Post on 01-Jan-2016
description
Evaluating the impact of Land Administration
Interventions in Africa:
Status and challenges
Klaus DeiningerLand Tenure Adviser
Nov. 19, 2007
What’s special about Africa? Many land-related challenges
Title vs. non-title debate Gender & inheritance rights (HIV/Aids)Customary authorities & decentralization Access to land by foreign investorsGovernance & corruption (state land)Most rapid urbanization in the world.. but more limited resources than elsewhere
Plenty of land policy reform initiatives 21 countries with new land laws since 1990Lengthy processes of public consultationRecognition of customary rights w/o reg’n Protection of women’s rightsLow-cost documentation (e.g. CCROs)
Process half-finished in many respects Laws & regulations incomplete/contradictoryOther policies (inheritance, rural-urban, valuation, eminent domain) to be adjustedLittle progress on procedures or issuance Updating arrangements unclear/parallelCoverage spotty at best (elite lands only?)Due to lack of technology or other factors?
What do projects do? Issuance of certificates
Systematic, area-wide adjudicationOften as pilots Both in rural and urban areas.. in addition to hardware, legal work, etc.
Enormous variation in Nature & length of certificates Transferability/scope to mortgage rightsOptions & procedures to upgrade later Process (intensity, gender, CPRs) Technology & cost Record-keeping/updating arrang’s Beneficiaries’ awareness/perceptionsComplementary interventions
Simple data can tell a lot on these .. even if only based on proxiesShow dangers of on-demand approachPromote cost-effective processes Increase transparency of processEvolve service standards, Develop ‘readiness’ criteria Policy dialogue & build capacity
-> even more for IA …
Identification strategy & rationale
Ex ante: DD treatment / control Define treatment (info & adjudication)Roll-out strategy (lottery across parishes?) Select spatial control units (externalities?)Baseline before intervention, follow-upPossibly “densify” national survey Maybe complement w other interventions
Ex post: Discontinuity possiblePartial issuance (clouds, war, budgets, admin)Or dense panel sample Possibility of low-cost fill-in… can help justify/generate hypotheses
What can be learned from a baseline? Knowledge of law/procedures by diff’t groups Awareness of procedures, security perception Demand (WTP) for documentation Incidence of conflictOutstanding policy issues Potential benefits from greater security
Design a robust/sequential process Combine administrative, community, and indiv. data for continuing follow-upIntegrate qualitative/satisfaction survey… critical to keep ears close to the ground, get feedback, & sustain policy level support
Example I: Ethiopia
The government program Systematic land rights certification >6 mn hhs; 20 mn. parcels 2003-5… bigger & faster than WB projects Elected Land Use Committee, adjudication But key policy weaknesses
Sequence of engagement Case study in 4 regions National survey (panel) half way Regional panel: 4th round
Results on process Cost an order of magnitude below othersNo anti-poor bias; most conflicts resolvedJoint cert’s: 40-90%; picture keySignificant investment impact WTP; Perception of females; compensationBut clear gaps on policy, registries, CPRs-> Many recommendations taken up-> Registration component under SLM
Ongoing research & follow-up Quantified severity of market imperfections Data entry for 4th panel round ongoing Impact on gender, investment, productivity, Land market functioning & migrationImpact evaluation of SLM project w. IFPRI
Example II: UgandaA “baseline” w/o a project
Request for project 2004 ($ 24 mn; PSD)Government-run SD pilots: 6 parishesBaseline after basic sensitization done Process stopped after mob incident-> knowledge impact on investmentLimited knowledge but sig. effect on tenure security, investment, prod’yTransfer rights not less on customary Mailo overvalued due to land fund
Impact of overlapping rights Key unresolved policy issue Inclusion of plot-level data in UNHS Within-household variation to identifySurprisingly big investment effects: Trees 5x; soil conservation & manure 2x
SD impact evaluation baseline Purposive selection of districts, SCsPipeline of parishes within SCJoint with local research instituteBuilding on 2005 questionnaires
Example III: Tanzania Outstanding policy issues
$ 30mn. component under PSD projectSome legal work done under BESTProposed spot adjudication in rural RLs in urban areas Integration with LUP & pastoralists Villages demarcated; no certificatesUnwieldy processes allow land grabbing Over-conversion from rural to urban
Urban evaluation RLs to 0.2/0.4 mn plots issued in DarDiscontinuity & clouds to identify impact Will also provide baseline for CROsOverlap with CIUP (infra w & w/o tenure; tenure w/o infra) of great interest Delay due to funding issues; now resolved
Rural baseline Identified 2 pilot districts for systematicVillage selection ongoing (gov’t)Once done, identify matches, do baselineLink to other ongoing efforts
Causes & impacts of land conflicts
Revision of deSoto pilots Legal review (registries, LUP
law)
Some tentative lessonsLand IE in Africa not straightforward
There is no neat ‘standard’ productLoose ends on policy to be addressed Need for joint land & IE expertise else danger of miscommunication, delays
… but has huge unexploited potential In-country analytical capacity emergingPolicy debate wide openTechnology far ahead of practice Demand for tenure security is growingAnalytical work to help define the agenda
Speed & independence are required Traditional land bureaucracies too slow or lacking the ability to take a critical lookProjects to support follow-up, not baselineFunding modes to be adjusted accordingly
.. and collaboration across domains Little IE capacity among land consultants Few IE understand land, technology, legalNeed joint effort to pull things together
2-3 lead cases per regionInteraction & experience
sharingBaselines to inform policy
dialogueEverybody could benefit