Executive Summary

This research evaluated Kenyan youth perceptions towards the European Union (EU), with emphasis on their role, credibility, and visibility in governance, peace-building, and youth empowerment given the rising levels of civic activism, such as the recent 2024 youth-led protests. This study aimed to evaluate how youth view projects sponsored by the EU, their participation levels, and their expectations in further collaboration between Kenya youth and the Delegation of the European Union to Kenya.

This research took place in five counties: Nairobi, Kericho, Taita Taveta, Makueni, and Baringo between August 2025–February 2026. These five counties were chosen to encompass a wide range of geographical, economic, and digital environments. Mixed methodology was adopted for this study. A survey with 391 youth respondents via Kobo Collect and Google Forms and quantitative research techniques, FGDs and 10 KIIs with youth leaders, trainers, digital stakeholders, and social organizations representing qualitative methodology.

Findings revealed that the total awareness of the EU among Kenyan youth is at 62 percent, which is moderate name recognition. Furthermore, it is evident that the awareness of the EU is not balanced among the countries, nor is it in-depth. Although 82 percent of the respondents managed to identify one of the EU-funded projects, few could explain the bigger picture of what the EU does in Kenya. Notably, the key area that the youth identified with the EU were police and security sector reform (42 percent), Erasmus+ projects, education (29.5 percent), economic empowerment projects (26 percent), digital innovation, and Team Europe multi-partner projects, which were significantly lower.

Perceptions of EU visibility were mixed. While the EU is seen as a credible development partner, there is limited direct engagement of EU with the Kenyan youth. Only 26.5 percent of the respondents had direct personal engagement with any of the EU-funded programs, whereas most 70 percent of the group had regular direct engaged with any of their programs, citing a lack of information or higher exclusion as significant factors. FGDs were consistent with these results, with youth from the rural areas expressing that the “EU is heard of but rarely seen, apart from NGO communities.”

Trust in the EU came out to be conditional, rather than unconditional. Though 55 percent of people showed their trust in the EU-funded schemes despite the 2024 protests, 31 percent showed a lack of trust, mostly because of the lack of adequate communication by the EU in cases of police brutality or social unrest. It came out that young people appreciate the diplomacy of the EU but would like to witness more overt support for human rights ideals in critical situations within their nation.

Despite these issues, the study revealed that the youth showed significant openness to engaging with the EU in a more transparent, inclusive, and participatory form. Transparency, inclusivity, and accountability in governance were strongly emphasized among the respondents for government-related interventions at the country level. In conclusion, the results point to a critical need for the EU to not only make significant programmatic efforts in the youth space in Kenya but also to ensure that it is visible, youth-responsive, and inclusive in engaging with youth as key partners. This would be crucial for it to regain the trust of Kenyan youth and ensure that their collaboration is sustained.