Post Type: Article

In many countries affected by conflict, households and entire communities have often been displaced multiple times, forcing them to leave behind land and property. One household’s loss becomes another one’s gain as internally displaced people are shuffled around and squat in any available space that provides a temporary reprieve from the insecurity and lawlessness. This creates opportunities for land grabbing as well. The problem can become more acute at the end of violence once security improves and prior owners attempt to return after years of dislocation to find others occupying their property. This leads to new rounds of post-conflict violence that can be destabilizing in fragile environments. In Mogadishu, the situation is no different and land disputes are becoming a more common occurrence occupying much of the mayor’s time and resources.

For more information see this Los Angeles Times article. One possible solution to this problem would be the development of a land claims registry to address competing land claims – a similar program has been effective in Timor-Leste as the country emerged from internal conflict.

Afghanistan has significant amounts of mineral resources according to an assessment completed by the U.S. Geological Survey in 2007. However, according to a recent article by the New York Times “the potential resource boom seems increasingly imperiled by corruption, violence and intrigue.” Control over land and resource rights are increasingly becoming a source of contention, especially as the government begins to make land concessions. Local officials and militia leaders are competing over rights to areas with high mineral wealth, while contention over compensation for land is increasing as well. To help ensure investments in the mineral sector advance at the current scale and can provide a sustainable source of income, the government will need to ensure clear and enforceable property rights that enable the long-term investments required for mining. At the same time, local communities will need to be consulted and their land rights compensated, otherwise local grievances could escalate, generate new rounds of violence, and curtail badly needed investment.

The question of land rights is important not only for commercial-scale mining but small-scale artisanal mining as well. The New York Times article references the preponderance of small mines, which are not under state control and possibly fueling the insurgency. There are parallels between the situation in Afghanistan and the alluvial diamond mines that were used to finance the purchase of arms and rebellions in Africa during the 1990s and early 2000s. USAID, through its Property Rights and Artisanal Diamond Development (PRADD) project, has sought to bring such informal diamond mining activity under the state’s control and to prevent related conflict through the mapping and public validation of mining claims in the Central African Republic. Although there are differences between these two regions and the minerals being extracted, there are potentially lessons learned from the PRADD program that could be applied to help bring illicit mining activities under the state’s control, reduce violence and promote economic growth. For information on the PRADD program see here.

USAID’s September/October 2012 Issue of FrontLines magazine features an article by Anthony Piaskowy titled Liberia’s Future Land Experts. The article highlights a USAID program that provides scholarships to five Liberian students to obtain Masters Degrees in Land Administration/Surveying. These students are gaining valuable skills in modern surveying techniques and, upon completion of their studies, will return to Liberia to work for the national government and assist the University of Monrovia develop a new curriculum in land surveying and administration.

Effective land administration – and building the local capacity to carry out that administration – is key to promoting stability and decreasing conflict in Liberia. The country emerged from a 14-year civil war in 2003 and property rights remain a source of conflict. With the support of this USAID-led scholarship program, Liberia’s future land experts will help prevent future conflicts and promote economic development in their home country.

Around the world competitive forces are driving a variety of investors to search for land for agriculture, for mineral exploration, for conservation, for biofuel production, etc. Investment in land is not per se bad. Development can bring important benefits to communities: new knowledge and skills, new connections to markets, in some cases employment, and perhaps other positive spillover benefits related to spending money in the local economy.

In countries with weaker property rights institutions, governments typically contract directly with investors to lease or sell land. This is legal so long as the government is the ultimate title holder to the land. But what is technically legal may lead to harm on the ground for people who lose traditional rights to land. Finding solutions that empower local communities to engage directly and in a meaningful way with investors should lead to more sustainable development outcomes. Here’s an example from Canada of how communities can engage more directly with investors when community-level property rights are secured with a credible government commitment. The government is providing the First Nation Haisla people the right to own land on the British Columbia coast line in an area that may become a shipment location for natural gas. The Haisla may, in turn, lease this land to investors who would build, manage, or otherwise invest in the shipment/transport facilities. Haisla chief councilor Ellis Ross says in this article: “We see land as an essential element in building a strong and sustainable economic future for the Haisla people.” Allowing communities to leverage their traditional land-based assets is an important component of sustainable economic development; one that USAID supports.

