UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL WORK

THE ROLE OF KITCHEN GARDENS IN FOOD SECURITY AND

NUTRITIONAL DIVERSITY:

A CASE STUDY OF WORKERS AT JAMES FINLAY KENYA- KERICHO

BY

JOHN MBURU NJUGUNA

(C50/62987/2011)

A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AWARD OF DEGREE IN MASTER OF ARTS
IN RURAL SOCIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

NOVEMBER 2013
 DECLARATION

This research is my Original work and has not been presented for a degree in any
other university.

Signature……………………………… Date………………………………

John Mburu Njuguna

C50/62987/2011

This research report has been submitted for examination with my approval as the
University supervisor.

Signature……………………………… Date…………………………………

Dr G.G.Wairire

Department of Sociology and Social Work

University of Nairobi

ii
 DEDICATION

This research project is dedicated to my parents, the late Samuel Njuguna and
Elizabeth Mumbi for their prayers and support. My beloved Wife Mary Njoki and my
children, Ruth, Nathan and Simon for their deep understanding and allowing me to be
away from them at times during my study.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My heart is indebted to my supervisor the Late Dr. Pius M. Mutie for his rich
guidance almost through the entire project. I am equally indebted to Dr G.G. Wairire
who finished the good work started by his predecessor. I acknowledge the work of
Prof. Chitere, Dr. Robinson Ocharo, Prof. Yambo and Dr Agnes Zani for their help in
imparting skills that helped me complete my research project.

I cannot forget to thank my supervisor at workplace Brenda B. Ochieng and former

colleague Mohamed Mbarak for their moral support during the course work. Marcus,
Kean, Daniel Kirui, Betty Kibiliach, Reuben Langat, Jane Ndirangu, Chris Masika
and the entire James Finlay Kericho Team that facilitated my data collection for this
research.

Special thanks to all my research assistants for the special role they played as
participant observers during the fielding of questionnaires and to James Finlay
managers at different sections who joined the various focused groups and offered vital
information during the sessions.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENT

Declaration ............................................................................................................................. ii
Dedication ................................................................................................................ iii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................... iv
Table of content .......................................................................................................... v
List of Tables .......................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures ........................................................................................................... ix
List of Plates ....................................................................................................................... ixi
Acronyms ................................................................................................................xii
Abstract .............................................................................................................................. xiii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1
1.1 Background Information .................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem ................................................................................................. 3
1.3 Research Questions .......................................................................................................... 5
1.4 Objectives ........................................................................................................................ 5
1.4.1 Specific Objectives ....................................................................................................... 5
1.5 Justification of the Study ................................................................................................. 5
1.6 Scope and Limitations...................................................................................................... 7
1.7 Definition of key terms .................................................................................................... 8
1.7.1 Kitchen Garden ............................................................................................................. 8
1.7.2 Food security................................................................................................................. 8
1.7.3 Nutritional Diversity ..................................................................................................... 8
1.7.4 Food Availability .......................................................................................................... 8
1.7.5 Food Access .................................................................................................................. 8
1.7.6 Utilization ..................................................................................................................... 9
1.7.7 Stability ......................................................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................ 10
2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 10
2.2 Kitchen Gardens and African Leafy Vegetables in Nutritional Diversity ..................... 12
2.3.1 Food Accessibility and Vulnerability .........................................................................15
2.3.2 Food availability ......................................................................................................... 17
2.4. Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................. 19
2.4.1 Techno-Ecological Theory.......................................................................................... 19

v
2.4.2 The Adoption of Innovation Theory ........................................................................... 19
2.4.3 Conceptual Model. ...................................................................................................... 20
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .............................................. 21
3.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 21
3.1 Research design ............................................................................................................. 21
3.2 Site Description.............................................................................................................. 21
3.2.1 Unit of observation ..................................................................................................... 22
3.2.2 Unit of analysis ........................................................................................................... 22
3.3 Target population......................................................................................................... 22
3.4 Sampling procedure ....................................................................................................... 22
3.5 Types of data .................................................................................................................. 23
3.5.1 Data collection ............................................................................................................ 23
3.5.1.1 Household interview ................................................................................................ 23
3.5.1.2 Key informants......................................................................................................... 24
3.5.1.3 Focus Group Discussions ......................................................................................... 24
3.5.1.4 Desk Review ............................................................................................................ 25
3.5.1.5 Observation .............................................................................................................. 25
3.6 Data analysis .................................................................................................................. 25
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS ................................ 26
4.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 26
4.1 Demographic Characteristics ......................................................................................... 26
4.1.1 Respondents Household Distribution.......................................................................... 26
4.1.2. Distribution of Respondents by Sex........................................................................... 27
4.1.3 Marital Status .............................................................................................................. 27
4.1.4 Distribution o Respondents byAge ............................................................................ 28
4.1.5 Education level............................................................................................................ 29
4.2.0 Main Findings ............................................................................................................. 29
4.2.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 29
4.2.1 Kitchen Garden Set Up ............................................................................................... 29
4.2.2 Size of gardens ............................................................................................................ 35
4.2.3 Source of Help and Organization ................................................................................ 37
4.3 Kitchen Garden Food Security Effect ............................................................................ 38
4.3.1 Value of Food Supply ................................................................................................. 40
4.4 Kitchen Garden Effect on Nutritional Diversity ............................................................ 41
4.4.2 Nutrition Diversity of Kericho District ....................................................................... 42
4.4.3 Value of Nutrition Diversity ....................................................................................... 44

vi
4.4.4 Vegetables as a Source of Protein ............................................................................... 45
4.5 Challenges Faced by the Kitchen Garden ...................................................................... 46
4.6 Correlation between attendance and food supply value................................................. 48
4.6.3 Solution to the challenges ........................................................................................... 49
4.6.4 Improvement recommended by respondents .............................................................. 50
4.6.5 Vegetable production in Containers ............................................................................ 51
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................. 56
5.1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 56
5.2 Summary of Findings.................................................................................................... 56
5.3 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 57
5.4 Recommendations......................................................................................................... 58
5.4.1 Recommendations to JFK ........................................................................................... 58
5.4.2 Recommendations to other investors in Agriculture................................................... 59
5.4.3 Recommendations to Government .............................................................................. 59
5.4.4 Recommendations to Development Agents ................................................................ 60
5.4.5 Further Research ......................................................................................................... 60
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 61
APPENDIX 1 ....................................................................................................................... 1
Questionnaire ........................................................................................................................ 1
APPENDIX II.................................................................................................................... 12
Key Informant Interview Guide .......................................................................................... 12
APPENDIX III .................................................................................................................. 13
FGD Guide.......................................................................................................................... 13

vii
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1 Village Distribution of the Respondents .............................................................. 26
Table 4.2 Gender.................................................................................................................. 27
Table 4.3 Marital Status ....................................................................................................... 27
Table 4.4 Age Group Distribution ....................................................................................... 28
Table 4.5 Education level .................................................................................................... 29
Table 4.6 Size of the Garden................................................................................................ 35
Table 4.7 Vegetables Bought Before ................................................................................... 39
Table 4.8 Vegetables Bought Today .................................................................................... 39
Table 4.9 Value of Food Supply to the Respondents ........................................................... 40
Table 4.10 Vegetables/Fruits Grown in Kericho District .................................................... 43
Table 4.11 Challenges faced by the Kitchen Garden ........................................................... 47
Table 4.12 Correlation between attendance and food supply value..................................... 48

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Distribution of hungry people in the world in millions ............................. 15

Figure 2.2 Conceptual framework .................................................................................. 20
Figure 4.1 Sources of design help ............................................................................ 37
Figure 4.2 No of variety grown in households ......................................................... 41
Figure 4.3 Respondents value diversity ........................................................................ 43
Figure 4.4 Frequency of buying meat ............................................................................46
Figure 4.5 Solution to the challenges ............................................................................ 49
Figure 4.6 Improvements recommended ................................................................. 51

ix
 LIST OF PLATES

Plate 4.1 Demarcation with wood ................................................................................31

Plate 4.2 Garden layout .................................................................................................32
Plate 4.3 Hibiscus hedge ............................................................................................... 33
Plate 4.4 Green hegde at the beginning of the project...............................................34
Plate 4.5 Workers in one of the early gardens ............................................................. 34
Plate 4.6 Side Garden in Umoja Village at Tiluet Estate.......................................... 35
Plate 4.7 Compost pit ......................................................................................................36
Plate 4.8 A Banana Stool in One of the Kitchen Garden ........................................... 45
Plate 4.9 Nutritional board near a dispensary ..............................................................50
Plate 4.10 Strawberry growing in improvised containers .......................................... 52
Plate 4.11 Banana stems used as containers for vegetable production ..................... 52
Plate 4.12 Vegetables growing in upright sack containers ..................................... 53
Plate 4.13 Vertical Multistory Garden ...........................................................................54
Plate 4.14 Vegetables growing in hydroponics...................................................... 55

x
ACRONYMS

FAO- Food and Agricultural Organization

JFK- James Finlay Kenya

WHO-World Health Organisation

OECD- Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

FGD-Focused Group Discusions

ALVS- African Leafy Vegetables

UN-United Nations

DFID- The Department for International Development

xi
ABSTRACT

Food security and nutritional diversity is one of the key areas that a developing
country should address. With varying local opportunities and challenges, the kitchen
garden forms a panacea that can address food insecurity and bring in self reliance,
sovereignty and dignity. Households have labour power– the physical ability of
household members to generate income (Christopher, 2006). When this labour power
is used in the Kitchen garden it has the ability to improve food security and nutritional
diversity of the household. Even with the dwindling land resource small areas around
the house as small as ten square meters can make the difference in the lives of many.

This research was undertaken on workers at James Finlay Kenya to investigate the
role of kitchen gardens in addressing food security and nutritional diversity. The
research used both qualitative and quantitative approach to collect data from
households and stakeholders. Stratified sample was used to pick household
respondents.

The findings show that the kitchen gardens at James Finlay are small organic gardens
which were started about six years ago. Majority of them are about 10 square meters.
The size of the garden was designed to be big enough to produce sufficient vegetables
for the household but small enough to be replicated in many areas in Kenya where
land as a production unit has become too small. In the innovation uptake the social
capital (in this case the predominant Seventh Day Adventist teaching of healthy living
by promoting the use of plants as the major source of nutrients, the goodwill from the
management) and the human capital in the form of traditional knowledge (71% had
kitchen gardens before) played a big role. The management decision to reinforce this
innovation by hiring a consultant to bring a positive change to food security and
nutritional diversity of the workers acted as a trigger. Almost 48% of the respondents
do not buy vegetables after establishing kitchen gardens as compared to 4.2% who
were not buying vegetables before the gardens were formalised. About 99% of the
respondents think that the kitchen garden has improved their nutritional diversity.
Compared to the monoculture of the few gardens that existed before the formal
gardens, more than 18 different varieties of vegetable and fruits were recorded in
different households during the study indicating that a wide diversity has been

xii
achieved. Eighty five % have replicated the garden in their rural homes, and 98%
have learnt a new skill indicating that the kitchen garden seems to be positively
addressing food security and nutritional diversity and further demonstrating the
central role of agriculture in meeting household needs.

James Finlay Kenya management should continue popularising the kitchen garden to
bring more workers to self sufficiency in vegetable supply. As an organic garden the
phosphorous deficiency should be addressed, possibly by using Finlays IPM crop
division to improve the productivity of the gardens. Dudutech products from Finlays
IPM approach like Rhizatec (mycelia enhancing roots system) and Vermitec
(vermicompost) (Dudutech ltd, 2012) can be used for this purpose. The government
can learn from this innovation and include a kitchen garden in its extension program
as it has the capacity to address food security and nutritional diversity and especially
so with the dwindling land sizes. Further research needs to be done to establish the
quantity of vegetables harvested from these gardens. This will further help to establish
the cost savings from the kitchen gardens which is important in arriving to wider
recommendations.

xiii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Information

In Kenya and world over high population growth, rural urban migration and
vulgarities of weather have pushed the cost of food upwards (Silvia, 2012). The
increased use of food crops in biodiesel production put further imbalance to food
supply which further affects the demand/supply relationship. Non-communicable
diseases add further pressure to the citizens and more so to low income groups. The
resultant of this is more people are going to be food insecure. Famine Early Warning
system warned that there will be a rise from 2.2 million to 2.4 million food insecure
people in August 2012 (UN, 2012).

The answer to increased food demand cannot be met by the green revolution as well
as rain fed agriculture which is already showing fatigue (Pastakia, 2011) This food
insecure group needs to face the current environmental and health challenges by
identifying ways to better align aesthetics, ecology, and health (Denver Urban
Gardens, 2012). A kitchen garden can be a part of the solution to this problem. As
already proven one-size-fits all solutions cannot be applied in every area to answer the
question of food sustainability (Beddington, 2011).

