165. The main purpose of the survey is to collect information on the sources of food and livestock products consumed in Nairobi. The information on sources of food is therefore completely essential. Write down the name of the district (Column G7) where the firm obtained each item. If a particular item is from outside Kenya, enter only the name of the country in the space provided for district (Column G7). Leave the area code (Column G8) blank. It will be coded during data entry. If the trader purchased item from within Nairobi, enter the area as Nairobi and not where the food originally came from. 166. Write down the type of seller of each item in Column G10 and enter the code for type of seller in Column G11. For example, an item bought from traders in Nairobi (Column G10) should be coded 6 in Column G11. COST OF ITEMS PURCHASED (Columns G12 to G15) 167. The purpose of this section is to obtain information on the cost of the items relative to other costs incurred by the firm e.g. transport costs of deliveries of the specified items. Transport costs includes imputed value of own transport (petrol, oil, grease, and wear and tear) and purchased transport services (road, rail and inland transport fares). The enumerator should record the estimates of cost of own transport as given by the respondent, but should not inquire on costs of individual items that constitute cost of own transport e.g. diesel, grease, and wear and tear. Record transport costs only if it is not reflected in the cost of food items purchased by the trader. 168. Enter the average cost per unit (Column G12) and full value in Shillings (Column G13), irrespective of whether the goods were bought in cash or on credit. The average cost per unit and value should be recorded in full Kenya shillings. The value of produce should be the actual purchase price of an item, and not the value the firm expects to receive on sale of the produce or processed product. 169. The average cost of an item purchased from outside Kenya should be converted to Kenya shillings using the exchange rate that the trader used. If such a firm gives a price in Kenya shillings, record the answer and do not probe its equivalent in the currency the firm used to purchase the food items. If the item is from the firms own produce, the price should be the one prevailing in the area the item was obtained from. 170. Total cost (Column G15) is the sum of cost of purchase (Column G13) and transport costs (Column G14). SALE OF OUTPUTS (Columns G16 to G20) 171. This section is supposed to capture information on the outputs of the firm during the reference period of October 2001. Enter the name of the outputs in Column G16. A list of outputs appears at the bottom of the Form. However, the list may not be exhaustive. 172. Under each output, indicate the unit of measurement as given by the firm. The codes for the unit of measurement are given at the bottom of the questionnaire. The purpose of giving the units of measurement is to be able to convert the data collected for each crop variety into a single unit e.g. kilos. If and only if the enumerator is unable to identify the correct code, then enter code 7 for other and specify
184

the unit reported as used in the transaction of the item. Whenever possible all quantities should be converted to standard units, i.e. kilograms. If the item quantities are given in non-standard units, the enumerator should, with the help of respondents, convert them into standard units. 173. Enter the quantity produced for each of the outputs in Column G19.

174. Enter the quantity sold in Nairobi during the month of October 2001 for each of the outputs in Column G20.

185

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE OF MARKETS FOR FRESH AND DRY CROP PRODUCE History of the market When it started and by whom Changes in management and business since it was started Management of the market The roles and responsibilities of the management committee Services provided by the committee Levies charged by the committee on traders (or wholesalers) Other services provided by the management committee Roles of official agencies e.g. Nairobi City Council and the provincial administration Breakdown of levies (who pays and how much) by type of food Facilities and Amenities Water Toilet (types of toilets, adequacy, functionality, cleanliness) and sewerage facilities Roads and accessibility (quality of access road) and congestion for motorised traders and customers Security and fencing (and security of traders merchandise) and charges for security Walls (if any) and types of stalls Packing/offloading area Storage Lighting Ventilation, cleanliness and garbage disposal Main business conducted in the market Types of food sold in the market Sources of food by type and traders tales of experiences in bringing from the rural areas to the market Types of food by main sources of food, quantities, and changes in an annual cycle The quality of the road network and support (or support by official agencies) en route Types of food brought and on which days (market days) Food brought from other markets in Nairobi (types of food and originating markets) Premises used by traders (fixed or open) Other types of business conducted in the markets Type of restrictions on entry to new traders Types of food (crops and livestock) and their quantities sold in the market that originates from urban agriculture in Nairobi province The volume of business conducted by a typical retailer and fluctuation of business over time (over a week, month, and year) Food distribution systems from the wholesale market to the retail markets, how the food is distributed there and the problems encountered How food changes hands from farmers, through middlemen, all the way to the consumer Roles of other informal marketing agents (e.g. brokers) Roles of brokers where wholesalers purchase their goods from Roles of brokers in the market Effect of brokers on market access by wholesalers and retailers Their role in setting prices and selecting wholesalers or retailers Fees paid to brokers by service provided (to whom and by type of food)

186

DEBRIEFING OF ENUMERATORS ON FIELDWORK (a) (b) (d) (f) (g) What went right? What went wrong? What could have been done better? Recommendations for future survey designs. Comments on the questionnaire. Reliability of the data collected, giving reasons.

