INTRODUCTION TO THE
LAND GOVERNANCE
ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK
(LGAF) : PROCESS
April 8th 2013
The Context
© Curt Carnemark / World Bank © Curt Carnemark / World Bank
Key Challenges for Strengthening Land
Governance & Responsible Tenure
Fragmentation of institutions (agriculture, urban
forest, mining, environment, local government, etc.)
Vested interests opposing change (one of the most
corrupt sectors)
Perception of land sector being too complicated and
high risk
Technical complexity and the need to tailor
intervention to local circumstances (national/sub-
national, different groups): no blueprint
Requirements to Improve Land
Governance for All
Long-term, country-specific reform agenda based on comprehensive assessment
Build legitimacy and broad support for change
• Agenda based on analysis and understanding by all relevant groups
• Pressure for interventions that work
Embed interventions in a process of continued monitoring and dialogue of risks and results
• Cannot afford to fail: too risky- undermines tenure security
Go step by step: Develop scalable approaches based on rigorously monitored pilots
• Rwanda: pilot for 18 months and register 15,000 plots, in order to register 8 million in 2 years
Why Was the LGAF Developed?
Need for a participatory, country driven process assisting countries in knowing:
-Where they are (assessment)
-Where they want to go (vision & goals)
-How to get there (phased roadmap)
-have a benchmark to monitor progress
Foundation: based on assessment from existing knowledge (documented, monitoring data and tacit) & broad country expert analysis arriving at a consensus & recommendations
Key Thematic Governance Areas
Legal and Institutional Framework
Land Use Planning, Management, and Taxation
Management of Public Land
Public Provision of Land Information
Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management
Optional Modules: Forestry, Large Scale Land Acquisition, Tenure Regularization
Structure of the Assessment
Framework
Area
Legal and
Institutional
Framework
Indicators Recognition of
a continuum of
rights
Enforcement of
rights
Mechanisms for
recognition of
rights
Restrictions on
rights
Clarity of
institutional
mandates
Equity and
nondiscrimination
in the decision-
making process
Land tenure rights recognition (rural)
Dimensions
Land tenure rights recognition (urban)
Rural group rights recognition
Urban group rights recognition in
informal areas
Score
Opportunities for tenure individualization
A B C D
The Scoring: Coded Answers
Drawn on Global Experience
LGI 16,
Dim. I
Mapping/
charting
of
registry
records is
complete
Assessment
A – More than 90% of records for privately
held land in the registry are readily
identifiable in maps held by the registry or
the cadastre.
B – Between 70% and 90% of records for
privately held land in the registry are readily
identifiable in maps held by the registry or
the cadastre.
C – Between 50% and 70% of records for
privately held land in the registry are readily
identifiable in maps held by the registry or
the cadastre.
D – Less than 50% of records for privately
held land in the registry are readily
identifiable in maps held by the registry or
the cadastre.
The Process
Inception Phase
Background Report
based on exiting
information
7 Panels of Experts
Draft Report
Technical Validation
Workshop & Policy
Dialogue
Follow Up
AC
TIO
N
1 2 3 4 5 6
Next Steps in Country
Result
Agreement amongst experts & backed by stakeholders on strengths, weaknesses & priorities to improve land governance
Next steps:
Initiatives for policy, regulatory or institutional change (“easy wins” & more mid-term)
Piloting new approaches and interventions to be taken forward by operational programs
Research/ monitoring to address gaps in existing evidence
Sub-national assessments (cities, states provinces..)
Regular Stakeholder Dialogue &
Tracking Progress
Select key indicators & mechanisms
Track progress regularly
Dialogue
And institutionalization..
Analysis and
Dialogue
Plan
Implement
Monitor
Countries with LGAF (32)
pilot completed Ongoing -1- -2-
Benin Democratic Republic of Congo Bangladesh Mauritania
Ethiopia Georgia Brazil Moldova Indonesia Ghana Cameroon Philippines Kyrgyzstan Madagascar Colombia Rwanda Peru Malawi India Senegal Tanzania Nigeria The Gambia South Sudan
South Africa Honduras Sudan
Ukraine Liberia Uganda
Mali Vietnam
Findings -Scorecards
1. LEGAL & INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK GE GH NG SA BR
M
G MW
Recognition of a continuum of rights
1 i Land tenure rights recognition (rural) A A A B A A B
1 ii Land tenure rights recognition (urban) A A A B B C C
1 iii Rural group rights recognition D A C B C B C
1 iv Urban group rights recognition in informal areas B C C C D C
1 v Opportunities for tenure individualization D B C C C
A C D
Enforcement of Rights
2 i Mapping/registration of claims on communal land D D D D D D D
2 ii Registration of individual rural properties A D D A A D D
2 iii Registration of individual urban properties A D D A A NS C
2 iv Recognition of women's right in formal system C D D A A C C
2 v Condominium regime to manage common prop. C C B A C
A C A
2 vi Compensation due to land use changes D C B B D C C
Mechanisms for Recognition
3 i Non-documentary evidence to recognize rights B C C C C C B
b3 ii Formal recognition of long-term possession C C D C A A B
3 iii Formal fees for 1st time registration low C C D D C D B
3 iv No significant informal fees for 1st time reg. C D C B A D B
3 v Housing formalization feasible & affordable B C C C A D B
Some Substantive Findings
Good practice in every country - can be shared
But there are also weaknesses to be addressed…
Public land management non-transparent, institutions non-sustainable
Dualistic land ownership structures; lack of recognition of community land/forest
Cost of surveying; insecurity, mis-information land-related corruption
Common gaps where we need to push the frontier
Low-cost recognition (incl. mapping) of rights (individual or communal)
Unaffordable cost of land transfers, institutional overlaps , fees
Non-transparent mechanisms to acquire land & transfer to private interests
Monitoring absent or non-participatory
To Conclude
Land governance has to be improved at the country level
In the „VG spirit‟ : country demand/ broad stakeholder participation; cross-sector –also outside “land sector” with sustained & coordinated support from partners
The LGAF can help focusing implementation efforts, build support for change and set benchmark for tracking progress
http://econ.worldbank.org/lgaf