the land governance assessment framework (lgaf) an approach for participatory benchmarking,...

28
THE LAND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK (LGAF) AN APPROACH FOR PARTICIPATORY BENCHMARKING, MONITORING, AND DIALOGUE Thea Hilhorst –December 10 th 2013 1

Upload: adele

Post on 26-Feb-2016

34 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

The land governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue . Thea Hilhorst –December 10 th 2013. Overview presentation. Aim and approach LGAF Structure of the framework Some findings Using data for improving land governance . - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

1

THE LAND GOVERNANCE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK (LGAF) AN APPROACH FOR PARTICIPATORY BENCHMARKING, MONITORING, AND DIALOGUE

Thea Hilhorst –December 10th 2013

Page 2: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

2

Overview presentation Aim and approach LGAF Structure of the framework Some findings Using data for improving land

governance

Page 3: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

3

Why LGAF instrument was developed (2008) Land sector reforms to be driven by country

level, evidence-based assessment Should be based on broad, participatory

policy dialogue between/ within government and other stakeholders

Comprehensive assessment – across silos & strategic priority setting

Need for land governance baseline to track progress both for in-country policy reform and for regional/global initiatives (VGGT, LPI )

Page 4: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

4

Aim and Structure LGAF Framework

Set baseline (country scorecard) - for tracking progress Consistent with the VGGT principles, and other

(emerging) principles (‘responsible agro-investment’) Pre-coded framework based on global experience Rankings assigned by panels of local experts (gov, CSO,

academia, private sector), justified by evidence Goal is to arrive at consensus scoring- Aim for

consensus: on strong points; what to improve and where to start (priority recommendations)

Results validated in national technical workshop, translation into policy recommendation

Conclusion presented to policy makers for concrete follow-up

Page 5: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

5

LGAF approach: Substance and process

Substance: Comprehensive analysis of land sector; Assessment guided by framework of indicators, based on

global experience of “good” land governance Evidence-based (administrative data, studies, tacit

knowledge) Process:

Fast, low-cost assessment - Use available information – no new primary research (gaps can be identified)

Driven by national experts - Participatory - multiple sectors and stakeholders

Led by a country coordinator, working with national specialists to prepare background analysis; Scoring in 9 thematic panels

Page 6: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

6

Voluntary Guidelines (VG) Topics Covered by the LGAF

VG Topics# of

Corresponding LGAF Dimensions

Tenure Rights and Responsibilities 16

Policy, Legal and Organizational Frameworks

17

Delivery of Services 15Safeguards 8Public Land, Fisheries and Forests 12

Indigenous Peoples, Communities with Customary Tenure Systems

3

Informal Tenure 6Markets 6Investments 13Redistributive Reforms 5Expropriation and Compensation 5

Records of Tenure Rights 16

Cont’d. #

Valuation 2

Taxation 5

Regulated Spatial Planning 12Resolution of Disputes Over Tenure Rights 4

Land Consolidation and Other Readjustment Approaches

1

Restitution 0Transboundary Matters 0Climate Change 1Natural Disasters 1Conflicts in Respect to Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests

19

Page 7: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

7

Process and Steps: 4-6 months

Inception

Phase

Background

Report based

on existing informat

ion

9 Panels

of Experts Draft

Report

Technical

Validation

Workshop &

Policy Dialog

ue

Follow Up1 2 3 4 5 6

Final report & Score card

Dialogue

Platform/observator

y

monitoring

Page 8: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

8 Framework

Page 9: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

9

5 thematic governance areas

Recognition and respect for existing rightsLand Use Planning, Management, and Taxation

Management of Public Land

Public Provision of Land Information Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management

Page 10: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

10

9 PanelsPanel 1 Land Tenure Recognition

Panel 2 Rights to Forest and Common Lands; Rural Land Use RegulationsPanel 3 Urban Land Use, Planning, and Development

