Land Administration:

Indicators of Success, Future Challenges

October 2006
 Acknowledgements
This report is based on the documentation prepared in 2003 for the first stage of a
global study undertaken in support of the World Bank's Policy Research Report on
land policy (Deininger 2003), which was supported by USAID, the Norwegian ESSD
Trust Fund, the Australian Consultant Trust Fund, and the World Bank's Latin
America Region. The initial global study was undertaken under the general
supervision of Isabel Lavadenz of the World Bank and Jolyne Sanjak of USAID. A
preliminary report was prepared in late 2003 by Tony Burns, Chris Grant, Anne-
Marie Brits and Kevin Nettle of Land Equity International Pty Ltd (LEI) and circulated
for review. In 2006 this final version of the publication was edited by Tony Burns and
Kate Dalrymple from LEI. This report is intended as a base document for land
administration and development practitioners.
This report is the product of a number of experts’ research and field experience in
land administration systems around the globe. Without their insight and dedication
preparing this report, the task would have been unachievable. We acknowledge the
comprehensive and astute reporting by a team of experts for the effort they put into
preparing and updating regional case studies, Clarissa Augustinus (Africa), Gavin
Adlington (Europe and Central Asia), and Grenville Barnes (Latin America and the
Caribbean). We are also thankful for the invaluable lessons and knowledge provided
by authors of the country case studies. Since preparation of the case studies
progress has varied across the jurisdictions and therefore with further contributions
from the respective authors progress and future proposals are presented.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance in reviewing the preliminary
report provided by Gavin Adlington, Clarissa Augustinus, Grenville Barnes, and Nigel
Thompson. The final editing of this report significantly benefited from the constructive
comments and critiques offered by, Gavin Adlington, Clarissa Augustinus, Grenville
Barnes, Klaus Deininger and Elena Panaritis.
Any errors in the text are the sole responsibility of the authors and the views
expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those
of the sponsoring agencies.

Company: Land Equity International Pty Ltd

Address: Suite 12-13 / 74 Kembla St, Wollongong, NSW, Australia 2500
PO Address: PO Box 798, Wollongong, NSW, Australia, 2520
Telephone: +61 2 4227 6680
Facsimile: +61 2 4228 9944
Web page: www.landequity.com.au
Email: tburns@landequity.com.au

–i-
 Table of Contents
1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background.................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Study Objectives .......................................................................................... 2
1.3 Country Case Studies .................................................................................. 3
1.3.1 Africa Country Case Studies................................................................. 4
1.3.2 Asia Country Case Studies ................................................................... 6
1.3.3 Europe and Central Asia Country Case Studies ................................... 8
1.3.4 Latin America and Caribbean Country Case Studies............................ 9
1.4 Regional Papers ........................................................................................ 11
2 Land Administration .......................................................................................... 13
2.1 Definitions and General Background ......................................................... 13
2.2 Environment for Land Administration Projects ........................................... 16
2.3 Archetypical Contexts ................................................................................ 17
2.4 Global Land Administration Issues............................................................. 18
3 Critical Issues and Current Trends Specific to the Regions .............................. 23
3.1 Critical Issues in Africa............................................................................... 23
3.2 Critical Issues in Asia ................................................................................. 25
3.3 Critical Issues in Europe and Central Asia ................................................. 26
3.4 Critical Issues in Latin America and the Caribbean.................................... 28
3.5 Trends in Jurisdictions with Well-Developed Land Registration Systems .. 30
4 Land Administration System Indicators ............................................................. 33
4.1 Framework to Assess Land Administration Efficiency and Effectiveness .. 33
4.2 Policy/Legal Framework............................................................................. 34
4.3 Qualitative Indicators for Customary Tenure.............................................. 38
4.4 Quantitative Indicators for Formal Land Administration Systems............... 41
4.4.1 Indicators and Criteria for Success ..................................................... 41
4.4.2 Comparative Study Results ................................................................ 47
4.4.3 Summary of ‘Mean’ Indicators ............................................................ 51
4.5 Property Registration as a Business Indicator ........................................... 53
5 Future Challenges............................................................................................. 59
5.1 Approach to Land Administration Reform .................................................. 59
5.1.1 Long-Term Nature of Land Administration Intervention ...................... 59
5.1.2 Sequencing of Land Administration Interventions............................... 61

