local level participatory planning, an approach towards
TRANSCRIPT
Local Level Participatory Planning, an approach towards tenure security and development
planning.
Marcel Meijs, Claus-Peter Hager, Jericho Mulofwa
Ministry of Lands and Resettlement, Namibia
Paper prepared for presentation at the
“2014 WORLD BANK CONFERENCE ON LAND AND POVERTY”
The World Bank - Washington DC, March 24-27, 2014
Copyright 2014 by author(s). All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this
document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided that this copyright notice
appears on all such copies.
Abstract
In Namibia access to grazing forms an essential source of livelihoods for the poor. Namibia is witnessing
an exacerbation of the proverbial ‘tragedy of the commons’ caused by ‘defensive’ fencing of communal
areas, predominantly by the well-connected and the rich.
Since 2006 the Ministry of Lands and Resettlement (MLR) is implementing a land reform program to
ensure that land rights are secured, Land Use Plans are established and that development of underutilized
land is supported by providing key infrastructure. As part of the implementation, the local level
participatory planning (LLPP) process was developed, tested and implemented in three underutilized
areas.
Through LLPP the MLR has effectively dealt with a host of challenges, including, a lack of congruence
between Traditional Authorities and the recently instituted Communal Land Boards as regards the
legitimacy of land rights; attempts of marginalisation of certain groups in programme areas; allaying
boundary disputes between Traditional Authorities, and the need to create mechanisms to negotiate and
secure land rights for groups of local residents.
The paper explores design features, institutional overviews, challenges encountered, emerging success
stories and possible lessons from a process-based land governance intervention aimed at informed and
secured land based investments in a prevailing climate of uncertainty and transition.
Key Words: Development, Investment, Local level, Namibia, Planning,
1 Introduction
1.1 Namibia
The Republic of Namibia gained independence from South Africa on 21 March 1990. It is situated in
Southern Africa and is fully covered by desert, semi desert and savanna. It has a population of 2.1 million
on a total surface of 825,418 km2. General population density is low (second lowest in the world), with a
countrywide population density of 2.6 persons per km2. The density of the rural population is highest in
the north due to a more favourable agricultural climate and to past colonial and apartheid interference.
In Namibia, land is classified for administrative purposes as state land, commercial (freehold) land, or
communal land (Guide to the Communal Land Reform Act, Legal Assistance Centre, NNFU (2003)).
This paper focuses on experiences gained in designated areas within the communal lands which represent
around 40% of the country’s total surface area. The communal lands are the safety net for a large part of
the population. It is estimated that 50% of Namibia’s population lives in the rural parts of the communal
lands and at least 70% derives a significant part of their livelihood from them.
The climate in the northern regions, where most of the communal lands are situated, allows for the
cultivation of crops as millet, sorghum and maize. Most of the country is used for cattle, small livestock
or game farming or is unsuitable for any agricultural activities. About half of the population depends on
agriculture (largely subsistence agriculture) for its livelihood. Rainfall in the whole country is erratic and
droughts are occurring frequently.
Namibia’s economy consists primarily of mining (diamond and uranium), agriculture, and Tourism. In
terms of revenue, mining is the biggest contributor to Namibia's economy, accounting for 25% of the
country's income. Namibia’s economy is tied closely to South Africa which is the source of four-fifths of
Namibia’s imports.
1.2 Land Reform in Namibia
At Independence, the Namibian government inherited an asymmetrical system of land distribution along
racial lines. Land and land reform are a highly prominent political and social topic in Namibia, and are
considered decisive for the socio-economic development and social peace of Namibia. The Namibian
Government has therefore been implementing an ambitious land reform programme addressing the
skewed ownership of commercial (freehold) land primarily held by previously advantaged farmers, as
well as reforming tenure rights and improving farming systems in the communal areas of Namibia. The
main aim of the land reform programme is to bring about more equitable land distribution and access to
land, to promote sustainable economic growth, to lower income inequalities and to reduce rural poverty.
Great emphasis is continuously placed on carrying out land reform within the rule of law.
To target both the commercial and communal areas, the government is implementing two land reform
programs each through its own act of parliament and regulations. In the commercial (freehold) areas the
skewness of land ownership is being addressed by acquiring and redistribution of land through a willing
buyer – willing seller program, in accordance to the commercial land reform act of 1995. In communal
areas land reform is guided by the Communal Land Reform Act No 5 of 2002 (CLRA) which is aiming at
securing land tenure, ensuring equitable access to commonages and prevention of land grabbing by the
regulation of fencing. In addition, the MLR is implementing the Programme for Communal Lands
Development which supports the objectives of the land reform action plan and also comprises support to
economic development by assisting the beneficiaries of the land reform programs with infrastructure and
post settlement support.
1.2.1 Communal Land Reform
Legal instruments and policies such as the CLRA, the Traditional Authority Act and the National Land
Policy empower statutory bodies to administer and allocate land rights on communal land. The State
assists in the process by putting systems in place to ensure that communal land is correctly administered
and managed. The CLRA legislates for this by incorporating the Traditional Authorities in the
administrative structure, and by creating CLBs.
The CLRA was passed with the aim of facilitating a proper and uniform land administration and
management, with secure land tenure for all, which will result in the minimization of land disputes on
communal land (Communal Land Reform Act, No 5 of 2002). This is the key reason why communal land
registration is being carried out in Namibia. Moreover, by having all land rights registered and surveyed,
the Ministry of Lands and Resettlement as well as the Traditional Authorities will be able to improve their
means of land administration and ensure that all people have equal access to land.