187

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE OF ABATTOIRS The market is segmented by type of livestock and species. The main market for goats is Kiamaiko market. Cattle meat is mainly from Dagoretti, Dandora, Kayole, Kiserian, Ongata Rongai, Athi River and Kitengela. Camels are mainly slaughtered in Mlolongo abattoir. The questionnaires will cover livestock deliveries within a month, the source of the livestock, and the livestock products sold within Nairobi. The data will be collected once in each abattoir. Qualitative information will include a detailed analysis of the condition of each abattoir e.g. waste disposal methods, killing/slaughter facilities and processes, conditions of buildings, staff qualifications, staff uniforms and health certificates, meat handling, etc. Other issues of investigation will include: History of the abattoir When it started and by whom Changes in management and business since it was started Ownership of the abattoir Management of the abattoir The roles and responsibilities of the management committee Services provided by the committee Levies charged by the committee on traders (or wholesalers) Other services provided by the management committee Roles of official agencies e.g. Nairobi City Council and the veterinary department Facilities and Amenities Water Toilet (types of toilets, adequacy, functionality, cleanliness) and sewerage facilities Roads and accessibility (quality of access road) and congestion for motorised traders and customers Security and fencing, and charges for security Walls (if any) and types of stalls Packing/offloading area Storage Lighting Ventilation, cleanliness and garbage disposal Main business conducted in the abattoir Types of livestock slaughtered in the market Sources of livestock by type and traders tales of experiences in bringing livestock from the rural areas to the abattoir Types of livestock by main sources of livestock, quantities, and changes in an annual cycle The quality of the road network and support (or support by official agencies) en route Systems of distribution of livestock products from the abattoir to the retailers, how it is distributed there and the problems encountered How livestock products changes hands from farmers, through middlemen, all the way to the consumer Roles of other informal marketing agents (e.g. brokers) Roles of brokers where livestock wholesalers purchase their livestock from Roles of brokers in the abattoir Their role in setting prices and selecting livestock wholesalers or purchasers of livestock products Fees paid to brokers by service provided

188

GUIDELINES ON URBAN AND PERI-URBAN AGRICULTURE Kenya has a hierarchically nested organisation of administrative areas, from nation, province, district, division, location, and sub-location. The hierarchically nested administrative organisation of government is normally referred to as provincial administration. It starts from the president (in his capacity as the chief executive) all the way to the sub-chief at the sub-location level. The office of the provincial director agriculture has similar administrative arrangement as a district agricultural office. Nairobi district has seven administrative divisions, namely, Embakasi, Makadara, Kasarani, Kibera, Pumwani, Dagoretti, Westlands and Kamukunji. Each administrative division has a divisional agricultural extension officer who reports to the provincial director of agriculture. The study process will involve preparation of information schedules that will be used to prepare background reports on urban agriculture from each of the seven divisions. A workshop will be organised under the auspices of the provincial director of agriculture. A synthesis report will be prepared as an outcome of the workshop. The report will cover types of urban agriculture (farm produce, livestock, poultry), areas where grown, rough estimates of annual production, where the produce is sold, and general issues of crop and animal husbandry. There will also be general write-up of policies that promote or hinder urban agriculture, and how this impacts on support services for urban agriculture. For each administrative division in Nairobi: Types of crops grown, livestock kept Size of holdings For each crop: Where grown (be specific) Technology and source of water (irrigation, wastewater) Seasonality Where sold Estimates of sales by crop/variety, livestock species Changes over a historical period Tenure of land Support services provided and by whom Problems encountered by farmers (inputs, theft, markets, support services)

