Civil Society Advocacy and Climate Change in Kenya : The Question of “Local Voices” and Their “Amplification”

ABSTRACT

The role of civil society organizations (CSOs) in addressing climate change is acknowledged, but engagement with questions of voice remains limited, especially in the Global South. Addressing this, this paper zooms in on (International) nongovernmental organizations ((I)NGOs) and their collaborations with domestic CSOs in the Global South on this front. (I)NGOs often sum up their role here as “amplification of voices,” which foregrounds communities articulating their perspectives and agendas, with domestic CSOs and (I)NGOs supporting and facilitating. However, this raises questions about where “voices” come from and how to understand their “amplification”. Based on qualitative research in Kenya, this paper examines how CSOs in Kenya working on amplification of voices on climate change relate to the populations they work with, and what these relationships reveal about what amplification of voices entails in practice for CSOs working on climate change in a setting in the Global South where climate change impacts are directly experienced. Key findings are, first: CSOs centered local settings and local people, but co‐created voices rather than amplifying existing ones. Second, they also co‐created arenas and processes in which voices were to be heard and promoted state actors' receptiveness to them. Third, the nature of the focus on the local kept voices circumscribed to immediately experienced climate change impacts and solutions conceived as projects that mitigate them, with little engagement with larger issues. The findings indicate that the notion of amplification as strengthening authentic existing voices of marginalized groups, while justly foregrounding lived experience and people's priorities, may not do justice to what happens. While providing legitimate CSO roles in facilitation of, and support for, “the local,” the notion of amplification, when used in a straightforward manner, hides the multidimensionality of CSO roles, fails to recognize how local voices are embedded in webs of power and politics, and discourages CSO roles in building larger movements that can engage complex issues.