Before the enactment of the CLRA, Traditional Authorities used to allocate land rights in accordance with
their customary tenure systems (National Land Policy, 1998). These allocations were not documented
and were considered biased by some residents of communal land. Results included that some people
were allocated large land parcels whereas other received less; some people were allowed to fence around
their land parcels, whereas others were not; and there were cases of double allocation of land rights. This
biased land tenure system was characterized by many land related disputes, including boundary disputes,
self-extensions and illegal fencing, and was operated in the absence of regulatory legislation. In these
tenure settings, widows and orphans in particular were often deprived of the rights to land.
Tenure insecurity and a period of transition between customary and modern land administration has led to
‘defensive’ fencing by some relatively well-off citizens, escalating after Independence. These fences
reduce the commonage in spite of growing population pressure and increasing livestock numbers, and
have led to a proliferation of land disputes.
Over the last decades, the country is witnessing the rapid erosion of the communal grazing areas due to a
multitude of factors. These factors include the overall lack of spatial planning, the expansion of villages
due to population growth, and the fencing in of large tracks of commonage by individuals. Besides the
reduction in grazing area, the remaining area is being overgrazed due to the increased number of
livestock, water that has become permanently available by drilling boreholes and the unrestricted access
to the commonage.
A lack of organized and well documented tenure security further manifests in limited private investment
in the land, a lag in the modernization of farming systems, and a quasi-absence of private sector provision
of inputs and services.
1.2.2 Stakeholders of Communal Land Reform
Communal Land Boards
The Communal Land Boards are established by the Minister of Lands and Resettlement in terms of the
Communal Land Reform Act (Act No.5 of 2002). The communal land boards consist of representatives of
relevant line Ministries, Traditional Authorities, as well as representations from the farmer communities
and four women with expertise relevant to the functions of the board.
The Act sets out the functions of Communal Land Boards as follows:
• Controlling the allocation and cancellation of customary land rights by Chiefs or Traditional
Authorities.
• Deciding on applications for rights of leasehold.
• Creating and maintaining registers for the allocation, transfer and cancellation of customary land
rights and rights of leasehold.
• Advising the Minister on regulations to be made to meet the objectives of the Act.
• Giving effect to the provision of this Act.
The administrative tasks of the board are performed by the MLR through an appointed secretary to the
board. The CLBs perform their functions in monthly meetings as well as through appointed committees.
While the CLBs in general take their work very serious, they are often under capacitated to perform the
duties assigned to them by the act.
The Ministry supports the CLBs in the administration of their functions. In reality this means that most of
the vital tasks, such as the verification of land rights are actually done by MLR staff. Therefore, whatever
the CLBs decide depends on the performance of the MLR. The work of the MLR is guided by its
planning cycles, and its own management structure. Therefore, with the limited capacity of the CLBs,
Land Reform is factually implemented by the MLR.
For leaseholds above 50ha and for longer than 10 years, as well as for customary land rights above 20
hectares, the Ministry will have to give it prior approval before the CLBs can allocate such a land right.
Traditional Authorities
According to the Communal Land Reform Act, the Traditional Authority is given the responsibility of
land allocation and administration at community level. The Traditional Authority is further empowered
through the Traditional Authority Act to administer land and other natural resources within their areas of
jurisdiction, and to impose fees and fines in the process of allocating both access and user rights to those
resources.
The TAs in some areas maintain their traditional way of doing business and have improved little in
transparency and written record keeping. In the current reality of land allocation, both the TAs and the
CLBs are involved in the allocation of land parcels for customary rights and leaseholds. This situation of
dual legal empowerment in land administration often poses a great challenge. This becomes very
pertinent in cases where leaseholds are concerned, in particular in the determination of leasehold
conditions and fees as well as selection criteria for land allocation, leasehold conditions and co-funding
for economic investments.
Other line Ministries
There has been little coordination between Ministries in Namibia, with a tendency for each Ministry to
make and implement its own plans. The MLR, through the processes of Integrated Regional Land Use
Plans (IRLUP) and the LLPP methodology is aiming to improve coordination and promote a wider
analyses in planning processes.
Regional Councils, Councillors and Governors
Regional councils comprise elected councillors from every constituency and in Namibia, there are on
average 10 constituencies per region each with an elected councillor. The Namibian Constitution allow
for the President to appoint a Governor for each region.
The regional leadership has often a powerful hand in local politics and most of the development plans are
initiated through the regional councillors and approved by the Regional Development Coordinating
Committee comprising all line ministries at regional level. The Chief Regional officer - who is the
regional chief administrator - is a member of the Communal Land Board.
Other Stakeholders
Farmers Associations represent farmers at constituency level and they form a cooperative at regional
level. The farmers associations coordinate activities related to input availability and distribution,
marketing and keeping of records of farmers in the district and they know which farmers have legitimate
land rights within the areas they occupy. The LLPP model often makes use of the farmer associations to
do preliminary verification of local rights as part of the regional consultation process, culminating into the
actual planning stage.
Conservancies, Community Forests and Cooperatives are community based organizations formed through
the relevant legal instruments such as the Forest Act (Act No 12 of 2001), the Nature Conservation
Amendment Act (Act No 5 of 1996) and Cooperative (Act No 23 of 1996) The Community Based
organizations are installed to foster good governance through a democratic process of managing common
land resources such as wildlife, water, forests and others. The land these institutions occupy is not legally
secured through lease as their registration is only for access and management.