189

GEOGRAPHICAL CODES 11 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 31 311 32 33 34 35 36 41 411 42 43 431 44 441 45 46 47 48 49 51 52 53 61 611 62 63 631 64 641 642 65 66 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 Nairobi Kiambu Thika Kirinyanga Muranga Maragwa Nyandarua Nyeri Kilifi Malindi Kwale Lamu Mombasa Taita Taveta Tana River Embu Mbeere Isiolo Kitui Mwingi Machakos Makueni Marsabit Meru Makueni Tharaka-Nithi Moyale Garissa Mandera Wajir Kisii Gucha Kisumu Siaya Bondo Homa Bay Suba Rachuonyo Migori Nyamira Kajiado Kericho Laikipia Nakuru Narok Trans Nzoia Uasin Gishu Bomet
190

81 811 82 83 84 85 86 91 92 93 94 1015 1016

Baringo Koibatek Elgeyo Marakwet Nandi Samburu Turkana West Pokot Bungoma Busia Kakamega Vihiga Tanzania Uganda

191

CLASSIFICATION OF FOODS AND THEIR LOCAL NAMES

Type Kiswahili Cereals and grain products Maize meal Dona/ Mahindi Finger millet Wimbi Pearl millet Mawele Rice Mchele Sorghum Mtama Wheat flour Ngano Starchy roots and tubers Arrow roots Nduma Cassava Mhogo Kikuyu Mutu mbembe Ugimbi Mwere Mucere Muhia Ngano Nduma Mwanga Ngwaci Waru Ikwa Mboco Njahi Thoroko Ndengu/ngina Miji Njugu Njugu karanga Terere Mboga/Kabici Nyeni cia nthooko Thukuma Retithi Managu Ndania Nyeni marenge Cibinathi Biriganya Hoho Karati Gicucu Gitunguru Itunguru cia wa Kikamba Mutu wa Mbemba Wimbi Mwee Musele Muvya Nganu Nduma Manga Makwasi Maluu Ikwa Mboso Nzavi Ndengu Nthooko Ndengu poyo Olayo? Nzuu Nathi Nzuu kalanga Kiwua Ikovisi Nyunyi siya Sukuma Letisi Kitulu kya nyunyi nyunyi siya ulenge Sivinasi Maviligani Ndulu Kalati Mongu Kitunguu 192 Luo Mogo Oduma Kal Thow Mchele Bel Enuamo Nduma Mwogo/ mariwa Rabuon Nguachi Budho Oganda Olayo Bo Ngor Oganda Kabiji Sukuma Osuga Susa budho Omboga Kitunguu Kisii Obokima bew Chibando Obori Amaemba Omochere Amaemba Enkano Enduma eiyekire Omwogo Amanyagwari Ebiasi Chingende Egesare Chimbisi Ebikeri Ekabichi Egesare Ekabichi nyamato Rinagu Risosa Ekabichi Eyarare Ekarati Ekabishi Egetunguu Luhya Obosie Obule Amabele Omuchele Indava Yingano Tsinduma Omwoko Vilasi Amapwoni Amakanda Tsinavalaya Tsidegu Tsimbindi/Tsingoli Tsimbanzi? Tsinjugu Likabichi Likhubi Lisukuma Lisutsa Idania Lisieveve Spinachi Shitungwo

Sweet Viazi vitamu potatoes English Viazi ulaya potatoes Yam Viazi vikuu Grain legumes and products Beans Maharagwe Bonavist beans Chicken pea Dengu Cow peas Kunde Green Pojo grammes Green peas Njegere Pigeon peas Mbaazi Soya beans Soya Coconuts Dafu Groundnuts Njugu karanga Leafy vegetables Amaranthus Pigweed Mchicha Cabbage Mboga Cowpea Makunde leaves Mathoroko Kale Sukuma wiki Lettuce Nightshade Coriander leaves Pumpkin leaves Spinach Saladi Manuvu Dania

Majani ya Mboga Mboga mbichi Other vegetables Brinjals Briganya Capsicum Pilipili kubwa Carrots Karati Cauliflower Gobi maua Cucumber Tango Leeks Vitunguu Onions Vitunguu

Type Pumpkin Tomatoes Fruits Avocado Grape fruit Lemon Mango Mulberry Orange Papaw Passion fruit Pineapple Plums Guavas Rasberry Tangerine Water melon Honey

Kiswahili Mboga Nyanya Parachidi Balungi Ndimu Enbe Forosadi Machungwa Papai Nanasi Mapeara Chenza Tikiti Asali