– ii -
 5.1.3 Community Mobilisation...................................................................... 66
5.1.4 Solving Rather than just Identifying Problems .................................... 68
5.2 Institutional Challenges .............................................................................. 69
5.2.1 Authority of the State .......................................................................... 69
5.2.2 Institutional Arrangements .................................................................. 73
5.2.3 Corruption and Governance................................................................ 79
5.3 Focus on Sustainability .............................................................................. 81
5.3.1 Technical Sustainability ...................................................................... 82
5.3.2 Financial Sustainability ....................................................................... 90
5.3.3 Participatory Sustainability.................................................................. 91
5.3.4 Capacity Building for Sustainability..................................................... 93
5.4 Land Tenure Policy .................................................................................... 96
5.4.1 Land Administration and Land Reform................................................ 96
5.4.2 Customary Tenure .............................................................................. 98
5.4.3 Alternatives to Titles ......................................................................... 104
5.4.4 Pro-Poor Emphasis and Safeguards for Vulnerable Groups............. 110
6 Conclusions and Recommendations............................................................... 123
6.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................. 123
6.2 Recommendations ................................................................................... 124
6.2.1 Approach to Land Administration Reform ......................................... 124
6.2.2 Institutional Challenges..................................................................... 127
6.2.3 Focus on Sustainability ..................................................................... 128
6.2.4 Land Tenure Policy ........................................................................... 130
Appendices ............................................................................................................ 135
Appendix 1 - Policy/Legal Framework Indicators ................................................ 137
Appendix 2 –Customary Tenure Indicators......................................................... 151
Appendix 3 – Land Administration Parameters................................................... 165
Appendix 4 – Formal Land Administration Effectiveness Indicators ................... 173
References............................................................................................................. 179
Index ...................................................................................................................... 189
Author Index........................................................................................................... 191

– iii -
Figures
Figure 1 Land Management Arrangements (Dale and McLaughlin
1988:4). .................................................................................................13
Figure 2 Land Administration Project Environments. ...........................................16
Figure 3 Tenure Security/Institutional Arrangements Matrix. ............................... 17
Figure 4 Generic Strategies to Strengthen Land Administration..........................18
Figure 5 Hierarchy of Tenurial Concerns. ............................................................20
Figure 6 Framework to Assess Land Administration Efficiency and
Effectiveness. ........................................................................................33
Figure 7 Case Study Country’s Ease of Business Rank against
Property Registration Rank (based on Doing Business
2007) .....................................................................................................55
Figure 8 Economics of Institutions (from Williamson 2000:597). .........................60
Figure 9 Geographic Phasing of Systematic Titling in Thailand
(updated from World Bank 1990b).........................................................62
Figure 10 Schematic of Tasks within Generic Strategies.......................................65
Figure 11 The 2002 Transparency International Corruption
Perceptions Index..................................................................................79
Figure 12 Cadastral Concept (from Williamson, 2002) ..........................................83
Figure 13 Thailand Land Titling Project Ground Survey/Conversion
Cost Components..................................................................................87
Figure 14 Options for Cadastral Surveying (based on Dale and
McLaughlin 1988:110). ..........................................................................87
Figure 15 Equipment Cost/Accuracy Matrix (from Dale and
McLaughlin 1999:55). ............................................................................88
Figure 16 Evolution of Western Land Administration Systems (from
Ting and Williamson 1999:2). ..............................................................100

Tables
Table 1 List of Country Case Studies. ..................................................................3
Table 2 Generic Approach to Indicators for the Policy/Legal
Framework. ...........................................................................................35
Table 3 Approach to Qualitative Indicators for Customary
Systems.................................................................................................39
Table 4 Criteria for Successful Administration of Legal Rights in
Property.................................................................................................42
Table 5 Indicators of the effectiveness and efficiency of land
administration systems. .........................................................................43
Table 6 Criteria and Relevant Indicators. ...........................................................44
Table 7 Generic Issues and Approach to Determining Indicators.......................45
Table 8 Comparison of 'Mean' Indicators for Formal Land
Administration Systems .........................................................................52
Table 9 Doing Business Indicators for Formal Land Administration
System. .................................................................................................54
Table 10 Property Transfer Costs. .......................................................................56

