• Fatuma Horow Abubakar The Management University of Africa
  • Paul Machoka The Management University of Africa


Purpose of the Study: To determine the degree to which legitimate and administrative structures by the National lands commission in Kenya has affected the management of public resources this is in addition to management capacity, administrative structure and costs.

Statement of the Problem: In the recent past, there has been gigantic arraignment of state officials, including Heads of State across Africa, due to mismanagement of public assets, irreconcilable situation, maltreatment of office, defective business practices and helpless obtainment rehearses, every one of these being moral issues that are inserted in the lawful and administrative structures. A more intensive glance at the Kenyan perspective, and with regard to the National Lands Commission postulates that issues to do with regulatory framework, management capacity, administrative structures as well as costs if well-handled could ensure effective utilization of public resources.

Methodology: The targeted the national lands commission workers selected from different divisions within the institution. The research design in this study was a descriptive. A stratified random sampling technique was used to choose a sample size of 38 from a target population of 125. A 5-point Likert scale questionnaire was utilized as the primary study tool. Primary data was gathered via the use of questionnaires that were distributed through the links as Google forms.

Result: The findings revealed a coefficient of determination of 0.709, implying that management capacity, regulatory frameworks, administrative structure and costs management jointly explain 70.9 percent of the variation in public resource management at the Kenya National Lands Commission. The findings also revealed that management capacity had positive and significant effect on public resource management at the Kenya National Lands Commission (β =.202, p=.026<.05), regulatory framework had positive and significant effect on public resource management at the Kenya National Lands Commission (β =.362, p=.000<.05), administrative structures had positive and significant effect on public resource management at the Kenya National Lands Commission (β =.341, p=.003<.05) and finally that cost management had positive and significant effect on public resource management at the Kenya National Lands Commission (β =.247, p=.003<.05).

Conclusion: Management capacity, regulatory frameworks, administrative structure, cost positively and significantly affects public resource management at the Kenya National Lands Commission.

Recommendation: Regulatory framework regulating the Kenya National Lands Commission should undertake awareness and outreach programs to improve staff literacy and understanding of the idea of public resource management, which is currently missing in a portion of the workforce.    

Keywords: Management capacity, Regulatory frameworks, Administration structure, Costs, Public Resource Management.

Author Biographies

Fatuma Horow Abubakar , The Management University of Africa

Postgraduate Student

Paul Machoka, The Management University of Africa



Antoniou, S., Finkielsztein, L., and Winston, E. (2019). How Will Stakeholder Considerations Impact Shareholder Primacy as a Company’s Mandate.

Beshi, T. D., and Kaur, R. (2020). Public trust in local government: Explaining the role of good governance practices. Public Organization Review, 20(2), 337-350.

Biondi, Y. (2016, September). Accounting representations of public debt and deficits in European central government accounts: An exploration of anomalies and contradictions. In accounting forum (Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 205-219). No longer published by Elsevier.

Buchholz, R. A., and Rosenthal, S. B. (2004). Stakeholder theory and public policy: How governments matter. Journal of business ethics, 51(2), 143-153.

Cuvelier, J., Vlassenroot, K., and Olin, N. (2014). Resources, conflict and governance: A critical review. The extractive industries and society, 1(2), 340-350.

Dennehy, E. (2012). Corporate governance-a stakeholder model. International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, 7(2), 83-95.

Elsayed, K. (2010). A multi‐theory perspective of board leadership structure: what does the Egyptian corporate governance context tell us? British Journal of Management, 21(1), 80-99.

Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.

Filatotchev, I., Jackson, G., and Nakajima, C. (2013). Corporate governance and national institutions: A review and emerging research agenda. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(4), 965-986.

Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge university press.

Glow, H., Parris, M. A., and Pyman, A. (2019). Working with boards: The experiences of Australian managers in performing arts organisations. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 78(3), 396-413.

Harrison, J. S., Freeman, R. E., and Abreu, M. C. S. D. (2015). Stakeholder theory as an ethical approach to effective management: Applying the theory to multiple contexts. Revista brasileira de gestão de negócios, 17(55), 858-869.

Hawrysz, L., and Maj, J. (2017). Identification of stakeholders of public interest organisations. Sustainability, 9(9), 1609.