The higher demand for food should be met by practical innovations like kitchen
gardening which not only improves availability but also answers the question of
diversity required for a healthy community. The kitchen gardens can be viewed as an
adaptive strategy of communities as an entry point for development. The kitchen
garden can also help to reduce the gap of productivity between the technical potential
and actual production levels of food crops due to low use of suboptimal inputs and
low adoption of most productive technologies (Tittonell, 2012). A kitchen garden
involves the very people who are the greatest resource for development in a view to
improve their own livelihoods and empowerment as envisaged in the rural university
concept (Mathai, 1985). The kitchen gardening is a radical transformation towards
using resources more efficiently. The kitchen garden is perhaps the only available
ecological space available to the poor to meet their economic needs especially so in

1
Africa where the poor tends to rely more on natural resource base for their livelihood.
Kitchen Gardens depend on the gardeners for maintenance and are spaces made
meaningful by the actions of people during the course of their every-day lives. They
are spaces where the gains from social capital, physical and symbolic arrangement of
items of private living space are aggregated and given utility value. Above all,
Kitchen garden is an avenue where the actor is totally immersed in his role (Kimber,
2012).

The British and the Americans won two world wars by growing their own food to
feed their armies and the people left at home (Great Britain Ministry of Food, 1946).
Kenyans can feed themselves by growing what we eat and one way to do this is
adopting the Kitchen garden. The kitchen garden is a form of Community adaptive
strategies that leads to sustainable livelihoods (Agobia, 1999).

A kitchen garden is an integrated system which comprises the family house, a

recreational area and a garden producing a variety of foods including vegetables,
fruits and medicinal plants for home consumption or sale. The kitchen/home gardens
have been found to play an important role in improving food security for the resource
poor rural households in developing country like Bangladesh (Asaduzzaman, 2011)
and can do the same in Kenya.

In addition to supplying the food needs, the kitchen gardens help in biodiversity
conservation as well as a platform of socializing the younger generation into the
communities’ norms as they interact with the older people while tending the gardens.
While it may not directly supply the cereals need for the family, the savings achieved
from not buying fruits and vegetables would be used to buy additional cereals.

Most of the African homes had a garden either by default or design which often
undermine its usefulness. The spring onion which has wide usage in many households
as a spice/condiment has always been grown near homestead officially cultivated and
protected from animals. In many cases this garden evolves from the dumpsite where
seeds from plants like pumpkin are thrown with trash, germinate and grow into plants.
Eventually this dumpsite evolves into a valuable garden supplying vegetables. Many
African families depend for survival on what they grow. For such families Kitchen

2
gardens are the difference between life and death. For the Kikuyus there is a saying,
“ndoigangue ni ng'aragu ,tetereukamera”, which translates “when I give up on
hunger, amaranthus (vegetable) germinates and life continues”.

Ornamental or vegetable gardening is a fun pastime or hobby for many people who
enjoy but do not spend much time analyzing. Many people cannot really explain why
they have to plant something; before they call any place they have lived a home. In
high rainfall areas like Kericho, food supply is expected not to be a problem but food
is produced on land and not everybody is in control over land and hence will depend
on the market forces for food supply.

In 2010, Italian NGO, Terra Madre launched an ambitious project in kitchen gardens
in Africa dubbed “A thousand Gardens In Africa” which aimed to create a thousand
gardens in schools, villages and the outskirts of cities(Miller, 2012).In Kenya’s Vision
2030 Public- Private Partnership has been singled out as one key driver of
development (Kenya (NESC), 2007). James Finlays Kenya (JFK) is one such
company that embraced this partnership way back before it was officially known.

The purpose of the Kitchen Garden Project was to help employees in the village
improve on family food supplies and nutrition year round, through sustainable
exploitation of the land, water and other resources around the house including the idle
household labor and skills. The status quo at this time in the workers villages was a
free for all situations even where some people had tried some gardening. The villages
were messy with poorly cultivated and eroded gardens, un-coordinated and dirty
children play areas. By growing our own food we are also helping the environment by
not importing food from around the globe.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Agricultural workers lack sufficient incomes to meet their food and nutritional
demands adequately. An alternative way of improving their food supply is practicing
kitchen garden farming. African countries contribute the highest human development
index in terms of GDP but this has not been translated into food security (Goswan,
2012). In the developing countries food production has gone down as result of poor
governance, poor land management, and marginalization of the peasant production

3
and rural urban migration which has deprived the food production areas of the much
needed workforce. Monoculture commercial production also pushed the peasants to
marginal and non productive lands. The globalized system of food production and
trade favors a reliance on export crops while discriminating against small-scale
farmers and subsistence crops. More than 16 million people are at risk in the Sahel
alone (across the semi-arid belt from Senegal to Chad) and an equal number in the
Horn of Africa remain vulnerable after last year’s food crisis in Djibouti, Ethiopia,
Kenya and Somalia (FAO, 2012). In such a situation of food scarcity the population
on the lower end of the social class is extremely vulnerable.

The agricultural workers are the least paid all over the world and will be the most
affected by food inflation. The living wage is not yet achievable in any part of the
world and as the investors compete in the global perspectives solutions to food
security through salary increments are not tenable. Alternative ways of helping the
poor to get their food supply would be a noble method. Prevention, efficiency and the
primacy of localism are the three governing principles of the self-reliant city (Grewal,
2011). Looking at Finlays as one of these cities, the kitchen garden is one efficient
use of the land resource. The kitchen gardens can be an example of how to attain
food security not only to Finlays but to the entire country when the knowledge and
skills are transferred to other areas.

About a third of the world population suffers from one or more deficiency of
micronutrient (Amaroso, 2012) which has persisted even when the food stocks are
said to be above demand. The kitchen garden falls under bio-intensive and
participatory innovation which can provide year round availability, access and
consumption of adequate amount and varieties which supply not only the calorific
demands but also the micronutrients by the resource poor. Iron deficiency affects
about two thirds of the world population and consequently reduces work capacity of
entire populations (Wanjek, 2005). This serious handicap to development can only be
overcome by the diversity embodied in the kitchen garden.

Sustainable production and consumption was defined by Oslo symposium 1994 as

follows, “the production of goods and services that responds to basic needs and bring
a better quality of life, while minimizing the use of natural resources’, toxic materials

4
 and emission of waste and pollutants over life cycle, so as not to jeopardize the ability
to meet the needs of future generations.

Provision of food which is a key driver to the health and well being of the workers
goes beyond basic contractual obligation. JFK attempted to provide food indirectly to
the workers by introducing a structured kitchen garden in 2005. To this day no
evaluation has been done to ascertain the extent of success of the project. Availability
of food does not guarantee its accessibility due to social and/or economic constraints
(Kavishe, 1993). For the JFK workers income and localization (alienation from the
areas of food production) forms part of these constraint. Areas where food crops are
also cash crops have been found to exhibit high levels of malnutrition (Mushi, 1993).

1.3 Research Questions

The research questions that the study sought to answer are;
1. What are kitchen gardens and how are they designed?
2. To what extent have the kitchen gardens impacted on food security of JFK
workers?
3. To what extent have the kitchen gardens impacted on nutrition diversity of JFK
workers?
4. What challenges do kitchen gardens face and how can the challenges be handled?

1.4 Objectives
The general objective is to investigate the role of kitchen gardens in Food supply and
nutritional diversity to James Finlay workers.

1.4.1 Specific Objectives

i. Find out what kitchen gardens are and how they are designed.
ii. How effective are kitchen gardens in food security.
iii. In what way have kitchen gardens influenced nutritional diversity.
iv. Establish the challenges that are faced by the kitchen gardens and what is being
done to overcome these challenges.

1.5 Justification of the Study

Kitchen gardens are an area that is currently under research in an attempt to shed
more light into this subject in Kenya. Kitchen gardens are important in the domestic

5
economy of the marginalized but because they are relatively not immediately obvious
and less visually impressive than field systems, they tend to be overlooked and their
contribution to survival of mankind underrated (Kimber, 2012). Agriculture extension
officers advise farmers to practice crop rotation. This kind of practice would not hold
in a small plot and it is thus necessary to find out how these kitchen gardens overcome
low productivity usually associated with overworked soils (Agobia, 1999). The
parameters of food production are inter-related in terms of land, water, environment
and the people involved in the production.

The 2007/2008 post election violence in Kenya destroyed civil and social capital as
well as networks which are vital in survival and especially in food acquisition (World
Bank, 2009). This further worsens food shocks for the poor and it has always been in
history, these shocks are better addressed by local participation in the production
process.

The availability of vegetables and fruits in a kitchen garden would increase

consumption and hence mitigate against malnutrition. The availability of the food
would spur consumption as observed by a study of urban community gardeners in
USA (Alaimo, 2008). Beyond the obvious hunger resulting from insufficient food, we
have hidden hunger of micronutrients deficiency that leads to vulnerability to
infectious diseases physical and mental impairment that leads to low productivity in
addition to reduced life expectancy (Turner, 2012).The kitchen gardens are known to
increase local opportunities to eat better(Litt, 2011).

Among the barriers that deter consumption of fruits and vegetables are costs,
availability and acceptance. Kitchen gardens have been found to lower these barriers
as the cost of production is low as the participants invest their own labor and other
production functions like land and organic fertilizer (Dibsdall, 2011). The individual
production will certainly grow varieties that one would like thus increasing access and
eventually increased acceptance of tastes perception of fruits and vegetables. Herbs
and condiments improve the taste of food and thereby encourage consumption.

Poor people more often pay a higher price for food as they buy in expensive small
quantities as well as traveling far to get to where the food costs relatively lower

6
thereby losing that advantage on transport(Smit, 2001). Kitchen gardening can thus
be argued to improve access to food to the vulnerable groups.

Kitchen gardens provide and supplement subsistence requirements and generate

secondary direct or indirect income (Ninez, 1984). Direct income is by sale of surplus
production while the indirect income is by the savings achieved by not buying the
same products from the market as well as butter trade when produce is exchanged
with others from the neighbors.

Besides the provision of fruits and vegetables gardening provides an aesthetic and
therapeutic exercise that helps in relieving stress. The perception of good health goes
beyond what we eat and encompasses the whole being. While the poor engage in
manual work in their employment they do so as an obligation but in their gardens they
do it because they like it. Gardening promotes relief from acute stress (Berg, 2011)
which further improves the wellbeing of the participants.

African leafy vegetables (ALVS) form part of the richest sources of vitamin sources
for human consumption. About 45,000 species of plants are found in sub-Saharan
Africa, 1000 of which are edible. African spinach happens to be the most common in
African diets (Oiye, 2009). Micronutrient deficiencies in iron, selenium, copper, zinc
and iodine affects many people in Africa. Vitamin A deficiency has been found to
affect a third of the population The Kitchen garden through diversification and
adoption of the ALVS will certainly address the much needed nutritional diversity.

1.6 Scope and Limitations

The study covered the James Finlays Kenya ltd in Kericho. The target households
were those that practice kitchen garden. It also focused on the impact of kitchen
gardens on food security and household nutritional diversity. Since the study was
done in an area that is peri-urban, the results may not be applicable to urban areas.
However, they may be true for other parts of Kenya that bear similar characteristics.

7
1.7 Definition of key terms

1.7.1 Kitchen Garden

The simplest definition of a kitchen garden is a garden where vegetables, herbs, and
fruits are grown for one's own consumption. This is related to the household garden
definition which defines these gardens as a subsystem within a larger food
procurement system which aims at the production of household consumption items
that are not obtainable, readily available or affordable through other means including
wage earning. These gardens supply supplements subsistence requirements and
generate direct or indirect income (Ninez, 1984).

1.7.2 Food security

This research project has adopted the 1996 World Health Organization definition of
food security which states “when all people at all times have access to sufficient,
safe, nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life”(WHO 2013). Access here
has to do with physical and economic factors that enable people to meet their dietary
needs as well as their dietary preferences.

1.7.3 Nutritional Diversity

Nutritional diversity refers to a diet that focused on the diversity of the food
consumption to maintain overall health and vitality. A human diet requires at least 51
nutrients in adequate amounts consistently for good health (Remans, 2003).

1.7.4 Food Availability

The availability of sufficient quantities of food of appropriate quality, supplied
through domestic production or imports (including food aid).

1.7.5 Food Access

Food access refers to the access by individuals to adequate resources for acquiring
appropriate foods for a nutritious diet. Entitlements are defined as the set of all
commodity bundles over which a person can establish command given the legal,
political, economic and social arrangements of the community in which they live
(including traditional rights such as access to common resources).

8
1.7.6 Utilization
Utilization refers to utilization of food through an adequate diet, clean water,
sanitation and health care to reach a state of nutritional well-being where all
physiological needs are met. This brings out the importance of non-food inputs in
food security.

1.7.7 Stability
To be food secure, a population, household or individual must have access to
adequate food at all times. They should not risk losing access to food as a
consequence of sudden shocks (e.g. an economic or climatic crisis) or cyclical events
(e.g. seasonal food insecurity). The concept of stability can therefore refer to both the
availability and access dimensions of food security.

9
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction
Various names and definitions have been used to describe the kitchen garden over
time. For this paper the kitchen garden represents the universal subsistence food
production unit also going by the name farmyard enterprise, backyard garden,
dooryard garden, home garden or food garden. The kitchen garden entails small scale
economic production units in relatively confined areas located close to the family
dwellings. Kitchen gardens have evolved with man over the years but still remain the
most ancient and persevering form of cultivation (Kimber, 2004). Kitchen gardens
easily fall within the definitions of urban agriculture as the practice of cultivating,
processing and distributing food in, and/or around a village, town or city. It is not just
limited to foods and fruits but also include keeping of small animals like chicken,
rabbits and bees for honey as well as non food items like flowers and trees.

