Elizabeth Fairley Ph.D. Candidate

Department of Geography,

University of Minnesota

fair0111@umn.edu

Upholding Customary Land Rights

Through Formalization: Evidence from Tanzania’s Program of Land Reform

Global Views of Customary Land Rights

• Customary land rights were once seen as a hindrance to economic development.

• The last 15 years have seen a shift in our general understanding.

• Protecting customary rights is now seen as one of the most important keys to ensuring security of tenure, particularly for the poor.

• Recent legislation in numerous countries purports to protect customary land rights.

The Village Land Act (1999)

• “A customary right of occupancy is in every respect of equal status and effect to a granted right of occupancy “ (VLA IV.A.18.1)

• Upholding customary land rights = Upholding current land use patterns

• Village lands account for ~ 80% of all land; security of tenure crucial for poverty reduction

Tanzania’s Hybrid Approach

• “Bringing the informal into the formal”

• Upholding customary land tenure through devolving authority to local institutions

• Flexibility in localized land management encouraged

Implementation Spread

Implementation of VLA

• Two major forms of registering / certifying village land – Certificate of Village Land (CVL)

– Certificate of Customary Right of Occupancy (CCRO)

• Other implementation activities include – Land use plans / maps

– Dispute resolution mechanisms

Certificate of Village Land (CVL)

• Purpose: delineate boundaries of each village so that village

authorities know precisely which lands they are administering.

• Impact: CVLs are in demand. Villages want them because they are

seen to secure village land. Process of delineating boundaries sometimes clears up decade-old conflicts between villages.

• Challenges: Policy allows for flexible arrangements, such as

common resources with management shared by multiple villages.

Practice – one village to one piece of land – creates conflict.

Members of the Village Council in Mitengwe (Kisarawe District) (notice the land use plan behind them)

Certificate of Customary Right of Occupancy (CCRO)

• Purpose: uphold rights of customary land users through registration and formal “titling”.

• Benefits (in theory): access to bank loans; fewer land disputes; protection from losing land without recompense (imminent domain); women’s rights protected when registered.

• Impact: Initial support by villagers tapers off when promised benefits are not realized. CCRO as “family security” is gaining traction.

• Challenges: Policy allows for flexibility but practice is extremely standardized. This works well when tenure patterns are already individualistic.

A family at their homestead in Halungu (Mbozi District)

Is the Hybrid Approach Working?

• Security of village lands is enhanced, and authority is devolved to local institutions.

• Practical applications of flexibility in land reform implementation are not pursued. Formalization isn’t enough for security.

• The overbearing focus on CCROs for collateral may derail the entire project.

Implications

• Titling alone is not sufficient for improving tenure security.

• Hybrids allow flexibility for local institutions to manage lands in consonance with existing tenure patterns, including communal land use.

• Pilot projects focus on top-down, one-size-fits-all solutions that are failing.