Trade liberalization in Kenya started in the early 1980s with the structural adjustment programmes, and continued under the multilateral framework of the WTO. During the same period, the incidence of poverty and level of inequality also worsened. The government’s focus on trade negotiations has been to ensure that there is policy space for the daily running of the economy even though welfare impacts are also important. Non-state actors have argued that trade liberalization has negatively affected the poor; particularly the farmers, since they cannot compete with the developed countries whose farmers enjoy significant government support through subsidies, making their products much cheaper in the world market. Government officials, on the other hand, contend that trade liberalization is good as it brings in competition and transfer of technology which is good for an economy. It is important to examine how trade liberalization has affected household’s welfare in Kenya, given that this kind of analysis has not been conducted in Kenya. This study is unique because it does not assume the existence of a trade liberalization– poverty relationship, unlike most studies. It uses a multi-method approach to first test the hypothesis that there is no statistically significant relationship between trade liberalization and poverty, it further tests for multiplier effects of trade liberalization on poverty determinants. Trade Liberalization and poverty is found to have a stochastic relationship, furthermore investments and capital stock were found to significantly affect poverty determinants in the stochastic model. Due to unavailability of household welfare measure data in time series, a CGE model was used to establish the dynamics of trade liberalization on poverty at a point in time using the 2003 Social Accounting Matrix Data for Kenya. Overall, trade liberalization accompanied by FDI had the greatest impact on household welfare. Trade liberalization had a positive impact on household welfare since household incomes and consumption increased. Micro simulations results, based on changes in consumption, also showed that poverty incidence reduced for all households, even though the urban households experienced higher decreases. The study found that there was little difference in protecting sensitive products and not protecting them; secondly, trade liberalization accompanied by foreign direct investment had greater impact on improving the household welfare. Consumption and incomes increased, resulting in overall poverty reduction. The welfare of urban households was much higher than rural households in terms of income and consumption increases. However, income inequality was much higher in urban than rural areas. / Economics / D. Litt. et Phil. (Economics)