– iv -
Table 11 TLTP Component Structure (from Rattanabirabongse et
al 1998:23). ...........................................................................................63
Table 12 Planned Phasing of Activity in Indonesia (BPN 1993:64-
65). ........................................................................................................63
Table 13 Planned Phasing of Activity in Ghana (Ministry of Lands
and Forestry 2002:33). ..........................................................................64
Table 14 Types of Societies (from Diamond, 1997:268-9). ..................................70
Table 15 Historical Stages of the Evolution of Informal Housing in
Peru.......................................................................................................71
Table 16 Administration Features of World Bank Decentralisation
Models...................................................................................................75
Table 17 Breakdown of Systematic Registration Costs from Case
Studies (US$/parcel). ............................................................................85
Table 18 Summary of Cost and Time Estimates in Ethiopia (from
Alemu 2006). .........................................................................................89
Table 19 Summary of Performance Assessment in Ethiopia (from
Alemu 2006). .........................................................................................89
Table 20 Land Office Revenue/Allocated Budget in Thailand (year
ending 30/09/01)....................................................................................91
Table 21 Land reform processes and the values and
characteristics of associated land rights. ............................................. 109
Table 22 Changes in Agrarian Codes with respect to Gender
(Deere and León 2001: 186). ..............................................................113
Table 23 Collective Land Rights in New Constitutions and Agrarian
Codes (Deere and León 2001:238). ....................................................117
Table 24 Summary of Land Administration System Efficiency
Indicators.............................................................................................124
Table 25 African Country Case Studies ............................................................138
Table 26 Uganda Country Case Study ...............................................................140
Table 27 Asian Country Case Studies................................................................ 141
Table 28 Europe and Central Asia Country Case Studies.................................. 144
Table 29 Latin America and the Caribbean Country Case Studies .................... 146
Table 30 Customary Tenure Indicators for African Country Case
Studies ................................................................................................152
Table 31 Customary Tenure Indicators for South Africa and
Uganda Case Studies .........................................................................154
Table 32 Customary Tenure Indicators for Asian Country Case
Studies ................................................................................................156
Table 33 Customary Tenure Indicators for Europe and Central Asia
Country Case Studies..........................................................................159
Table 34 Customary Tenure Indicators for Latin America and
Caribbean Country Case Studies ........................................................ 160
Table 35 Land administration parameters African and Asian
Country Case Studies..........................................................................166
Table 36 Land administration parameters for European and
Central Asian and Latin American, Caribbean Country
Case Studies .......................................................................................169
Table 37 Land administration parameters for selected jurisdictions
with well-developed registries..............................................................171

–v-
Table 38 Indicators of Formal Land Administration Effectiveness
for the country case studies (Africa and Asia) .....................................174
Table 39 Indicators of Formal Land Administration Effectiveness
for the country case studies (ECA and LAC) ....................................... 175
Table 40 Indicators of Formal Land Administration Effectiveness
for selected jurisdictions with well-developed registries ...................... 176

Abbreviations
A&D Alienable and disposable land (in the Philippines)
ADB Asian Development Bank
ALDP Accelerated Land Distribution Program (Trinidad &
Tobago)
ALRO Agricultural Land Reform Office (Thailand)
AREA Association of private real estate agents (Trinidad &
Tobago)
ASHTA Agricultural Small Holdings Tenure Act (Trinidad &
Tobago)
ASRP Agricultural Sector Reform Program (IDB funded program
in Trinidad & Tobago)
AusAID Australian Agency for International Development

BAL Basic Agrarian Law of 1960 (Indonesia)

BOO Build-Own-Operate
BPN Badan Pertanahan Nasional (National Land Agency)
(Indonesia)
BTI Bureau of Technical Inventory (ECA countries)
CahT Ad Hoc Land Commission (Mozambique)
CAN National Agrarian Commission (Bolivia)
CARL Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1987
(Philippines)
CARP Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (Philippines)
CDA; PIDCOTT Land management agencies in Trinidad & Tobago
CIS Confederation of Independent States (part of FSU)
CLAR Centres for Land and Agrarian Reform (Kyrgyzstan)
CMO Central Mortgage Office (Kyrgyzstan)
CNR National Registries Center (El Salvador)
CNRA National Council of Agrarian Reform (Bolivia)
COFOPRI La Comisión de Formalización de la Propiedad Informal
(Commission for the Formalization of Informal Property) -
Titling Agency (Peru)
CoSL Commissioner of State Lands (Trinidad & Tobago)
CPR Common Property Resources
CRS Customer Relations and Services/Community Relations
and Services
CSUTCB Confederations of Campesino Workers, Colonizers and
Indigenous Settlements (Bolivia)
CVA Central Valuation Authority (Thailand)

