the land governance assessment framework (lgaf): …
TRANSCRIPT
THE LAND GOVERNANCE
ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK
(LGAF):
GLOBAL EXPERIENCE & LESSONS
LEARNED FROM THE PHILIPPINES
Folay Eleazar & Keith Clifford Bell
August 13, 2013
Why an Assessment of Land
Governance is Required
Land sector reforms should be driven, by an evidence-
based assessment and participatory policy dialogue
between government and stakeholders
Governments require a land governance baseline to
monitor progress of reforms and interventions
Investment by donors, incl. support from the WB, should
be on the basis of priority need determined through an
evidence-based, validated assessment.
LGAF provides the key input to a country’s land sector
engagement strategy.
LGAF’s contribution to VG
implementation
Comprehensive, fast, low-cost assessment
Driven by national experts
Highly participatory
Consensus on what are strong points; what needs to improve and where to start (priority recommendations)
Sets a benchmark (country scorecard) to be used for tracking progress and identify opportunities for south-south exchange
LGAF is consistent with the VG principles, as well as other good governance principles such as PRAI and standards such as LADM
Land governance issues
A broader view of land governance is needed at
the country level – too many silos
Urban land tenure essential for low-cost housing
and livable cities
Tenure security key constraint for farmers, especially
for women
Tenure security / demarcation & registration of
Common lands/ forest lands/ ancestral lands
Institutional & political economy issues often
neglected
LGAF approach
Attention for both Substance and
process
Substance: comprehensive analysis land sector; use
a framework based on global experience on what
is “good” land governance to guide analysis
Process:
Evidence-based
multiple sectors and stakeholders
aim for consensus on strengths and weaknesses in a
country, on scores & priorities for change
Key thematic governance areas
analysed in LGAF
Recognition and respect for existing rights
Land Use Planning, Management, and Taxation
Management of Public Land
Public Provision of Land Information
Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management
Large Scale Land Acquisition and Forestry
Methodology
Pre-coded framework based on global experience
Led by a local country coordinator, working with national specialists to prepare background analysis
Using existing studies, information and data
Rankings assigned by panels of local experts (land users) and justified by evidence
Goal is to arrive at consensus scoring
Results validated in national technical workshop, translation into policy recommendation
Present conclusion to policy makers for concrete follow-up
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– example of coded
answers drawn on global experience
LGI 16,
Dim. I
Mapping/
charting of
registry
records is
complete
Assessment
– More than of records for privately
held land in the registry are readily
identifiable in maps held by the registry or
the cadastre.
– Between of records for
privately held land in the registry are readily
identifiable in maps held by the registry or
the cadastre.
– Between of records for
privately held land in the registry are readily
identifiable in maps held by the registry or
the cadastre.
– Less than of records for privately
held land in the registry are readily
identifiable in maps held by the registry or
the cadastre.
The scoring: General Structure for
Assessment based on global experience
Dimension Assessment
Brief description
of dimension
A – Dimension description is the best option
towards a good land governance scenario.
B – Dimension description is generally the second
best set of options for making progress towards
good land governance.
C – Dimension description generally struggles to
meet the criteria for good land governance
however some attempts are being made.
D – There are no attempts in this area towards good
land governance.
