COUNTY GOVERNMENTS MUST USE SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION AS TOOLS FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

From the just ended general election, it is clear that the mode of governance in this country has changed given that there will be two tiers of governance at national and county levels. National government will basically coordinate national security and defense, health, education and development of road infrastructure while the county government will to a larger extent charter the development trajectory of counties depending on their specific and available resources. This paradigm shift places a huge responsibility on newly elected county leaders especially governors and calls upon them to come up will effective people-friendly policies and  strategies that will ensure optimal exploitation of resources that for a long time have been underutilized. However, it is important to bear in mind that even as development will be determined from ‘mashinani’ with ‘wanjiku’ being at the centre of each decision, our national values and aspiration must always be kept alive. The only way to ensure that this is done will be for county governors to synchronize county government Marshall plans with national development blueprints especially the Vision 2030.

The counties that want to move forward will have to undertake both an inward and outward retrospection. Inwardly, the governors and the entire leadership will have to determine the resources available within their borders and come up will strategies that will enable the county maximize on their use. Outward retrospection will involve an impartial SWOT analysis that will enable the county  develop sectors in which they have a competitive edge over other counties while keeping in focus areas in which they will require to form collaborative partnership with other counties and national government to grow. In many counties, a lot of focus will have to go towards addressing challenges of high levels of poverty, public health, education, food and water security, unemployment, climate change and environmental degradation. In my opinion, only counties whose leadership will embrace and adopt innovative scientifically proven technologies to address these problems will be on the true path to sustainable socio-economic growth.

The governors in counties that want to leap frog and catch up with other counties like Nairobi must first of all remain open to expert advice and use research-based policies to drive their development agenda. This may call for such governors to engage science advisors capable of interpreting research findings and translating them into sound policies with respect to the needs and aspirations of their counties. More importantly, this will require that counties development agenda clearly identify key sectors which will most likely benefit from interventions of science, technology and innovation( ST&I) besides availing required resources to move the programs forward. In this era of transparent accountable and public-driven governance, the leadership must from the onset set clear indicators and time lines on how to achieve agreed targets.

Already things are beginning to look up for those counties that will want to use ST&I as an enabler. Two recently enacted laws; the Universities Act 2012 and the ST&I Act 2013, provides national frameworks that will allow counties to tap into ST&I potential for their development plans and besides assurance for quality university education and research. For instance, through the ST&I Act, the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NCST&I) will outline national research agenda thus providing national compass on the direction the county should take as far as Research &Development (R&D) is concerned. Alongside NCST&I, there will be the National Research Fund (NRF) which will ensure effective coordination and funding for research that have socio-economic impact. On the other hand, University Act 2012 will ensure harmonized university education and quality assurance to boot. And taking into consideration the recent increase in numbers of public university spread across various counties within the country, the county governments need only to reposition to tap into the quality human capacity and research that will come from these institutions.

More importantly, counties must develop innovative strategies that will ensure that the counties realize sustainable growth for the benefits of their citizens. The leadership must consider as their key responsibility the need to serve with clear visionary milestones geared towards improving the socio-economic status of their people. Using the equalization funds, counties that have for a long time been marginalized will need to invest in certain areas such as education, health, human capacity building and road infrastructure for faster “catch up” with other relatively developed counties. Counties that have had some measure of growth need not rest on their laurels. The new dispensation offers such counties the opportunity to reorganize themselves to be centres of excellence in many areas. They have an opportunity to export both goods and services to the counties that may be lacking in such. It will also be imperative for the leadership in counties that are relatively more developed to set good governance structures that will ensure the entire citizenry partake of the socio-economic benefits instead of being just for a privileged few. Indeed, it must be business unusual for it is not the time to manage by exclusion but the time to involve all in decision making through transparent accountable public consultative processes.

The onus is also on the national government to provide the necessary support to the county governments in areas in which there may be challenges if sustainable development at both national and county governments is to be realized. This will call for pragmatic inclusive planning in which key ministries consult and fuse economic planning with technology planning. In my opinion, the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of State for Planning and the Ministry responsible for Science, Technology and Innovation or their respective departments at the county government must strive to synchronize their budgets and programmes and make sure research work that guarantees socioeconomic development are prioritized. If everything is important then nothing is important and we must prioritize.

Lastly, county government will need to benchmark with other counties and even with other countries to learn and adopt best practices that can be useful in spurring county and ultimately national development. The county leadership must ensure that their development agenda create a lasting and sustainable impact on the society. The national agenda has to be cascaded to the county level to ensure that programs at county build up to the national development agenda. I am persuaded that use of science, technology and innovation will provide more effective tools for faster national and county growth. Our governors must therefore strive to embrace technology, research and innovation if they want to leave a legacy after their 5 year tenure in office.