Panel 4 Public Land Management

Panel 5 Transfer of Public Land to Private Use Follows a Clear, Transparent, and Competitive Process

Panel 6 Public Provision of Land Information: Registry and CadastrePanel 7 Land Valuation and Taxation

Panel 8 Dispute Resolution

Panel 9 Review of Institutional Arrangements and Policies

Page 11: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

11

Panel – Indicator, dimensions and scoresPa

nel 1

Indicator 1

Dimension 1 Ranked on a scale from A to D by the panel

Dimension 2 Ranked on a scale from A to D by the panel

Dimension 3 Ranked on a scale from A to D by the panel

Dimension 4 Ranked on a scale from A to D by the panel

Indicator 2

Dimension 1 Ranked on a scale from A to D by the panel

Dimension 2 Ranked on a scale from A to D by the panel

Dimension 3 Ranked on a scale from A to D by the panel

Dimension 4 Ranked on a scale from A to D by the panel

Dimension 5 Ranked on a scale from A to D by the panel

Dimension 6 Ranked on a scale from A to D by the panel

Dimension 7 Ranked on a scale from A to D by the panel

Page 12: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

12

ExampleArea

Panel 5: Transfer of large tracts of land to investor

s

Indicators

Transfer of public land to private use follows a clear, transparent, and competitive process; payments are collected and audited Private Investment StrategyPolicy implementation is effective, consistent and transparent and involves local stakeholdersContracts involving public land are public with agreements monitored and enforced

Public land transactions are conducted in an open transparent manner.

Dimensions

Payments for public leases are collected.

Public land is transacted at market prices unless guided by equity objectives. The public captures benefits arising from changes in permitted land use.

Score

Policy to improve equity in asset access and use by the poor exists, is implemented effectively and monitored.

A B C DArea 3: Managem

ent of Public land

Page 13: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

13

The scoring/ ranking: based on global experience

Dimension Assessment

Brief description of dimension

A – Best option towards a good land governance scenario.

B – Second best set of options for making progress towards good land governance.

C – Generally struggles to meet the criteria for good land governance however some attempts are being made.

D – No attempts in this area towards good land governance.

Page 14: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

14

Example of coded answersDimension 5.1.1

Public land transactions are conducted in an open transparent manner. (with the exception of transfers to improve asset equity such as land distribution and land for social housing).

AssessmentA –The share of public land disposed of in the past 3 years through sale or lease through public auction or open tender process is greater than 90% (Except for equity transfers).B –The share of public land disposed of in the past 3 years through sale or lease through public auction or open tender process is between 70% and 90%. (Except for equity transfers).C –The share of public land disposed of in the past 3 years through sale or lease through public auction or open tender process is between 50% and 70%.D – The share of public land disposed of in the past 3 years through sale or lease through public auction or open tender process is less than 50%. (Except for equity transfers).

Page 15: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

15

11 Indicators important for large-scale land acquisitions Panel 1: Land Rights Recognition

Recognition of a continuum of rights Respect for and enforcement of rights

Panel 2: Rights to Forest and Common Lands & Rural Land Use Regulations Rights to forest and common lands Effectiveness and equity of rural land use regulations

Panel 4: Public Land Management Identification of public land and clear management Justification and time-efficiency of acquisition processes Transparency and fairness of acquisition procedures

Panel 5: Transfer of large tracts of public/communal land to investors Transfer of public land to private use follows a clear, transparent,

and competitive process and payments are collected and audited Private Investment Strategy Policy implementation is effective, consistent and transparent and

involves local stakeholders. Contracts involving public land are public with agreements

monitored and enforced.

