Post Type: Article

Last week, USAID hosted three experts in the urban land tenure sector at a launch event of its new issue brief on Land Tenure in Urban Environments. Consultant Geoffrey Payne, Habitat for Humanity International’s Liz Blake, and UN-Habitat’s Remy Seitchiping all spoke about the importance of addressing land tenure challenges in cities to solve development challenges across Africa, Asia, the Caribbean and Latin America. The conversation builds on the many urban tenure presentations at the World Bank Annual Conference on Land and Poverty two weeks ago, and those taking place this week at the World Urban Forum in Medellin, Colombia.

Remarks by the panelists and narrative in the issue brief reinforce the idea that land tenure issues present complex challenges. Solutions to these challenges are often nuanced, but do not need to be large – in terms of scope or money. In many cases, incremental activities are effective at increasing the perception of tenure security, which is often enough to improve lives and livelihoods.

Solutions for increasing tenure security include leveraging training, information awareness, organization and technology. Secure land tenure and property rights generate benefits for vulnerable communities, private sector investors, government and civil society advocates. These efforts also build greater municipal capacity and improve the provision of key services, which are priorities in USAID’s Urban Services Policy.

Together with its partners, USAID will work to address land tenure and governance issues in the increasingly urban developing world. Read the issue brief on Land Tenure in Urban Environments and if you have any questions, contact us or send a tweet via @USAIDEnviro or @USAIDEconomic.

Congressional Briefing hosted by Congresswoman Betty McCollum on March, 28 2014
Remarks by Dr. Gregory Myers, Land Tenure and Property Rights Division Chief, USAID (as written)

First, I would like to thank Congresswoman McCollum for hosting this event and ActionAid for organizing and bringing all of us together for this important briefing. I would also like to thank Congresswoman McCollum’s staff for their attention to these critical issues.

Background
For 18 months, I had the honor to Chair, on behalf of the United States, the Open-Ended Working Group that negotiated the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (commonly known as the VGs). The VGs were negotiated through a broad and inclusive participatory process – under the UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS) – that involved governments, civil society organizations and the private sector. The VGs were unanimously endorsed by 96 member countries in May 2012. With endorsement, the global community demonstrated their recognition that improving land and other resource governance systems is a strategy for improving food security, promoting sustainable development, limiting conflict, and reducing extreme poverty.

While the development and endorsement of the VGs represents an important achievement, their ultimate value will be determined by their implementation and by measured improvements in the lives and livelihoods of women, men, children and other vulnerable people around the globe.

Where we are now
Having had the opportunity to participate in these negotiations, and managing the largest global bi-lateral program supporting the VGs, I would like to offer an assessment of what has been achieved thus far and what remains to be done.

In the almost two years since the VGs were adopted, much progress has been made. The VGs have become ‘the’ guiding doctrine for emerging economy governments to develop laws and policies that strengthen the protection of property rights for women and men. Donors and development agencies, including USAID, are beginning to align their land and resource governance programs more closely with the principles and practices outlined in the VGs.

Today, in 32 programs across 25 countries, USAID is deploying over $300 million in programs that implement many of the principles and practices outlined in the VGs. These programs help to clarify and strengthen the land tenure and property rights of all members of society — enabling broad-based economic growth, gender equality, reduced incidence of conflicts, enhanced food security, improved resilience to climate change, and effective natural resource management.

For example, in Ethiopia, USAID is building on the success of a series of programs that strengthened property rights of smallholder farmers by expanding the program to a traditionally vulnerable group: pastoralists. Over the past six years under this program, USAID-supported certification efforts led to the issuance of more than 500,000 land certificates to over 230,000 households. Under these programs, boundaries are clarified and validated by neighbors and community members prior to certification, reducing the likelihood of future disputes. The certificates, which can be transferred to descendants, give holders the right to use and profit from the land. This arrangement represents an important shift from the previous system, which was marked by frequent land seizures, redistribution, and declining agricultural productivity. Evidence from evaluations by the World Bank and the Government of Ethiopia suggests that household productivity increased measurably in areas where certificates were issued. In one region where the certification program was implemented, crop yields increased by 10 to potentially 40 percent per acre with no other inputs. USAID’s Ethiopia program is closely aligned with the principles outlined in the VGs.

The brief and infographic that we handed out have additional information about how USAID is supporting implementation of the VGs and making secure land tenure and property rights a reality for people and communities around the world.

