Kenya has entered a decisive new phase in the global carbon economy, and the question now is not whether the country can attract carbon credit investors. The real question is whether ordinary Kenyans, especially communities living around forests, rangelands, wetlands and renewable energy sites, will benefit fairly from the billions promised in climate finance.
The launch of the Kenya National Carbon Registry in February 2026 has given the country a stronger footing in the carbon market. The registry, established by the Ministry of Environment and the National Environment Management Authority, NEMA, is meant to track carbon projects, verify emissions reductions, prevent double counting and improve transparency in the sale of carbon credits.
More than 80 project concept notes had reportedly been submitted by the time of the launch, signalling strong investor interest in Kenya’s climate assets.
On paper, this is a major opportunity. Kenya has vast natural and economic advantages: forests that store carbon, grasslands that support pastoral communities, mangroves along the Coast, geothermal energy in the Rift Valley, and growing interest in clean cooking and direct air carbon capture.
In a world where companies and governments are under pressure to reduce emissions, Kenya can position itself as a credible source of high-quality carbon credits.
However, credibility is where the battle begins.
For years, carbon markets have been criticized for allowing wealthy polluters to buy offsets while communities on the ground receive little benefit or face restrictions on land use.
In Kenya, that concern is not theoretical. Many carbon projects sit on land used by pastoralists, forest-adjacent communities or rural households whose livelihoods depend directly on natural resources. If poorly governed, carbon trading can easily become another extractive industry dressed in green language.
This is why Kenya’s carbon market regulations matter.
The Climate Change (Carbon Markets) Regulations, 2024 introduced stronger rules on project approval, benefit sharing, safeguards and the role of the National Carbon Registry. Reports on the regulations indicate that land-based projects are required to allocate 40 per cent of net earnings to communities, while non-land-based projects are expected to allocate 25 per cent.
That provision could become a turning point, but only if it is enforced.
A conservation officer involved in community-based climate projects said the registry must not become “a Nairobi-facing system that only satisfies investors and government agencies.” According to him, “communities must be able to see what has been registered on their land, who is buying the credits, how much money is coming in, and how the benefit-sharing formula is being applied.”
That is the transparency test.
Kenya’s carbon market has already seen turbulence.
The dispute involving clean cooking company Koko Networks, which relied heavily on carbon credit revenue, raised difficult questions about verification, government authorisation and the integrity of emissions reduction claims. The company’s collapse after a clash with the Kenyan government over carbon credit approvals underlined the risks facing both investors and regulators in a market where trust is everything.
Yet the answer is not to abandon carbon markets. The answer is to govern them better.
Carbon credits should not merely be a new export product. They should finance real climate action: restoring degraded land, protecting water towers, supporting clean energy, strengthening community livelihoods and creating green jobs.
The communities protecting these ecosystems must be treated as rights holders, not background actors in investor brochures.
Environment officials have framed the national registry as a tool to enhance transparency, prevent double counting and ensure that revenues benefit local communities while safeguarding national interests. That ambition is sound. But Kenya’s history with natural resources offers a warning: laws and registries are only as strong as the enforcement behind them.
The carbon credit boom could place Kenya at the centre of Africa’s green finance future. It could also reproduce old injustices, where rural communities carry the burden while distant actors take the profit.
The difference will come down to three things: public disclosure, community consent and enforceable benefit sharing. Without those, carbon credits will be just another climate gold rush. With them, Kenya could prove that climate finance can be both profitable and just.
Follow our social media pages for breaking news updates, in-depth stories and videos.
news@nairobilens.ke
