The riparian countries of LVB through the East African Community (EAC) and its protocol for sustainable management of the LVB have developed an action plan for management of the entire lake and its catchments across sectors.
In 2003, the EAC signed a Protocol for Sustainable Development of LVB. The Protocol has played a crucial role in the establishment of an institutional framework for better management of the LVB. Under the protocol, Lake Victoria Basin Commission (LVBC) was formed as an apex institution responsible for all the management initiatives in the LVB.
Other important management bodies involved in the LVB include Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) and the Nile Equatorial Lakes Subsidiary Action Programme (NELSAP) focusing on the promotion of economic growth, eradication of poverty and a reversal of environmental degradation.
There are significant differences in institutional structure between the two catchments (Kagera and Nyando).
Kagera being a transboundary river basin means that the countries within the catchment (Burundi, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda) would have to set and agree on a management structure in reference to the policy framework of the LVBC. However, in terms of institutional setting Kagera in the mean time does not have any institutional framework as the KBO has been dissolved and the proposal to form Kagera basin management unit are still under way and not yet formalized. There is no management structure in place since KBO was dissolved in 2004. Currently there is a proposal to form a Kagera Basin Management Unit (KBMU) to be under LVBC but it is still in an early development stage. Each country tries to manage their portion of the river basin.
On the other hand, Nyando as a single country catchment which is managed by the WRMA and specifically under the Lake Victoria South meaning Nyando has a proper management structure. There is also a CMS in Nyando though focusing mainly on flood management.
In terms of policy framework and land management practice implementation, both catchments face the same challenges. In addition, land management policies within a catchment (upstream and down stream) vary significantly.