Kikuyu Marenge Nyanya Makorobia Marimau Ndimu Maembe Ndare Macungwa Mababai Matunda ma Gikuyu Mananathi Ndarathini Haru/Mbera/ Ngando Ndare Thandara Uki Cukari Kigwa Ngombe Ngondu Mburi Ngamira Nguku Matumbi Iria ria ngombe Thamaki -

Kikamba Elenge Nyanya Ikolovea Malimau Ndimu Maembe Ndae Masungwa Mavavai Makundi Mananasi Mavera Ndae Candala Tikitiki Uki wa nzuki Sukali Kiwa Ngombe Ilondu Mbui Ngamia Nguku Matumbi Iia ya ngombe Makuyu -

Luo Nyanya Malmau Maembe Onunga Machungwa Apoyo Matunda Nasi Napera Morkich Sukar Niang Thiang Rombo Diel Ngweno Tong Chak Rech Omena Mbuta

Kisii Omwongo Chinyanya Avocado Amtunda Amaroro Reimbe Obwabari obuk rambi Amatunda Ripaipai Ritunda Nyakoranda Rinanansi Mabera Chinkenene Oboke Sukari edabu Omosii Engombe Engondie Embori Engoko Amagema Amabere Enswe omena Egekoro

Luhya Tsinyanya Liovacado Tsindime Mabera Amachunga Lipaipai Amatunale Eshikakha Mabera Obushi Esukari Emingonye Ingombe Lichese Tsimbusi Tsingamia Tsingokho Kamaki/Livuyu Emabore Inyeni Tsimene Imbuta

Sugar Sukari Sugarcane Mua Meat, poultry and eggs Cattle Ngombe Sheep Kondoo Goat Mbuzi Camel Ngamia Chicken Kuku Eggs Mayai Cow milk Maziwa ya ngombe Fish and fish products Tilapia Samaki wa maji baridi Dagaa Samaki wadogo Nile perch -

193

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES

194

UNITED NATIONS HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PROGRAMME (UN-HABITAT) URBAN ECONOMY AND FINANCE BRANCH SURVEY OF FOOD INFLOWS TO NAIROBI, NOVEMBER 2001 FRESH CROP PRODUCE FORM UNHABITAT/I Name of enumerator__________________ Name of market _______________ Name of trader ___________________ Sex of trader (see codes) ___________________Type of transport (see codes) ____________ Vehicle registration number_________ Date of Interview (dd/mm/yy) __ __ __ Final interview status (see codes) _____ Name of supervisor ________________
Market 1-2 Name Code Respondent 3-5 Date 6-7 RT 8 1 Final interview status 9

TO BE COMPLETED BY ALL WHOLESALERS OF FRESH CROP PRODUCE

Crop Crop code TYPES OF FRESH CROP PRODUCE Unit of Unit Crop Crop measurement code variety variety (see code codes) A3 A4 A5 A6 Units delivered Kilos per unit Division SOURCE OF PRODUCE DELIVERED Seller From District Area Distance code whom code one way (see bought (kms) codes) A10 A11 A12 A13 A14 If 8 in col. A14, name of market A15 Average cost per unit Cost of purchase COST OF PRODUCE DELIVERED Transport Packaging Market costs costs access costs Other costs (specify) Total cost

A1

A2

A7

A8

A9

A16

A17

A18

A19

A20

A21

A22

Final interview status: 1=Completed, 2=Partial response, 3=Refusal, 4=Temporarily closed, 5=Permanently closed, 6=Other (specify) Sex of trader: 1=Male, 2=Female Type of transport: 1=Head load, 2=Push cart, 3=Bicycle, 4=Bus, 5=Matatu, 6=Pickup, 7=Lorry, 8=Rail, 9=Animal, 10=Saloon car Unit code (Column A6): 1=Kilo, 2=Bag, 3=Extended bag, 4=Crate/box, 5=Net, 6=Bunch, 7=Tray, 8=Other (specify) From whom bought/seller code (Column A14): 1=Own produce (outside Nairobi), 2=Own produce (within Nairobi), 3=Other farmers, 4=Cooperatives, 5=NCPB, 6=Rural markets, 7=Roadside (outside Nairobi), 8=Traders in Nairobi, 9=Other (specify) Other costs (Column A21): Specify other costs for each entry in the box below:

195

UNITED NATIONS HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PROGRAMME (UN-HABITAT) URBAN ECONOMY AND FINANCE BRANCH SURVEY OF FOOD INFLOWS TO NAIROBI, NOVEMBER 2001 DRY CROP PRODUCE (FOR OCTOBER 2001) FORM UNHABITAT/II Name of enumerator__________________ Name of market _______________ Name of street ______________ Name of shop_______________ Name of trader ___________________ Sex of trader (see codes) ___________________Type of transport (see codes) ____________ Date of Interview (dd/mm/yy) __ __ __ Final interview status (see codes) _____ Name of supervisor ________________
Market 1-2 Name Code Respondent 3-5 Date 6-7 RT 8 2 Final interview status 9

TO BE COMPLETED BY ALL WHOLESALERS OF DRY CROP PRODUCE

Crop Crop code TYPES OF DRY CROP PRODUCE Unit of Unit Crop Crop measurement code variety variety (see code codes) Units purchased Kilos per unit Division SOURCE OF PRODUCE PURCHASED Seller From District Area Distance code whom code one way (see bought (kms) codes) If 8 in col. B14, name of market Average cost per unit COST OF PRODUCE PURCHASED Market Cost of Transport Packaging costs access purchase costs (if costs separate) Other costs (specify) Total cost

B1

B2

B3

B4

B5

B6

B7

B8

B9

B10

B11

B12

B13

B14

B15

B16

B17

B18

B19

B20

B21

B22

Final interview status: 1=Completed, 2=Partial response, 3=Refusal, 4=Temporarily closed, 5=Permanently closed, 6=Other (specify) Sex of trader: 1=Male, 2=Female Type of transport: 1=Head load, 2=Push cart, 3=Bicycle, 4=Bus, 5=Matatu, 6=Pickup, 7=Lorry, 8=Rail, 9=Animal, 10=Saloon car Unit code (Column B6): 1=Kilo, 2=Bag, 3=Extended bag, 4=Crate/box, 5=Net, 6=Bunch, 7=Tray, 8=Other (specify) From whom bought/seller code (Column B14): 1=Own produce (outside Nairobi), 2=Own produce (within Nairobi), 3=Other farmers, 4=Cooperatives, 5=NCPB, 6=Rural markets, 7=Roadside (outside Nairobi), 8=Traders in Nairobi, 9=Other (specify) Other costs (Column B21): Specify other costs for each entry in the box below

196

UNITED NATIONS HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PROGRAMME (UN-HABITAT) URBAN ECONOMY AND FINANCE BRANCH SURVEY OF FOOD INFLOWS TO NAIROBI, NOVEMBER 2001 LIVESTOCK AND LIVESTOCK PRODUCTS (FOR OCTOBER 2001) FORM UNHABITAT/III Name of enumerator__________________ Name of market/Street ______________ Name of trader _____________ Sex of trader (see codes) ___________________Type of transport (see codes) ____________ Date of Interview (dd/mm/yy) __ __ __ Final interview status (see codes) _____ Name of supervisor ________________
Abattoir 1-2 Name Code Respondent 3-5 RT 6 3 Final interview status 7

TO BE COMPLETED BY ALL ABATTOIRS IN NAIROBI AND ITS ENVIRONS

Animal Animal Code C2 TYPE OF ANIMAL Number Animal Animal slaughtered variety variety code C3 C4 C5 Number sold in Nairobi C6 SOURCE OF LIVESTOCK SLAUGHTERED Seller From Division District Area Distance code whom code one way (see bought (kms) codes) C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 Average cost per animal C13 Cost of purchase C14 COST OF LIVESTOCK SLAUGHTERED Abattoir Slaughter Inspection Meat fee costs fee loading costs C15 C16 C17 C18 Refrigeration costs C19 Other costs (specify) C20 Total cost C21

C1

Final interview status: 1=Completed, 2=Partial response, 3=Refusal, 4=Vacant/closed, 5= Other (specify) Sex of trader: 1=Male, 2=Female Type of transport: 1=Head load, 2=Push cart, 3=Bicycle, 4=Bus, 5=Matatu, 6=Pickup, 7=Lorry, 8=Saloon car, 9=Other (specify) Item code (Column C1): 1=Cattle, 2=Goats, 3=Sheep, 4=Pigs, 5=Chicken, 6=Other (specify) Source of livestock/seller code (Column C13): 1=Own produce, 2=Other farmers, 3=Cooperatives, 4=Rural markets, 5=Roadside (outside Nairobi), 6=Traders in Nairobi, 7=Other (specify) Other costs (Column C20): Specify other costs for each entry in the box below

