Getting electricity: Mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) in Kenya
Kenya: Getting electricity: Mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019. ▬ Flat
Getting electricity: Mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) in Kenya, 2014–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
The most recent figure for getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) in Kenya is 1 DB16-20 methodology, measured in 2019. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.
That represents a change of unchanged over ten years.
That places Kenya 1st out of 186 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the top 10%.
Countries ranked near Kenya
- 1 China, People's Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 India 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Indonesia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Pakistan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United States 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mexico 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Russian Federation 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Japan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Brazil 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Albania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Algeria 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Antigua and Barbuda 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Argentina 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Armenia, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Australia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Austria 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Azerbaijan, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahamas, The 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bahrain, Kingdom of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Barbados 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belarus, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belgium 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Belize 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bolivia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Brunei Darussalam 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Bulgaria 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Burkina Faso 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Burundi 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cambodia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Canada 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Chile 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Colombia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Costa Rica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Côte d'Ivoire 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Croatia, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Cyprus 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Czech Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Denmark 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Djibouti 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Dominica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Dominican Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ecuador 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Egypt, Arab Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 El Salvador 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Estonia, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Eswatini, Kingdom of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Fiji, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Finland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 France 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Gabon 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Germany 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ghana 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Greece 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Guatemala 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of China 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Hungary 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iceland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Iraq 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ireland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Israel 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Italy 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Jamaica 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Jordan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kazakhstan, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Korea, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kosovo 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Kuwait 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lao People's Democratic Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Latvia, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Libya 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Lithuania, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Luxembourg 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malawi 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malaysia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Malta 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Mauritius 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Moldova, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Montenegro 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Morocco 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Namibia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Netherlands, The 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 New Zealand 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Nicaragua 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 North Macedonia, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Norway 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Oman 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Palau, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Panama 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Papua New Guinea 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Paraguay 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Peru 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Philippines 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Poland, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Portugal 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Puerto Rico 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Qatar 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Romania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Rwanda 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Samoa 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 San Marino, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Saudi Arabia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Senegal 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Serbia, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Singapore 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Slovak Republic 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Slovenia, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 South Africa 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Spain 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sri Lanka 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 St. Lucia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sudan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Suriname 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Sweden 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Switzerland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Taiwan Province of China 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tanzania, United Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Thailand 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tonga 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Trinidad and Tobago 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Tunisia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Türkiye, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uganda 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Ukraine 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United Arab Emirates 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 United Kingdom 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uruguay 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Uzbekistan, Republic of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Vanuatu 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Vietnam 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Palestine, State of 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 1 Zambia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
More private sector data for Kenya
- Merchandise trade 22.2% (2025)
- Food imports 16.3% (2024)
- Manufactures imports 56.6% (2024)
- Merchandise imports 21.61 billion current US$ (2025)
- Food exports 49.2% (2024)
- Manufactures exports 30.7% (2024)
- Merchandise exports 8.60 billion current US$ (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per capita 149.5 current US$ per person (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), per unit of GDP 0.0633 current US$ per US$ of GDP (2025)
- Merchandise exports (current US$), annual growth rate 4.42 % change on previous year (2025)
Frequently asked questions
- What is getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) in Kenya?
- Getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) in Kenya was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) recorded in Kenya?
- The highest recorded value was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- What is the lowest getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) recorded in Kenya?
- The lowest recorded value was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2014.
- How does Kenya rank for getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1)?
- Kenya ranks 1st out of 186 countries with data for 2019.
- Is getting electricity: mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) rising or falling in Kenya?
- Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
- Where does this Kenya data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Getting electricity: Mechanisms for restoring service (0-1) (DB16-20 methodology). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 6 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
The mechanisms for restoring service index evaluates what tools are used by the distribution utility to restore power supply. A score of 1 is assigned if the utility uses automated tools, such as an OMS/IMS or SCADA system. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.