Page 16: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

16 Results

Page 17: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

17

Countries with LGAF (33)pilot completed Ongoing Starting

2014

Benin ** Brazil* Bangladesh Burkina faso

EthiopiaDR CongoColombia Cameroon Burundi

Indonesia Gambia DRC- Kinshasa* Mozambique

Kyrgyzstan Georgia * GuineaKalimantan-Indonesia*

Peru ** Ghana Honduras Timor Leste

Tanzania Madagascar* India -7 States*Malawi * MaliMauritaniaMoldova Rwanda

***-monitoring Philippines Sudan** 2nd round South Africa

South Sudan Uganda*=+sub-national

Ukraine VanuatuVietnam

Page 18: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

18 Scorecards

Page 19: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

19

Recognition and Respect for Existing Rights: Legal and Institutional Environment

Land tenure rights recognition (rural) A B A ALand tenure rights recognition (urban) A B C BRural group rights recognition D B A CUrban group rights recognition in informal areas C C COpportunities for tenure individualization D C B B

Mapping/registration of communal land D D D CRegistration of individual rural land A A D CRegistration of individual urban land A B C A D BFormal recog of women's right C A D ACondominium regime A C C A A CCompensation due to land use changes D B B C

Non-documentary evidence to recognize rights B C C DRecognition of long-term possession A C D CFormal fees for 1st time registration low A A B D D D CNo high informal fees for 1st time registration A B B A DFormalizing housing is feasible & affordable A C B CClear process for formal recognition of possession B C

Restrictions on urban land use, ownership and transferability C B B BRestrictions on rural land use, ownership and transferability A B B B

Clear separation of institutional roles A CInstitutional overlap A CAdministrative overlap B CInformation sharing among institutions B C

Clear land policy developed in a participatory manner C B C C CMeaningful incorporation of equity goals C C CCost of implementing policy is estimated, matched with benefits, and adequately resourced

B C D C C

Regular, public reports indicating progress in policy implementation B C D C C

C B

C

C C

AC BC D

C BC C

A AD

B B

A AB B

A AC

C CA AB B

DDCCC

CCD

C

BCCD

BA

A

DD CD CA A

CC

C

BDBAA

B

D

C

B

C

CACACC

AB

C

D

A

Brazil

NationalPara State

Piauí State

Georgia

BA

CCB

A

CCA

B

ABAAB

BDC

B

Enforcement of Rights

CAB

CD

DB

DClarity of Institutional Mandates

Equity and Nondiscrimination in the Decision-Making ProcessAC

C

A

C

CC

AA

DDB

C

Recognition of a continuum of rights

Mechanisms for recognition of rights

Restrictions on Rights

D

ABAA

Peru PhilippinesSouth Africa

Senegal Ukraine

AAAA

Page 20: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

20

Management of Public Land

Public ownership is justified A C C B DComplete recording of public land C D A C BManagement responsibility for public land is clear A C C B C B CInstitutions are properly resourced A D C D DPublic land inventory with public access B C C DKey information on land concessions is public A A C C C

Expropriated land is used for private purposes A A A A ASpeed of use of expropriated land A A C A A

Fair compensation for expropriation of ownership A B B B CFair compensation for expropriation of other rights A B C C DPromptness of compensation A D A A DIndependent & accessible appeal A B B C ATime it takes for a first-instance decision on an appeal A D A

Openness of public land transactions A D D DCollection of payments for public leases A A D AModalities of lease/sale of public land A A D CA D

B

D DD

C CD DB A

DA A

B C

AAC

C BB CC DD DC CB C

D

AA

Ukraine

BABC

Peru PhilippinesSouth Africa

SenegalGeorgia

BA

Identification and Clear Management of Pulic Land

DCC

C

CB

AA

A

Incidence of Expropriation

Brazil

NationalPara State

Piauí State

CBBD

DAAB

A

A

Transparent Processes for Divestiture

Transparency of Expropriation Procedures

Page 21: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

21

Public Provision of Land Information

Mapping of registry records A B C A B CRelevant private encumbrances A A A ARelevant public restrictions A C A ASearchability of the registry A A B A C AAccessibility of registry records A A A CTimely response to requests A A B C