197

UNITED NATIONS HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PROGRAMME (UN-HABITAT) URBAN ECONOMY AND FINANCE BRANCH SURVEY OF FOOD INFLOWS TO NAIROBI, NOVEMBER 2001 LIVESTOCK AND LIVESTOCK PRODUCTS FORM UNHABITAT/IV Name of enumerator__________________ Name of abattoir ______________ Name of trader _____________ Sex of trader (see codes) ___________________Type of transport (see codes) ____________ Date of Interview (dd/mm/yy) __ __ __ Final interview status (see codes) _____ Name of supervisor ________________
Abattoir 1-2 Name Code Respondent 3-5 Date 6-7 RT 8 4 Final interview status 9

TO BE COMPLETED BY ALL LIVESTOCK WHOLESALERS (INCLUDING POULTRY)

SOURCE OF LIVESTOCK SLAUGHTERED Animal Animal Animal Animal Number Code variety variety delivered code Division SOURCE OF LIVESTOCK DELIVERED Area Distance District From code one way whom (kms) bought Seller code (see codes) Average cost per animal COST OF LIVESTOCK DELIVERED Animal Transport Other Cost of loading costs costs purchase costs (specify) Total cost

D1

D2

D3

D4

D5

D6

D7

D8

D9

D10

D11

D12

D13

D14

D15

D16

D17

Final interview status: 1=Completed, 2=Partial response, 3=Refusal, 4=Temporarily closed, 5=Permanently closed, 6=Other (specify) Sex of trader: 1=Male, 2=Female Type of transport: 1=Head load, 2=Push cart, 3=Bicycle, 4=Bus, 5=Matatu, 6=Pickup, 7=Lorry, 8=Saloon car, 9=Trekking, 10= Other (specify) Animal code (Column D2): 1=Cattle, 2=Camels, 3=Goats, 4=Sheep, 5=Pigs, 6=Chicken, 7=Other (specify) Frowm who bought/seller code (Column D11): 1=Own stock, 2=Other farmers, 3=Cooperatives, 4=Rural markets, 5= Traders in Nairobi, 6=Other (specify) Other costs (Column D16): Specify other costs for each entry in the box below

198

UNITED NATIONS HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PROGRAMME (UN-HABITAT) URBAN ECONOMY AND FINANCE BRANCH SURVEY OF FOOD INFLOWS TO NAIROBI, NOVEMBER 2001 FISH AND OTHER MARINE PRODUCTS FORM UNHABITAT/V Name of enumerator__________________ Name of market ______________ Name of trader _____________ Sex of trader (see codes) ___________________Type of transport (see codes) ____________ Date of Interview (dd/mm/yy) __ __ __ Final interview status (see codes) _____ Name of supervisor ________________
Market 1-2 Name Code Respondent 3-5 Date 6-7 RT 8 5 Final interview status 9

TO BE COMPLETED BY ALL WHOLESALERS OF FISH AND OTHER MARINE PRODUCTS

FISH/MARINE PRODUCT Type of Fish/marine Kilograms fish/marine product code delivered product E1 E2 E3 SOURCE OF FISH/MARINE PRODUCTS DELIVERED Area Distance Division District From Seller code one way whom code (see (kms) bought codes) E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 Average cost per kg E10 COST OF FISH/MARINE PRODUCTS DELIVERED Transport Refrigeration Other Cost of costs costs costs purchase (specify) E11 E12 E13 E14 Total cost E15

Final interview status: 1=Completed, 2=Partial response, 3=Refusal, 4=Temporarily closed, 5=Permanently closed, 6=Other (specify) Sex of trader: 1=Male, 2=Female Type of transport: 1=Head load, 2=Push cart, 3=Bicycle, 4=Bus, 5=Matatu, 6=Pickup, 7=Lorry, 8=Saloon car, 9=Other (specify) From whom bought/seller code (Column E9): 1=Individual fishermen, 2=Cooperatives, 3=Middlemen (outside Nairobi), 4=Traders in Nairobi, 5=Other (specify) Other costs (Column E14): Specify other costs for each entry in the box below