In the land allocation process, there are areas designated for commercialized farming that overlap with
conservancies and community forests. In such areas with overlapping land use, the conservancy or
community forest involved give a consent indicating that the intended area for development does not
conflict with the zonation plan, regarding wildlife migration, breeding or trophy hunting.
1.3 Programme for Communal Land Development
Since 2006 the Ministry of Lands and Resettlement (MLR), with support of the German Government
through the KfW, is implementing a land reform program to ensure that land rights are secured, land use
plans are established and that economic development of underutilized land is supported by providing key
infrastructure. A set of clearly articulated core principles have been developed and guide the
implementation of the Programme for Communal Lands Development (PCLD) across 7 regions and on 5
Million hectares.
Figure 1: Map of the PCLD intervention sites
The PCLD addresses some of the core developmental challenges of Namibia – a colonial legacy of
skewed access to land, tenure insecurity in the areas of the poorer populace, the absence of processes and
legal instruments for communities to lead local development, and limited means to manage and utilise
land as both a productive and market-oriented resource.
The design concept of the PCLD can be summarized as follows: The registration of all legitimate rights in
a specific intervention area forms the secure basis for participatory planning and subsequent infrastructure
investments. Secure property rights generate and sustain a genuine interest and motivation, as well as the
necessary clout, to participate in community-level planning processes. Moreover, security of tenure is a
pre-requisite for private investments in securing and improving the productive capacity of the land itself.
The provision of (partially) publicly funded infrastructure in communities can be safeguarded when the
resulting benefits are tangible and provide the required utility for people to actually look after the given
infrastructure. Secure rights, jointly prepared plans and physical infrastructure alone however do not
ensure a commercially successful farmer, and as such targeted advisory services underpin the prior
investments.
Partners in this programme are the Government of the Republic of Namibia, the European Commission,
the Kredietanstalt fuer Wiederaufbau (KfW) and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale
Zusammenarbeit (GIZ).
1.3.1 Objectives and Expected Results
The PCLD provide the basis for improved land inventory and administration, informed and empowered
planning, private investments in the land, and – in the longer run – potentially unlocking the economic
value of land as collateral for communal farmers. The overall objective of the programme is to improve
rural communities’ land based livelihoods through the development of communal lands and a better
integration into the mainstream economy.
The following results are pursued in order to contribute meaningfully to the overall objective:
Result 1 (R1): Verified and mapped existing customary Land Rights and Leaseholds in communal
areas are registered, secured in the administration system for communal lands and issued to the
beneficiaries.
The PCLD’s efforts to conclude the registration of both customary land rights and commercial leaseholds
in communal areas is an important step in providing the tenure security enshrined in the Namibian
Constitution. Also, tenure security provides a platform for improved participation and ownership in
planning processes and stimulates private investments in land.
The PCLD is piloting efforts to make provisions for infrastructure, and more importantly land rights, to
be held in common and be legally defendable by groups. Close collaboration with civil society, and in
particular legal advice, is maintained in this regard.
Sustainability, in terms of land tenure, is achieved through systematic verification and registration of
communal land rights in a central register at regional level, with an operational link to Deeds. The
existing registration system allows for the transfer and continuously update of rights. The existing legal
framework makes provision for the adjudication of disputing claims via a Tribunal and in the court of
law. As the programme is hosted by the MLR itself, working in close collaboration with local-level
institutions which primarily include the Traditional Authorities and Communal Land Boards, the land
register’s sustainability from a regulatory and institutional perspective is enhanced.
Result 2 (R2): Participatory Integrated Regional Land Use Plans (IRLUPs) and Local Level
Participatory Plans (LLPP) are developed in accordance with MLR standards.
Options for land based activities in rural communities have proliferated since Independence, as have
associated institutions and interest groups. The absence of integrated land use plans at the regional level,
in terms of coordinated public service provision, exacerbates a situation of overlapping and at times
conflicting land uses. The discipline of land use planning provides the platform for community members,
traditional authorities and communal land boards to actively influence and secure access rights, shape
rules of affiliation to selected land uses, to disentangle and streamline overlapping land uses, and
generally determine their own resource management plans and affiliated investments in the land.
The Local Level Participatory Planning process is discussed in more detail in Chapter 2.
Result 3 (R3): Core infrastructure investments identified through the participatory planning
processes (LLPP) have been implemented and improve the conditions for commercial land-based
development in designated areas.
The communal areas of Namibia continue to lack critical infrastructure in many farming areas. Farming
enterprises in semi-arid environments are built predominantly on a few base conditions: access to reliable
water, to land and a fodder base, and to husbandry infrastructure. As such, infrastructure support is
predominantly in the form of boreholes and water abstraction/ reticulation equipment, fences where
justified and needed for improved rangeland management practices, and marketing and husbandry
infrastructure where considered of strategic importance.
However, the MLR is committed to support a wider variety of intervention modalities in terms of
infrastructure development and importantly includes different ownership, management and land use
options to suit prevailing social practices and preferences by local residents. The rules governing access
to, and obligations associated with publicly provided infrastructure are based, as much as possible, on
existing systems successfully employed in rural areas across Namibia (such as water point committees,
their associated structures and regulations) in consultation with communities via the LLPP process.
