That will be an issue later for a few people. Why gov't buys land to resell to its own people is a very serious moral and economic issue. Why not buy land in kile and resell to the poor in kibera then have them pay off in 100yrs? We haven't even finished settling the IDP's and volla we have 5k acres somewhere.....psssst its only for ict!

Why can't the ministry of health also buy land somewhere and be allowed to sell it to some indians to build a hospital city? Why not the ministry of agriculture?

I find this Konza thing one of the biggest white elephants we will ever undertake and I'm not mincing my words here.

I find no logic in it in terms of ICT.

I find every property investing logic in it.

So my question becomes, so why wasn't it done by the ministry of planning or whatever ministry deals with properties? Why the information ministry? What new idea is the information ministry bringing to the table in terms of city planning?

Lastly...why this campaign elsewhere in this forum to push for the said PS to continue working in the same area? Does it mean that the success of one Gov't project is reliant on only one Kenyan? What does that smack off?

Coz ICT is not it.

We have had a very lengthy discussion here in wazua related to this Konza City project under a thread titled "Konza city Reality."

First things first, I have a lot of admiration and respect for Dr Bitange and Mr Mugo and all others who are pioneering these projects. They have atleast seen some light and created the confidence in the country that it is all possible if we commit to work for the good of the nation.

Having said that, I have a bit of challenges in agreeing with the bigger picture they are pursuing.

As rightly mentioned here, if you trully and sincerely understand how the ICT industry works, you would agree that they are totally missing the target. It is rather ironical that the discussion is purely being focused on infrastructure and real eastate.

Software development can be considered to be labor intensive (highly skilled labour) and that is the key factor of production in that sector.

I heard Dr Bitange mention that they new city will create 200,000 jobs. To me that figure is highly debatable if not plain wrong. I'll take a sample of only a few companies and the number of their employees.

-Microsoft has 55,002 employees in the US and 92,000 world wide.
-Qualcomm has 12,520 employess in US and about 4000 out of US.
-Intel has 45,400 in US and 37 125 out of US.

Total revenue of these companies = 138,9 Billion dollars (microsoft $69.94B, Qualcomm $14.96B, Intel $54.0B). I've not even taken Apple and others into account.

-Tata Consulting Services in India has 226,751 employees. TCS' revenue is $7.57 Billion

The three US companies directly employ 112,922 people in the US and have a cumulative revenue of $138,9 Billion. Tata Consulting employs 226,751 people locally in India with reported revenues of $7 Billion.

The US is a developed market with extremely highly skilled engineers. India on the other hand has a large supply of engineers (over 20 million) who we can say have some level of skills but not at par with the US. This explains the discrepancy on the revenues. Either way India has been able to draw investors based on this talent pool.

Now, Dr Bitange where are you hoping to get these 200,000 skilled people in ICT related matters to fill that city?

Will you import them?

This is a case where we are putting the cart before the horse.

[quote=a4architect.com]@ alma..
For Konza, the purchase and advert is funded by tax payer money direct from treasury. Clearance from PAC Bonny Khalwale et al is needed for such a venture especially on how the profits from land sale will be repatriated back to treasury.


My little understanding is that the land will not be on sale, govt will lease out to interested investors.

I stand to be corrected.

I was serious,already talked to one of the guys.

..Here we go again!!

Am yet to see the k24 shows regarding Konza but let me pre-empt..

In these times of economic doom, gloom and failure, the government wants to see success in the areas of the future. It needs to be seen to be encouraging success and it needs the economic growth that comes from new industries and the tax revenues that come from people working to create new products and services and customers buying them (read Konza,TurkanaOil,LAPSET,Thika Road)and many more..

But will it work? Governments and civil services are slow, political and have their own internal agendas. The internet world is fast and vibrant and anarchic. Companies grow, flourish, get overtaken, die and reform themselves in months, not over government lifetimes. Is there a role for government? (Apart from providing free money, of course, but civil servants and politicians have a terrible record in selecting potential winners to give it to).

Hubs of innovation form themselves. People with like interests come together because they like being with people who are like themselves and have similar interests and aspirations. People like hanging out after work in bars with people who they regard as peers and respect and can learn from. Often, there will be a catalyst – something which is not directly participating and is itself unchanged by the experiences in its surroundings.