199

UNITED NATIONS HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PROGRAMME (UN-HABITAT) URBAN ECONOMY AND FINANCE BRANCH SURVEY OF FOOD INFLOWS TO NAIROBI, NOVEMBER 2001 ALL NON-PROCESSED FOODS (OCTOBER 2001) FORM UNHABITAT/VI Name of enumerator____________ Name of supermarket/hotel ____________ Name of street ____________ Name of respondent ____ Date of Interview (dd/mm/yy) __ __ __ Final interview status (see codes) _____ Name of supervisor ________________
Establishment 1-2 Name Code RT 3 6 Final interview status 4

TO BE COMPLETED BY SUPERMARKETS AND HOTELS

Crop/ meat/ meat/ product F1 TYPES OF CROP/MEAT/MEAT PRODUCTS Unit of Unit Crop/ Crop/ Crop/ measurement code meat meat meat/ (see variety variety meat codes) code product code F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 Units purchased Kilos per unit SOURCE OF FOOD, MEAT AND MEAT PRODUCTS PURCHASED If 7 in Division District Area Distance From Seller col. code code one way whom F13, (kms) bought (see name codes) of market F9 F10 F11 F12 F13 F14 F15 Average cost per unit COST OF FOOD, MEAT AND MEAT PRODUCTS PURCHASED Cost of Transport Packaging Refrigeration Other purchase costs (if costs costs costs separate) (specify) Total cost

F7

F8

F16

F17

F18

F19

F20

F21

F22

Final interview status: 1=Completed, 2=Partial response, 3=Refusal, 4=Temporarily closed, 5=Permanently closed, 6=Other (specify) Unit code (Column F6): 1=Kilo, 2=Bag, 3=Extended bag, 4=Crate/box, 5=Net, 6=Bunch, 7=Tray, 8=Number, 9=Other (specify) From whom bought/seller code (Column F14): 1=Own produce, 2=Other farmers, 3=Cooperatives, 4=NCPB, 5=Rural markets, 6=Roadside (outside Nairobi), 7=Traders in Nairobi, 8=Other (specify) Other costs (Column F21): Specify other costs for each entry in the box below:

200

UNITED NATIONS HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PROGRAMME (UN-HABITAT) URBAN ECONOMY AND FINANCE BRANCH SURVEY OF FOOD INFLOWS TO NAIROBI, NOVEMBER 2001 ALL NON-PROCESSED FOODS (OCTOBER 2001) FORM UNHABITAT/VII Name of enumerator____________ Name of firm ____________ Name of street ____________ Date of Interview (dd/mm/yy) _____________ Final interview status (see codes) _____ Name of supervisor ________________
Firm 1-2 Name Code RT 3 7 Final interview status 4

TO BE COMPLETED BY FOOD PROCESSING FIRMS

TYPES OF UNPROCESSED FOOD INPUTS Item Item code G2 Unit of measurement G3 Unit code (see codes) G4 Units purchased G5 Kilos per unit G6 SOURCE OF FOOD, LIVESTOCK PRODUCTS Seller District Area Distance From code code one way whom bought (see (kms) codes) G7 G8 G9 G10 G11 COST OF FOOD, LIVESTOCK PRODUCTS Average Cost of Transport Total cost per purchase costs (if cost separate) unit G12 G13 G14 G15 SALE OF OUTPUTS Name of output G16 Unit of measurement G17 Output code (see codes) G18 Units produced G19 Units sold in Nairobi G20 Kilograms per unit G21

G1

Final interview status: 1=Completed, 2=Partial response, 3=Refusal, 4=Temporarily closed, 5=Permanently closed, 6=Other (specify) Inputs code (Column G2): 1=Chicken, 2=Pigs, 3=Maize, 4=Wheat, 5=Other (specify) Unit code (Inputs) (Column G4): 1=Kilo, 2=Bag, 3=Number, 4=Other (specify) From whom bought/seller code (Column G11): 1=Own produce, 2=Individual farmers, 3=Cooperatives, 4=NCPB, 5=Rural markets, 6=Traders in Nairobi, 7=Imports, 8=Other (specify) Name of output (Column G16): 1=Chicken, 2=Eggs, 3=Pork, 4=Sausages, 5=Maize flour, 6=Wheat flour, 7=Other (specify) Unit code (outputs) (Column G18): 1=Kilo, 2=Bag, 3=Number, 4=Other (specify)

201

MAP OF AGRICULTURE IN NAIROBI

202

203

MAP OF MARKETS IN NAIROBI

204

205

206