Last Updated 41 mins ago by Kenya Engineer
Europe is moving into the next chapter of structural engineering standards. After more than a decade of development, the second generation of the Eurocodes is now moving from technical preparation into national implementation, with the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre confirming that the formal voting process for the new standards was completed in November 2025. The definitive texts were made available to national standards bodies by March 2026, with publication at national level scheduled by September 2027 and withdrawal of conflicting first-generation standards by March 2028 within the European system.
For European engineers, this marks the beginning of a major transition. For countries outside Europe that have adopted the Eurocode framework, however, it raises another question: what happens when the country is still completing its own journey of adopting, adapting and implementing the first generation?
That question is particularly relevant in Kenya.
Kenya adopted the Structural Eurocodes as Kenya Standards in 2012, beginning a transition away from the British Standards that had long been embedded in engineering education and practice. More than a decade later, the country is still developing and publishing Kenya-specific National Annexes, while the National Building Code 2024 has brought Eurocodes much more firmly into the regulatory framework for building design. At the same time, Europe is preparing engineers for the second generation.
Kenya therefore finds itself at an unusual point in the history of the Eurocodes: completing the localisation of one generation while the next is already arriving.
Why is there a second generation?
The Eurocodes were developed to provide a common approach to the structural design of buildings and civil engineering works. The first generation established a comprehensive framework covering the basis of structural design, actions on structures, concrete, steel, composite structures, timber, masonry, geotechnical design, earthquake-resistant design and aluminium structures.
But structural engineering has not stood still.
New research, new materials, changing construction practices, the growing importance of existing buildings and the need to respond to climate and sustainability considerations have all created reasons to update the standards.
The second generation is therefore not simply a replacement of one set of equations with another. According to the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre, the revision seeks to improve the practical use of the Eurocodes for everyday calculations, introduce provisions for assessment, reuse and retrofitting of existing structures, strengthen requirements for structural robustness and extend the suite into areas such as structural glass. Work has also progressed on technical specifications covering fibre-polymer composite and tensioned membrane structures.
This represents an important shift in emphasis.
The first generation was largely associated with designing new structures within a common framework. The second generation gives much greater attention to what happens to structures that already exist, how they can be assessed, strengthened and reused, and how structural design can respond to changing technical and environmental requirements.
That could have particular relevance for countries such as Kenya, where the built environment includes a large stock of buildings and infrastructure designed under different generations of standards.
What actually changes?
One of the most significant developments is the introduction of a dedicated framework for the assessment of existing structures. The second generation of Eurocode 0 includes EN 1990-2, addressing the basis of structural and geotechnical design for existing structures. The European Commission’s current programme specifically identifies assessment and retrofitting as one of the major additions to the second generation.
For an engineer assessing an older building for a change of use, additional floors, deterioration, damage or an extension of its service life, this is potentially more useful than simply applying the rules originally intended for a new structure.
The revised Eurocodes also place greater emphasis on robustness. The objective is to improve the ability of structures to withstand localised damage without disproportionate consequences, an issue that sits at the intersection of structural design, risk and resilience.
There is also an effort to make the codes easier to use. The second-generation Eurocodes seek greater consistency in design models and provisions and, in several areas, a reduction in the number of Nationally Determined Parameters. The second-generation Eurocode 2, for example, includes changes covering durability, analysis, ultimate and serviceability limit states, detailing, cracking and structural fire design, while its developers highlight improved consistency and ease of use.
Climate and sustainability considerations also feature more prominently in the revision. The second-generation programme includes work on how future climate change impacts can be considered within structural design, while the revised framework also incorporates considerations associated with durability, reuse and the life of existing structures.
The scope of the Eurocode family itself is expanding. A new Eurocode for structural glass is being developed, while technical work is continuing around fibre-polymer composite and tensioned membrane structures.