In the aftermath of the January 2010 earthquake, land and property issues emerged as an area of significant concern in Haiti. Analyses in the weeks following the disaster warned that destruction of property records, massive population displacement and loss of life could contribute to opportunism, land grabbing, conflict and delayed resettlement—particularly in urban areas severely affected by the earthquake. Prior to the earthquake the situation in Haiti was complicated due to high levels of squatter settlements on both public and private land, a poorly operating land registration system, disparities in land ownership and high levels of informality. These conditions contributed to a general environment of tenure insecurity that impacted peoples’ land use decisions, including the types of investments made on the land and whether the land could be leased. As a result of this environment , much of the land in Haiti is fragmented and degraded, which has negatively affected the environment and food production.

In this context, it is welcome news to see that the Government of Haiti has recently launched a process of land reform aimed at clarifying land rights and ownership. The details are included a recent Haiti Libre blog post.

Here’s a short video (within the blog post) from Landesa that “connects the dots” between securing land rights and improving educational opportunities for girls. The connection may not be immediately clear so teasing out the links – which the blog does – is important:

“Sometimes land allows families to stop migrating and grow roots in a community. Other times a land title provides families with the proof of residency they need to enroll their child in school or obtain the tuition subsidy that makes school affordable. And often legal control over land is what allows families to start investing in their land to improve their income and their harvests and that is what pays school fees and buys school uniforms. And research has indicated that children whose parents – especially mothers – have secure rights to the land they farm, enroll in school earlier, have better educational outcomes and stay in school longer. Each extra year of primary school boosts a person’s future wages. Girls who finish primary school have fewer children, and healthier and better educated children.”

To learn more about women’s land and property rights see here.

Is the government of Laos committed to shifting its land policy to enable greater local control? This story suggests that it is. The President of the National Assembly’s Committee on Economic Planning and Finance, Dr. Souvanhpheng Bouphanouvong, is quoted as saying: “For over a year, Lao has been undergoing a process of reviewing and revising various policies and legislation pertaining to land and natural resources. What we’ve learned from countries across the world is that by ensuring local peoples’ rights to the land they live and work on, we are opening the door for numerous other benefits for our country.” (emphasis added). Shifting meaningful control of resources and many of the benefits that derive from their use to local communities follows best practice, particularly when coupled with efforts to build the capacity of these communities. Here’s a link to a USAID-sponsored study that discuss the need for stronger local involvement in resource management in Laos. And for more information on land issues in the country see here.

A recent Poverty Matters post highlights some of the differences that mark the Santos regime in Colombia from that of his predecessor Alvaro Uribe. In some ways the two leaders share a vision for their country. The post puts it this way, both want to “attract foreign skills and investment to expand natural resource exports to pay for social investments.” But, author Jonathan Glennie points out that what distinguishes Santos is his decency and his willingness to embrace modernization. These can be difficult qualities for politicians who often respond to pressures from local interests to protect local (and perhaps less modern) production. Decency may mean giving way when those with less power and prestige face challenges to their homes and safety. In the latter case, the blog notes that the Santos government did not fight back when indigenous Nasa people expelled government troops who were battling FARC rebels from their lands. Property rights remain insecure and highly contested in Colombia but avoiding further fighting may be a sign of some small progress. Here is a photo essay.

The list below includes projects funded and managed by both the Land Tenure and Resource Management Office, as well as USAID Missions and other operating units. This list includes programs and projects that wholly focused on strengthening tenure governance and property rights, as well as programs and projects with a broader focus on other issues, in which tenure and property rights activities were included.

Here’s a nicely done, interesting, and largely on-point, article from the Irish Times about the need to give Chinese farmers more secure rights to land. Right now, the reporter notes: “farmers lease their land for 30 years from their village collective, run by the local Communist Party, and they are allowed to own the crops they produce, but not the land.” Because they do not own the land farmers have a thinner bundle of legal rights than they otherwise would: they themselves may be able (or may not be able or likely need permission) to sub-lease lands and they cannot use land as collateral for commercial loans. Whether smallholder farmers would actually succeed at using land as collateral is a contentious issue: given how risky agriculture is, given than many plots will be small, distant from markets, and maybe not worth much, given transaction costs for banks, limited credit histories for farmers, social norms against dispossession, and the need to house families and informal businesses, many bankers and many farmers may find land as collateral just too risky a proposition. But the bigger point the article raises is right: clarifying and “thickening” ownership rights will shift incentives towards increased agricultural production and food security. As a number of southeast Asian nations struggle with transitions (Cambodia, Laos, Burma) China’s leadership on this front can play a hugely important role.