The way forward
What comes next? While USAID and other development organizations have made progress supporting implementation of the VGs, more remains to be done. At the global level, we need, first, more specific guidance on how to implement the VGs. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations is contributing to the development of technical guides and training programs that support VG implementation. This is a good start.

We also need better coordination and information sharing among development partners. All too often our development efforts are hampered by a lack of coordination among relevant partners striving toward common goals. The VGs represent an ambitious global agenda; achieving success will require coordinated action by civil society, governments and the private sector.

Last year more than 25 donors and development organizations came together to form the Global Donor Working Group on Land. One of our first objectives was to develop a common platform for sharing data and best practices on land programs that support the VGs. USAID led this initiative. Over the past year, we managed a project that collected information on the land and resource governance programs funded by members of the Global Donor Working Group on Land. The result of this effort is a comprehensive database of 445 programs, funded by 16 donors and development agencies, being implemented in 119 countries, with a total value of over $2 billion.

This information can help stakeholders identify opportunities to coordinate activities and leverage resources for greater impact. The database initiative also provides stakeholders with a platform to share knowledge and best practices, potentially improving the efficiency and effectiveness of current and future programs that support the VGs.

We can bridge the gap between what the global community has agreed to and what is understood and pursued at the ground-level in developing countries. At the local level, we need to experiment with new investment models that will promote smallholder agriculture and/or create opportunities for smallholders to link with commercial investors in ways that are secure and profitable for all.

The development community should also recognize that the private sector plays a key role in the success of implementing the VGs. The private sector is moving forward—in consultation with civil society, host country governments, and donor organizations—to develop better practices for acquiring land for commercial agriculture, extractives, and biofuels. Last year, The Coca-Cola Company negotiated an agreement with Oxfam to respect local property rights along its supply chain, and PepsiCo has recently agreed to do the same. The global community, with U.S. leadership, is in the process of developing guidelines for the private sector: the Principles for Responsible Agricultural Investment (known as the RAI), which are also being developed under the UN Committee on World Food Security. These principles will provide a framework to guide global corporate social responsibility initiatives, and individual investment contracts covering all types of investment in agriculture. In other words, the RAI will provide a framework for the private sector – much in the same way the VGs provide a framework for the public sector. Responsible investment in agriculture can lead to improvements in food security and economic growth.

Another possible next step could be the development of a globally-accepted certification standard – as was done with Fair Trade Coffee or the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. An industry certification, whether added to existing commodity standards or organized as a stand-alone initiative, could set an acceptable expectation for how companies will invest and conduct business with respect to land rights in emerging economies. Certification of land-based investments could also help build the private sector expertise required to effectively manage land throughout supply chains. Such a scheme could also empower civil society to monitor investments in a more systematic way and allow consumers to reward companies that behave responsibly and apply pressure to those that do not.

Conclusion
USAID appreciates civil society organizations bringing the issue of land tenure to the attention of policy leaders in the US. We welcome this opportunity to share progress and challenges with you and our colleagues on the Hill. To help ensure a stable world — where market-based democracies thrive and trade expands, where we create jobs- at home and abroad — we must focus on empowering every global citizen to make individual decisions about how they will acquire, use, enjoy, and dispose of property. The Voluntary Guidelines help all actors design and implement policies and programs that make secure property rights a reality.

USAID Land Tenure and Property Rights Division Chief Dr. Gregory Myers’s Remarks from Partners’ Support to the Voluntary Guidelines & Land Governance: Exploiting Synergies & Measuring Impact. Remarks posted as written.

The United States Government’s contributions to Ethiopia’s land administration reform began in 2004 with methodologies to promote more precise second level registration. During the course of two pilot projects, USAID-supported certification efforts led to the issuance of more than 500,000 land certificates to over 230,000 households. These certificates give holders the right to use and profit from the land. Evidence suggests that household productivity increased measurably in areas where certificates were issued. In one region where the certification program was implemented – the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and People’s Region (SNNPR) region – crop yields may have increased between 11 percent and 40 percent per acre with no other inputs.

In fact, these certification programs were so successful that the Government of Ethiopia scaled up the programs nationwide and solicited the investment of other bilateral and multilateral donors, including the UK – who are investing in the expansion of second level certification in Ethiopia. (Our partner, the U.K. is investing + or – 50 million pounds, while Germany with the EU is investing $3 million euros).

