2060 dream? You can't plan 30 years ahead without auditing the past 20 years

President William Ruto launched what he has termed “the most consequential national conversation since the adoption of (the) Constitution in 2010; a national conversation about Kenya’s development charter”.  Those are the words he used to open his July 30 address on the country’s new national development vision beyond Vision 2030.

Despite its useful content in parts, this was a long speech, and its delivery was more wooden than warm. Some called it a ChatGPT speech, which is what happens when you get used to talking at, not to, people.  But this is not about speechwriting or speechmaking, leave that to the experts.

The larger irony here is Kenya has a potentially exciting moment that isn’t exciting Kenyans.  In truth, it is difficult to  think about 2060 when you’re unsure of survival to 2030, while struggling to get to the end of 2026.  In reality, the current public lens on politics and political leaders is laser-focused on 2027 and nothing more.  That’s today’s consequential national conversation.

Which is why reaction to the idea of the Vision 2060 itself has been so mixed.  Expectedly, political reaction has mirrored the political divide, with regime players arguing that it builds on successes already achieved by the administration, against the opposing view that it is either a con game or a diversionary waste of time.  Or that this should really be a post-2027 conversation.  In the meantime, this administration says they expect the full vision to be ready by December 2026.

You get the feeling that Dale Carnegie’s famous book “How to Win Friends and Influence People” should be compulsory reading for all politicos.  More worryingly, this vision doesn’t seem to have gained significant traction in non-state spaces, including private sector, and mostly, civil society.

Again, you can see how this is Kenya entering its usual phase of pre-election hibernation and slowdown. Which, paradoxically, is exactly what a long-term development agenda is supposed to address by offering business and economic certainty, and institutional and social continuity.  So, we don’t plan long-term because we think we can’t, and because we don’t think we can, we won’t.

As said before, this is not the first time we have had a national visioning process leading into an election; we were in the same circumstances when President Kibaki launched the actual process to develop Vision 2030 in October 2006, just over a year before the December 2007 election.

The difference between then and now is we have a progressive constitution that sits above any visioning, which is why the current visioning call is to operationalize its development charter as the next step in our national transformation journey.  With a Vision 2060 draft prepared by a team of experts (under the guise of “strategic guidelines”), we also have raw material to reflect upon, especially regarding the three proposed economic pillars and eight enabling foundations.

And you can be sure today’s launch, which coincides with the United Nations’ International Youth Day and its theme “different contexts, common aspirations”, will enlighten us on the process of national and county-level consultations to deliver the vision, even as the draft is presented to us.

My minor comment at this stage is, as others have also suggested, that we really should be talking about Vision 2063, not 2060 for two obvious reasons.  Domestically, this is when Kenya reaches its independence centenary (100 years).  Continentally, it aligns with the African Union’s Agenda 2063, which isn’t just cosmetic, but smartly positions Kenya as a central player in this agenda.

But I also think we need to be more structural.  If we are to truly get this long-term development blueprint right, then it must rest on what I will call five “process/content” pillars of evaluation.  As the saying goes, “things don’t go wrong, they start wrong”.  So we must build on these pillars. 

First, as a baseline, an evaluation of Vision 2030, because you cannot plan the next 30 years without an audit of the last 20.  Here is where we get to understand successes and shortfalls – from macro-targets to flagship project completion and operationalization, ensuring that the next vision scales what worked and abandons what didn’t.  Even in 2026, this is something to be done.

Second, an evaluation of successive Medium-Term Plans (MTPs) under Vision 2030.  Nobody will willingly admit that MTPs shifted focus away from the vision.  Think about the Jubilee I  manifesto that overrode MTP II (2013-2017).  Or the more finessed tweaks in Jubilee II’s post-manifesto “Big Four” (for MTP III 2018-2022) and Kenya Kwanza’s “The Plan” (for MTP IV 2023-2027). 

Evaluation here would delve into why planning deviated from the original road map, and how to build better policy continuity going forward.  While we are told anchoring the vision in law is a solution (Vision 2030 was embedded in policy as Sessional Paper Number 1 of 2012), there is merit in exploring the (non-legal) political and institutional incentives behind these deviations.

Third, an objective post-1963 progress assessment.  This is where we build the link to 2063, but mostly, it allows us to understand our historical context and measure development progress over time (poverty reduction, access to education) to see if we are truly breaking old systemic cycles. 

We could actually do this in two timelines: a “without vision” development planning timeline (1963-2008), then the current “with vision” timeline (2008 to date).  This doesn’t need to be complicated, a simple side-by-side view of key development indicators over time would suffice.  If we did this correctly, we end up with a proper “picture of today” to add to the earlier baseline.

Fourth, the pivot from Vision 2030 to Vision 2063.  Given that MTP IV ends in June 2028, but Vision 2030 closes in December 2030 and we are doing Vision 2063 today, this is about seamless transition from one vision to the next.  Simply, how unfinished Vision 2030 goals evolve into Vision 2063 goals, integrating modern global shifts like green and digital (especially AI) agendas.

Last but not least, links with the constitution, as the vision’s legal and ethical anchor.  Too many have spent too long in the delusion that Vision 2030 is the constitution’s co-equal because the latter’s promulgation was the former’s first big achievement.  This pillar reflects the earlier correct logic that Vision 2063 must not just build around, but implement the 2010 constitution. 

So there we have it, Vision 2030 evaluation as the baseline, MTPs evaluation to understand deviations, post-1963 progress view to understand our historical arc to today, transition to Vision 2063 as the pivot and the constitution as the anchor – the five “process/content” pillars that must underpin this process.  Think of these pillars as checkpoints in our hurry to get the vision done.

This is not about today’s launch, but if it was, the smart thing would have been to have a set of simple infographics and data stories around these five pillars.  Which would then drive a people-led consensus around a national development compact beyond endless law and regulation.  So here’s a question: What do you think are the “10 Commandments” of our Vision 2063 compact?