The USA the kitchen gardens/urban farming came into the lime light during the 2nd
world war due to shortage of food, labour and transport. The government encouraged
citizens to grow their own fruits and vegetable in what was called “Victory Gardens”.
It was estimated that over 20 million victory gardens were created between 1942 and
1943. Over 40 percent of their vegetables and fruits were produced that year as people
felt they were doing a patriotic act by growing on the victory gardens.

“This is a food war. Every extra row of vegetable in the allotments saves…the battle
on the kitchen front cannot be won without the help from the kitchen garden, Isn’t an
hour in the garden better than an hour in the queue?" (World Carrot Museum, 2012).
The above statement observed by Lord Woolton, Minister of Food, 1941 underscores
the importance of the Kitchen gardens during the war.The victory gardens were not a
preserve of the USA but were a common phenomenon with its allies in Canada,
United Kingdom, and Germany.

Land that has been left behind by former industrial cities as well as homes left behind
by disasters like Katrina has been converted into gardens. Food miles concerns as well
as rampant food illness from industrially produced foods has helped to promote
locally grown foods. In March 2009, US First lady Michelle Obama planted a 1,100-

10
square-foot (100 m2) "Kitchen Garden" on the White House lawn (Michelle, 2012), is
the first since Eleanor Roosevelt's, to raise awareness about healthy food.

The production of vegetables and fruit in gardens and allotments was economically
and nutritionally important for the poor, often the only supplement to their low wages
(Kemp, 1977) until the onset of green revolution which came with monoculture and
“one size fits all” model of agricultural food production.

In Germany there are German garden Ghettos, which are small plots for rent,
popularly known as the schrebergarten located at the edge of the cities where
Germans spend their time over the weekends. Small vegetable plots exist within these
ghettos where families teach the young generation on vegetable production (German
Survival Bible, 2006).

After the fall of USSR in 1989 and tightened economic embargo by USA, Cubans lost
the food aid and had to feed themselves. Some 8000 gardens known as Popular
Gardens were created in Havana most of which are farmed organically as fertilizers
and pesticides used to come from Russia. These gardens are responsible for more than
50 percent of all vegetables consumed in Havana (Chaplowe, 1996).

In Philippines a project by the name, “Oh My Guly” (OMG) that stands for ‘oh my
vegetables’ in the local Tagalog language was launched to improve production and
consumption of local vegetables. In this project local celebrities in dance, music and
television are featured in print and on television, posing with their favorite vegetables.
These role models are being used as “gate keepers” to boost consumption of fruits and
vegetables among children as opposed to meats and rice-based diets as is common
with Philippinos (Cotthem, 2012).

From these gardens man has managed to produce relatively large amounts of food
from relatively small extensions of land ordinarily unsuited for field agriculture,
supply nutrition not obtained solely from field agriculture like the condiments and
spices which are relatively fresher than when obtained far from the fields, provide
food (including staples) in non-farm settings especially urban centers, seal food
supply gaps in terms of famine or food flow disruptions like it happened in Kenya

11
during the Post Election Violence of 2007/2008, provide fodder for household
animals like rabbits and chicken, accrue in-kind or cash benefits when exchanged
with money or other needs with the neighbors’, ( cash from incidental sales of surplus
production), obtain secure production through location to the dwellings in terms of
time and space, provide relatively less contaminated foods by reducing the number of
people handling the product . Kitchen gardens are good experimental bases for new
genetic material and cultivation techniques with ample time to tend and follow the
plants throughout the growing period. They guarantee women who are the mediators
between production and consumption in the family, a regular and secure supply of
food, petty cash or goods for trade. As recognized by International Plant Genetic
Resources Institute (IPGRI) the kitchen gardens form an important role in in-situ
biodiversity (Eyzaguire, 2001). The kitchen gardens provide aesthetic value which in
turn provides therapeutic healing to the community. As the family works together in
the garden, the older regeneration is able to pass important life skill knowledge to the
younger generation. The garden offers physical exercises to the family members
which guard against obesity. The availability of fruits and vegetables from the garden
induces consumption of the same.

2.2 Kitchen Gardens and African Leafy Vegetables in Nutritional Diversity

African leafy vegetables (ALVS) form part of the richest vitamin sources for human
consumption. About 45,000 species of plants are found in sub-Saharan Africa, 1000
of which are edible. African spinach happens to be the most common in African diets.
Per capita Consumption of number of fruits and vegetables declined between 1986
and 1995 (29 kg per capita consumption) in sub-Saharan Africa while it was rising in
developed countries (Oniang’o, 2009).

According to FAO/WHO vegetable consumption per person should be 146 kgs per
annum. In Kenya urban vegetable consumption is 147 Kgs per person against 73 Kgs
in rural areas (Onim, 2008). In terms of nutrition ALVS have been found to be
important than the brassicas in Yaoundé Cameroon for household consumption and
income generation for poor households (Shiundu, 2007). ALVS are generally more
profitable giving about $19708 per ha (sold as leaves) as compared to $1197 for
maize per ha (Mwaniki, 2008). The kitchen gardens can be used to grow the vitamin
rich ALVS. The main benefits of ALVS include superior nutrition qualities in

12
vitamins, oils and micronutrients. They are adapted to the local environment, they use
own seeds as opposed to expensive hybrid seeds, fast growth, and lately high income
for the health conscious consumers. Unhealthy diets, sedentary lifestyles as well as
tobacco use have been scientifically proven as major determinants of non
communicable diseases (Rasanathan, 2011). Unhealthy diets are perhaps the major
determinant for non communicable diseases for the poor people. WHO listed Kenya
among 72 countries with low serum retinal levels as a result of Vitamin A deficiency.
Vitamin A supplementation began several years ago but food based long term strategy
is more cost effective and here the ALVS play a major role.

Iron deficiency affects about 50% of the world population predominantly in the
developing countries (WHO, 2004). This deficiency results in 30% impairment in
physical capacity and performance (WHO, 2001). The ALVS produced in Kitchen
gardens would form a stable supply of this much required iron. The traditional
vegetables, meet the major protein calorie nutritional needs especially in children, the
sick, elderly, expectant and lactating mothers (FAO, 2005).

2.3 Kitchen Gardens and Food Security

Food security was defined in 1974 by the first World food summit in Rome under the
auspice of FAO as, “availability at all times, of adequate world food supplies of basic
foodstuffs to sustain a steady expansion of food consumption and to offset fluctuation
in production and prices” (FAO, 2003).

The most widely accepted definition and concept of food security is the World Bank
1986 definition which is as follows, “access by all people at all times to enough food
for an active and healthy life”(FAO, 2003). This definition is broken down to
availability, access, utilization and vulnerability. Food security in Kenya has been
tackled differently by trying to control the units of production and mainly land and
water.

Many famines in the world happen not because of lack of food but in poor distribution
occasioned by poor government policies, perishability of the food as well
geographical challenges’. In 1943 Bengal had one of the biggest rice harvest yet

13
hundreds of laborers starved to death. The poor laborers are vulnerable and lack the
security of livelihood that will secure food (Department for International
Development (DFID) , 2004).

Sessional paper no 10 of 1965 identified poverty, ignorance and disease as the leading
problems to deal with as a government (Kenya Government, 1966). Top-down
projects were designed with an aim that benefits will trickle down to the people. At
micro level poverty concerns were not addressed. Basic needs approach has also been
tried as a form relief but has been found to leave people as it found them in 1972. To
date this model is practiced through the ministry of Special programs. District Focus
for rural development (DFRD) came into being in 1983 (Maina, 2005).

The Vision 2030s enhanced equity and wealth creation opportunities for the poor;
policy can only be achieved when the poor has access to one of the greatest
production input “the land” (Kenya Government, 2007). This does not necessarily
need to change the land tenure system by using the land around where the poor people
live (kitchen gardens) more efficiently. This is one way that Kenya can feed itself. In
March last year the government launched the Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture
Project (UPAP) in an effort to promote food production in urban and peri-urban areas.
A number of districts have been selected to spearhead this project with the main
emphasis on innovative use of the scarce land resource to boost small scale
production. This project is also aimed at building the capacity of small farmers who
have embraced the greenhouse farming but lacks the technical know-how of
greenhouse farming. Kiambu and Kericho districts are some of the districts in this
project (Ministry of Agriculture, Government of Kenya, 2012). A key area is the
realization that 36% of the urban population practices agriculture.

The kitchen garden is a principal source of household food and income during periods
of stress, e.g. the pre-harvest lean season, harvest failure, prolonged unemployment,
health or other disabilities suffered by family members or agricultural and economic
disruption caused by wars for instance the post election violence in Kenya. In
Kampala, Uganda, after the civil war, urban agriculture substantially fed the city in
non-cereal foods. Kitchen gardens contributes to household food security by
providing direct access to food that can be harvested, prepared and fed to family

14
members. Poor, landless or near landless people practise gardening on small patches
of homestead land, vacant lots, roadsides or edges of a field, or in containers.
Gardening may be done with virtually no economic resources, using locally available
planting materials, green manures, "live" fencing and indigenous methods of pest
control. Kitchen gardening is a production system that the poor can easily access.
Kitchen gardening provides a diversity of fresh foods that improve the quantity and
quality of food rich in nutrients available to the family (Marsh, 1998).

2.3.1 Food Accessibility and Vulnerability

Geographical barriers, geo-politics, globalization, level of development,
regionalization, gender, income, religion and culture are among the many factors that
play a big role in access to food. Paradoxically the world has enough food for the
current population but it just happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and
belonging to the wrong person or in a form that is not palatable to the people.

Constraints to food access include economic growth that is inadequate in the

aggregate, or in wholesome leading to lack of opportunities to become an active
participant in the economy (USAID, 1992). This could be an acquired behavior in the
form of “Learned helplessness” (Peterson, 1993) as a result of colonization most of
the developing countries are net importers of food making it food a commodity that
can only be accessed through the income that one has.

Globalizations has broken both the physical and the mental barriers and brought
unrealistic perception of access to food. The adverts in the media and in the market
places of food from far lands look cheaper than they really are and tend to undermine
local production. We are like a people in an ocean of food which is visible to us
through a thick glass which can only be broken by monetary exchange. Widespread
hunger exists today in a context of global oversupply of food as the chart below
suggest.

15
Figure 2.1: Distribution of undernourished people in the world in millions

The figure above shows about 1 billion people were classified as hungry in the world
in 2010 (FAO, 2010).

The current FAO global cereal production for 2012 is 2396 million tons against a
global utilization of 2370 million tonnes (FAO, 2012). This paints a picture of a world
of plenty where hunger should be a foreign word from. The food situation contradicts
the1798 Thomas Malthus population theory (Burns, 2011. Inventions like the green
revolutions seem to have reversed the growth patterns in food production. Generally
in developed countries as well as some countries in Far East the food production
increased as a result of green revolution.

Vulnerability is a dynamic concept which looks at the situation before and the results
or outcomes. It is an expression of the future world which we don’t know and is a
very subjective area. This concept is more of the perception of the people involved
rather than the very physical availability of food or ability to acquire it. Different
people will return different levels of satisfaction given the same physical conditions

16
and endowments. Kenya is the most developed in east and central Africa yet the
Kenyans are the least satisfied people in the region.

2.3.2 Food availability

Globalization has helped man to include foods from un-imaginable distances to be on
his plate, by improved transport, processing, cooling and communication in general.
Though this has increased food availability in developed countries, the same cannot
be said to be true in developing countries where infrastructure is poor to say the least.
Food production is done in areas of low human population and has to be transported
to areas of low production and of high food demand.
Though the green revolution had succeeded in developed countries and some Asian
economies, food production in Africa and particularly Sub-Saharan Africa has
stagnated if not declined (Asiema, 1994).

People living below the poverty line are net buyers of food. In terms of quality man
needs other types of food besides cereals. Fruits and vegetables are perishable and
have a short vase life compared to the cereals. Transporting them to great distances
requires expensive processing and refrigeration which highly increases their prices.
Besides the fruits and vegetables, meats and animal products are also highly
perishable. This perishability further compromises the relative availability of a
balanced diet food to the vulnerable. Before the recent draught in northern Kenya last
year, which resulted in “Kenyans for Kenyans food campaign,” excess milk in central
Kenya and central Rift valley was poured into open drains (Wambugu, 2011).

The availability of food is not just about the inadequacy and the immediate
entitlement but has to do with paucity of the household as without assets to liquidate
and buy food one will go hungry (Maxwell, 1992).

Despite the bill of rights in Kenya’s constitution “guaranteeing food” (National

Council for Law Reporting, 2010) as adopted from the Universal Declaration human
rights (United Nations, 2013) we are in private ownership market economy where
entitlement (read availability) and relations of persons are determined by what they
own, what they generate, what they can trade, what they can accede to or are given.

17
“Food Deserts” have emerged from the current food retailing structures in America
large supercentres in suburban areas where food is scarce for disadvantaged
consumers (Thomas, 2010). Most of the imported foods in developing countries are
found in supermarkets which are located away from the marginalized people.

As eluded earlier in this paper, the world food production is above its utility needs.
The late Roger Revellie of Harvard University claimed that Africa, Asia and Latin
America could feed 35- 40 billion people(seven to eight times the current world
population) if they used water more efficiently(Richman, 1995). The kitchen garden
uses part of domestic water thereby improving growing conditions for plants.