Thus far, the US has focused on improving property rights for smallholder farmers in the highland regions. For the US, the next challenge is to extend this same type of security to pastoral communities in the lowlands. Through USAID’s new Land Administration to Nurture Development (LAND) project, we will develop experimental approaches to secure the property rights of up to 15 pastoral communities by 2019. In addition the program will focus on training and capacity building for land administration.

The United States believes the new multi-stakeholder partnership between the governments of Ethiopia, Germany, the UK, and the US provides a model for greater coordination that will improve the effectiveness of our investments in securing land tenure and property rights in Ethiopia. We believe that this will accelerate progress toward achieving food security. We applaud the Government of Ethiopia for its commitment to strengthen rural land governance, and experiment with new models. We also welcome the opportunity to collaborate more closely with our partners, and we hope to see more of these partnerships developed in other countries in the future.

USAID Land Tenure and Property Rights Division Chief Dr. Gregory Myers’s Remarks from Partners’ Support to the Voluntary Guidelines & Land Governance: Exploiting Synergies & Measuring Impact. Remarks posted as written.

Madam Chair (Rachael Turner), thank you for the opportunity to speak today. On behalf of the United States, I would like to thank the U.K. Department for International Development for their excellent leadership as the inaugural Chair of the Global Donor Working Group on Land. We look forward to working with the incoming Chair of the Working Group—the Government of Germany.

I am here to introduce a new initiative: a comprehensive database and map of land governance programs that are funded by members of the Global Donor Working Group on Land. As we have heard, The Global Donor Working Group was officially launched last year to promote greater coordination on land and resource governance.

One of the primary goals of this group is to support implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines for the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security. From 2011 to 2012, I had the honor to Chair the negotiations of these Guidelines. Some of you in this room were part of those negotiations and know the efforts required to produce an agreement that was endorsed unanimously by 96 member countries, civil society and the private sector.

While the development and endorsement of the Voluntary Guidelines was an important achievement, their ultimate value will be determined by their implementation and measured in improved development outcomes for women, men and children around the globe. Delivering on this ambitious agenda in countries across the developing world will require coordinated action by donors and development agencies, civil society organizations, governments and the private sector.

In order for the Global Donor Working Group to identify opportunities for synergy and achieve greater coordination, we had to first develop a clear understanding of who is doing “what – where” in the land sector. To that end, the United States worked with the Global Donor Platform and members of the Global Donor Working Group on Land to lead a data collection and visualization initiative on the land and resource governance programs from 16 bi-lateral and multi-lateral donors and development agencies, including the development agencies from Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Germany, the European Commission, France, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom, as well as the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, and the World Bank.

The result of these efforts – negotiated through the Global Donor Working Group on Land – is a database of approximately 231 active programs in 103 countries with a total value of approximately $2.9 billion. The database contains information on the location, duration, funding, and scope of each program, as well as information on what specific aspects of the Voluntary Guidelines are addressed by each program’s activities. The database also allows donors to include links to supplemental resources, such as reports or program websites, and points of contact for each program.

An interactive map of the information in the database clearly displays where different donors and development agencies are working and what they are working on with respect to land and resource governance. This information can help us and other stakeholders better coordinate these programs and leverage our collective resources for maximum impact. As we have heard throughout this session, better communication and coordination among development partners can help us avoid unnecessary duplication, share lessons learned, leverage limited resources and most importantly amplify the impact of our development efforts.

While this initiative is an important step in the right direction, it is only one step. Our next endeavor could be to consider how we link this data to other sources of information: such as demand for land tenure reform, and/or capacity to address land tenure challenges, or with data sets illustrating the locations of large-scale land transactions or overlapping land use rights. Several data sets like this already exist, however, these data systems often use different standards and are incompatible with each other. One vital task we should consider is how to develop common data standards and shared platforms for all types of land and resources rights data and tools. If we do this, we may more fully realize the benefits of the Voluntary Guidelines, resulting in more robust economic growth, better food security and nutrition, and reduced conflict.

A guest post by Robert Oberndorf, Resource Law Specialist, Tenure and Global Climate Change Project.

Recent rapid changes in Burma have led to concerns related to the land tenure and property rights (LTPR) of smallholder farmers and communities throughout the country. The limited harmonization and dated nature of the overall legal and governance frameworks related to land use management and tenure security in the country adds to these concerns. The Government of Burma is well aware of the concerns being raised, and recognizes that issues relating to LTPR threaten the fledgling democracy in Burma and the social stability of the country.