Steps: 4-6 months
Inception Phase
Background Report
based on existing
information 9 Panels
of Experts Draft
Report
Technical Validation Workshop & Policy Dialogue
Follow Up 1 2 3 4 5 6
Final report & Score card
Tracking progress & dialogue
Dialogue with policy makers
Countries with LGAF (35) pilot completed Ongoing Starting
Benin + 2nd round Philippines Bangladesh Burkina Faso
Ethiopia DR Congo Brazil* Burundi
Indonesia Gambia Cameroon DRC- Kinshasa
Kyrgyzstan Georgia + Monit Colombia Guinea Peru + 2nd round Ghana Mali Honduras Tanzania Madagascar + Monit Moldova India*
Malawi-+ Monit Rwanda Sudan
Mauritania South Sudan Uganda
Nigeria Vanuatu
Senegal Vietnam *=sub-national South Africa
Ukraine
LGAF in the PHILLIPINES
Recognition and Respect for Existing Rights: Legal and Institutional Environment
Land tenure rights recognition (rural) A B A A
Land tenure rights recognition (urban) A B C B
Rural group rights recognition D B A C
Urban group rights recognition in informal areas C C C
Opportunities for tenure individualization D C B B
Mapping/registration of communal land D D D C
Registration of individual rural land A A D C
Registration of individual urban land A B C A D B
Formal recog of women's right C A D A
Condominium regime A C C A A C
Compensation due to land use changes D B B C
Non-documentary evidence to recognize rights B C C D
Recognition of long-term possession A C D C
Formal fees for 1st time registration low A A B D D D C
No high informal fees for 1st time registration A B B A D
Formalizing housing is feasible & affordable A C B C
Clear process for formal recognition of possession B C
Restrictions on urban land use, ownership and transferability C B B B
Restrictions on rural land use, ownership and transferability A B B B
Clear separation of institutional roles A C
Institutional overlap A C
Administrative overlap B C
Information sharing among institutions B C
Clear land policy developed in a participatory manner C B C C C
Meaningful incorporation of equity goals C C C
Cost of implementing policy is estimated, matched with benefits, and
adequately resourcedB C D C C
Regular, public reports indicating progress in policy implementation B C D C C
C B
C
C C
A
C B
C D
C B
C C
A A
D
B B
A A
B B
A A
C
C C
A A
B B
D
D
C
C
C
C
C
D
C
B
C
C
D
B
A
A
D
D C
D C
A A
C
C
C
B
D
B
A
A
B
D
C
B
C
C
A
C
A
C
C
A
B
C
D
A
Brazil
NationalPara
State
Piauí
State
Georgia
B
A
C
C
B
A
C
C
A
B
A
B
A
A
B
B
D
C
B
Enforcement of Rights
C
A
B
C
D
D
B
D
Clarity of Institutional Mandates
Equity and Nondiscrimination in the Decision-Making Process
A
C
C
A
C
C
C
A
A
D
D
B
C
Recognition of a continuum of rights
Mechanisms for recognition of rights
Restrictions on Rights
D
A
B
A
A
Peru PhilippinesSouth
AfricaSenegal Ukraine
A
A
A
A
Management of Public Land
Public ownership is justified A C C B D
Complete recording of public land C D A C B
Management responsibility for public land is clear A C C B C B C
Institutions are properly resourced A D C D D
Public land inventory with public access B C C D
Key information on land concessions is public A A C C C
Expropriated land is used for private purposes A A A A A
Speed of use of expropriated land A A C A A
Fair compensation for expropriation of ownership A B B B C
Fair compensation for expropriation of other rights A B C C D
Promptness of compensation A D A A D
Independent & accessible appeal A B B C A
Time it takes for a first-instance decision on an appeal A D A
Openness of public land transactions A D D D
Collection of payments for public leases A A D A
Modalities of lease/sale of public land A A D CA D
B
D D
D
C C
D D
B A
D
A A
B C
A
A
C
C B
B C
C D
D D
C C
B C
D
A
A
Ukraine
B
A
B
C
Peru PhilippinesSouth
AfricaSenegalGeorgia
B
A
Identification and Clear Management of Pulic Land
D
C
C
C
C
B
A
A
A
Incidence of Expropriation
Brazil
NationalPara
State
Piauí
State
C
B
B
D
D
A
A
B
A
A
Transparent Processes for Divestiture
Transparency of Expropriation Procedures
Public Provision of Land Information
Mapping of registry records A B C A B C
Relevant private encumbrances A A A A
Relevant public restrictions A C A A
Searchability of the registry A A B A C A
Accessibility of registry records A A A C
Timely response to requests A A B C
Registry focus on client satisfaction A C D B
Cadastral/registry info up-to-date D C D A B C
Cost for registering a property transfer A C D B
Financial sustainability of registry A A A C
Capital investment in the system to record rights A A B A B A
Schedule of fees for services is public A A A A