Gardeners directly experience nearby nature by 'getting their hands dirty' and growing
food. They enjoy the way vegetables taste and form emotional connections with the
garden. The physical and social qualities of garden participation awaken the senses
and stimulate a range of responses that influence interpersonal processes (learning,
affirming, and expressive experiences) and social relationships that are supportive of
positive health-related behaviors and overall health. This research suggests that the
relational nature of aesthetics, defined as the most fundamental connection between
people and place, can help guide community designers and health planners when
designing environment and policy approaches to improve health behaviors. Young
people trained to be the farmers through the kitchen gardens can produce and process
food for tomorrow, not just to feed themselves and their villages, but to grow the food
to feed our cities (JFAD, 2012).
Food insecurity in a household can be seen as a combination of two distinct problems:
a problem of acquirement and a problem of utilization. Below is a four dimensional
angle of looking at the food insecurity; the ability to improve and maintain the level
of acquirement, the ability to cope with shocks to acquirement, the ability to improve
and maintain the level of utilization; and the ability to cope with shocks to utilization
These elements above are not independent of one another but are rather interrelated
and hence complex. Other external factors like national policies variables will have
their effects on the household which lies at the end of the chain.

18
2.4. Theoretical Framework
Two theories were relied upon in this research are Techno-Ecological theory and the
adoption theory as explained below.

2.4.1 Techno-Ecological Theory

Techno-ecological theory of Berry and Cline (Scanlan, 2003) best captures the
Kitchen garden innovation. This theory opines that technology and human ingenuity
are the greatest resources’ available and are not being threatened with scarcity. The
theory further says that as it has been in the past, future challenges confronting the
world’s carrying capacity will be met.
Kitchen Gardens are a result of human ingenuity and were instrumental in the shift of
humankind from the hunters and gatherers stage to domesticated agriculture where
seeds selected from the forest were planted near the dwelling places in the
domesticating process. The success that this garden has had in the past can be used to
address food and nutritional diversity. Combining this with organic farming
techniques will have a garden producing sufficient food for years from a small area.

2.4.2 The Adoption of Innovation Theory

The Adoption of Innovation Theory (Rogers, 1995) gives light to how innovations are
adopted or not. The elements of diffusion are very important in respect to the type of
innovation, the communication channels, the timing and the social system that would
determine the success of adoption. This answers the process question important in
evaluation of who was involved in decision making, how the decisions were made,
whether new networks have been made and who benefits from the innovation. Typical
top-down innovations are short lived as the recipients do not own the process. Rogers
refers these kinds of decisions as Authority Innovation-design. JFK used this system
but due to sustained reinforcement, the timing, and by use of village champions
(communication channels) the project has been successful to a greater extent. The
project used old employees as opinion leaders and gate keepers to the society.

19
Figure 2:2 Conceptual Framework

Impact

Health
and
Outcome
Outputs fulfilled
1. Improved Families
1. Small food supply
productive to the
organic family
Activities
gardens for 2. Improved
1. Develop a kitchen every nutritional
garden policy, household diversity
plan and budget. 2. Improved no 3. Improved
2. Mobilize and of varieties of disposable
train the vegetables income
households on and fruits
kitchen gardening 3. Improved
3. Set up production
demonstration and
plots and consumption
workshops of indigenous
4. Supply inputs like vegetables
seeds, manure
and information

2.4.3 Conceptual Model.

The Kitchen garden project was set up using result chain logical framework typical of
result based management as shown above. This provides a way of indentifying
measurable indicators which helps to recognize changes attributable to the innovation.
The activities were well defined and form a basis of expectations in terms of short
term outputs like seeing the actual physical garden and workers supplying the
household labor. The outcomes desired were the improved food supply and nutritional
diversity. Replication of these gardens outside Finlays would be a good indicator of
the uptake of the innovation. Happy and healthy families are the greater why the
kitchen garden was started.

20
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction
The chapter presents the research design and methodologies used in this study. The
areas that were reviewed under this chapter include; the research design, site
description, unit of observation, sample size, data collection techniques and data
analysis were discussed in this chapter.

3.1 Research design

This study was designed to understand the roll of the kitchen gardens to the JKF
workers by interviewing them, their leaders and the stakeholders in the area. This was
done through administering a structured questionnaire to the workers, three focused
discussions in three villages, Observations, Key informant interviews and desk review
of information from stakeholders.

3.2 Site Description

The study was carried out at JFK Kericho both the tea and the flower section. The
purpose of this study was to documents the geographical features of the villages,
infrastructures, social backgrounds and social composition of the population. This site
was selected because of the researchers urge to survey how the people use the land
resource in formal kitchen gardens. Moreover, JFK is one of the few farms that still
house its employees. The employees live deep in the farm cut from the normal market
supply which ideally would make them vulnerable.

The population of the workers was 14,314 at the time of the study. The tea estates
section employs over half (56.4%) of the population while the rest are in tea factories
and services departments. JFK is situated in Kericho County which has a total
population of 758,339 people. Kericho County has five constituencies namely,
Kericho, Kipkelion, Londian, Litein and Kabuti. It covers 2479 square kilometers and
a population density of 309 people per square kilometer. It has a poverty rate of 44.2
%(USAID, 2012).

Temperatures range from a minimum of 16°C to a maximum of 20°C. The average

rainfall ranges between 1,400 mm and 2,000mm per annum. This choice has been
done because JFK has adopted the kitchen garden innovation. Though Kericho is a

21
high rainfall area where food should be plenty, most of the land is put on cash crops at
the expense of the food crops. JFK has recorded an average of 1867.mm of rainfall for
the last ten years.

3.2.1 Unit of observation

Unit of observation is the unit upon which one collects or analyzes data (OECD,
2005) term analogous with unit of measurements. The unit of observation is the JFK
workers in the lower cadre usually referred to as unionisable staff.

3.2.2 Unit of analysis

The unit of analysis is the major component that is being analyzed in the study
(Trochim, 2006). It is the 'what' or 'whom' that is being studied. The unit of analysis
in my study is the perceived role of kitchen garden is in food security and nutritional
diversity of James Finlay’s workers in Kericho.
3.3 Target population
The target populations for this study were the JFK workers in the lower cadre who
were about 1100 households living in the farm. In this case one hundred and forty two
(142) households were sampled.

3.4 Sampling procedure

Sampling is the process of selecting a group of subjects for a study in such a way that
the individuals represent the larger group from which they were selected (Yount,
2006). When one is studying a population it may be logistically and economically
impossible to study the full population, but looking at a group that represents the
population may help one to make inferences and extrapolations to the whole
population. Sampling is the process of collecting information from the sample.

The study population (JFK) is about 1100 households (Finlays, 2011) who live in the
farm. According to Small sample technique (Morgan, 1970) a 280 sample would be
most ideal at 95 level of confidence. However this puts a very big impact on the cost
of the study as to administer the questionnaire alone will require in excess of 2
months having in mind that the workers may only be available for not more than a
three hour window when workers are in their houses after work. One hundred and
forty (140) households were sampled for this study.

22
To avoid biasness a stratified random sample was used. This was done to help cover
the stratified nature of the workers and in turn help to capture all the possible
perceptions across the groups. Various income groups have different perceptions
about food and this can only be captured by a random stratified sample. This
probability element allows the findings of the study to be used to infer to the JFK
population. Eighty three households in tea, twenty five in flowers, nineteen in
factories and fifteen in services were sampled. The tea villages were taken from two
productive estates (Tiluet and Kaproret) and one low production estate (Kapsongoi).
The factories were represented by Kitumbe, Medical team was sampled from Miwani
village and the flower section was represented by Master D village in Flowers Two.

3.5 Types of data

The study used both primary and secondary data. The primary data was collected
from the respondent on their perception of their state of food security and their dietary
diversity. Five research assistants were recruited, trained and helped to fill the
questionnaires to the households under my supervision. Secondary data was sourced
from the human resource department, food prices treads from the ministry of
agriculture, and timelines from the elderly people in Kericho.

3.5.1 Data collection

Household interviews, key informant interviews, focused groups’ discussions; desk
review, photography as well as observations were used to carry out this study.

3.5.1.1 Household interview

The household is central to the development process not only as a production unit but
it is also consumption, social and demographic unit. This is so because the household
is the basic unit of influence to the members’ well-being. This study uses the
Malawian definition of household which is as follows; “the household was defined as
“consisting of one or more persons related or unrelated who make common provision
for food and who regularly take their food from the same pot and/or share the same
grain store (Nkhokwe) or pool their incomes for the purpose of purchasing food."
Malawi 1987, 1998”, (Coast, 2008). A structured questionnaire was used to get the
respondent household perception on various issues about the kitchen garden

23
3.5.1.2 Key informants
Key informants are individuals with knowledge of the community under review in
terms of their needs. They provide key information on the subject matter in the
community. The informant should be well versed with information about the
community. A key informant interview guide structured to shed light on the JFK
kitchen gardens discussions was prepared. Those interviewed were;
1. Eight JFK personnel managers
2. The project consultant
3. Four Women leaders
4. Five Section heads
5. Kericho District Agricultural Officer
6. Two JFK Medical Personnel
7. Union leader
Union leaders are in the political front and are more critical on any developments
initiated by the management. A note taker accompanied me during the key informant
interviews.

3.5.1.3 Focus Group Discussions

Focused groups discussions (FGDs) are group of individuals selected and assembled
by researchers to discuss and comment on, from personal experience, the topic that is
the subject of the research(Gibbs, 1997). They entail organized discussions aimed at
gaining information from the individuals about the topic at hand and organized in
such a manner that all the perspectives of the subject will be covered. This is
important in qualitative research where the indicators in review are perceptions
difficult to quantify and can only be captured in emotions and where visual and body
language and weight to spoken or written words. FGDs help to gain insight gaining
insights into people’s shared understandings of everyday life and the ways in which
individuals are influenced by others in a group situation. A moderator was required to
control and guide the discussions and will be employed for this study. An FGD guide
was used to restrain the discussions from digression.
In this research 3 focused group discussions were done, in Mara Mara club. The
discussions included managers, section heads, village champions, medical personnel,
ground men and welfare representatives’.

24
3.5.1.4 Desk Review
Desk review also known as secondary research is done by collecting information from
existing data from other researches and government organs as well as stakeholders in
the area. The stakeholders in this research were the JFK management executives, the
project consultant and village committee members. A check list was used to ensure all
possible data is collected.
3.5.1.5 Observation
Observation helps in gathering information primarily through close visual inspection
of the natural setting. Here the research tries to be unobtrusive and detached from the
setting. Participant observation where the researcher and the assistants will try and
observe and experience the world as a participant, while retaining an observer's eye
for understanding, analysis and explanation will be applied in this study(Smith, 1997).
Field notes were taken and maintained throughout the research. Observations were
done in an open mind to avoid bias interpretations of the situation. The information
gathered here was of snapshot nature and cannot be conclusive. A structured checklist
was used to guide the observation. However it helped to build a good picture of the
subject as well as identifying outliers during the data cleaning exercise.

3.6 Data analysis

The study employed both qualitative and quantitative methods but with a bias on the
former. Quantitative data was coded and summarized in tables and analyzed in
frequencies and percentages. Descriptive Statistics of The Statistical Package for
Social Scientists (SPSS) was used to analyze some of the data. Findings were
presented in tables, narratives and bar charts. Qualitative data was analyzed by
screening all the notes taken and presented in narratives where necessary. In many
areas the qualitative data was used to give meaning to the findings to the quantitative
data.
The biggest challenge in this study was the vast size of the JFK with villages located
several kilometers from one another. To cover the as many perceptions as possible the
researcher avoided neighboring villages which further added to the challenge. As an
employee of the flowers section it took a lot of discipline not to direct the research to
the flower section only.

25
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4.0 Introduction
This chapter presents the research findings obtained from 142 respondents who are
workers selected from the JFK workers households, observations seen in the gardens,
information from focused group discussions and Key informant interviews as well as
secondary data from stake holders. The data generated contained enough information
which can effectively answer the research questions. The survey focused on assessing
whether the Kitchen gardens have influenced food security and nutritional diversity of
the practicing households.

4.1 Demographic Characteristics

4.1.1 Respondents Household Distribution
The structured questionnaire was administered to 142 households in seven villages at
JFK. The factory was represented by Mamba village in Kitumbe, Master D village for
flowers, Barrier village for Kapsongoi estate, Miwani village for the medical section,
Dimboli and Umoja village for Tiluet estate and Kaproret Tea Estate as shown in the
table 4.1 below.

Table 4.1 Village Distribution of the Respondents

Frequency Percent
Flowers 35 24.6
Kaproret 19 13.4

Kapsongoi 30 21.1
Kitumbe 23 16.2
Medical 5 3.5
Tiluet 30 21.1
Total 142 100.0
I had more flower workers available and hence a slightly higher percentage sampled
than it would normally be in a purely stratified sense.

26
4.1.2. Distribution of Respondents by Sex
From the 142 respondents thirty six point six percent of the respondents
were females while the rest were men. No data was available to compare
with the households gender data and hence this is not a reflection of the
farm but for those who were available in their homes at the time of survey.
The higher male percentage was perhaps due to the different tasks done by
both women and men. Many men work in areas that set them free during
daytime when the study was done. Machine tea harvesters who are
predominantly men work early in the morning and are back in their homes
in mid morning

Table 4.2 Gender

Gender Frequency Percent
Female 52 36.6
Male 90 63.4
Total 142 100.0

4.1.3 Marital Status

Majority of the respondents (83.1%) were married which would point to
some level of seriousness in handling household needs. About 13% of the
respondents were single as shown in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3 Marital Status

Marital Status Frequency Percent

Married 118 83.1

Separated 4 2.8

Single 18 12.7

Widowed 2 1.4

Total 142 100

27
The higher percentage of married gives the research more weight as married
people are normally directly involved in food provision to their households.