For engineers, the significance is broader than learning a new edition of familiar design rules. The second generation reflects an engineering environment in which existing buildings, new materials, resilience, climate considerations and resource efficiency increasingly form part of the structural design conversation.
Kenya’s Eurocode journey began in 2012
Kenya’s own Eurocode story began more than a decade ago.
In September 2012, through Gazette Notice No. 13048, Kenya adopted the Structural Eurocodes as Kenya Standards, initially with the UK National Annex. At the time, the standards represented a significant shift for Kenyan engineering practice because British Standards had traditionally been widely used in engineering education and construction. Kenya Engineer reported in 2016 that the implementation programme was expected to be completed by January 2021.
The transition was never intended to be achieved simply by publishing the standards.
KEBS, working with academic and professional stakeholders, embarked on sensitisation and training. In 2016, Kenya Engineer reported on workshops aimed at government technical personnel, institutions of higher learning, professional bodies, control and certification bodies and companies in the construction industry. The intention was to give the people who would actually use, review and enforce the standards the necessary understanding of the new system.
The importance of training became clear again several years later.
In 2024, KEBS announced a new programme of five-day courses covering Eurocode 2 for concrete design, Eurocode 3 for steel design, Eurocode 7 for geotechnical design and a bridge module. The programme was offered in Naivasha and Nyeri and was recognised for Engineers Board of Kenya continuous professional development purposes.
The fact that such training was still being actively promoted in 2024 illustrates an important distinction: adopting a standard and achieving effective implementation across an engineering profession are two different processes.
The National Annex is where Kenya makes the Eurocodes local
One of the easiest aspects of the Eurocode system to misunderstand is the relationship between the common European standard and the National Annex.
A Eurocode establishes a common technical framework, but certain parameters are deliberately left for national determination. These can relate to matters such as climatic conditions, loads, reliability and other circumstances where national conditions need to be reflected.
An important question for Kenya is how far the country has progressed in developing and implementing the Kenyan parameters needed to make the framework appropriate for local conditions.
The 2016 Kenya Engineer report noted that Kenya had initially adopted the Eurocodes together with the UK National Annex.
The more recent picture is different.
KEBS’s current standards catalogue lists Kenya National Annexes for several Eurocode parts. These include the National Annex to Eurocode 0 on the basis of structural design, as well as National Annexes for Eurocode 2 on concrete and Eurocode 3 on steel and structural fire design.
The Kenya Gazette of October 2025 also records the Kenya National Annex to KS EN 1990:2002 as a first-edition Kenyan standard.
The process has continued into 2026. KEBS’s catalogue lists Kenya National Annexes for parts of Eurocode 1 covering general actions, including densities, self-weight and imposed loads, as well as fire actions, and a National Annex for Eurocode 7 covering geotechnical design.
The implication is significant. Kenya’s Eurocode journey isn’t simply about importing a European design methodology. It is increasingly about building a Kenyan standards framework around that methodology.
Why local parameters matter
The importance of this process becomes clearer when considering something as ordinary as wind.
Research undertaken in Kenya has examined the challenges of determining wind loads using the Eurocode framework in the absence of a Kenyan National Annex. Differences between the approaches historically used in Kenya and those in Eurocode 1 demonstrated why local parameters matter when applying a common international methodology to a particular environment.
The principle is straightforward.
Two engineers can use the same Eurocode methodology but arrive at different design actions if they use different nationally determined parameters. The National Annex is therefore not simply an administrative attachment to a European standard. It is part of the mechanism through which the common methodology is adapted to national conditions.
This is also why Kenya’s National Annex programme deserves attention beyond the standards community. It affects structural designers, reviewers, regulators, universities, software developers, contractors and clients.
The National Building Code changes the context
The Eurocode transition is also taking place alongside a much broader change in Kenya’s construction regulatory environment.
Kenya’s National Building Code 2024 was published as Legal Notice No. 47 on 1 March 2024, replacing the Local Government (Adoptive By-Laws) (Building) Order of 1968. The Code came into force on 1 March 2025 following its one-year transition period. The National Construction Authority has subsequently undertaken nationwide training and sensitisation on its implementation.