In order to properly assess and begin addressing the problems relating to land use management and law harmonization in the country, the Government established a multi-ministerial Land Use & Land Allocation Scrutinizing Committee (Land Scrutinizing Committee) in 2012. One of the primary tasks of the Land Scrutinizing Committee is to develop a comprehensive Land Use Policy for the country, which would ultimately help to guide effective implementation of existing legal frameworks and also lead to the development of an “umbrella” Land Law for the country that would address many of the law harmonization issues that currently exist. It was a very promising sign that, in late 2012, the Land Core Group of the Food Security Working Group, in cooperation with Government, donor and private sector representatives, conducted a multi-stakeholder National Dialogue on Land Tenure and Land Use Rights. This multi-stakeholder dialogue resulted in recommendations being generated for inclusion into the National Land Use Policy.

USAID, in close coordination and cooperation with other donors and civil society stakeholders, has provided technical assistance to the Land Scrutinizing Committee during the development of the National Land Use Policy. As part of this assistance, USAID has been helping the Committee capture lessons learned and experiences with land tenure reform processes from regional neighbors in ASEAN. Guidance has also been provided on ways to incorporate international best practices, such as those reflected in the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security, into the National Land Use Policy. It is hoped that the efforts of donors, NGOs, CSOs and other stakeholders working on land issues in Burma and elsewhere in the region will be used to inform the ongoing National Land Use Policy development process without jeopardizing the development of a policy that is carefully tailored to the unique cultural, historical, political and legal traits of the country.

This research is presented as part of a session on interventions to improve governance and sustainable management of land at scale during the 2014 World Bank Land and Poverty conference on Tuesday, March 25 at 10:30 am.

Further Reading

• Read more on the Tenure and Global Climate Change (TGCC) Project
• Read more on Burma

A guest post by Dr. Steven Lawry, Global Lead, Land Tenure & Property Rights, DAI

A recent systematic review—funded by the U.K. Department for International Development (DFID)—of quantitative and qualitative literature on the effects of tenure formalization in developing countries in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, confirmed theories that formal registration of individual land rights increases investment, productivity, and household consumption.

However, productivity did not rise as much on African farms as on farms in Asia and Latin America. Differences in short-term gains were considerable, with 5 to 10 percent average gains in Africa, compared to 25 to 35 percent gains in Latin America and Asia.

The muted impact of formal registration of individual land rights in sub-Saharan Africa might have to do with pre-existing institutions, wealth effects, and a lack of investment in complementary institutions and reforms. Future research should examine whether the observable implications of these hypotheses are evident in cases of reform in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, keeping in mind broader welfare considerations. A modest productivity gain in the Africa studies does not in itself mean that there are not positive welfare effects associated with formal registration of land rights. For example, in Africa, tenure security may have increased agricultural investment for food for the household, but not enough to generate agricultural products to sell in the marketplace. There may also be social benefits associated with the reduction in land-related conflicts or validation of the property rights of women and other vulnerable individuals. Of course, a thorough assessment would evaluate such benefits in comparison to those associated with alternative modes of property rights recognition, including statutory recognition of customary tenure.

The presentation of this research is at 8:30 – 10:00 am on Tuesday, March 25 during a session on impact evaluation of land tenure interventions at the World Bank’s annual Land and Poverty conference.

Read Impacts of land property rights interventions on investment & productivity: A systematic review.

A guest post by Dr. Daniel Monchuk, Agricultural Economist, Cloudburst Group; Dr. Cynthia M. Caron, Assistant Professor of International Development and Social Change, Clark University; and Stephanie Fenner, IDCE Fellow, Clark University

Foreign direct investment and large-scale land acquisition for agriculture, extractive industries, and other land-based activities is on the rise in Sub-Saharan Africa. One emerging concern of increased investment is that local land conflict may adversely impact the economic viability of such investments, potentially threatening both the financial health of the investment and the livelihoods of local smallholders. In our research, we explore the financial implications of ignoring land tenure relations as part of early investment decision-making and project design. We present an analysis of eight case studies that draw attention to investment commonalities and highlight key differences in so far as they influence investment outcomes. We explore investment performance, and where possible, identify threats to corporate brand image or ‘on the ground’ threats that investors face when ignoring local land tenure relations and property rights regimes prior to investment. These threats include: disruptions to production as a result of local social unrest, sabotage, and/or the need to hire private security forces to protect the investment and manage relationships with smallholders. The three key questions guiding this research are:

1. When assessing the financial risk of a large-scale land investment, what are the most important tenure-related factors for an investor to take into account?
2. What are the consequences that companies face when failing to take such land tenure factors into account?
3. What are the key land governance relationships between the state, private sector, and local communities in the context of responsible land-based investments?