– vi -
DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(Philippines)
DKI Jakarta Daerah Khusus Ibukota (Capital City Region of Jakarta)
DINAGECA National Directorate of Geography and Cadastre
(Mozambique)
DITM Department of Information Technology and Management
(New South Wales, Australia)
DMA U.S. Defence Mapping Agency; now NIMA – National
Imagery and Mapping Agency
DOL Department of Lands (Thailand)
DOS British Directorate of Overseas Surveys (Trinidad &
Tobago)
ECA Europe and Central Asia
EU European Union
FIG International Federation of Surveyors
FSU Former Soviet Union
GIS Geographic Information System
GLTN Global Land Tool Network
GORTT Government of the Republic of Trinidad & Tobago
GosREGISTER State land registration system (Kyrgyzstan)
GosCartographia State service of Geodesy and Cartography (Kyrgyzstan)
GPS Global Positioning System
ha Hectare (10,000 square metres)
HM, HGU, HGB, HP Hak Milik (ownership), Hak Guna Usara (cultivation right),
Hak Guna Bangunan (lease right for 20-30 years), Hak
Pakai (use right), Hak Pengenolaan (land management),
rights recognised under the Indonesian Basic Agrarian
Law
HRD Human Resource Development
IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization (Trinidad &
Tobago)
IDA International Development Agency (World Bank)
IDB Inter-American Development Bank
IFC International Finance Corporation
IGN National Geographic Institute (El Salvador)
ILD Institute for Liberation and Democracy (Peru)
INCo National Institute of Colonization (Bolivia)
INC National Cadastre Institute (Bolivia)
INRA National Institute for Agrarian Reform (Bolivia)
ILAP Indonesian Land Administration Project
IPO Indigenous People’s Organisations
IPRA Indigenous People’s Rights Act of 1997 (Philippines)
ISTA Salvadorian Institute for Agrarian Transformation (El
Salvador)
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
LA Latin America
LA98 Land Act of 1998 (Uganda)
LAC Latin America and the Caribbean
LAD Land Administration Division (Trinidad & Tobago)

– vii -
LAO PDR Lao People’s Democratic Republic
LAMP Land Administration and Management Project
(Philippines)
LGU Local Government Unit (Philippines)
LTC Wisconsin Land Tenure Center
LTP Land Titling Project
LUPAP Land Use Policy and Administration Project (Trinidad &
Tobago)
L&SD Lands and Survey Division (Trinidad & Tobago)
NCIP National Commission on Indigenous People (Philippines)
NSL Certificate for public land issued under the Land Code
(Thailand)
NS2, NS3, NS4 Private tenure rights recognised under the Thailand Land
Code. NS2 rights are pre-emptive and not transferable;
NS3/3K are certificates of utilisation and NS4 are titles.
NS3/3K & NS4 are transferable.
NGO Non-governmental organisation
NORAD Norwegian Agency for Development Co-operation
OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development
OMO Organisation and Management Operations
PADL Planning and Development of Land Bill (Trinidad &
Tobago)
PDR People’s Democratic Republic
PETT Special Project for Land Titling and Rural Cadastre (Peru)
PHARE Pologne, Hongrie Assistance à la Reconstruction
Economique
PTO Permission to Occupy (Namibia)
PPR Project Preparation Report
PRDSA Agriculture Services Rehabilitation and Development
Project (Mozambique)
PROAGRI Programa de Investimentos Publicos na Agricultura
(Agricultural Reform Program) (Mozambique)
PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (World Bank)
RFD Royal Forest Department (Thailand)
RPI Immovable Property Registry (Peru)
RPU Urban Property Registry (Peru)
RPO Real Property Ordinance (Trinidad & Tobago)
RRP Rural Rehabilitation Project (Mozambique)
RTC Rights, Tenancy and Crop Inspection; record for taxation
purposes (Karnataka)
SAL Standard Agricultural Lease (Trinidad & Tobago)
SALIS State Agricultural Land Information System
SC Scheduled Castes (Karnataka)
SDI Spatial Data Infrastructure
SEPR Special Section of Rural Parcels
SNRA National Agrarian Reform Service (Bolivia)
ST Scheduled Tribes (Karnataka)
STK 5 year usufruct license (Thailand)