Henrique, P. (2018). The relationship study of teachers' perceptions on their leadership capacity and competence at secondary school of 1912 Dom Boaventura Same, District of Manufahi, Timor-Leste.

Imenda, S. (2014). Is there a conceptual difference between theoretical and conceptual frameworks?. Journal of social sciences, 38(2), 185-195.

Jaguszewski, J., and Williams, K. (2013). New roles for new times: Transforming liaison roles in research libraries.

Kivistö, J. (2007). Agency theory as a framework for the government-university relationship. Tampere University Press.

Le Billon, P. (2011). Extractive sectors and illicit financial flows: What role for revenue governance initiatives?. U4 Issue.

Levi, M., and Soudijn, M. (2020). Understanding the laundering of organized crime money. Crime and Justice, 49(1), 579-631.

Lindner, M., Fitzgerald, J. B., Zimmermann, N. E., Reyer, C., Delzon, S., van der Maaten, E., and Hanewinkel, M. (2014). Climate change and European forests: what do we know, what are the uncertainties, and what are the implications for forest management?. Journal of environmental management, 146, 69-83.

Listorti, G., Basyte Ferrari, E., Acs, S., Munda, G., Rosenbaum, E., Paruolo, P., and Smits, P. (2019). The debate on the EU Better Regulation Agenda: a literature.

Madison, K. J. (2014). Agency theory and stewardship theory integrated, expanded, and bounded by context: an empirical investigation of structure, behavior, and performance within family firms.

Mansuri, G., and Rao, V. (2012). Localizing development: Does participation work?.

Martin, J. A., and Butler, F. C. (2017). Agent and stewardship behavior: How do they differ?. Journal of Management and Organization, 23(5), 633-646.

Matei, A., and Drumasu, C. (2015). Corporate Governance and public sector entities. Procedia Economics and Finance, 26, 495-504.

Morrison, J. (2020). The Global Business Environment: Toward Sustainability?. Red Globe Press.

Muller, S., and Supatgiat, C. (2007). A quantitative optimization model for dynamic risk-based compliance management. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 51(3.4), 295-307.

Poncian, J., and Kigodi, H. M. (2018). Transparency initiatives and Tanzania’s extractive industry governance. Development Studies Research, 5(1), 106-121.

Qiu, R. G., Tang, Y., and Xu, Q. (2006). Integration design of material flow management in an e-business manufacturing environment. Decision Support Systems, 42(2), 1104-1115.

Schilling, J., Locham, R., and Scheffran, J. (2018). A local to global perspective on oil and wind exploitation, resource governance and conflict in Northern Kenya. Conflict, Security and Development, 18(6), 571-600.

Sharma, U., and Lawrence, S. (2009). Global remedies for local needs: Corporate governance and public sector reforms in Fiji. Pacific Accounting Review.

Sukmadilaga, C., Pratama, A., and Mulyani, S. (2015). Good governance implementation in public sector: exploratory analysis of government financial statements disclosures across ASEAN countries. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211, 513-518.

Tilley, A., Hunnam, K. J., Mills, D. J., Steenbergen, D. J., Govan, H., Alonso-Poblacion, E., and Cohen, P. J. (2019). Evaluating the fit of co-management for small-scale fisheries governance in Timor-Leste. Frontiers in Marine Science, 6, 392.

Vivekananda, J., Schilling, J., Mitra, S., and Pandey, N. (2014). On shrimp, salt and security: livelihood risks and responses in South Bangladesh and East India. Environment, development and sustainability, 16(6), 1141-1161.

Wagner, R. E. (2016). Politics as a peculiar business: Insights from a theory of entangled political economy. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Wehrmeyer, W. (Ed.). (2017). Greening people: Human resources and environmental management. Routledge.

White, J., and Wildavsky, A. (2021). The deficit and the public interest: The search for responsible budgeting in the 1980s. University of California Press.

Williams, D. A., and Dupuy, K. (2016). At the extremes: Corruption in natural public resource management revisited. U4 Brief.

Wingårdh, G., and Wærn, R. (Eds.). (2012). Crucial words: conditions for contemporary architecture. Walter de Gruyter.

Zetzsche, D. A., Buckley, R. P., Barberis, J. N., and Arner, D. W. (2017). Regulating a revolution: From regulatory sandboxes to smart regulation. Fordham J. Corp. and Fin. L., 23, 31.
How to Cite