These questions highlight the significance of recognizing land tenure early in investment decision-making and integrating land tenure relations into investment decision-making and project design. The implications are important not only from an investment point of view, but also from a development point of view, as local host governments and local communities are more likely to benefit directly from foreign direct investment that takes into account and respects local land rights.

The eight investment case studies were chosen to be generally representative of firms facing tenure-related difficulties in Sub-Saharan Africa. In general, our analysis suggests that respecting and recognizing local land rights minimizes social, political, and economic risks to communities, governments, and businesses. Seven of the eight investments either failed completely or were altered throughout the design and implementation process, resulting in significant financial losses or company bankruptcy. One commonality of these failures was the failure to consider tenure and resource rights during initial risk analysis. The questions emerging from this paper are a point of departure for additional primary research projects with interested corporate actors, investment firms, and national governments.

If you are attending the World Bank’s annual Land and Poverty conference, the presentation is at 3:00 – 4:30 pm on Monday in a session on impacts from interventions to secure land rights. Read The Implications of Uncertain Land Tenure on Investment Success.

A guest post by Zemen Haddis Gebeyehu, Senior Agriculture Policy Advisor, USAID/Ethiopia

With 83 percent of its population living in rural areas, Ethiopia is one of the least urbanized countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Agriculture remains the main economic activity of the rural workforce. However, migration from rural areas to cities has been increasing in recent years. This week, I will present a paper that examines the relationship between migration and the land and rural development policies of Ethiopia. The study tests the hypothesis that Ethiopia’s land and rural development policies influence the dynamics of rural-urban migration in ways unanticipated by the policies.

The Constitution of Ethiopia vests all land in the Government of Ethiopia. While rural residents are entitled to indefinite-term use rights to land, the existing land laws discourage landholders from pursuing non-agricultural livelihood strategies away from their holdings. The laws restrict land rental markets and mandate that landholders farm their land or risk losing it through redistribution or expropriation.

As in many countries in the region, farm sizes in Ethiopia are decreasing as a result of population pressure, which results in increased subdivision to allow successive generations’ access to at least a small plot for farming. On the one hand, limited rural land availability may incentivize rural-urban migration, but, on the other hand, land rental restrictions may reduce incentives to migrate by increasing the costs of leaving rural areas. Nonetheless, the combination of improved job and income opportunities in urban areas and deteriorating living conditions in rural areas appears to favor migration.

Despite diminishing farm size and increasing population pressure, the agriculture sector has continued to heavily dominate the rural economy. Notwithstanding attempts to diversify, the lack of capital and skills in rural areas constrain the promotion of non-agricultural activities. At the same time, although the country’s development policy emphasizes the agriculture sector, the available arable land is not able to provide a sufficient livelihood for the growing rural population. Moreover, the rural areas have been deprived of critical infrastructure, such as roads, markets, electricity, communication technologies, and skills development institutions. Absent significant reforms, this lack of investment in rural areas and competition for increasingly scarce arable land is likely to result in increased rural-urban migration.

Although further research is needed, this work suggests the need to consider removing or reducing restrictions on land transfers. Support for land rental markets that is combined with investments in capacity building and rural infrastructure could reduce land pressure and combat the unsustainable subdivision of farmland. Over time, these reforms could both increase investment and job creation in rural areas and reduce rural-urban migration by allowing successful farmers to expand their landholdings through rentals and helping others to successfully transition into non-agricultural livelihoods in rural areas.

If you are attending the World Bank’s annual Land and Poverty conference, the presentation takes place at 1:00 – 2:30 pm on Monday in a session on country level implementation. Read Rural-Urban Migration and Land and Rural Development Policies in Ethiopia.

This week, the World Bank will host its annual Conference on Land and Poverty in Washington, DC. The theme of the conference is “Integrating Land Governance into the Post-2015 Agenda: Harnessing Synergies for Implementation and Monitoring Impact.”