Registry focus on client satisfaction A C D BCadastral/registry info up-to-date D C D A B C

Cost for registering a property transfer A C D BFinancial sustainability of registry A A A CCapital investment in the system to record rights A A B A B A

Schedule of fees for services is public A A A AInformal payments discouraged A A D C

AA

A CD D

AAD

C DA AC D

DD DD D

AAB C C

Reliability of Registry Records

A AA AB AA A

B

South Africa

Senegal Ukraine

AA

Peru PhilippinesGeorgia

DCAC

AA

D D

Brazil

NationalPara State

Piauí State

Transparency

Cost Effectiveness, Accessibility, and Sustainability

Completeness of Registry Information

AAA

B

DA

AB

AA

AA

AA

AD

C

Page 22: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

22

Transfer of Public Land to Private Use Follows a Clear, Transparent, and Competitive Process

Most forest land is mapped; rights are registered A D CFew conflicts generated and how they are addressed C D DLand use restrictions on rural land parcels generally identifiable A D AClear, consistent public institutions in land acquisition B D CIncentives for investors are clear and consistent B A CBenefit sharing mechanisms for investments in agriculture B D CDirect/transparent negotiations between right holders and investors A B BSufficient information required from investors B A D A DInvestors provide required information B C C

Contractual provisions on benefits/risks sharing A C CDuration of procedure to obtain approval A A BSocial requirements clearly defined B B CEnvironmental requirements clearly defined B B BProcedures for economically, environmentally, and socially beneficial investments A D DCompliance with safeguards is checked B C BProcedures to lodge complaints B C B

C

CC

C C

C

C

A

BD

BCA

C

CD

D

D

D

D

D

D

CC

C

CA

B

B

C

CC

CA

A

AA

CD

DD

C

AA

AA D

D

PhilippinesSouth Africa

Senegal Ukraine

LSLAAB

Brazil

NationalPara State

Piauí State

Georgia

C

C

CC

DBCC

DD

CCB

CC

CD

BC

BC

CC

CC

B

CB

Page 23: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

23 Conclusions

Page 24: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

24

Process LGAF proven to be a good diagnostic tool Comprehensive analysis across stakeholder much

appreciated; Breaking down traditional silos in country = panels are important

Creates baseline for tracking progress – regular monitoring key quantitative indicators

Helps to focus efforts in land sector and encourage collaboration, basis for building platforms for stakeholder dialogue

Helped to start taking sometimes controversial issues forward / create space for dialogue

Tool for expressing & communicating country demand Provides justification for investments/ interventions in

land sector reforms move up “land issues” on broad policy agenda;

Page 25: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

25

Contribution to transparency & change

Information land sector pulled together, brings tacit knowledge on actual practice in the public domain

Brings (potential) change agents together; podium for potential “champions”

Building block for Implementation (can agreement on strong and weak

points (evidence) lead to change?) – allign… Innovation? (pilot, sharing practice, capacity etc.) Institutionalize dialogues and monitoring – allign.. VGGT Demand for data from administrative system =>

transparency & performance? More monitoring (timely check) & impact

Page 26: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

26

Presenting data in accessible format

LGAF Framework Structures analysis Structures assessment : comparable

over time and between countries Produces scorecards: strong & weak

points Baseline; also helps to identify

opportunities for sharing good practice

Page 27: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

27

LGAF prepares the ground for regular –reporting on land governance

Produces baseline & national platform demanding data & ability to use these data

Uses data from administrative systems: government responsibility to supply data (accountability) and has incentive to Improve ability of systems to produce data Undertake actions that will show progress)

Work towards regular reporting on short list of global land indicators (see also) –incl. Post- 2015 land indicators (land in name of women; mapping communal land; transactions recorded; expropriation, conflict, taxation)

Page 28: The land  governance assessment framework (LGAF) an approach for  participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue

28

More Information on LGAF instrument and findings

http://econ.worldbank.org/lgaf