4.1.4 Distribution of Respondents by Age

Majority of the workers fall in the so called youth group with respondents
aged between 21 and 40 years making a total of 71.1% of the respondents.
The high percentage of the youthful workers agrees with the national
outlook where the youth forms the majority of the nation (United Nations
Development Programme, 2013). The youthful range could also be a result
of turnover of old workers who could be going for greener pastures away
from the low paying agricultural sector.

Table 4.4 Age Group Distribution

Age group Frequency Percent
21-30yrs 48 33.8
31-40yrs 53 37.3
41-50yrs 29 20.4
51-60yrs 6 4.2
Above 61yrs 1 .7

Total 142 100.0

28
 4.1.5 Education level
Majority of the respondents had the primary level of education (47.9%) with
almost an equivalent number with secondary (43.7%). Seven % have tertiary
courses while 1.4 % had only pre-primary education. The high level of
secondary school graduates in JFK agrees with the availability of skilled
manpower in Kenya which places the country at a comparative advantage
over its neighbours. This could also be an indicator of high level of un-
employment in Kericho forcing educated people to take the only available
slots in the agricultural sector

Table 4.5 Education level

Education level Frequency Percent

Pre-primary 2 1.4

Primary 68 47.9
Secondary 62 43.7

Tertiary 10 7.0

Total 142 100

4.2 Main Findings

4.2.0 Introduction
The research was able to answer all the questions that it sought to answer in the objectives as
detailed below.

4.2.1 Kitchen Garden Set Up

The first objective sought to understand how the Kitchen gardens were set up. To do
this a reflection of the food security status was sought from the Kericho District
Agricultural Officer (DAO). Kericho district is a high productive area and save for the
workers in plantations the district is relatively food secure. The district was 60 % food
secure in 2012 according to the DAO. A Kipsigis elder helped to lay a background of
food security perception of the community.

29
One 83year old Kipsigis elder says, “to the Kipsigis food security involved the
availability of Finger millet, milk from cows and African leafy vegetables like black
nightshade (soyik), spider plant ( kilchik)

To the Kalenjin extreme lack of food like in major draughts is referred to as “rubeti”.
Moderate food availability where staple food accompaniment like vegetables and milk
are lacking is referred to as “Munyasta”. People who live in abject poverty with
meager food availability are said to experience “Sineti”.

Before colonization the Kalenjin did not use sugar in their diets and it’s only much
later by around 1930. Table salt in the old times was not available and instead water
was made to pass through the ashes to serve as the food sweetener. Kalenjins have
seen three major famines, kimauto Sigiri( where the draught was so severe that the
Kipsigis ate the donkey an animal they abhor). The other famine was Kimauto Kisii
where the Kalenjins sold their children to the Kisii´s in exchange of food. The other
famine was Kimauto muhogo (where cassava flour was the only food available).
Floods in 1961 swept a lot of food away and whatever remained developed into
manure inside the stores). On the overall the Kipsigis people occupied a very
productive land and food has been in abundance until recently due to population
pressure.”

The idea of formal kitchen garden was approved by the management to reduce the
Munyasta condition among its workers in 2003. It was not until 2006 when the first
gardens were set in Masobet village occupied by Finlays Flowers employees. A
consultant, Ms Grete Davey was engaged to lead the program with an objective to
help employees in the villages improve on family food supplies and nutrition year
round, through sustainable kitchen gardens.

As observed by many stake holders during the FGDs, the villages before the onset of
the program were untidy and messy with free for all outlook with only the very
industrious people who had resemblance of gardens and which were mainly with one
crop (kales) on the periphery of the villages. The same gardens were poorly cultivated
and as result soil erosion had taken its toll.

30
Plate 4:1 Demarcation of the Gardens at the onset of the Project (the fencing was done
to mark out areas for garden and other uses of the ground area as spelt out in the policy)

There were no demarcations of the play areas or individual private areas and people
were roaming all over depriving the residents of any sense of privacy. Every place
was a playground or drying space for the laundry. Any attempts of recreation were
bringing in social conflicts between the families.
The company strategized to provide information on improvements employees can
make through a kitchen garden so that they are able to improve their wellbeing.
By and large tidy, pleasant and attractive villages with well kept and well cultivated
sustainable organic kitchen gardens would be realised. Neat compounds with tidy
hedges and well defined paths which introduced privacy and aesthetics would
improve the workers self esteem. The vegetables and fruits from the gardens would
bring a necessary nutritional diversity required for a healthy family. The size of the
garden was done to give sufficient production for the family but small enough to fit in
the ever decreasing land sizes at home.
To jumpstart the program the company initially provided seedlings like Cabbage,
spinach, Sukuma wiki (kales), tomato, indigenous vegetable seedlings, sweet potato
slips, climbing spinach, bunching onions, marigold flowers, gooseberry fruit
seedlings. Beans and soya seed were given for direct sowing. Climbers like pumpkin
and cucumber were provided. Tree tomato, loquat, mulberry and pawpaw seedlings

31
were provided for fruits. Indigenous trees were provided for aesthetics. Plenty of
mulch was provided from the company organic waste (tea and flowers) program while
labor was mobilized from the camp workers and household owners.

Entrance

Side Garden

Hibiscus edge

Plate 4.2 Kitchen Garden Layout (showing the agreed positioning of various activity areas in
relation to the house meant to create order and harmony in operation)

32
Plate 4.3 Hibiscus Hedge used for Demarcation (the fence was meant to protect the garden
and bring in beauty and sustainability compared to the wooden fence)

Demarcation of the compound was done with red hibiscus hedge as shown in plate 4.3
above. This was a big contrast from the previous tea hedges which were at the
periphery of the villages as shown in plate 4.4. The recommended measurements were
4 meters to the front of the house, 2 meters at each side (See plate 4.6), 3 meters at the
back of the house. These measurements are not always possible round some of the
houses, so these measurements are a guideline. The sides and back of the compound
to be dug up and the grass removed. The front should not be dug up, as this area is
used for recreation needs.

33
Plate 4.4 Tea Hedge as Appeared before the Program (this hedge was monotonous and
especially to the tea workers who spend the whole day in tea plantations)

Once the back and sides are dug, then compost manure was scattered over the dug up
area, and then re-dug to a depth of at least one foot, more if it is possible resulting in a
good soil manure mix. In any side of the house, digging would not be allowed within
2 feet from the foundation.

Plate 4.5 Workers in One of the first Gardens (as with every new innovation the participants
put in their best and soon blooming gardens were realized)

34
As with all pioneers the first group was very enthusiastic with the gardens and the
palte above(4.5) explains it all.

4.2.2 Size of gardens

JFK has different kinds of houses which have been set up in different times of
company history. The circular houses have bigger garden area and the households
there in have gardens in excess of 10 square meters. The newer villages have block
houses which have more families together. As a result their gardens are smaller but

Table 4.6 Size of the Garden

Size Frequency Percent

<10m 20 14.1

11-50m 115 81.0

51-100m 7 4.9

Total 142 100.0

still within the 10 square meters. In Villages where the area is really limiting
households are given equivalents plots within the periphery of the village. Eighty one
percent of the gardens were between 10 and 15 square meters as shown in Table 4:6

35
Plate 4.6 Side Garden in Umoja Village at Tiluet Estate ( Durantus sp hedge now
demarcates the gardens replacing the hibiscus which was not responding well to clipping. The side garden
enhances the total area under production and helps to improve the crop rotation planning as seen in small
sub-plots in this plate)

For the waste management the households digs holes in the garden where they
dispose their organic waste from the house as well as garden debris (see plate 4:7).

Plate 4.7 Compost Pit in One of the Gardens (the compost pit is covered as a safety precaution
and when in use it’s covered to keep off bad smell from the house. The plate also display a drying rack for utensils,

a structure that helped to bring order and hygiene to the villages)

Ash and water are added , occasionaly turned untill its ready for use as manure. Anew
pit is dug when the old one is full. The plastic, metalic and glass waste is seperated

36
and deposited in clearly marked holding areas awaiting central collection by the
company refuse team. The meatalic waste is sold to scrap metal dealers and proceeds
used im vilage maintenance.
After successful rollout in the flowers villages the innovation was introduced to the
tea area in 2010 in all villages. Initialy hibiscuss hegdes were used to demacate the the
gardens but with time they proved not to respond well to treaming and the more
recilient Durantus sp (plate 4.6) was identified and after a few trials a decision was
made to replace the hibiscus. The old villge setup had tea as hedges giving the
monotous green look. In the begginning the households were not allowed to keep
animals but with time households were allowed to keep two chickens in small cages.

4.2.3 Source of Help and Organization

The project used a top-down approach with the human resource department being
incharge of the program. This perhaps explains why a high percentage of respondents
didnt recognise design help from any quater as shown in the table above. To improve
on positive uptakde by the workers a village comitee headed by village champion
oversees the implementation.

Figure 4.1 Sources of design help (over 50 % of the respondents did not recognise the help of the
company in setting up the gardens. Many did not understand the link between the project consultant and
the management thus not crediting her contribution to the company)

37
Demonstration gardens were set near the dispensaries with the medical teams every
morning explaining the benefits of healthy eating to the patients who come to seek
treatment. Grete Davey, the project consultants alo conducts cooking lessons in
which households are taught how to prepare mixed vegetables and retain good
acceptable tastes. The company also maintains nurseries for fruit, ornamental and
hegde plants for the program, a job done by the team that maintains the overall
cleaness of the village. The project seems to have failed in the pimary group phase
where effective relationship and sence of belonging among the participants
cultivated.

4.3 Kitchen Garden Food Security Effect

The second objective was to find out how effective the kitchen gardens are in
addressing food security. Both the recipients and the managers agree that the program
has improved the food security of the workers. “Before the gardens were introduced,
only a few workers had sukuma wiki gardens. Over the weekends workers were going
to Kericho and its environs and come back with bags full of vegetables. Today I see
the same bags with vegetables but moving in the opposite direction”, says estate
Manager Tiluet. From the 142 household respondents 47.9 % do not buy vegetables
today as compared to 4.2% who were not buying vegetables before. This shows that
more households are now relying on their gardens for vegetables supply as table 4:7
below suggest. Before the gardens many workers had to buy the most inexpensive
vegetable (kale) and one that was readily available. This is the same in many
communities where this resilient vegetable (kale) has been widely accepted. The
mixed vegetables was second in demand perhaps from the predominant Kisii and
Kalenjin communities in the tea sector who traditionally love vegetables in their
meals.

38
Table 4.7 Vegetables Bought Before

Vegetables Frequency Percent

Kales 65 45.8

Indigenous vegetables 16 11.3

Mixture 55 38.7

None 6 4.2

Total 142 100.0

Out of the 142 respondents only one who didn’t think that the garden helped at all in
food supply with 99.3% saying that the garden has improved their food supply. As the
vegetables became available through the kitchen garden workers had to alter their
behaviour parten and buy less vegetables from the market. The smarter workers sell or
exchange their excess vegetable products with cash or use it to build their social
capital explaining the outward movement of vegetables as observed by the managers.

Table 4.8 Vegetables Bought Today

Vegetables
Frequency Percent

None 68 47.9

Kales 9 6.3

Indigenous 19 13.4
vegetables
Mixture 21 14.8
Cabbage 24 16.9

Spinach 1 .7

Total 142 100.0

39
People do not buy what they have but rather what they don’t have. Many workers
produced their own vegetables making many households attain self sufficiency
explaining the high number of workers not buying vegetables today (47.9%).
Apparently a higher percentage of workers now buy indigenous vegetables (14.8%
compared to 11.3%) than before. This indicates that the awareness workshops and the
knowledge attained from them may have altered the altitudes of the workers towards
indigenous vegetables. Additionally more disposable income from the savings of not
buying the vegetables is now available to buying non available indigenous vegetables,

4.3.1 Value of Food Supply

Majority of the respondents think that the gardens have helped with the highest scale
of “extremely a lot response” (32.4%) as table 4:9 below shows. As aluded to by the
many during te FGDs the gardens have become a major source of food to the workers.

Table 4.9 Value of Food Supply to the Respondents

Response Frequency Percent

A lot 38 26.7
Extremely a lot 46 32.4

Fairly 46 32.4

Not at all 1 .7
Sparingly 11 7.7
Total 142 100.0

Table 4:9 shows that all except one put some value to the kitchen garden in regard to
food supply. The garden quickily gave the workers a new form of self-efficassy. This
was perhaps enhanced by the short growing periods of the vegetables which brings
results quick enough to be repeated. Watching neighbours harvesting vegetables from
their own gardens presnts favourable vicariuos experiences which further enhances
self-efficassy. The verbal pursuasion in workshops and the choice of using an external
consultant may have done the trick.

40
4.4 Kitchen Garden Effect on Nutritional Diversity
The third objective sought to find how the kitchen gardens have influenced
Nutritional diversity to the workers. From the first respondent the nutritional diversity
was obvious. She had just picked some vegetables for lunch from the garden and there
were more than three varieties in her basket. Through the help of the consultant and
the medical team the workers have embraced the garden as a source of diversity.

