Can Collective Property Right Protection Measures be an Inclusive Alternative:

The Case of Community Land Delimitation (CLD) Initiative in Mozambique?

Hosaena Ghebru (1), Raul Pitoro (2), and Sileshi Woldeyohannes (1)(1) International Food Policy Research Institute – IFPRI; (2) Michigan State University - MSU

Annual World Bank Conference on Land and Poverty Washington, DC

March 23 – 27, 2015

Background• There were successive efforts which were

culminated with Land Policy (1995), Land Law (1997), and Land Law Regulations (1998)

• Some of the salient features: Gov’t owns land; All have Use Right; Communities entitled to Certificate

• Main objectives of the Mozambique’s Land Policy: security of land tenure; participation in decision making; and benefit sharing

In 2009, the MCC provided more than US$61 million to fund a five-year project

The Community Land Initiative (iTC) – established in 2006 by a group of six donors (DFID, Netherlands, SIDA, Irish Aid, SDC, and DANIDA)

GESTERRA (Capacity Building for Land Management and Administration in Mozambique) program supported bythe Netherlands and Swedish Embassy in Maputo

Community-investor Partnerships supported by IFAD

Background: Mozambique Land Projects

Background• The Community Land Delimitation (CLD) :

is a legally defined PARTICIPATORY process which involves

Community Sensitization

Community Consultation

Community Map Description

Community Land Mapping (Cartogram) production

Land Map Validation by neighboring community

Issuance of Community Land Certificate

Objective of the Study• To develop an evaluation framework that

helps to assess the impact of community land formalization in Mozambique

• Specifically, the study attempts to assess the CLD process with respect to: Its adherence to the legally defined procedure

Improving communities’ land administration and management

conflict resolution and prevention

Methodology and Data• Methodology: Descriptive Analysis

• Data: The study uses community-level Community Land Delimitation survey

conducted in September 2014

comprehensive community-level questionnaire was administered

94 communities were surveyed

secondary data collected from different

NGOs involved in the CLD Process

Government Offices

Findings based on

Secondary Data

Between 2006 and 2013 659 communities were delimited

about 35 million hectares of land

413 CLDs were made by the Community Land Initiative (Iniciativa de Terras Comunitárias-iCT).

2,802 Land Law dissemination workshops were conducted

Summary of CLDs in Mozambique from 2006 to 2013 by regionProvince

# of delimitations

Total area delimited (ha)

# of Land Law dissemination workshops

# of land conflicts reported

# community land mgt. councils created

NIASSA 148 3,431,879 171 19 36C. DELGADO 43 364,119 43 77 84NAMPULA 77 675,378 153 18 418ZAMBEZIA 181 1,853,528 81 94 171TETE 9 3,984 1,053 71 85MANICA 41 15,600,000 889 54 87SOFALA 62 3,756,982 157 18 55INHAMBANE 16 8,461,690 158 35 92GAZA 58 516,609 75 72 69MAPUTO 24 45,975 22 176 43Total 659 34,710,144 2,802 634 1,140Source: Author's compilation based on MINAG (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010b, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014)

Between 2006 and 2013 No stable trend observed in CLD Process

The major causes of land conflicts vary by period and region

In the initial period, land conflicts were related to land access in the Central and Northern regions

In the later period, land conflicts were related to land use in all regions of the country

Negative association was observed between delimitated area and the number of land related conflicts

Findings based on Secondary Data Figure : Number of community delimitations and the corresponding area

Source: MINAG (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010b, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014)

050

100

150

200

250

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Communities delimited Area delimited in '00,000ha

Findings based on Secondary Data• Before 2010, little has been done both in

terms of number of

seminars conducted to disseminate the land legislation and

the number of participants

• The largest number of outreach seminars were in 2011

997 meetings with 12,009 participants

The % of female participants was only 37%

Findings based on Secondary Data Figure : Dissemination of Land Law

Source: MINAG (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010b, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014)

0500

1,0

00

1,5

00

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Disseminition seminars Male participants ('10 units)Female participants ('10 units)

Findings based on

Community Level Survey

Findings from CLD Communities• In the CLD survey,

94 communities were surveyed

CLD process was introduced in 60 % of the communities

Several NGOs were involved in several of communities’ CLD process

iTC (Community Land Initiative)

ORAM

OLIPIA

Forum Terra

Etc…

Reasons for Initiating CLD process

Other reason

Investors' intent of land acqusition

NGOs' economic intiative

Private-Community land confilct

0% 10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

11%

23%

47%

75%

Of the total CLD communities surveyed, in 74 % the Community Land Management

Committee (CLMC) was established

71 % sensitization phase completed

95 % delimitation phase completed

62 % demarcation phase completed

62% acquired Certificate

Only 2% have an approved business plan

Findings: Reasons for the Halt of CLD Process

Only in 32 % attempts were made to restart the process

NOGs Left Conflit Resolved Investors Changed Mind

Conflit Intensified CLC Dsisolved0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%44%

30%

15%

22%19%

Findings from CLD Communities• In 67 % of the CLD communities, issues with

the bordering communities were raised during the CLD processes, and the issues were

Border disputes (77%)

Lack of bordering communities’ involvement (9%)

Bordering communities were not aware (29%)

• 78 % of the issues were resolved through Certificate and approved map (32%)

District gov’t resolution (39%)

Mutual agreement (39%)

Findings from Non-CLD Communities• Non-CLD communities have limited

awareness

Findings from Non-CLD Communities• Only 8% of the non-CLD communities were

offered CLD services from NGOs

• Only 6% of the non-CLD communities attempted to contact NGOs

• Among the reasons given for not contacting NGOs,

Lack of fund (7%)

Lack of awareness(76%)

Lack of consensus within community(21%)

Findings: Involvement of Non-CLD Communities in CLD Process

Findings from Non-CLD Communities: WTP• All non-CLD communities surveyed are willing to

partake in NGOs initiated CLD process

WTP for CLD process Observations Mean

How much is the WTP of the community per each household?

90 MT (Metical) per hh at one time 33 48%

90 MT per hh at three installment 16 50%

A subsidized price of 45 MT per hh 11 64%

Man days of free labor per hh 19 32Source: Authors' computation from community survey 2014    

Conclusion

62 % of the CLD communities have completed the CLD process and acquired CERTIFICATE

The major reason for initiating CLDs was private-community land conflict, and land related disputes are still the first most common disputes

Results suggest positive impact of the delimitation process on land conflicts

Conclusion

There are cases where later phases of the CLD process were started without the completion of earlier phases

All non-CLD communities are willing to partake in NGO initiated CLD process

Non-CLD Communities also have some degree of WTP for CLD processes

Policy Implication• The CLD process is worth continuing as

it is the best way to tackle the private-community and inter-community land conflicts

communities are willing to partake in and contribute for CLD processes

• Efforts should be made to keep the participatory nature of the CLD process. In this regard, emphasis should be given

For completion of all the phases of CLD process

Specially, to involve bordering communities

• Efforts should be made to link the CLD process with Development Initiatives

Obrigado!

27

qualquer pergunta?