I believe that a coherent image of our construction sector's future, or any sector for that matter, should shower us with valuable insights into today.
It should make us better prepared. Alvin Toffler writes in his book ‘Future Shock’ that: “Future shock will not be found in Index Medicus or in any listing of psychological abnormalities.
Yet, unless intelligent steps are taken to combat it, millions of human beings will find themselves increasingly disoriented, progressively incompetent to deal rationally with their environments.” Change in the construction sector is avalanching upon us, and most people, especially its leaders, are grotesquely unprepared to cope with it.
The unfortunate error of giving the construction and real estate sector temporary solutions, derived from temporary methods, to serve parochial temporary needs cannot continue in light of the coherent future image.
People who continue to view this sector through the lens of status-quo permanence bias have no place discussing its progressive future. We cannot continue with this Newtonian hangover view of the sector.
Over the years, in the midst of various proposed construction sector regulations discussions, I have maintained that our construction and real estate sector requires radical surgery to genuinely make an about-turn to move forward, not patched-up fables.
We need radical legislation with no historical parallels to not only deal with the current volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous construction environment challenges but also prepare for the coming sector future shocks.
However, incessantly, we are confronted with a parochial and proprietary now-mindset legislations that only serves the interests of a few people and not the sector. The proposed Architectural and Quantity Surveyors Bill 2026 is no exception. Allow me to show you how…
Before venturing into the bill, let me give some historical perspective on this proposed legislation.
Back then, in 2019, while serving as the Chairman of the Association of Construction Managers of Kenya, we formed, for the first time, the Built Environment Coalition forum that brought together all the leaders of the various professional associations in Kenya – Architects, Engineers, Planners, Quantity Surveyors, Construction Managers, Interior Designers, name them.
One of the key considerations of this coalition was a review of the sector professional regulations. There was consensus among the leaders that the existing construction profession regulations were not only ineffective but also regressive.
To validate this concern, the coalition commissioned a study that was carried out by Prof. Omenya. The study was to, among other things, interview various members of different professions in the construction sector and also look at other effective profession regulations in Kenya, like the lawyers, doctors, and accountants.
Further, it was to review construction sector profession regulations in other jurisdictions such as South Africa, Australia, UK, etc. The report, which was ratified and adopted by nearly all the associations, painted a dire picture of the current construction sector profession regulations.
It was unmistakable that the professional players in the sector felt that the current regulations that were more government-leaning were ineffective.
Most people who were interviewed indicated that there was a need to have more professional members-led regulations, like in the case of lawyers, doctors, etc. Further, the report indicated that there was a need to urgently regulate the emerging professions of project and construction managers, interior designers and landscape architects.
Lastly, the report was unequivocal on the need to promptly establish a built environment council that was to be the guiding body for the entire sector, especially on national matters. At the tail end of the coalition, we in fact had started drafting various pieces of legislation in line with the study recommendations.
Fast forward, we are faced with a bill that is not only totally out of touch with what the sector professionals loudly stated back in 2019 but also with what is happening today. This bill is proposing to regulate five professions under one board – the Board of Regulation of Architects and Quantity Surveyors.
It is preposterous! First, it is laughable that someone in 2026 is proposing to put the distinct professions of project and construction management, interior design and landscape architecture under a board of another profession.
It is like proposing that planners be regulated under the Engineers Board of Kenya. They could not even be ingenious enough to find a more accommodating name for it. It is utterly disrespectful to the professions.
But even besides the lack of name creativity and obvious disrespect, there is no jurisdiction globally that has such five professions regulated under one board.
In fact, there is no jurisdiction globally that even has architects and quantity surveyors regulated under one board like we are currently having. What are these people smoking?
Each of these professions is unique, with bespoke needs that require careful nurturing under their respective boards.
Many countries that are ahead of us saw the sense and have done this; why aren’t we able to? South Africa did it in the year 2000; each profession in the built environment there have their own board of regulation.
The proposed board composition is another eighth wonder of the world. The composition is vastly skewed towards the more established professions. This will result in decision-making domination by the established professions at the expense of the emerging ones.
The bill under clause 3(b) talks of a degree in construction project management. There is no institution offering a degree course in construction project management in Kenya.
The profession of construction project management is born out of the course training in construction management that is offered at both undergraduate and master's level.
Let us stop reinventing the wheel. The world is replete with good examples of effective built environment profession regulations.
It is far from what this bill is proposing. As a developing country, we must do legislation that not reflect the wishes of the sector but also one for the future. There are far too many graduates of these construction professions entering the sector every year.
It is foolhardy to think that one board can be able to effectively regulate all five professions over the next ten years, looking at the numbers. Let us do what South Africa did 26 years ago, in the year 2000, when they were confronted with such similar situations of emerging professions and the need to progress for the future.
The government then drafted close to eight bills, including various amendments that established various independent boards for every profession.
We can see what it has done and continues to do for the construction sector. Let us be bold and create legislation that can drive this sector over the next 20 years, not years.
This bill needs to be withdrawn pronto. It is not only bad but grossly shameful for the sector in this day and age.
The writer is a construction and real estate expert.