Figure 4.2 Number of Varieties grown in Households

Variety inventory had over 17 names from the sampled villages which indirectly
suggest that the workers have a great value for the nutritional diversity. They have
attributed good health to the eating of mixed vegetables. Majority of the respondents
have more than four varieties growing in their gardens as shown in figure 4.2 above.
Chief shop steward says, “The teachings we received from the first workshop by
Mama Kiko, agreed very well with the teaching we get from our SDA church in health
eating. Our church emphasizes on eating a mixed vegetables to improve our health as
opposed to animal proteins. The management has really helped us in the form of these
gardens and especially to us the vulnerable workers who cannot afford the expensive
animal protein. We really thank the management for introducing these gardens as
they have helped us to get the vegetables at our convenience. A lot of these indigenous
vegetables are not available in the market and even when available not as fresh as
from our gardens”. This agrees with Miller and Donald principles of fundamental to

41
learning; drive, cue, response and reward (Encyclopedia.com articles, 2011). The
need for vegetables food could have been the drive. Religious values play a big role in
self identity and could also have played a big role as members made efforts to
conform to their beliefs as explained by the shop steward. The SDA teachings instill
strong cognitive components on its followers which greatly influences their altitudes
to kitchen garden.

4.4.2 Nutritional Diversity from Kericho District

From Kericho district vegetable inventory the kitchen gardens seems to have brought
in all the diversity of the community in terms of the number of varieties(Table 4:10
below) compared to 17 varieties found in the kitchen gardens sampled.

42
Table 4.10 Vegetables/Fruits Grown in Kericho District (source- Kericho District
agriculture office)

CROP
ACHIEVED HA
2011 2010 2009
1 Cabbages 48 37 50

2 Spinach 4 4.6 4

3 Kales 110 49 120

4 Tomatoes 42 19 10

5 Bulb onions 5.5 5.5 5

6 Capsicum 2.5 2 2

7 Carrots 2.5 4 4

8 Eggplants 2.5 0.6 0.2

9 Butternuts 8.5 1

10 Watermelons 10 6 1

11 Saget( Spider plant) 12 10 30

12 Eggplants 2.5 0.6 0.2

13 Spring Onions 17

14 Irish Potato 36

Vegetables and fruits found in the market place forms the cognitive aspects as far as
diversity component is concerned. This formed the target that the participants would
be trying to achieve. Other sources of diversity were the homes where the workers
came from as well as the information received from the project consultant explaining
why they achieved a higher diversity. The social capital in the form of knowledge

43
gained from decades of traditional farming in different cultural set-ups was put to use
resulting in the amazing diversity.

4.4.3 Value of Nutritional Diversity

When asked about the value of the garden to their nutritional diversity, most of the
respondents think that the gardens have given them great value as the bar chart shows
in figure 4:3.below.

Figure 4.3 Respondents Value of Diversity

Diversity was one of the pillars of the project and the project consultant. The value
expressive function of altitude required that diversity is attained and appreciated by
the participants. The push by the medical team and associating consumption of
indigenous vegetables to good health formed a good cue to the participants.

44
Plate 4.8 A Banana Stool in One of the Kitchen Garden (part of the fruits introduced in
the villages both for food and income generation)

Village champion for Kitumbe village says, “The gardens have brought sanity in our
villages. Now each house has the necessary privacy for a household brought about by
the demarcations with the live and lovely looking hedges. The introduction of
chickens has brought a lot of value to us. We can now get eggs and sometimes meat
from them. Fruits like bananas give us additional income. One bunch of banana
fetches as much as ksh 700”. The extra income from the sale of the garden produce
forms part of the reward system critical in repeating the response in this continued
attachment to the kitchen garden.

Before the gardens were implemented respondents used to answer the diversity
elements with buying expensive meat and usually on credit which was not sustainable
as revealed during focused group discussions.

4.4.4 Vegetables as a Source of Protein

The management stopped the check-off system in meat buying which has helped to
turn to the traditional vegetables for their protein source. Although there is no baseline
to compare with, the respondents are not buying as much meat today (figure 4.4
below).

45
Figure 4.4 Frequency of Buying Meat

Besides the vegetables the inclusion of fruit trees improved the nutritional diversity.
The recent inclusions of chicken will also enhance this diversity through the eggs and
occasionally when they slaughter the chickens for meat. Almost every household has
a banana plant which has high potassium content.

A survey of the Mama Mboga Kiosks in the villages showed alsmost complete
absence of common vegetables on the shelves. The predominant vegetable on display
was the english potatoes. The shops in the villages stocked value added grocries like
bread, sodas, sweats , soaps, detergens and toiletries like tooth paste.The donkeys that
seems to be the main means of transport of food items to the villages could be seen
carrying only maize bags.

4.5 Challenges Faced by the Kitchen Garden

The third objective sought to establish the challenges faced by the kitchen gardens
and what was being done to overcome them.

From Table 4:11 pest and diseases were cited as the biggest problem facing the
gardens. Poor lifespan of the indigenous vegetables was also cited as a major setback
to the project in terms of diversity. The seeds they get from the market are of poor
quality. The high moisture of the region hampers the harvesting of seeds from their
own gardens. The annual nature of majority of the indigenous vegetables against the
resilient perennial Sukuma Wiki (kales) makes a few workers to stick to Kales.

46
Various types of monkeys and baboons are found across the villages and limit the
diversity of some gardens as they feast on certain preferred plants like onions making
them conspicuously absent from some villages.
Some workers appeared discouraged by overzealous managers who regularly order
the cutting back off tall sukawiki plants and worse so when the workers are absent.
In the beginning the diversity campaign was hampered by cultural believes as opined
by the medical staff. The predominant Ugali eating cultures take Ugali (starch) as the
main dish and anything else as an accompaniment. The nutritionist advise to bring

Table 4.11 Challenges faced by the Kitchen Garden

Challenges Frequency Percent

Wild animals 23 16.2

Pests/Diseases 43 30.3

Water supply 10 7.0

Poor lifespan of indigenous vegetables 10 7.0

Loss of soil fertility with time 13 9.2

None 39 27.5

supply of quality seeds 1 .7

Small Size of Garden 2 1.4

Theft 1 .7

Total 142 100.0

down the Ugali ratio to a third of the total meal tends to reverse this argument and
especially so with the general workers who naturally need a lot of energy in their
work. One of the challenges that elicited a lot of emotions is the stealing of vegetables
from the gardens by some workers (recorded as pests). This is common with all many
parts of the country where food has become a major source of conflict. Many youths
have been accused in this country of shying away from farming considered as dirty

47
and only thriving in errant behaviour of acquiring other hard earned proceeds. The
moral breakdown of the social fabric could be responsible for this evil. Twenty seven
point five % reported no challenges at all. This is a lower figure than those who are
self-sufficient in vegetables indicating more is required in improving the gardens.
Success brings with it satisfaction and along with it a strengthening of the relation of
the experience. The project should build on this success depicted by the number of
people who think that the garden has no challenge.

4.6 Correlation between Attendance and Food Supply Value

While collecting the data a trend appeared where respondents who put their own
labour and other resources in the garden were attributing a higher food supply vale to
the garden. The project consultant cites laziness as the main hindrance to success as
people have to dig and work their own gardens on top of supplying their own seeds.
This prompted the researcher to correlate attendance and food supply scores by the
respondents.

Table 4.12 Correlation between attendance and food supply value

attendance Value of food supply

Attendance Pearson 1 .145

Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed) .085

N 142 142

Value of food Pearson .145 1

supply Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed) .085

N 142 142

When attendance and food supply value to the respondents were correlated a positive
relationship was established although it failed the significance test at 95% confidence
(Table 4:12). Those who don’t work on the garden have low emotional attachment
and could score the gardens poorly.

48
Figure 4.5 Solution to the challenges

4.6.3 Solution to the challenges

Various efforts have been put to address the challenges facing the Kitchen garden. As
shown in figure 4:5, over 60% of the respondents are satisfied with the project as it is.
Loss of soil fertility overtime is mitigated by supply of manure and mulch as a
number of respondents suggested.

The gardens with high levels of mulching had low levels of complains whether its
water stress, or pests menace as they tend to have more health plants which can
withstand a myriad of problems. As the consultant explained the project was founded
on organic concept where fertilizers and pesticides were to be avoided. Crop rotation
even in a small area has been started to help mitigate against soil pests and diseases.
The incorporation of pests’ repellant plants like marigold has helped to address the
pest problems.
A number of respondents still do not understand the organic concept and as such they
suggested to be supplied with pesticides and fertilizers to improve their gardens.

49
Regular workshops helps to continually keep the workers informed on the importance
of the gardens. Demonstration plots located near every dispensary help to reinforce
the importance of the kitchen garden.

Plate 4.9 Nutritional board near one of the dispensaries (The board explains the
nutritional content of some indigenous vegetables against sukuma wiki)

4.6.4 Improvement recommended by respondents

Health personnel have been trained to preach the gospel of nutritional diversity and to
demonstrate the possibility of achieving this from one own garden. These trainings
are targeted not only to the health of the family but their entire wellbeing
The cultural disposition that Ugali and Sukumawiki (Kales) is the only life supporting
dish need to be demystified as identified by the consultant through continuous
awareness campaigns. The cultural/religious disposition of the workers was greatly
influenced by the Seventh Day Adventist teaching which emphasizes on plant/
vegetable diets for nutritional needs as was captured through the key informant
interviews, a few households complained of insufficient areas for the kitchen gardens

50
Figure 4.6 Improvement Recommended

Improved container technology can help alleviate this problem. Containers made from
plastic but conical in shape would improve the surface area available for putting
sufficient no of plants to sustain productivity in relatively very small ground area like
shown the improvised containers in the strawberry greenhouse in the picture. Many
models as shown in the pictures below of sacks and banana stems (Plate 4:9-4:13
below) can be used to improvise and increase surface area for crop production. The
challenge here is will be in the need to water the plants regularly and losing the rain
fed benefit.

4.6.5 Vegetable production in Containers

Containers come in handy where space for a vegetable garden is too small for
reasonable production (plate 4.1 to plate 4.13). A patio, doorstep, a balcony or even a
window seals can provide sufficient space for producing sufficient vegetables and
fruits for the family.

51
Plate 4.10 Strawberry growing in improvised containers (face book, 2012013)
(The vertical space created by the poles tremendously increases the surface area for production and creates
the most economical way to use the expensive green house enterprise).

Although containers come with a higher demand in plant care they have the added
advantage in that they can help to resolve the problem of common soil borne diseases
and root pests like nematodes by adopting alternative media to soil. In container
gardening plants that take little space and those which are productive for longer
periods are preferred.

Plate 4.11 Banana stems used as containers for vegetable production

(Agricultural the 21st century style, 2013) (The banana stem fibres beside increasing the surface
area,offers some nutrients like potasium to the plants as they rot. This is a very inovative of using locally available
resourses as captured in the rural university conceipt)

52
 Plate 4.12 vegetables growing in upright sack containers (AGFAX, 2010) (the
vertical/upright sack containers are the most common plant pots in urban agriculture where they improve
production area as well as where the soil media is absent like in paved backyards and rooftops).

As one moves close to shade it’s important to use plants that are shade tolerant.
Container vegetable production can improve the aesthetics of the surrounding by
brightening dull areas just by placing beautiful growing vegetables like the curly
kales.

Many possible containers can be used for gardening like clay pots, plastic, metal and
even wood like in plate 4.10 and plate 4.11 containers. The key is that the container
must be big enough to support plants when they are fully grown, hold the growing
media without spilling, have adequate drainage and should not have been used for
products that are harmful to people or the environment. Locally available material
like wood, banana stems like in plate 4.11 can be used in an innovative way to
generate space. Baskets lined with plastic with drainage holes punched in it, pieces
of drainage pipes and even sacs form good containers as in plate 4.13. Treated wood
is not good for food production and should be avoided.

53
Plate 4.13 Vertical Multistory Garden (Youth Agro-Environment Initiative, 2011) (The vertical
multistory garden improves the production area such that well planned three sacks can supply the needs of
a small household.The multistory garden can be made from variuos kind of bags that can hold the planting
media and the plants in place)

Plastic gunny bags like in plate 4.12 and plate 4.13 are in use in many parts of the
country especially in slums. They offer excellent drainage but they are made to be
used for a short time and disintegrate quickly under ultra-violet light. Light weight
welded wire shaped into cylinders and lined with moss can make excellent gardens
(University of Arizona, 1998). Most plants require containers 6 to 8 inches deep for
adequate rooting. With imagination and innovation there are a myriad of locally
available material can make good containers. With low volume of soil watering is
more important than in dealing with soil.

Use of hydroponics can also make space not suitable for plant growth produce
vegetables for the family. Ideally the soil supplies nutrients and also anchors the plant.
If the nutrients are supplied to the plant and anchorage provided mechanically like in
this case by using floaters the plants will still grow.

54
Plate 4.14 vegetables growing on water without soil media in a farm in Limuru
(innovative hydroponics where the plant nutrients are put in water for the plant)

Higher yields have been reported from this system as compared to conventional
agriculture (Infor Dev, 2013). The challenge here is the loss of organic component of
the project.