Result 4 (R4): Programme beneficiaries receive advisory services to tap into the improved physical
environment and successfully pursue more commercially driven modes of production and farm
productivity increases
In addition to the improved physical and regulatory means base provided by R1 through R3 above, the
skills to optimally utilise and manage the business of farming is paramount if sufficiently high rates of
return are to be realised from the investments in the programme. As such, the provision of 'mentorship' of
experienced commercial farmers is considered pivotal to the success of the proposed intervention –
infrastructure alone is no guarantee for improved production or for providing an impetus towards
commercialisation.
Result 5 (R5): The MLR has increased the capacity to assume its mandate for the management and
development of communal lands
The design, coordination and continued responsiveness to a participatory process not only require time
and dedication, but also a good understanding of the complexities of the process at hand. Equally, the
administrative and management capacity for such an endeavour, including sub-contracted components,
needs to be assured.
1.3.2 Method of Implementation
The PCLD supports the MLR in implementing the Land Reform Action Plan component addressing
tenure reform and land development in the communal areas of Namibia. The MLR takes full ownership
and responsibility, whilst donors and the most relevant national public institutions are members of the
Programme Steering Committee. The Namibian Government has a laudable and proven track record in
sensitively managing land reform within the existing legal framework, and regular communication with
the Namibian population, frequent partner dialogue and involvement with the programme steering
mechanisms, mitigate the risks of exposure. The role of the MLR at central level is predominantly
strategic, setting standards and executing oversight. The MLR regional offices are responsible for
programme implementation at the local level, and ensure close collaboration with the relevant parties at
intervention sites. Existing regulatory provisions and working practices ensure close collaboration with
Traditional Authorities and Communal Land Boards.
The programme strengthens the Divisions responsible for Land Boards, Tenure and Advice (LBTA), for
Land Use Planning and Allocation (LUPA) as well as the Directorate for Regional Programme
Implementation (DRPI), in order to ensure effective programme execution and contributes to the capacity
development for land management nationally. Provision is made to promptly address policy or regulatory
issues, as identified in the PCLD and emanating from programme activities, in order to underpin lessons
in the medium-term by contributing to an improved land administration and land management framework
in Namibia.
Advisory services will be rendered by GIZ building on a Farmer Support Programme, extending the
current mentorship pool to cover the communal areas as well. It is foreseen that other service providers,
notably from the private sector, will be contracted to provide advisory services. The Advisory Services
will be closely coordinated with the other components of the action, in order to ensure timely, targeted
and relevant advisory services.
2 Local level Participatory Planning, a Decision Making Modality for Local
Level Development
To facilitate the creation of development plans for the designated areas, in 2012-2013 the Local Level
Participatory Planning process was developed, tested and implemented in three selected designated areas,
and hence formally adopted by the MLR.
The LLPP process is nestled in the participation of the prevailing Traditional Authorities (TA), the
modern-day Communal Land Boards (CLBs), local residents and local and regional based stakeholders.
The LLPP process is integrated with the mapping and registration of communal land rights, the Regional
planning activities as well as the development of physical infrastructure. LLPP makes extensive use of
visual aids, and facilitates a process which allows for the local adaptation of both programme objectives
and eligibility criteria.
LLPP comprises the essential elements in the approach that should lead to a state borrowing from the
concept of free prior informed consent (FPIC), in order to ensure transparency in decision-making and
local ownership of programme outputs. It refers to informed consent by all affected parties to land tenure
arrangements, infrastructure developments, resource use rules and other key livelihood decisions made.
LLPP provides a platform for all stakeholders to:
• Streamline overlapping landuses
• Adjudicate land tenure (depicting the location of both legal and illegal land occupants)
• Determine and secure access rights
• Selection of the beneficiaries
• Shape use rules to selected infrastructure
• Define their own development plans in line with a given budget
The following general guidelines were designed to ensure that the Local Level Participatory Planning
process will have the desired results. Most of these guidelines are to ensure that all stakeholders will be
able to participate fully in the process:
• Ensure the allowance of sufficient time; time during workshops but also between workshops not
to force decisions and to allow for community internal process to ponder the trade-offs, impact
and expectations of decisions
• Allow for translation during workshops, and again, plan time for this.
• Involve respected local leaders in the work, but ensure that they will not bias the discussion
disproportionately.
• Where feasible, ensure that the Communal Land Board has an active role in the LLPP. Ideally
they should chair the LLPP workshops. They should take the lead in any issue related to land
administration.
• The MLR regional Deputy Director or a duly and capable designated member of staff, should be
actively involved in the LLPP process and all public consultations.
• The use of visual aids is to be considered wherever possible. However, ensure that appropriate
time and guidance is given to ensure that all participants are convenient with them.
• Do not shy away from repetition of content of previous workshops and be ready to answer
questions which have been answered before, be patient. Meetings are often one step back and two
steps forward.
• Be clear on what people can expect. Especially on the timeline of the process, the budget
available and the framework within which the LLPP has to stay.
• A site file, freely available in strategic places and with all relevant and up-to-date information,
should be developed and continuously updated.
2.1 LLPP Stages
The LLPP is process consists of four sequential stages. While stages have a fixed content, they are
implemented in a flexible way and adjusted to local circumstances. This means that where needed,
different methods can be used to reach the desired outcomes. Nevertheless, even these decisions on
varying the methodology will have to be taken and documented in the public domain.
Figure 1: Illustration of core elements of the LLPP process
Figure 2 illustrates the steps in the LLPP implementation with major activities and outcomes at each
stage.