Informal payments discouraged A A D C
A
A
A C
D D
A
A
D
C D
A A
C D
D
D D
D D
A
A
B C C
Reliability of Registry Records
A A
A A
B A
A A
B
South
AfricaSenegal Ukraine
A
A
Peru PhilippinesGeorgia
DC
A
C
A
A
D D
Brazil
NationalPara
State
Piauí
State
Transparency
Cost Effectiveness, Accessibility, and Sustainability
Completeness of Registry Information
A
A
A
B
D
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
D
C
Large Scale Land Acquisition (Optional Module)
Most forest land is mapped; rights are registered A D C
Few conflicts generated and how they are addressed C D D
Land use restrictions on rural land parcels generally identifiable A D A
Clear, consistent public institutions in land acquisition B D C
Incentives for investors are clear and consistent B A C
Benefit sharing mechanisms for investments in agriculture B D C
Direct/transparent negotiations between right holders and investors A B B
Sufficient information required from investors B A D A D
Investors provide required information B C C
Contractual provisions on benefits/risks sharing A C C
Duration of procedure to obtain approval A A B
Social requirements clearly defined B B C
Environmental requirements clearly defined B B B
Procedures for economically, environmentally, and socially beneficial investments A D D
Compliance with safeguards is checked B C B
Procedures to lodge complaints B C B
C
C
C
C C
C
C
A
B
D
B
C
A
C
C
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
C
C
C
C
A
B
B
C
C
C
C
A
A
A
A
C
D
D
D
C
A
A
A
A D
D
PhilippinesSouth
AfricaSenegal Ukraine
LSLA
AB
Brazil
NationalPara
State
Piauí
State
Georgia
C
C
C
C
D
B
C
C
D
D
CC
B
C
C
C
D
B
C
B
C
C
C
C
C
B
C
B
Good timing & highly relevant
Good governance important agenda of administration
Active national land policy debates and discussions on
20 year proposal for National Land Use Act
“Land sector” projects ongoing and planned; legal
changes and Bills in Congress
Commitment to complete land redistribution in the short
term
National REDD+ Strategy with strong constituency
Strong policies recognizing rights of indigenous peoples;
and decentralization to local governments
LGAF started in December 2012- Validation workshop
June 6th 2013
Strong points Philippines
Examples of innovative policies
land redistribution
tenure regularization
indigenous peoples rights
urban shelter
dispute resolution
legal framework allows for connecting tenure regularization,
land use planning and resource mobilization at the local
government level.
Good governance drive enables public display of information
and reports; streamlined processes through computerization
Strong democratic space allows public participation in policy
development and review
Legal Rights recognition is progressive
but..
44% of ancestral lands are not demarcated,
40% of the rural land not covered yet by any
tenure agreement
15 % of people in urban areas not having secure
rights
Unreliable and incomplete registries
Insufficient coordination and incentive for adequate
service delivery by land institutions
Public land, land use, investors
Urban land use planning is following, not leading in planning city expansion and access to formal low-cost housing:
Difficulties with identification of vacant land for resettlement from disaster prone areas:
Expropriation with insufficient or timely compensation:
Land speculation hinders effective land use planning by government:
LGUs make limited use of planning instruments at their disposal:
Limited transparency and community engagement hinder large-scale investment in land
Property tax collection is below potential:
Next steps
continuous conversation and dialogue
amongst land sector experts and specialist,
across government agencies ,
between central and local level and
with non-state actors, CSO and the private sector;
regular monitoring of key indicators to track
progress
consider sub-national land governance assessments
at the level of cities (Manila) and in Mindanao
To conclude: Contribution of LGAF to
VG spirit
LGAF proven to be a very good diagnostic tool to start taking issues forward
Express country demand, breaking down traditional silos in country
Helps to focus efforts in land sector and encourage collaboration
Helps to move up “land issues” on broad policy agenda
Flexible; can be used by range of stakeholders
Creates basis for building platforms, benchmark for tracking progress and stakeholder dialogue
Provides justification for investments/ interventions in land sector reforms
Publications: www.worldbank.org
