Diesel prices in Nairobi were nearly 30 per cent higher in June than a year earlier, while petrol prices rose by 15 per cent.
A new TIFA Research survey shows that six in 10 ride-hailing users would change how they travel if fares increased significantly, highlighting the growing tension between rising transport costs and passenger affordability.
Kenya’s fuel-price squeeze is colliding with mounting pressure on household budgets, with diesel and petrol remaining substantially more expensive than they were a year ago despite recent reductions in diesel prices.
In Nairobi, the average price of diesel rose from Ksh171.58 per litre in June 2025 to Ksh222.86 per litre in June 2026, representing a 29.9 per cent year-on-year increase, according to the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics.
Petrol prices also increased, rising from Ksh186.31 to Ksh214.03 per litre over the same period, a 14.9% increase.
The higher fuel costs are feeding into a wider debate over transport fares, as passengers show limited appetite for measures that could make ride-hailing services more expensive.
Diesel falls from peak
The latest fuel-price movements require an important distinction.
Diesel has fallen from its recent peak. Under the Energy and Petroleum Regulatory Authority (EPRA) pricing cycle that took effect on August 15, 2026, Nairobi’s maximum diesel price dropped by Ksh5 to Ksh217.86 per litre.
Super petrol remained unchanged at Ksh214.03 per litre, with the prices applying through September 14, 2026.
The reduction offers some short-term relief to motorists and transport operators. However, diesel at Ksh217.86 per litre remains about Ksh46 above its June 2025 average.
That distinction is central to the fuel story. Pump prices can fall from one month to the next while remaining considerably higher than they were a year earlier.
The latest EPRA review also underscores the pressure on petrol consumers. The regulator said petrol prices were kept unchanged with the help of Ksh938 million in additional government stabilisation support, despite a rise in the landed cost of imported petrol.
Passengers resist higher fares
The fuel-price pressure comes as policymakers consider a proposed minimum-fare framework for ride-hailing services.
Tifa Research found that 59 per cent of ride-hailing users viewed the proposed minimum-fare policy negatively, compared with 39 per cent who supported it.
The survey also found that 63 per cent of users believe fares for services such as Bolt, Uber, Little Cab and Faras should be determined by market forces, while 33 per cent favour government regulation and 4 per cent are undecided.
The findings suggest that consumers may support better earnings for drivers in principle but remain wary of policies that could transfer higher operating costs directly to passengers.
Tifa reported that 36 per cent of respondents feared the proposed policy would make rides more expensive. Among those supporting the policy, the strongest argument was that drivers deserve better earnings.
The strongest warning, however, is what passengers say they would do if prices rise.
Tifa found that 44 per cent of users would use matatus more often, 11 per cent would use ride-hailing services less often and another 11 per cent would switch to cheaper ride-hailing options. Only 18 per cent said they would continue using ride-hailing services as usual.
Taken together, the figures show that 60 per cent of users would change their transport behaviour if ride-hailing fares increased significantly.
That makes affordability more than a public-relations issue for ride-hailing companies and policymakers. It could directly affect demand.
The fuel-fare squeeze
For drivers, higher fuel prices increase the cost of operating a vehicle. For passengers, those costs can eventually appear in the price of a journey.
That creates a difficult equation for regulators.
If fares remain low while fuel and other operating costs rise, drivers may see their earnings squeezed. But if fares increase sharply, passengers may reduce their use of ride-hailing services or switch to cheaper alternatives.
Tifa’s findings suggest many passengers are already prepared to make that switch.
The survey found that 44 per cent would turn to matatus more frequently if ride-hailing fares rose significantly, while another 22 per cent would either reduce their use of ride-hailing services or move to cheaper options.
The result is a potential trade-off. Higher fares could improve earnings per trip while reducing the number of trips available to drivers.
The transport debate is also unfolding against wider concern about rising household expenses.
Tifa found that 81 per cent of respondents were very concerned about rising prices in everyday life, including fuel, groceries, rent and transport.
That finding provides context for the resistance to higher ride-hailing fares.
A passenger deciding whether to pay more for a ride is not considering the fare in isolation. The same household budget is also absorbing food, housing, fuel and other daily expenses.
For policymakers, the challenge is therefore to improve conditions for drivers without undermining demand for the services they depend on for income.
For passengers, the question is simpler: how much more can transport cost before changing the way they travel becomes the cheaper option?
The Tifa survey suggests that, for six in 10 ride-hailing users, that threshold may already be approaching.