55
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction
The findings from the research indicate that the kitchen gardens at JFK have had a
positive effect in food security and nutritional to the workers households. Clearly
many people have reduced the buying of vegetables since the introduction of the
program. As an organic project which is normally slow in uptake as results have to go
through full natural cycles, the results obtained are appreciable. The measure to role
of the kitchen gardens were indirectly measured in the comparing the sourcing
patterns of the vegetables not only in the in the JFK households but also the
relationship with the rural homes in terms of replication.

5.2 Summary of Findings

The kitchen gardens have helped to lower vegetables bought by the JFK workers.
Today 47.9 % of the workers do not buy vegetables compared to 4.2% before the
program was initiated. With 99.3 % of the respondents saying that the garden helps
them in food security the gardens has an effect in food security. Although 71.1% of
the respondents had gardens before the fact that 84.5% have replicated the gardens in
their rural homes from their own free will further suggests that they have attached
appreciable value to the kitchen garden.

The replication also shows that the program has weathered the typical top-down
resistant to innovation uptake. Ninety seven point nine percent of the respondents
have learnt a new gardening skill which perhaps explains the high level of replication
even with a people who are not new to gardening.

The predominant sukuma wiki garden has been replaced with a mixed garden rich
with indigenous vegetables which has helped to improve on nutritional diversity.
Ninety eight point six percent of the respondents feel that the garden has helped them
to increase their nutritional diversity.
The biggest challenge cited by the respondents was pest and diseases which is much
related to the soil fertility. The respondents wanted pesticides, fertilizers and mulch
supplied to them to improve productivity. This response from workers who work in

56
agriculture production fields where such problems are tackled by provision of
pesticides, fertilizers, and even high quality seeds is only natural. From the organic
layout of the project the project has made tremendous gains in achieving food security
and nutritional diversity.

5.3 Conclusion
The Kitchen gardens in JFK have helped to improve the food security and nutritional
diversity for the workers. While the management would perhaps have expected a
miraculous rollout of the program and immediate uptake by the workers the organic
approach is normally slow and results are achieved over a long period of time as the
project entails changing the perception of the recipients and worse so in an
environment that conflicts with the companies own practices which uses inorganic
fertilizers and other chemicals in production. The project has shown that there are
yield increases in food production from the system which has lowered procurement
from the open market. This is in agreement with other findings that show that organic
agriculture increase productivity rather than decreasing in tropical Africa (United
Nations Confrence on Trade and Development, 2008). This is in the quantity of food
as food produced by households leads to members of the same household having
access to food. The nature of some jobs as well as geographical location deprives
workers ample time to go and shop for food. The fact that the garden is adjacent to
house gives the worker access to food as and when required. Some vegetables like
Amaranthus only require a fertile open ground to supply to the mankind needs. Here
the kitchen garden has acted as a trap to this natural resource for the benefit of
mankind.

The organic approach of the kitchen garden innovation at JFK has increased the
ability of the workers to use better understanding of the holistic nature of farming that
helps them to adapt and change when faced with new challenges and become more
resilient in the ever changing environment. This is evident from their replication in
their rural homes and the urge to set up similar gardens wherever they will reside. The
land tenure issue has been partly shown by this research not to be the main hindrance
to food production. The workers do not own the land they are now cultivating. You
only need a people friendly policy in handling land and food production like in this

57
case the kitchen garden policy at JFK. The size also demonstrates how one can
produce sufficient food in relatively small areas.

The kitchen gardens at JFK are a good example of how one can combine the natural,
Social, physical and human capital to produce enough food for the households in a
sustainable way. The kitchen garden is an in situ on site household production with
the use of low cost local materials and technologies. This eventually improves self
reliance and substitute’s human capital for costly external inputs which agrees with
many researchers in this field ((United Nations Confrence on Trade and Development,
2008).

From the research about 71% had kitchen gardens previously which means they were
privy to the traditional systems of production that have evolved through centuries and
addresses local environmental and cultural conditions. It is then important to continue
recognising the recipients wide cognitive abilities and pointing to them where and
how their knowledge can be used to address local challenges central to human
existence like food security and nutritional diversity.

5.4 Recommendations

5.4.1 Recommendations to JFK

The kitchen garden project is of great value to the workers and should be encouraged.
De-linking the workers from what they do in their daily lives and what they do after
work would need a lot of sensitization and reinforcement. Higher levels of success are
achievable as enough drive and cue exists within the workers. The total picture of an
organic kitchen garden is that, that not only grows plants beneficial to man as food but
also should incorporate some animals to achieve the holistic mix required in life. At
present the gardens in Kericho are predominantly having plants and efforts to include
animals have not fully succeeded. While a few estates in tea are now having chickens
the roll out in flower villages has failed. The cure to this is sensitizing of the workers
on the benefits of having animals in the system. The key here is to encourage workers
to develop a new culture which takes training and reinforcement. There seems to be a
tread that households where the heads are involved in working on and maintaining the
garden seem to attach a higher value to the gardens. Further research should be

58
carried out to ascertain this phenomenon and help guide the training model for the
project. In areas where space available to the households is too small, container
vegetables growing can be adopted. Households have many containers which bring
other household groceries which can be used in plant production. This would bring
such households to per with their colleagues who have enough land space and reduce
the feeling of discrimination.
The organic garden can be improved by using Finlays Integrated Pest Management
and crop improvements which has inexpensive organic products like Rhizatec and
Vermitec which can improve the indigenous vegetable root system ability to harness
water and nutrients and in turn improve both their longevity and productivity
(Dudutech ltd, 2012). Incorporate bone meal in the kitchen garden to address the
phosphorous supply to improve the productivity (United Nations Confrence on Trade
and Development, 2008). Adopt a more participatory approach where the village
team should be given a bigger role in compliance.

5.4.2 Recommendations to other investors in Agriculture

Healthy workers are more productive. Improving productivity, workers health can be
achieved as the case of JFK not just by investing in health infrastructure but by
adopting such innovations like kitchen gardens. Such innovations improve the
workers confidence in their ability to participate in solving their own problems.
Involving workers in producing part of their own food helps to develop effective
relationship necessary for harmonious growth. Food security and nutritional diversity
is so basic and is a strong foundation for a productive society. The kitchen garden can
be an effective motivation tool that would mitigate against workers turnover by giving
the workers a sense of belonging.

5.4.3 Recommendations to Government

The kitchen gardens can be a panacea to the vulnerable households in Kenya in
providing a form of food security and nutritional diversity. This research showed that
there is a lot of potential in the knowledge accumulated in societies over time and
only require the right trigger to unlock it for the benefit of the same societies and the
nation at large. Encouraging the vulnerable Kenyans to adopt kitchen gardens could
be one way to meet the new constitution requirements of ensuring that no one suffers
from hunger. Adopting the kitchen garden which identifies with many cultures would
also help in achieving the first millennium development goal of ending poverty and

59
hunger as envisaged in the first millennium goal. Disposal of organic waste which is a
big headache to municipal authorities can also be eased as the organic waste would be
used to fertilize the organic kitchen gardens. The peri- urban agriculture should be
encouraged but made as simple as possible taking into consideration the available
resources to the vulnerable groups

5.4.4 Recommendations to Development Agents

Most of the development agents today target capacity building without tying it to
other productive factors like land. Building competence need to be tied to the
opportunities available to the recipients. Proper strengths, weakness, opportunities and
threats analysis (SWOT) need to be carried out for effective and meaningful
community development. As captured in this research communities have rich
knowledge derived from many decades through society values which only need a
trigger to bring the intended change. All we need is to identify those strengths and
encourage them to thrive in well planned programs. Reinforcement through well
trained personnel is all that is required to change communities. The household labour
is one of the biggest assets that the vulnerable groups have for gainful exchange.
Programmes that encourage and tap this asset are bound to be successful.

5.4.5 Further Research

A quantitative research involving the weighing and costing of the vegetables
harvested from the gardens would help to shed more light on the impacts in terms of
the biomass and the actual cash saved by the households. Correlations between the
attendance and food supply value need to be established in a further research to guide
the consultants of the target groups in terms of further training.

60
REFERENCES

AGFAX. (2010, june). Vegetable Growing in the Slums. Retrieved july 11/07/2013,
2013, from www.agfax.net: http://www.agfax.net/radio/detail.php?i=347&s=b

Agobia. (1999). Community Draught Mitigation Project,south African region.

Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development.

Agricultural the 21st century style. (2013, july 01/07/2013). facebook. Retrieved july
11/07/2013, 2013, from Agricultural prodct link: https://www.google.co.ke/

Alaimo, K. P. (2008). Food and Vegetable Intake among Urban Community

Gardeners. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, VOL40 , 94-101.

Alexandratos, B. (2012). World agriculture towards 2030/2050. Rome: FAO.

Alouko-Ondingo, A. (2009). Dertemination of Poverty ; Lessons leant from Kenya.

Geojournal , Vol 74.

Amaroso, T. a. (2012). Combating Micronutrient Deficiencies. FAO .

Asaduzzaman, N. S. (2011). Benefit-Cost Assessment of Different Vegetable

Gardening on improving Household Foood and Nutritional Security in Rural
Bangladesh. Pittsburgh, Pensylvinia: Agricultural & Applied Economics
Association’s 2011 AAEA & NAREA.

Asiema. (1994). Africa's Green Revolution. Biotechnology and Development Monitor

(No. 19, p. 17-18.), No. 19, p. 17-18.

Beddington, A. F. (2011). Achieving Food Security In the Face of Climate Change.

Copenhagen: Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change.

Berg, A. a. (2011). Gardening Promotes Neuroendocrine and Affective Restoration

from Stress. Journal of Health Psychology .

Biodiversity International, Rome. (2006). Workshop on Enhancing the Contribution

of Home Garden to On-farm Management of Plant Genetic Resources and to Improve
the Livelihoods of Nepalese Farmers: Lessons Learned and Policy Implications.,
Pokhara (Nepal), 6-7 Aug 2004. Pokhara (Nepal): Biodiversity International.

Burns. (2011). The Principle of Population, as it affects the Future Improvement of

Society. AP Environmental Science .

Chaplowe. (1996). Havanas Popular Gardens. City Farmer, Canada's Office of Urban
Agriculture.

Christopher, B. (2006). Food Aid’s Intended and Unintended. Rome: Agricultural and
Development Economics Division (ESA).

61
Coast, R. a. (2008). The Concept of the Household: From Survey Design to Policy
Planning. London: ESRC.

Cotthem. (2012). iiri news. Retrieved from

http://www.irrinews.org/Report/95140/PHLLPPINES-OMG-Eat-your-vegetales -
campaign

Denver Urban Gardens. (2012). Denver Urban Gardens. Retrieved December 15th,
2012, from Denver Urban Gardens: http://dug.org/gardens/

Department for International Development (DFID) . (2004). Agriculture, hunger and

food security. London: DFID.

Dibsdall, L. B. (2011). Low-income consumers' attitudes and behavior towards access

availability and motivation to eat fruit and vegetables. American Journal of Public
Health: August 2011, Vol. 101 , 159-168 .

Dudutech ltd. (2012). Dudutechs Beneficial Insects and Biopesticides. , Nairobi,

Kenya: Finlays Horticulture K ltd.

Encyclopedia.com articles. (2011). Medicine,psychology and psychiatric. Retrieved

september 20, 2013, from Encyclopedia.com: www.encyclopedia.com

Eyzaguire, W. a. (2001). Homegardens and In situ Conservation of Plant Genetic

material. ipgri.

Facebook. (2012013, February). https://www.facebook.com/. Retrieved july thursday,

2013, from Mukilima young: https://www.facebook.com/

FAO. (2005). Building on Gender, Agro-biodiversity and Local Knowledge. Rome:

FAO.

FAO. (2012). The Sahel Crisis. Dakar, Senegal: FAO.

FAO. (2012). The State of Hunger. Rome: JFAD, WFP, FAO.

FAO. (2003). Trade Reforms. Rome: FAO.

Great Britain Ministry of Food. (1946). How Britain was fed in war time: food
control, 1939-1945. London: Ministry of Food by H.M.S.O., 1946.

Infor Dev. (2013). Climate smart Farming in Kenya. Retrieved September 22, 2013,
from http://www.infodev.org/highlights/climate-smart-farming-kenya-yields-success-
and-many-more-tomatoes: http://www.infodev.org/highlights/climate-smart-farming-
kenya-yields-success-and-many-more-tomatoes

Kenya (NESC), T. N. (2007). Globally Competive and Prosperous Kenya-Vision

2030. Nairobi: Government printer-kenya government.

62
Kimutai, E. K. (2012). Bacteriological contamination of farm and market kale in
Nairobi and Environs. Nairobi.

Lathrop, P. C. (1919). Vegetable Gardening;World War 1914-1918. Philadelphia: J.P.

Lippincott Company.

Mathai, R. J. (1985). The Rural University: The Jawaja Experiment in Educational

Innovation. Popular Prakashan.

Michael, R. a. (2011). Direct Observation and Key Informant Interview Techniques

for primary data collection during rapid assessments. Better Assessment Better Aid.

Miller. (2012). An Introduction to A Thousand Gardens in Africa. Berkeley: The

Edible Schoolyard Project.

Ministry of Agriculture, Government of Kenya. (2012). Retrieved decenber

15/12/2012, 2012, from www.kilimo.go.ke: http://www.kilimo.go.ke

Mushi, K. a. (1993). Nutrition-Relevant Actions in Tanzania. Adelaide: UN

ACC/SCN.