The Code establishes an updated framework covering planning, design, approval, construction, maintenance and demolition of buildings. Its structural-design provisions reference the Eurocode family, making the relationship between Kenya’s building regulation and the Eurocode framework more direct.
This means the Eurocode discussion is no longer confined to standards committees or specialist structural-engineering classrooms. It sits within the wider regulatory system governing Kenya’s built environment.
The practical question now becomes whether engineers, regulators, approving authorities, contractors and educational institutions are operating from a sufficiently consistent understanding of that framework.
And then Europe moves on
This is where Kenya’s position becomes particularly interesting.
The first-generation Eurocodes are still central to the Kenyan transition, but Europe has already moved to the next stage.
The European Commission says the second-generation standards are to be made available to national standards bodies by March 2026. Within the European system, the common date for publication is September 2027 and the conflicting first-generation standards are scheduled for withdrawal by March 2028.
That does not mean Kenya is automatically required to follow the same timetable.
Kenya has its own standards-development and adoption processes. The European dates apply to the European standardisation system, not automatically to Kenya.
But the development presents Kenya with a strategic standards question.
If Kenya is still completing the National Annexes and implementation arrangements for the first generation, how should it approach the second?
One possibility is to complete the current localisation exercise and subsequently begin a structured transition to the second generation. Another question is whether, in some areas, it would make sense to avoid investing heavily in first-generation national arrangements where the underlying European standard is already being superseded.
The answer will require coordination between KEBS, the National Construction Authority, the Engineers Board of Kenya, universities, professional bodies, industry and other stakeholders.
Training will be as important as standards
Kenya’s experience with the first generation offers one obvious lesson: publishing standards does not automatically create implementation capacity.
The 2016 sensitisation programme and the 2024 KEBS training programme demonstrate that engineers need time to understand the codes, work through design examples, adapt software and calculation procedures, and become comfortable with the underlying philosophy.
A transition to the second generation will therefore involve more than purchasing new standards.
Universities will need to consider how the revised provisions are reflected in engineering education. Professional bodies may need new CPD programmes. Regulators and reviewers will need to understand the revised requirements. Software providers will need to support the applicable national parameters. Practising engineers will need accessible guidance and worked examples.
There is also a wider opportunity.
The second generation’s emphasis on assessment and reuse of existing structures could become increasingly relevant as Kenya’s urban areas mature and buildings are renovated, repurposed, extended and strengthened rather than simply demolished and replaced.
Kenya’s Eurocode story is entering another phase
When Kenya Engineer reported on the adoption of Eurocodes in 2016, the central question was how Kenya would make the transition from the British Standards that had dominated engineering practice for decades.
Ten years later, the question has changed.
Kenya now has a National Building Code built around a modern regulatory framework, KEBS has been developing Kenya-specific National Annexes, and professional training on Eurocodes has continued. At the same time, the international standards system from which the Eurocode framework originates is undergoing its most substantial revision since the first generation was developed.
The second generation brings existing structures, retrofit, robustness, new materials, improved usability and evolving sustainability and climate considerations further into the standards framework.
This does not necessarily mean abandoning the first-generation work. Rather, it means the country now has an opportunity to consider how that work connects to the next stage.
The central challenge may therefore be less about choosing between “first generation” and “second generation” than about building a standards transition that is coherent, locally relevant and practical for the engineers who have to use it.
The Eurocodes were originally conceived to create a common language for structural engineering. Kenya’s experience shows that adopting that language is only the beginning. The next task is making it genuinely Kenyan — and ensuring that when the language itself evolves, the country’s engineers, educators, regulators and construction industry are ready to evolve with it.
-
Product on sale
AWEBook Volume 2Original price was: KShs 3,500.00.KShs 3,000.00Current price is: KShs 3,000.00.