Technology-focused universities often fulfil that role and Cambridge in the UK and Stanford in the US are classic examples where hubs have spontaneously formed around them. So do manufacturing companies, where designers will leave a company and set up down the road making something similar, be successful at it, grow, then have their designers leave, set up down the road and make it happen all over again.

So hubs of innovation are organically created. Occasionally, governments can make it happen – an example is the Canadian government’s successful efforts in creating an aerospace hub around Bombardier in Montreal.

But such examples are rare and often happen because the government has a lot of buying clout, like buying planes and trains from Bombardier. Mostly the creation of successful hubs is spontaneous, organic and not predictable, plan-able or controllable.

Although governments can rarely create such hubs, they can facilitate their growth by smoothing the way, flattening obstacles that might block progress, making it easier for start-ups to get commercial credit, promoting the benefits of an area, making people aware of the opportunities and so on.

The fact that the internet industries are so fast-moving is in some ways an advantage. The nature of the products is fleeting, with every new development being quickly overtaken by its successors and products flowering, dying and being replaced.

Once people are in a stimulating and exciting environment where that happens, and where the supporting infrastructure has already been attracted, they will carry on doing it in the same place because that is where the stimulation and excitement is. So they will stay in the innovation hub unless they have a reason to go elsewhere.

So do organisations like iHub, actually run networking events, train and bring together people who can spark off each other? Others are trying, To get to be viable, a hub needs size and momentum to get to critical mass, easy accessibility and a flow of new people. Does Konza do this?

So my overall conclusion is, Government cannot make successful innovation hubs, but government does have a role to play and these needs to be identified whatever it is is not my brief, however for it to be successful or not has to be on its own and on its own terms. Like i said before Konza i will watch from behind the sofa.

It's 10 years since the darling of the government shored up in our lands Nik Nesbitt and what have we to show for it?? not much i presume but he became a director of CBK so maybe it worked for him..so again i choose to remove wool from my eyes and the feel good factor rarely gets me going!!

@muthoniruth....

all land in Kenya belong to the Government of the Republic of Kenya.
Govt then leases the land for 99 years to citizens. After expiry of 99 year lease, Minister for lands re-issues or ammends the title accordingly.

To lease the land, it uses Ministry of Lands and Ministry of Local Govt/councils as the agents to manage this.

When you buy a kaploti of 50 by 100 from your fellow citizen, you have in essence bought the lease from them.

Thats why titles with few years remaining on the lease e.g 10 to 30 fetch lower in the market as opposed to titles with many years remaining.

The 14000 acre land next to Konza belonging to EAPCement had its 99 year lease expire a few years ago.

Minister for lands will either renew to same owner or re-issue to a different owner or re-issue to same owner but with less land which he re-issues to a new owner.

Ndemo should have requested to be allocated 5000 ac from the 14000 acres all for free since its for the good of the people.

This way, he could have saved our kes 1 billion which he used to purchase the konza land and re-used the kes 1 billion to lay ICT infrastructure.

@a4arch...

if i have 1 acre i have developed with residential apartments.. lease period remaining is 2 years. when that expires are u saying the government can just issue the land to someone else? what about all the developments therein? are they transfered with the lease?

@Lolest..after new constitution, all land now belongs to the people of Kenya.
The 999 year lease was abolished and issues to do with foreigners owning land were addressed.See below link

http://www.kenyalaws.com...pter-five-part-one.html

Please read the law again brother.

The new constitution did not change the main land tenure systems as they were. From your link of the new law:

* (64) - Private land
1. Private land consists of —
1. registered land held by any person under any freehold tenure;
2. land held by any person under leasehold tenure; and
3. any other land declared private land under an Act of Parliament.

See, freehold ownership is even recognised by the new constitution!

The issue of leases not exceeding 99 years, this applies to cases where foreigners are involved but a Kenyan citizen can still have a lease of more than 99 years!

# 65) - Landholding by non-citizens

1. A person who is not a citizen may hold land on the basis of leasehold tenure only, and any such lease, however granted, shall not exceed ninety-nine years.

Maybe you guys are right, Konza City might end up being a successful real estate venture!