Mwaniki, O. a. (2008). Cataloguing and Evaluation of Available

Community/Farmers-Based Seed Enterprises on African Indigenous Vegetables
(AIVs) FOUR ECA COUNTRIES. kisumu: Lagrotech Consultants.

National Council for Law Reporting. (2010). Bill of Rights. In K. Government, The
Constitution of Kenya (p. 31). Nairobi: National Council for Law Reporting.

Nerth, H. a. (2005). The World Summit on Sustainable Development.Johanusburg

confrence. Dorderecht, Netherland: Springer.

Ninez. (1984). Household Gardens. Potatoes in food systems , 15.

Ninez. (1984). Household Gardens. Potatoes in Food System .

OECD. (2005, Dec 21). Glosary of statistical terms. (OECD) Retrieved Feb
15/02/2013, 2013, from http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=1873

Oiye, S. a. (2009). The Contribution Of African Leafy Vegetables (Alvs)To Vitamin

A Intake And The Influence Of Income In Rural Kenya . African Journal of Food
Agriculture Nutrition and nutrition .

Oniang’o, O. S. (2009). The Contribution of African Leafy Vegetables (ALVs).

Africa journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development , vol 9 no 6.

Onim, M. (2008). Cataloguing and Evaluation of Available Community/Farmers-

Based Seed Enterprises on African Indigenous Vegetables (AIVS) Four ECA
Countries.. Kisumu: Lagrotech Consultants.

63
Pastakia, O. (2011). livelihood Augementation in Rainfed Areas. Gujarat, India:
Development surport Centre(DSC).

Phillip, R. (2004). Poverty and Vulnerabilty. Bonn: ZEF.

Rasanathan, K. (2011). Action on social determinants of health is essential to tackle

noncommunicable diseases. Geneva: WHO.

Remans, F. D. (2003). Assessing Nutritional Diversity of Cropping Systems in

African Villages. Journal.pone.0021235 .

Richman. (1995, JULY 20/07/1995). The International Population Stabilization and

Reproductive Health Act. CATO .

Rogers. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. Frederick: Free Press.

Scanlan. (2003). Food Availability and Access in Lesser-Industrialized Societies: A

Test and Interpretation of Neo-Malthusian and Technoecological Theories.

Schwarzwalder. (2012). Hunger, Plenty, and Population . Washington: Family

Research Council.

Shiundu, O. (2007). Marketing African Leafy Vegetables: Challenges and

Opportunities in the Kenyan Context. Afrin Journal of Food, Agriculture,Nutrition
and Development , Vol 7 No 4.

Silvia, N. a. (2012). International Food Prices. ROME: FAO, IFAD,WFP.

Smit, J. N. (2001). Urban Agriculture. Food Jobs and Sustainable Cities .

Smith. (1997). participant observation and informal education. Retrieved JAN

12/01/2013, 2013, from www.infed.org.

Strochlic. (2011). Increasing Food Security Among Agricultural Workers In The

Salinas Valley Of California. REEIS .

Strochlic, R. (2010). Increasing Food Security Among Agricultural Workers In The

Salinas Valley Of California. Davis, California: REEIS, USAID.

Thomas. (2010). Food Deserts and the Sociology of Space. International Journal of
Human and Social Sciences .

Tittonell, G. (2012). When yield Gaps are Poverty traps; The Paradigm of Ecological
Intensification In Africa Smallholder Agiculture.

Trochim. (2006, Octomber 20). Research methods Knowldge Base. (Social Recearch
Methods) Retrieved Feb 25, 2013, from
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/unitanal.php

Turner. (2012). Solution to World Hunger. Potcom,USA: Food for Life.

64
UN. (2012). Kenya Food Security outlook. Nairobi: kenya government.

UN. (2013). Millenium Development Goals Beyond 2015. Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals

UN. (2102). Sustainable Development:. Washington: United Nations.

United Nation. (2013). The Universal Declaration Of Human Rights. New York:
United Nation.

United Nations Confrence on Trade and Development. (2008). Organic Agriculture

and Food Security in Africa. New York and Geneva: United Nations.

United Nations Development Programme. (2013). Kenya’s Youth Employment

Challenge. New York: Bureau for Development PolicyUNDP.

University of Arizona. (1998). Container Garden. Vegetable Garden Manual .

University of Arizona.

USAID. (1992, April 13). Defination of Food Security. Retrieved April 5th, 2013,
from www.usaid.gov: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNAAV468.pdf

USAID. (2012, DEC 14/12/2012). KENYA .COUNTY FACTS SHEET. Retrieved from
http://kenya.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/profiles/Kericho_Dec2011%2028.pdf

Wambugu, K. a. (2011). Productivity Treads and Performance of the Dairy Sector.

Wanjek. (2005). Food at Work;WORKPLACE SOLUTIONS FOR MALNUTRITION,.

Geneva: ILO.

WHO. (2004). Comaparative Quantification of Health Risks. Geneva: WHO.

WHO. (2001). Iron Deficiency Anaemia. WHO.

Wikipaedia Free Encycropaedai. (2013). Retrieved from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Kennedy

World Bank. (2009). Kenya Poverty and Inequality Assesment. Washington: World
Bank.

World Carrot Museum. (2012). Carrot History - Carrots in World War Two.
Retrieved Nov 15/11/2012, 2012, from www.carrotmuseum.co.uk:
http://www.carrotmuseum.co.uk/history4.html

WorldBank. (2011). Poverty. Washington: World Bank.

Yount. (2006). Populations and Sampling. (Research Design and Statistical Analysis
for Christian Ministry) Retrieved Jan 15, 2013, from www.napce.org:
http://www.napce.org

65
Youth Agro-Environment Initiative. (2011, SEPTMBER 11TH). Multi-story
Vegetables Gardening for Food Security in Kenya. Retrieved JULY 20TH, 2013,
from Yagrein.blogspot.com: http://yagrein.blogspot.com/2011/09/multi-storey-
vegetable-gardens-for-food.html

66
 APPENDIX 1

QUESTIONNAIRE

The Role of Kitchen Gardens in Food Security and Nutritional Diversity:

“A Case study of James Finlay Kericho”

Introduction

My name is John Mburu. I am a student at the University of Nairobi sociology

department. I have come to your village to ask you about the role of the Kitchen
gardens in your household food security and nutrition diversity. The information I
will collect could be used by the Company to introduce more innovations that can
improve your wellbeing. I would like to use the next 30 to 45 minutes in this exercise.
The information you will give will be treated in strict confidence.

Name........................................................

Village.................................house no............

Date..........................................

1. Sex?

 Male

 Female

2. What is your marital status?

 Single

 Married

 Separated

 Divorced

1
  Widowed

3. What is your age bracket?

 Below 20

 21-30

 31-40

 41-50

 51-60

 61 and above

4. What is your level of formal education?

 Pre- primary

 Primary

 Secondary

 Tertiary

 Others (specify)

5. Which department do you work at JFK?

 Flower harvester

 flower grading and pack house

 clerical

 Spray and fertigation

 General work,

 Tea plucking

2
  Supervision

 Security

 Other (specify)_______________________________________

6. For how long have you worked at JFK?

 0-5 YRS

 5-10YRS

 10-15YR

 15-20YRS

 OVER 20YRS

7. Which of the following workers committees/organizations have you served?

 none

 union

 health and safety

 Fair trade

 Gender

8. How much do you earn or make per month in Kenya Shillings?

 Below 10,000

 10,001- 20,000

 20,001- 30,000

 30,001 and above

3
9. Do you own land anywhere in Kenya?

 Yes

 No

10. Do you own a house or a plot?

 Yes

 No

11. Did you have a garden in JFK?

 Yes

 No

12. What size is your kitchen garden?

………………………………………………………………..

13. How did you design your Kitchen garden?.......................................................

14. Did you get external help in setting your garden

 Yes (if yes from whom?)...............

 No

15. Do you still get any help in running your garden?

 Yes (if yes from whom?)...............

 No

16. Did you have a garden before you came to JFK

4
  YES , if yes where?.................................

 NO

17. How many times do you get your food from the kitchen garden in a week/

 once times a week

 twice times a week

 thrice times a week

 more than three a week

18. What kind of plants do you grow in your Kitchen Garden?..............................

19. Before you started a kitchen garden what vegetables did use to
buy?...................................

20. What vegetables do you still buy after the establishment of the Kitchen
garden?...............

21. Has the Kitchen Garden helped to improve your food supply?

 Yes

 No

If yes above by how much in a scale of 1 to 5 ( 1being the lowest and 5 the highest)

 1

5
  2

 3

 4

 5

22. Has the kitchen gardens improved the variety of food for your household?

 Yes

 No

No

If yes above by how much in a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being the lowest and 5 the
highest)

 1

 2

 3

 4

 5

23. During the lean times did the garden supply your needs?

 Yes

 No

If yes in a scale of 1 to 5, 1 being the lowest and 5 the highest

 1

 2

 3

6
  4

 5

24. During drought times did the garden supply your needs?

 Yes

 No

If yes in a scale of 1 to 5, 1 being the lowest and 5 the highest

 1

 2

 3

 4

 5

25. Who attend the Garden?

 wife

 children

 whole family

 self

 hired labor

26. Have you learnt any new gardening skill

 yes

 no

27. Would you do a kitchen garden after you live employment with JFK?

 Yes

7
  No

28. Have you replicated the garden in your rural home?

 Yes

 No

29. What challenges do you have in your kitchen Garden?...........................................

30. How are these challenges being overcomed?............................................................

31. What improvements do you think would improve the benefits from Kitchen
garden?..............................................................................................................

32. How many times do you buy animal proteins other than milk in a month?

 More than 4 times

 Four times

 Two times

 Rarely(less than twice a month)

33. How much cooking fat/oil do you buy per month in kgs /liters

 6

 4

 2

 1

 Less than 1

8
34. How many times do you eat fruits a(Avocadoes, bananas, mangoes, papaws,
passion etc) per week

 Daily

 >three times

 Twice

 <twice

35. In the last 30 days did you or any household member eat any food that you did not
want just because you did not have resources?

 None

 Rarely (one or twice)

 sometimes (3-10 times)

 Often (more than 10 times)

36. In the last 30 days did you worry that your household will not have enough food?

 None

 Rarely (one or twice)

 sometimes (3-10 times)

 Often (more than 10 times)

37. In the last 30 days did you or member of your household had to eat lesser meals in
a day because there were no enough food?

 None

 Rarely (one or twice)

 sometimes (3-10 times)

9
  Often (more than 10 times)

38. In the last 30 days did it happen that there was no food to eat of any kind in the
house because of resources

 None

 Rarely (one or twice)

 sometimes (3-10 times)

 Often (more than 10 times)

39. In the last 30 days did it happen that you or any of the household member had to
eat a smaller meal that you felt you needed just because there was no enough
food?

 None

 Rarely (one or twice)

 sometimes (3-10 times)

 Often (more than 10 times)

40. In the last 30 days did it happen that you or any member of the household went to
sleep at night hungry because there was no food?

 None

 Rarely (one or twice)

 sometimes (3-10 times)

 Often (more than 10 times)

10
41. In the last 30 days did it happen that you or any of your household members went
for a whole day and night without eating anything because there was not enough
food?

 None

 Rarely (one or twice)

 sometimes (3-10 times)

 Often (more than 10 times)

11
 APPENDIX II

KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW GUIDE

The Role of Kitchen Gardens in Food Security and Nutritional Diversity: “A
Case study of James Finlays Kericho”

Name of interviewer: __________________________________________

Date of the interview: __________________________________________

Name of the community leader ____________________________________

Role in the Community; _____________________________________________

1. How were the kitchen gardens set up?

2. When were the kitchen gardens set up in James Finlays?

3. What were the objectives of setting up the gardens?

4. What kind of plants is found in these gardens?

5. What was the food security position (food supply) before the kitchen gardens were
introduced?

6. Has the Kitchen Gardens made any change to the food supply?

7. In what ways have gardens improved the variety of food to the participants?

8. What benefits do participants get from the kitchen gardens?

9. What was the position of food varieties (Nutritional diversity) to the workers
before the gardens were introduced?

10. Are there any changes in variety food (nutritional diversity) to the workers after
gardens were introduced?

11. What kind of problems do workers face in implementing the kitchen gardens?

12. In your view how can these problems be addressed?

12
 APPENDIX III

FGD GUIDE

The Role of Kitchen Gardens in Food Security and Nutritional Diversity:

“A Case study of James Finlays Kericho”

My name is John Mburu. I am a student at the University of Nairobi sociology

department. I have come to your village to ask you about the role of the Kitchen
gardens in your household food security and nutrition diversity. The information I
will collect could be used by the Company to introduce more innovations that can
improve your wellbeing. I would like to use the next 30 to 45 minutes in this exercise.
In our discussion try to be as objective as possible and give all speakers the right to
express themselves fully without fear. The information you will give will be treated in
strict confidence.

Ice breaker/introduction
Which department and area of expertise do you
come from?
What is a kitchen garden to you?
How is the kitchen garden designed?
What inputs do you need for a kitchen garden?
Which plants are grown in the kitchen garden?
Where do you participants get planting
materials?
In what ways Have kitchen gardens improved
food security (supply of food to workers)?
Have the kitchen gardens improved nutritional
diversity? If yes how?
What challenges do kitchen gardens face?
How can these challenges be solved?
What are your thoughts on the way forward

13
14