Stage 1: Selection of priority site(s) within the designated areas.
The LLPP process starts with a scoping visit to a selected designated area to ascertain the level of
readiness by the regional and local communities to proceed with the LLPP process and the
implementation of the PCLD. If the stakeholders are ready, an inception workshop is conducted to
introduce the PCLD and the LLPP process. During the inception workshop the institutional setup around
the LLPP is discussed which normally leads to the appointment of a LLPP organizing committee. The
inception workshop is followed by the mapping of the entire area. In most instances, initial mapping is
generic and captures the following elements.
• Registered land rights
• Villages
• Dwellings
• Fences and cattle handling facilities
• Livestock numbers
• Major land use zonations (formal and informal)
• Water points and boreholes
• Roads, schools, clinics
• Conservancy and community forest boundaries
From the collected data a baseline map is produced and presented in the following workshop. With the
use of the base map, the actual areas in which infrastructure developments are focussed will be selected.
Stage 2: Selection and agreement of beneficiaries, designing of the scenario for desired future of
designated area, including infrastructure investments on a local level, agreement on the rules of
affiliation.
This stage is the core of the LLPP process and starts with site specific detailed mapping which includes a
survey to assess the socio-economic conditions of the local farmers. With all possible data available,
maps will be produced and used in the meetings to develop scenarios. These scenarios are often
developed during group work after which they will be discussed finally the meeting will have to come up
with one development scenario, indicating the type and locality of the desired infrastructure. This scenario
will, after the meeting, be digitized and evaluated by some technical experts on economic viability,
practicality ad budget availability. In the following meeting, the results of this internal validation are
brought back to the meeting for their finalization. What follows is the selection of beneficiaries which is
guided by the MLR/CLB in accordance to the CLRA.
Through the LLPP, not only individual leaseholds are being registered, but there is an increasing request
for the registration of leaseholds for groups of people. The formalisation of group rights over
commonage, over cattle posts or over any other designated land holding, holds significant promise for the
PCLD not only to be able to support farmers in more densely populated areas, but also to spread
investments across larger groups of beneficiaries and allow a more diverse socio-economic stratification
amongst beneficiaries. However, the pursuit of formalising group rights in communal areas is a largely
unchartered territory with a multitude of possible legal implications. Therefore the PCLD has engaged the
services of a reputable entity (the Legal Assistance Centre) to assist in this part of the LLPP process. They
have been given the specific task to safeguard the rights of local residents in the intervention sites, in
particular the rights of poorer segments of society. They assist groups of local residents in their
understanding, selection and design of appropriate legal entities to formalise group rights and associated
rules of affiliation over jointly held land rights and associated infrastructure.
Besides, the LAC advises the MLR in an on-going fashion on the design of a suitable policy framework
for group rights over communal land and infrastructure through the synthesis of lessons learn in the
implementation of the programme.
Throughout the process, the implications of the selected tenure type and development scenario will have
to be explained. These include the leasehold conditions, lease fees in particular as well as requirements
regarding co-funding for economic investments.
Designated engineering services (further discussed in Stage 4 below) provide information needed to
estimate the costs of the selected development scenario, especially for the possible water supply options.
Stage two ends when a final local level development plan has been approved and beneficiaries of
leaseholds and investments are selected. Stage two can take as long as six months to be completed.
Stage 3: Validation of the local level development plan, investment plan and applications for
leaseholds
The third stage involves the finalization of the site file which describes the LLPP process so far and
includes all decisions made in all the workshops as well as the lists of people who participated. The
completed site file is circulated to key stakeholders such as the TA, RC, MLR, CLB and others for their
consideration and feedback. The leasehold applications are publicly displayed as well as advertised in the
newspapers and those with objections can lodge them in writing to the CLB which advertised the
leasehold application. The following diagram illustrates the process of validation.
Figure 3: Validation process in Stage 3 of LLPP
Stage 4: Implementation of the LLPP results
Once the LLPP results are validated as described in stage three and no objections have been lodged/ all
have been amicably resolved, the CLB send a written confirmation letter to the MLR indicating that the
LLPP process has been completed successfully. With this confirmation, the Ministry will start the tender
for the works as per the development plan yielded from the LLPP process. At the same time the CLB will
further process the application(s) for leaseholds. The Regional MLR Deputy Director also submits a
confirmation letter to proceed with the LLPP implementation.
Thereafter, the Ministry through the program for Communal Land Development goes through the tender
process and supports the monitoring and supervision of construction process up to handing over. In the
areas completed with LLPP planning, advisory services commence to enable farmers make use of their
investments to commercialize production.
To ensure proper technical designs for the infrastructure to be developed, but also to complement other
areas of expertise, the PCLD includes a pool of experts from which it can draw on behest of the MLR.
Since the development of water infrastructure forms a substantial part of the investments – usually more
than 50% of the infrastructure provisions, the MLR has recruited a specialized consulting engineer in this
field. This consulting engineer, from a purely technical point of view and building on LLPP results,
compiles a comprehensive needs assessment, detailed site surveys, designs, specifications, cost estimates
and the tender documents. The same consulting firm supervises all works and supply activities by
contractors during construction and the defects liability period on a continuous basis, including reporting
and certification of payment requests.
3 LLPP Results
As part of the overall Communal Land Reform process, in 2012-2013 the local level participatory
planning process has been developed, tested and implemented in three selected underutilized areas.
