Land Certification in Madagascar:
Formalizing f(or) Securing?
Perrine Burnod, CIRADRivo Andrianirina – Ratsialonana,
Madagascar Land Observatory Zo RavelomanantsoaNational Land Program
Foundation elements :• Downfall of the land title system (archive, cost,
time)• Congestion of land administration services,• Need to document rights : large practice of
“petits papiers” ; assumption of prevailing land insecurity,
• Assumption of a mass demand for formalization,• Formalized rights would boost investment, formal
land markets, access to formal credit, Two major innovations :• Revocation of the principle of state ownership. • Decentralization of land management to
communes (non – titled occupied land) : land certificates.
1.The 2005 Malagasy Land reform
• Around 500 Local Land Office (1/3 of the territory).
• > 200.000 (on – demand) requests – over 100.000 land certificates issued ,
• End of the monopoly of the land administration on land management and formalization,
• Participation of local communities in land rights recognition
2. An unprecedented revolution…
• Lower cost and quicker issuance,
• Access and legal empowerment of women, migrants and vulnerable groups,
• Land governance and empowerment of Communes (disputes arbitration)
2. An unprecedented revolution…
• Limited demand (9 %) for certificates: perception of security through customary system, collective tenure.
• Land certificate price (15 USD) is still an issue
• Sporadic applications , dispersed coverage
• Uphold of the practice of “petits papiers”,
3. …though emerging controversies
11 %
60%
23 %
5,5 %
0,5%
Written evidence
Not docu - mented Land
Certifi-cate
Land Title
Land taxreceipt
• Asymmetry of legal value : land certificate < land title: credit, transformation
• Link land certification and taxation not established,
• Non – systematic link and little added – value between formalization – investment – formal market – credit.
• Few formalized property transfers on certified land,
• Financial sustainability of LLOs, dependence over technologies.
• Weak enforcement of local land governance (LLO focused on formalization),
3. …though emerging controversies
• Mass demand for formalization: myth? At what scale? With which document? For whom? Against whom? Perception of security over time?
• Main reasons to certify lands: reaffirm ownership (in case threats or conflicts), opportunistic response to promotional campaigns,
• Land rights are already socially recognized, • Statutory vs. customary: the mayor seen as
a representative of central government. Fear of the State and of administrative office.
4. Formalizing vs. securing
• Households generally adopt more than one securing mode: complementarity more than substitution,
• Explore in – depth more options of formalizing the petits papiers (standardization of deeds, delineation, validation).
• Assign special status for pastureland and collective tenure. Do not have compulsorily to be certified.
• LLO and land certificate : a mean, not an objective? Promote systematic land registration for the purpose of taxation, land use planning. Land certification optional.
4. Formalizing vs. securing
Thank you for your attention
www.observatoire-foncier.mg