– viii -
SPGC Surveying office at provincial government level within the
Provincial Office of Agriculture and Rural Development
(Mozambique)
SUNARP National Superintendency of Public Registries (Peru)
SWAPO South-West Africa People’s Organization
TAN National Agrarian Tribunal (Bolivia)
TCO Tierras Comunitarias de Origen (Traditional Indigenous
Communities - Bolivia)
TCP Technical Cooperation Program
TLTP Thailand Land Titling Project
T&CPD Town and Country Planning Division (Trinidad & Tobago)
UNDP United Nations Development Program
UN FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations
USAID United States Agency for International Development
UTM Universal Transverse Mercator projection

– ix -
1 Introduction

1.1 Background
In most countries land 1 accounts for between half and three quarters of national
wealth. 2 Land is a fundamental input into agriculture production and is directly linked
to food security. 3 Land is also a primary source of collateral for obtaining credit from
institutional and informal providers of credit and security of tenure 4 provides a
foundation for economic development. Fees and taxes on land are often a significant
source of government revenue, particularly at the local level. Formalising rights is
often vital in ensuring indigenous and other vulnerable groups have access to land.
There are many demands on land resources; agriculture, pasture, forestry, industry,
infrastructure and urbanisation, as well as claims by indigenous groups and those
campaigning for ecological and environmental protection. Not surprisingly, most
societies cannot balance these often conflicting demands. Land has therefore
frequently been the basis of social upheaval and much effort was devoted to
developing systems to administer land rights, land administration systems. 5 A land
administration system may include processes to manage state land, record and
register private interests in land, assess land value and determine tax, define land
use and support the development application and approval process.
Numerous projects to improve land administration systems were undertaken over the
past half century or so primarily to provide formal recognition of rights in land and to
facilitate the trading in these rights. Typical project objectives include one or more of
the following: reforming and strengthening policy, legal and institutional frameworks;
introducing formal land titling systems or other forms of secure tenure; improving
registration practices; upgrading survey and record keeping technologies; capacity
building; all in an attempt to develop more efficient and effective land administration
services. The political spectrum of countries introducing projects from one party
States in Lao PDR, Cuba, Tanzania and Mexico, military regimes in countries such
as Peru and Argentina, to capitalist states such as Taiwan and Thailand. Many
former socialist countries have also implemented projects as part of a move from
command to market economies (Barnes 2006). Countries also cover the full
economic spectrum, from the poorest countries such as Malawi to developed
countries such as Japan and Taiwan. Projects have had varying emphases on social
equity and economic development with no consistent set of objectives and policies.
As a result it was very difficult to compare and evaluate the collective experience.
Project outcomes have also been mixed. 6 Projects to strengthen land administration
are often long term and usually require significant resources and funding. 7 These
characteristics are a disincentive for governments to clarify rights in land. It has been
suggested that the key reasons China did not introduce systems to recognise private
rights in rural areas following the decollectivization of farms in 1980s were the cost of
implementation and the unknown social implications of introducing private land
ownership (Kai-sing Kunk 2003:60).
The World Bank, with support from a number of donors, has prepared a Policy
Research Report on access to land and governance with respect to land (Deininger,
2003). In the context of preparing a Policy Research Report on land issues, the
World Bank commissioned background papers to assess and compare the context,

Page 1
cost and effectiveness of land administration systems in Asia, Latin America and the
Caribbean, Africa, and Europe and East Asia. Drawing upon the extensive research
and experience from the preparation of this report, this publication provides a
practical approach of ways to effectively and efficiently manage land administration
issues. The publication was commissioned to provide a global synthesis of
background papers in the form of a Comparative Study of Land Administration
Systems. Indicators were developed to assist the comparative analysis and are dealt
with in Chapter 4, while additional issues and challenges are examined together with
recommendations in Chapter 5 and 6.