Figure 4: Map of the LLPP pilot areas
In the selected areas, the LLPP approach has proven to be an important tool for ensuring local grown
development plans which underpin all investment decisions. It has also played a vital role in the
adjudication and formalization of land rights in the selected areas.
Through LLPP the Communal Land Reform Programme has effectively dealt with a host of challenges,
including, a lack of congruence between TA and CLBs as regards the interpretation of the legitimacy of
land rights; attempts of eviction of certain ethnicities in programme areas; allaying decade-old boundary
disputes between competing Traditional Authorities, and as a mechanism to negotiate and secure land
rights for groups of local residents to harness local ownership and decision-making. The LLPP has
yielded local level development plans that are adapted to the local needs and available budget, with a
focus on promoting the commercialization of land based economic activities. For three of the two sites,
infrastructure is presently being implemented
A number of challenges were encountered during the planning process; challenges at which the LLPP
methodology, and its embeddedness in the MLR, has proven to provide amicable solutions. These
include overlapping Traditional Authorities, overlapping land uses, the adjudication of fences, group
rights and a concerted effort to diminish the rights of certain groups. Each of these may well be worth a
paper in themselves, and are briefly alluded to in the following sections.
Namibia is witnessing the rapid erosion of one of its most valuable resources – the commonage. Set in an
ever-more marginal open access system local, often poor, residents are witnessing the dissolution of their
principle livelihood source, and the dwindling of a primary national safety net. Whilst ongoing efforts in
the registration of customary land rights are a positive development in post-Apartheid Namibia,
commonages remain largely a free-for-all. In reality, the open access regime is presently approached less
as a commodity “for-all”, but rather as “for-the-rich” as Namibia makes the transition from customary to
modern land administration systems. Namibia’s ill-fated history of colonization witnessed an
exacerbation of the proverbial ‘tragedy of the commons’; a lack of tenure security further manifested in
limited private investment in the land, a lag in the modernization of farming systems, and a quasi-absence
of private sector provision of inputs and services. Communal land allocations were mostly not
documented; transferred only orally with resulting boundary disputes, unauthorized extensions of
allocated land, and in unregulated - and at times illegal - fencing. Widows and orphans in particular were
often deprived of their land rights.
LLPP is nestled in the participation of local residents and locally based institutions, and plays an
important role in the adjudication process between these and the two primary land administration bodies
from separate eras, namely the prevailing Traditional Authorities (TA) and the modern-day Communal
Land Boards (CLBs). The tools and results of the LLPP process (inter alia residential, resource,
infrastructure and land use zonation maps; basic socio-economic assessments; land right scenarios
depicting settlement, commonage and commercialization sites; investment planning scenarios, list of
beneficiaries; rules of resource user rights and responsibilities; etc.), highlight the commonage
boundaries, potential conflict areas, numbers of households and livestock in an area and the proportion
dependent on the commonage, fenced-off sections and other important planning elements. These generate
a solid platform for informed discussion about prevailing practices, as well as possible future decisions.
Such decisions may pertain as to the need for secured group rights; alignment to or negotiation with other
land uses; adjudication processes on fences and water infrastructure (both existing and planned);
regulations as to the use of jointly held infrastructure or, on the other hand, regulations for exclusive use.
The work with designated entities like the LAC (reference is made to section x.x) is advancing the
institutional and legal framework response to such needs, to the affect that under the PCLD the first legal
entities of designated groups are being issues land rights.
Tenure insecurity and a period of transition between customary and modern land administration has led to
‘defensive’ fencing by some relatively well-off citizens. These fences reduce the commonage in spite of
growing population pressure and increasing livestock numbers, and have led to a proliferation of land
disputes. LLPP has successfully brought together local residents, affected parties, CLBs, TA’s and
support institutions and amicably resolved such situations. Decisions were recorded to remove certain
fences entirely, reduce certain land holdings, regularize certain portions and issue formal leasehold
certificates – all of this with due respect to both local customs and national laws.
Areas on which multiple Traditional Authorities lay claim, where successions are disputed, or where
residents pay allegiance to different TA’s, are commonplace. The LLPP process, by virtue of its
structure, the time it is allowed to take and the efforts it takes in having an inclusive consultation, has
proven apt at not only bringing such conflicts to the fore but, more importantly, allowing for a multitude
of interventions to eventually overcome such conflicts in the interest of advancing development in a
certain area. TA’s have provided written consent to the State to conclude the process of planning and
investments.
In insoluble cases the MLR has been willing to postpone the intervention by 12 months or more for local
leadership structures to sort their issues out, before again engaging at the regional/ local level.
3.1 The Otjetjekua example
Otjetjekua designated area covers 47.000 hectare and is sparsely populated. The area receives on average
around 300mm of rain a year and is fully used for grazing of small stock and cattle. There are 2.800 heads
of cattle, which is the main source of income for the local population consisting of 133 households. The
area is situated within the multipurpose zone of the Ehirivopuka conservancy. There are no clearly
defined traditional authority boundaries and conflicts with neighbouring cattle farmers invading into the
Otjetjekua area are frequent, especially in dry years.
Through the LLPP, the local residents have registered themselves as a cooperative and applied for a
leasehold over the larger Otjetjekua area. They have developed a basic business plan and have fully
constituted cooperative boards and bylaws, and prepared rules of affiliation for the shared infrastructure
which are being finalized.
Challenges in this area have been the insurance of the inclusion in the LLPP process of all the relevant
local residents as well as the definition of the boundaries for the leasehold without creating major
conflicts.
