For years, Kenyan creatives were told to be grateful for exposure. A musician would hear their song at a rally without payment. A photographer would be asked for a discount because the client had a following. A fashion designer would be praised online but denied credit. In 2026, that old conversation is changing.
Two things are happening at once. First, the Sanara programme says it has deployed more than KSh1.2 billion in commercial financing and grants, reaching more than 20,000 young creatives and over 330 creative enterprises across six counties. Second, Kenya is debating how music and audiovisual works should be licensed by politicians, salons, matatus, DJs, media houses and businesses.
Sanara is trying to prove that creative businesses are investable
Citizen Digital reported that Sanara has disbursed more than KSh1.2 billion in commercial financing and grants to support Kenya's creative economy. The programme is supported by the Mastercard Foundation and implemented by HEVA Fund, SNDBX Ubuntu, Baraza Media Lab and GoDown Arts Centre.
The numbers are important, but the model matters more. Sanara is not only handing out grants. It combines finance, business development, technical skills, market linkages, creative infrastructure mapping and policy support.
This matters because creative work often fails to fit traditional bank logic. A musician's value may be in catalogue rights. A filmmaker's cash flow may arrive after delivery. A fashion brand may need market access more than machinery. A designer may have orders but no working capital. Without sector-specific finance, many creatives stay talented and broke.
The other battle is whether music users will actually pay
The copyright tariff debate shows the tension. On one side are artists and rights holders who argue that music is used commercially every day and should generate royalties. On the other side are businesses and politicians warning that fees can become too heavy, confusing or poorly consulted.
Early reports said political parties would pay KSh600,000 per year to use music in events, while presidential candidates would face KSh500,000, governors KSh200,000 and senators KSh150,000 under the revised schedule. Other users such as DJs, salons, barbershops, restaurants, hotels, retailers and transport operators also appeared in the broader tariff discussion.
The pushback was immediate. MPs questioned public participation, the burden on small businesses and whether the campaign-season charges could limit fair competition. Eastleigh Voice later reported that MPs rejected the higher campaign music licensing fees, saying the proposal would impose unfair pressure on candidates.
| Group | Why artists care | Why users push back |
|---|---|---|
| Politicians | Campaigns use songs to create emotion and identity | High fees can be framed as a barrier to political participation |
| Salons and barbershops | Music improves customer experience and supports business | Small operators may see annual fees as another compliance burden |
| DJs and event organisers | They earn directly from using other people's music | They need predictable licensing that does not punish small gigs |
| Media and platforms | Broadcast and digital use can create large value from catalogues | Revenue-based models need transparent calculation and distribution |
A serious creative economy needs both capital and predictable income
Sanara solves one part of the problem: access to finance, skills and markets. Royalty reform tries to solve another: recurring income from work already created.
Those two sides must meet. A musician who receives training and a loan still needs a royalty system that pays reliably when their music is used. A filmmaker who gets grant support still needs distribution channels and licensing deals. A fashion designer who receives business training still needs buyers, contracts and protection against copying.
The most encouraging detail from Sanara is that about 30 percent of beneficiaries accessed formal credit for the first time. That suggests the programme is bringing creatives into systems they were historically locked out of. The challenge is whether they can stay in those systems after the programme cycle ends.
Talent is not enough if the business side is weak
The new financing conversation should push creatives to professionalise. That does not mean losing authenticity. It means knowing your costs, owning your records, registering your rights, pricing your work, issuing invoices and negotiating contracts before delivery.
Kenya's creative sector is growing up in public
The Sanara financing numbers show that investors and development partners now see creative work as business, not only culture. The copyright tariff fight shows that the rest of the economy is still adjusting to the idea that using music, images and performances has a cost.
Artists should be paid. Small businesses should not be crushed by confusing fees. Politicians should not use campaign energy to harvest creative value for free. Collection bodies should be transparent. And financiers should understand that creative businesses do not always look like ordinary shops.
This is why 2026 feels like a turning point. Kenya is not asking whether creatives matter. It is now arguing over how to finance them, regulate usage of their work and turn cultural energy into sustainable income.
The sector now needs proof that money reaches creators fairly
The next stage of Kenya's creative-economy debate should focus on measurement. How many supported enterprises increased revenue? How many created paid jobs? How many women-led businesses moved from grants to sustainable borrowing? How much royalty money was collected, and how much was actually distributed to rights holders?
These questions are not cynical. They are the difference between a creative economy that sounds good in speeches and one that changes people's lives. Artists and creative entrepreneurs do not only need applause. They need contracts, cash flow, legal protection, predictable licensing and customers who understand that creative work has commercial value.
For small businesses, the fair solution is not to ignore artists. It is to create affordable, clear and easy licensing tiers. For artists, the fair demand is not only higher fees. It is transparent collection, clean metadata and systems that can prove who deserves payment.
Counties also matter. A creative economy concentrated only in Nairobi will miss large pools of talent. Mombasa has music, film, fashion and tourism-facing design. Kisumu has performance, media and events. Turkana has refugee and host-community craft enterprises with international-market potential. Financing should therefore follow talent where it is, not only where boardrooms are.