Throughout the week, USAID staff will chair several sessions, including:

• Dr. Gregory Myers, Chief of the Land Tenure and Property Rights Division will chair two sessions–“Land policies in Kenya and Uganda: A roadmap for successful implementation and donor support” and “Evidence on ‘Agricultural Investors’ In Africa: Is There A ‘Missing Middle’?”
• David Atwood, Food Policy Advisor for USAID’s Bureau for Food Security will chair “Monitoring land governance: Options, evidence, and complementarities”
• Melissa Ho, Senior Policy Advisor for USAID’s Bureau for Food Security will chair “Improving Understanding of Large Scale Investment”
• Mercedes Stickler, Land Tenure and Property Rights Specialist in USAID’s Land Tenure and Property Rights Division will chair a session on Pasture Tenure

Dr. Myers will present a global land governance database and map that captures information on 445 programs in 119 countries. In the same session, Dr. Myers will also speak about a new multi-stakeholder partnership between the governments of Ethiopia, Germany, the UK, and the U.S. that will strengthen property rights and support greater transparency in rural land governance in Ethiopia. This type of multi-stakeholder partnership provides a model for greater donor coordination in the land and resource governance sector.

Several USAID land tenure projects will be featured throughout the week. Download and read the papers below, then follow @USAIDEnviro @USAIDEconomic and #landrights for live tweets during the presentations.

• Rural-Urban Migration and Land and Rural Development Policies in Ethiopia (Zemen Haddis, USAID/Ethiopia) (PowerPoint)
• Exploring the use of conceptual models to identify scenarios, lessons, and entry points for community-scale marine resource tenure and governance (Catherine Courtney, Tenure and Global Climate Change Project)
• Land use policy reform process in Burma: Engaging stakeholders and learning lessons from the region (Rob Oberndorf, Tenure and Global Climate Change Project)

Visit the LTPR Portal all week for frequent updates from the conference. Make sure to follow USAID’s Bureau for Economic Growth, Education, and Environment (E3) Bureau and #landrights on Twitter:

• @USAIDEnviro
• @USAIDEconomic

The 2014 theme for International Women’s Day is “Equality for Women is Progress for All.” There is a significant opening in the post-2015 global development and environment agenda for strengthening women’s property rights to move towards more broad-based economic growth. To fill that gap, the Environment and Gender Index (EGI) was launched by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) at the UN Climate Change Talk’s first Gender Day held in Warsaw, Poland in November 2013. The index is based on gender equality and women’s empowerment data in the environmental arena and includes national government performance on women’s property rights.

The EGI is the first index of its kind. Seventy-two countries have been rated in six different categories: livelihoods; gender-based rights and participation; governance; gender-based education and assets; ecosystem; and country-reported activities. Women’s property rights are an indicator in two of these six EGI categories: governance, and gender-based education and assets. Host country governments, such as Mozambique–the first to produce a national climate change and gender action plan–are keen to use the EGI results to guide policy work on gender equality and environmental protection.

For women, property rights are not simply important for accessing food and natural resources for family livelihoods, but are also stepping stones to obtain financial capital, to effectively engage in natural resource decision-making, and to enhance broader political participation. The strength and security of women’s property rights constitute a central asset that enables multidimensional empowerment. Despite women being active in household farming and forest use, their formal rights to land and forests are often low and their customary rights often depend upon permission from men. Tracking improvements to women’s property rights is therefore critical for understanding how progress is made. The EGI’s first report identified discrepancies between legal rights and the reality on the ground in the areas of inheritance, property, income, and finances.

The EGI enables donors, civil society, and development practitioners to understand the multiple dimensions of the intersection between gender and the environment. With this new tool, we are able to assess, for example, to what extent governments are supporting the secure and equitable distribution of women’s property rights. While the EGI highlights the considerable paucity of gender-disaggregated data to date, it provides strong insight into women’s empowerment, political rights, decision-making capacities, and livelihood conditions. It is an approach that facilitates both global and regional comparisons as well as identifies individual country strengths and weaknesses.

As Lorena Aguilar (Global Senior Gender Advisor for the IUCN) explained at the Warsaw meeting: “As an independent tool outside the UN system to measure government performance, the EGI can help policymakers and civil society evaluate and set new benchmarks for government progress. The ability to compare countries and regions establishes a basis for tracking changes in performance over time, and complements existing monitoring and evaluation tools and assessments.” More broadly, the index will facilitate sharing and learning so as to design better policies and implementation strategies. In order to help make the EGI more directly useful to governments and non-governmental organizations, there are plans afoot to both develop new data sets to specifically help with improving women’s participation in environmental decision-making, as well as to track progress and good practices.

Learn more about the Environment and Gender Index.