The final infrastructure agreed upon through the LLPP is a boundary fence and internal fences for better
grazing management as well as multipurpose kraals and auctioning facilities for better management and
marketing.
Figure 5: The Otjetjekua example
3.2 The Okongo example
The Okongo designated area covers 60.000 hectares and receives on average around 550mm of rain a
year. The area is covered by dens savanna and is mainly used for grazing of small stock and cattle with
some small patches of crop land. Most of the land is occupied by around 24 individual farmers and three
villages on the Western site. The three villages comprise of around 150 households in total, where the
farms support around 100 households. The area is disputed between the Ndonga and Ukwanyama
Traditional Authorities, with both claiming primary jurisdiction over the area.
Of the 24 farms 15 are having consent from one of the two mentioned TAs and therefore were considered
eligible for Leaseholds and infrastructure support. These 15 farms support 80 households and have a total
of 3.200 heads of cattle. Leaseholds for the 15 farms have been approved and developments are being
implemented. The LLPP process for the three villages has started and is steering towards the registration
of a cooperative and a group right over the larger area, thus securing the commonage for the local
population.
Figure 6: The Okongo example
The main challenges in this area were to adjudicate the existing farmers while there is a land conflict
between two TAs. The final infrastructure agreed upon through the LLPP is a boundary fence and internal
fences for better grazing management as well as multipurpose kraals and auctioning facilities for better
management and marketing. Also, water abstraction and reticulation will be augmented.
3.3 The Ongandjera East example
The Ongandjera East area was selected in the first stage of the LLPP through a zooming-in exercise. The
whole of the Ohgandjera area consists of more than 148.000 ha, and with the available resources only part
of the area can be developed. In the first stage of LLPP it was decided which areas would be developed;
one in the east and one in the west. Both areas were selected due to their lack of conflict as well as their
high potential (once water is made available). The Eastern area was selected to be handled within the
piloting phase while the Western site will be subject to LLPP in the 2014-2015 financial year.
The Ongandjera East area has 40.000 hectares with two permanent settlements occupied by the San
Community. The rest of the area is used as commonage for seasonal grazing for 120 cattle post owners,
predominantly from the Ovambo tribes. The area receives an average of 400mm of annual rainfall which
supports an open savanna vegetation. There are an estimated 3.400 heads of cattle grazing on the
commonage in the area
• The area has saline ground water and cattle owners harvest rainwater (floating on the salt water)
through hand dug wells. The area is fully covered by the Sheya Shuushona conservancy, but falls
outside the core areas.
• The area will be leased to a cooperative consisting of local residents. The larger area has been
zoned into three land use systems, which are:
Permanent village settlements mainly for San communities
Commonage areas for san communities as well as grazing of small herds of cattle.
Business area which will be sub leased for commercial cattle farming.
• The planned development mainly includes piping water from the main distribution network (40
km away), fencing of the business area, external fences as well as multipurpose kraals.
Figure 7: The Ongandjera East example
4 Reflection, lessons learnt and potential for wider application
LLPP is the pivot of the implementation approach adopted by the MLR in the implementation of its
Programme for Communal Lands Development. LLPP provides the causal and procedural link between
baseline data (maps), local conditions, local aspirations, the design of required infrastructure, and finally
the spatial arrangement of the infrastructure with the aim to enable famers – primarily local residents – to
improve productivity and market linkages.
The programme disburses relatively large amounts of public funding, which presents a large
responsibility for the implementing agency (MLR), and also promotes rent-seeking by a wide variety of
stakeholders. As such, the processes’ integrity is paramount. LLPP derives its integrity from transparent
processes, conducted throughout in the public domain; from taking the time for (predominantly) rural
communities to make decisions about their own livelihoods; to fostering inclusive decision-making
which, in as far possible, limits rent-seeking by proportionately better connected individuals. Any trade-
off, by definition, will yield both winners and losers. When it comes to land rights in Namibia, care is
being taken to, in the very least, do-no-harm.
Another core element for successful LLPP implementation is teamwork and open communication.
Teamwork between the main stakeholders – the regional and national MLR, Traditional Authorities,
Regional Councils, Communal Land Boards, resident (and absentee) farmers and designated LLPP
consultants – is paramount. Healthy teamwork requires that there is a common understanding of
challenges, opportunities, scope and promise, as well as a set of clearly defined roles and responsibilities.
Also, it requires open channels of communications.
LLPP furthermore requires a high degree of flexibility and situational intelligence from the relevant
decision makers in order to adequately respond to vastly different circumstances between sites, without
jeopardising the integrity if the process per se.
LLPP, with some additional expert inputs, has proven to be a suitable vehicle in the pursuit of the
following objectives:
• Being a structured, transparent and participatory process enable local residents and the MLR to
reduce excessive rent-seeking;
• Resulting in a high degree of awareness, involvement and ownership amongst stakeholders;
• Ensuring tenure security according to the local needs through individual or group rights;
• Ensuring that the resulted plans fit the available resources and result in socially and economically
viable and thus sustainable investments;
• Beneficiaries agree to their responsibilities vis a vis the maintenance of the infrastructure through
the application of designated rules of affiliation and the regulatory tools available to the MLR.
However, LLPP is also a costly exercise – both in terms of required human resources and means to
mobilise expertise, to hold consultative workshops at various levels, the time it requires from (often quite
senior) personnel of the host institution, and the inherent risk of participation revealing latent conflicts
and yielding demands outside the scope of a programme.
