Conserving Commons for Whom? Heritage Conservation in Nairobi and Other Places in Kenya

ABSTRACT

Urban heritage is an indicator of people’s idiosyncrasies. Significant values and meanings are created, and their decline can be controlled through conservation. Unfortunately, conservation in Kenya has been endorsed somewhat by powerful politicians and administrators for partisan objectives. They have failed to enforce existing conservation law and tried to appropriate value heritage assets. This paper, therefore, assesses the challenges of heritage conservation, the extent of systematic heritage destruction and the causes of conflict in the heritage conservation of Kenya. Three cases have been examined: the Ojijo Road Flats in Nairobi, Endorois court case and the Kaya Forest sacred ritual sites. A research programme was designed which involved participants with relevant knowledge. It emerged that conflict of interest, limited consultation and poor heritage management had resulted in the loss of heritage authenticity, integrity, and values. Furthermore, lack of public involvement and limited resources derailed heritage conservation. A literature review revealed the extent to which national legal instruments lacked reference to community responsibility in heritage conservation. The study concludes that a relevant conservation policy needs to be established to enhance sustainable heritage conservation and management in Kenya.

KEYWORDS:

• Authenticity
• conflicts
• conservation
• heritage values
• integrity

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1. Benesch, H., Hammami, F., Holmberg, I. & Uzer, E., Heritage as Common (s) – Commons as Heritage; 8

2. Rosilawati, Y., Rafique, Z., Habib, S. & Nurmandi, A., Cultural Psychology, 81–93.

3. Muñoz Viñas, S., Contemporary Theory.

4. McClelland, A., Peel, D., Hayes, C. M. L. & Montgomery, I., A values-based approach to heritage planning, 583–603

5. Avrami, E., MacDonald, S., Mason, R. & Myers, D., Values in Heritage Management, 1–2

6. Hidaka & Lucia T. F., In the Contemporary Theory of Conservation, by Salvador Muñoz Viñas. City & Time, 65–68.

7. Marta de la Torre., Values and Heritage Conservation, 155–166.

8. Ostrom, E., Burger, J., Field, C. B., Norgaard, R. B. & Policansky, D., Re-visiting the Commons: 278–282.

9. See note 5 above.

10. Nezhad, S.F., Eshrati, P. & Eshrati, D., A Definition of Authenticity Concept, 93–107

11. Nasar, J. L., Urban Design Aesthetics, 377–401

12. Brundtland, Gro Harlem (ed.). Our Common Future.

13. Pereira, H. N., Contemporary Trends in Conservation, 15–25.

14. See note 7 above.

15. Bunu, S. M, Ong’ayo A. H. & Shauri, H. S., Community Participation in the Conservation, Volume IV.

16. See note 13 above.

17. Government of Kenya, National Museums and Heritage Act.

18. Government of Kenya, The National Museums Act. Cap. 216.

19. See note 17 above.

20. PIC (Public Investment Committee). 2009

21. PIC (Public Investment Committee). 2012

22. Government of Kenya, The Physical and Land Use Planning Act No. 13 of 2019

23. See note 21 above.

24. KLA (Kenya Land Alliance).

25. See note 20 above.

26. KNCHR (Kenya National Commission on Human Rights) & KLA (Kenya Land Alliance) Report.

27. See not 26 above.

28. UNESCO, Kenya Lake System in the Great Rift Valley and Australia’s

29. KLA (Kenya Land Alliance).

30. See note 28 above.

31. See note 29 above.

32. Donders, Y., ‘The legal framework of the right to take part in cultural life’, 231–271.

33. See note 26 above.

34. Government of Kenya, Constitution of Kenya.

35. UN, Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

36. AU, African Charter on Human and People’s Rights.

37. See note 29 above.

38. See note 36 above.

39. UNESCO, Sacred Mijikenda Kaya Forests.

40. Ibid.

41. The listing Criteria stated above emanates from the UNESCO World Heritage Convention, as, ‘The Criteria for Selection’. These criteria are described in the ‘Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention’ that besides the text of the Convention, is the key working instrument on World Heritage.

42. Mwandoto, W., Calls to Save Kaya Forest, 41.

43. See note 29 above.

44. Gitau, P., Conservation.

45. Shepheard-Walwyn, E. (2014). Culture and Conservation in the Sacred Sites. Thesis.

46. Kibet, S. and Celia, N. (2008). Cultural and Biological Heritage at Risk. 287–295

47. See note 15 above.

48. ICOMOS, The Nara Document on Authenticity.

49. Jokilehto, J., ‘Conservation Concepts’, 3–9.

50. See note 15 above.

51. Nilson, T. & Thorell, K., Cultural Heritage Preservation.

52. Cherry & Martin, Architectural History and Conservation, 9–25.

53. Apaydin, V., Critical Perspectives on Cultural Memory and Heritage.

54. Siân, J., Wrestling with the Social Value of Heritage, 21–37.

55. See note 15 above.

56. See note 35 above.

57. See note 36 above.

58. UN., International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

59. UNWTO., Global Code of Ethics for Tourism.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the authors through self-contributions for research work.