Growing the Wealth of the Poor - World Resources Institute

In the 1970s and 1980s, efforts to make tenure more securein Africa, Asia, and Latin America focused on large-scale landtitlingprograms, emphasizing formal land registration andindividual title deeds backed by detailed surveys of propertyboundaries (cadastral surveys). This approach brought somesuccess in Latin America and Asia. In Nicaragua, Ecuador, andVenezuela, research shows that registration of land has broughthigher agricultural investment and land values, while Thailand’stitling program has increased productivity and investment ontitled farm land (Cotula et al. 2006:20; van den Brink et al.2006:19–20; Feder 2002: 15, 18; Deininger 2003:42–51).In general, however, traditional titling efforts have notproved to be an effective and cost-efficient approach, particularlyin Africa. They tend to be too expensive, time-consuming, andbureaucratically complex and therefore not very accessible to thepoor. In 1985, Ghana enacted a registration law intended to helpformalize all interests in land, whether under customary tenure orthe nation’s common law tenure. But the country’s registry hasnot been able to process applications quickly enough and a largebacklog remains. In addition, poor quality control in the registrationprocess led to 30,000 disputed titles as of 2000 (Cotula et al.2006: 20–22; Toulmin 2005:46; van den Brink et al. 2006:12–13).Titling also brings with it other challenges and unintendedconsequences. Experience shows that local elites often try to takeadvantage of the titling process to grab land or to influence theregistration process in their favor, such as by registering commonlands in their own name. Titling may also work against marginalizedgroups, such as widows or the poor, who may not have thetime, money, or technical understanding to protect their interestsagainst those with more influence or contacts. Titling may evenincrease land conflicts—at least in the short term—as peoplewith latent disputes realize that registration will be a decisive stepin deciding who holds property rights over a given piece of landor resource (Cotula et al. 2006:20).Using Local InstitutionsAs a result, the thinking on how best to improve tenure security hasnow shifted away from wholesale replacement of customary tenurewith formal titles. The current consensus is that a broader approachis necessary that builds on local tenure practices and uses local institutionsto help execute simpler forms of land and resource registrationopen to a broader range of rural families. Such registration can bemuch lower-cost and can offer an intermediate level of formalizationthat provides a measurable increase in security (Cotula et al. 2006:21–22; van den Brink et al. 2006:14). In Niger, for example, thegovernment has instituted a community-based system for registeringlocal land rights in the Mirriah region by creating Village LandCommissions. The five-person committees publicize the requests theyreceive for land registration and, if a request is not contested, theyrecord it in the village land register (Toulmin 2005:48).Another key to increasing tenure security is rectifying nationaltenure laws so that they recognize local customary land rights.Countries such as Uganda, Mozambique, Tanzania, Niger, andNamibia have all made efforts to protect such customary tenure inB U I L D I N G O W N E R S H I P, C A P A C I T Y , A N D C O N N E C T I O Nlaw and often to recognize it through various forms of registration.On the other hand, under Mozambique’s 1997 land law, customaryuse rights are protected whether they have been registered ornot. The law also mandates that communities be consulted wheninvestment projects are proposed within their jurisdiction and begiven the right of first refusal (Cotula et al. 2006:21; IIED 2006:7).One potential problem with blanket recognition of customarytenure is that it may formalize existing inequalities in customarytenure arrangements, which often concentrate land rights inauthorities such as tribal chiefs (Ribot 2008).Rights for the LandlessA comprehensive approach to increasing tenure security must alsoserve those who don’t own land. Land leasing arrangements, forexample, are an important form of land access for many ruralfamilies. Tenure experts point out that full, titled ownership is notalways required to give secure access to land and resources. Longertermlease or tenant arrangements can also provide security andflexibility at much lower cost than land purchases, making them agood entry point for many poor families to increase their land andresource access. Sometimes, NGOs can play a useful intermediaryrole in helping the poor negotiate land leases. In the Indian state ofAndhra Pradesh, an NGO called the Deccan Development Societyhas helped lower-caste women lease underutilized private land ona tenancy basis (Cotula et al. 2006:25).Finally, any approach to more secure tenure must include thedevelopment of more effective systems to resolve land disputes.Often, several different courts and land dispute tribunals—somepart of the national legal system and some operating undercustomary law—operate in the same jurisdiction without coordination.Those with conflicts often go “forum shopping,” lookingfor the venue where they feel they will get the most favorableruling. The result is that many land disputes are never fullyresolved in a manner that is binding or accepted by all parties. Afunctional dispute resolution system must include both customaryand statutory mechanisms within a single framework, with theconnection between the two clearly established (von Benda-Beckmann 1981; Cotula et al. 2006:23).Forests: Leading Tenure ProgressHow quickly such approaches can be applied to bring measurableincreases in resource tenure security is uncertain. But it is clear thatfundamental changes in the tenure landscape are already underway, particularly with respect to state-owned resources such asforests. Forest tenure has changed substantially in the last fewdecades, with the area of forest administered by communitiesdoubling in the past 15 years alone to 25 percent of all developingcountryforests (White et al. 2007:15) New legislation and reformsnow taking place suggest that this increase may continue, withsome experts predicting the percentage of community forests maydouble again by 2020. For instance, in 2006, the Indian parliamentpassed legislation recognizing the land and use rights ofindigenous tribes and other traditional forest dwellers. Meanwhile,the Indonesian government indicated it would allocate 60 percentOWNERSHIP53