4.1 The Use of GIS and Maps in LLPP
Maps are of essential importance, both in the land registration and in the IRLUP and LLPP processes. It is
only since the introduction of orthophoto maps and the NCLAS (Namibian Communal Land
Administration System) databases that the CLBs have become equipped to be able to detect and address
double allocations, as well as land grabbing and illegal fencing. However, due to the limited capacity of
the CLBs and the regional MLR offices, the incomplete first registration of land rights, and the missing
political pressure, the full potential of the NCLAS had not been utilized yet.
During the LLPP process it became clear that development of an area will not be possible without solving
the land disputes, assessing the legality of land claims and (as applicable) the removal of illegal fences.
Therefore it has only been during the LLPP process that the NCLAS, other GIS tools and the use of maps
has been fully used to facilitate land use and investment planning in designated areas.
The basis of many of the LLPP processes forms the mapping of all infrastructure and claims to land in the
selected area. This is done by collecting data from stakeholders, mapping from orthophotos and satellite
images as well as by doing site surveys with hand held GPSes. The maps produced are then validated
through the LLPP process after which the land tenure issues are discussed and recommendations to the
CLB made.
The results of the planning (often done by drawing on printed maps) are again captured in the GIS and
validated in public LLPP meetings. In many cases, maps are not easily translated to the ground by local
stakeholders. In these cases, the results of the maps are again verified in the field by using hand held
GPSes. By doing this, a high buy in and understanding from the local population has been achieved.
The maps are also used in the public display period, when people have the chance to lodge an objection to
the outcome of the LLPP process.
Finally the resulted plans are translated into land rights as well as investment plans.
The limitation of these maps is that they may be rather intimidating and extra care needs to be taken to
ensure that people have understood the map and its consequences to the reality on the ground.
4.2 Replication
Entities using a LLPP process are advised to allow for some general best practice rules when conducting
such a process:
• Make allowance for sufficient time; time during workshops but also between workshops not to force
decisions and to allow for community internal process to ponder the trade-offs, impact and
expectations of decisions. Be prepared for the need for repetition of contents of previous workshops
and be ready to answer questions which have been answered before. Meetings are often one step
back and two steps forward.
• Allow for translation during workshops.
• Involve respected local leaders in the work who do not bias the discussion disproportionately.
• Where feasible, let the Communal Land Board have an active part of the LLPP. Ideally they should
chair the LLPP workshops and answer questions of land administration.
• The most senior regional officials of the hosting institution, or a duly designated member of staff,
should be actively involved in the LLPP process and be present in all public consultations.
• The use of visual aids is strongly encouraged, but should be given appropriate time and guidance to
ensure that all participants are included in the discussions around them.
• A site file, freely available in strategic places and with all relevant and up-to-date information,
should be developed and continuously updated.
In summary, replicability may principally be a function of political will, programme resources and time
available for implementation. Sufficient amounts of all three are required. Maybe surprisingly,
replicability is to a lesser extent influenced by the geographic scale of the intervention and the complexity
of the land uses in a rural setting, as experience in the PCLD has shown.
4.3 Sustainability of results of the PCLD
Programme beneficiaries, with improved tenure security and full understanding of their rights, will not
only feel safe to invest in their land but have a greater incentive to influence the overall development of
their areas in the long term. At the local level the process of participatory land use planning propagated by
the PCLD, performed from within a secured tenure base, is a developmental and empowerment process
contributing to sustainability. Besides the LLPP, Integrated Regional Land Use Plans are valuable across
institutions for concerted and informed planning processes. The maintenance and periodic update of the
data underpinning these plans is supported by MLR staff in the regions, and strengthens the longevity of
the plans.
Investments in tenure security, and the provision of infrastructure and advisory services in support of
better land and animal husbandry, enhance the resilience and adaptive capacity of Namibia’s communal
population to climate change. The programme provides the incentives/ mandate to ensure the maintenance
and further development of the infrastructure. It also contributes to the building of capacity needed to
successfully commercialize operations in the designated areas. Furthermore, close collaboration with
MET and other relevant stakeholders tries to ensure that physical infrastructure will be adapted to
minimize the potential for human-wildlife conflicts, as well as the preservation of, and access to, strategic
natural resources.
5 References
1. Johann Malan, Guide to the Communal Land Reform Act, No. 5 of 2002. Windhoek, Namibia. Legal
Assistance Centre and Namibia National Farmers Union, 2003
2. Republic of Namibia. Communal Land Reform Act, No 5 of 2002. Windhoek, Namibia. Government
Gazette, 2002
3. Republic of Namibia. National Land Policy. Windhoek, Namibia. Government Gazette, 1998
4. Ministry of Lands and Resettlement, Road Map for the development of small-scale farming areas on
communal land in Namibia. Windhoek, Namibia, Project documentation, 2012
5. Ministry of Lands and Resettlement, Local Level Participatory Planning for the Development of
Infrastructure for Small Scale Commercial Farming in the Communal Areas of Namibia. Windhoek,
Namibia, Project documentation, 2013
6 Figures
Figure 1: Map of the PCLD intervention sites
Figure 2: Illustration of core elements of the LLPP process
Figure 3: Validation process
Figure 4: Map of the LLPP pilot areas
Figure 5: The Otjetjekua example
Figure 6: The Okongo example
Figure 7: The Ongandjera East example