1.2 Study Objectives

In preparing the terms of reference for this comparative study it was noted that
‘…despite the significant resources being invested by the donor community for
modernizing land administration infrastructure, there is little systematic discussion of
the key elements of such a system and of what constitutes effectiveness within
particular socioeconomic, cultural and temporal contexts.’ (Lavadenz et al 2002).
This comparative study of land administration systems provides a basis for an
informed assessment by systematically reviewing the characteristics, accessibility,
costs, and sustainability of different land titling and registration options. Importantly
this text sets out with the intention of describing what to do and not why to do land
administration reform. The economic and social rationale for undertaking land
administration reform is discussed at length by a number of authors including Feder
(1988), de Soto (2000) and Deininger (2003). This report is based on information
compiled in a number of case study countries that are characterised by the presence
of either project interventions or specific innovative approaches and aims to identify
those parameters critical for policy development and operational efficiency.
The comparative study was undertaken as follows:
1. Detailed country case studies, based on specific terms of reference, were
prepared to explore the individual cost elements for providing secure and
transferable property rights and how they change with the requirements of
formalisation, the institutions involved and the available technical options (see
Appendices 9 – 12);
2. The country case studies were synthesised into four regional papers which were
presented at regional workshops in Budapest, Kampala, Pachuca (Mexico) and
Phnom Penh (see Appendices 5 – 8);
3. A global synthesis was undertaken of critical issues with comparisons drawn from
within the regions as well as across the regions. A set of indicators were used to
compare case studies and the results are tabulated in Appendices 1-4.
This global synthesis provides the main analysis of the studies conducted. Chapters
1 to 3 provide introductory and overview information of the Comparative Study.
Chapter 4 describes the land administration indicators of efficiency and Chapter 5
discusses future challenges. Chapter 4 provides practical indicators and approaches
for land administration practitioners to assess systems comparable to a wide range
of social and economic climates. One of the potential shortcomings of describing
past experience is that critical issues may be systematically overlooked. To remedy
this, the Chapter 5 delivers a systematic discussion of future challenges in the

Page 2
development of more efficient and effective land administration systems. This
discussion is based on topics identified as potential “blind spots”. Conclusions and
recommendations are presented in Chapter 6.

1.3 Country Case Studies

By applying a consistent methodology across different countries, the case studies
provide a framework for decision-makers to assess options for implementing or
modernising land administration systems.
A detailed Concept Paper and Annexes were prepared in early 2002 to support the
preparation of country case studies, (Lavadenz et al 2002). The concept paper
contained a checklist of contextual information seeking specific land-related
information about: (1) the country (in brief); (2) the land tenure system; (3)
institutional arrangements; (4) the legal framework; (5) the technology used; (6) the
administrative process for registration; (7) land and immovable property market
information.
Each case study used a framework to draw out costing information of the primary
registration function of the country’s land administration system. Data was collected
for each country case study to assess the following costs of activities:
• General Project Dimensions – overall project costs of land administration as
they typically require several interventions, including legal framework
development, equipment, technical assistance, etc. all costs were taken into
account. These were then broken up into smaller divisions in subsequent
tables;
• Project Component Costs – takes the figures from Table I and divides the
various expenditure items into categories;
• Regularization Activity Costs – considers the costs of first registration (or
converting land from informal to formal) and how the costs are broken up into
various categories to achieve that first registration;
• Property Market and Maintenance Details – considers the ongoing costs of
running the registration system, and the volume of transactions; and
• Checklist for Technical Work – provides a simple checklist of some of the
major activities and costs for ease of reference.
Country case studies were prepared for the following countries/jurisdictions.

Table 1 List of Country Case Studies.

Africa Asia Europe and Central Latin America and
Asia (ECA) the Caribbean (LAC)
Ghana Indonesia Armenia Bolivia
Mozambique Karnataka (state in India) Kyrgyzstan El Salvador
Namibia Philippines Latvia Peru
South Africa Thailand Moldova Trinidad & Tobago
Uganda

The Asian country case studies were all prepared in a consistent format by Land
Equity International, although not all have the same level of information. The country
case studies for ECA and LAC were prepared by different individuals so there is

Page 3
some variation in the content of these reports. The country case studies for Africa
were commissioned late (December 2002) and were prepared by Clarissa
Augustinus as office studies. For this reason the Africa country studies do not have
the same level of information prepared for the other regions.
The country case studies have had vastly different historical influences on their
present-day political, economic, judicial, social and cultural environments, which is
reflected in their land administration systems. The prominent country characteristics
are summarised below.
1.3.1 Africa Country Case Studies
Ghana. Ghana is a West African country, which gained independence from the
British in 1957 – the first sub-Saharan country to do so. Ruled by successive military
dictatorships and democratic systems, in 1992, with the introduction of the 4th
Republic Constitution, democracy was re-established.
Ghana has a total land area of about 230,000 square kilometres, with approximately
95% of this is cultivable. The country’s population was estimated at 17 million in
2000 and is rapidly urbanizing and continually expanding due the high fertility rate
and low infant mortality rates. Ghana’s economy and labour force remain dependent
on agriculture.
In West Africa generally, land belongs to a community respecting both a physical
and spiritual relationship with the dead, living and unborn. With the advent of
colonialism and European acculturation strains have appeared in the hitherto stable
traditional land holding regime. Transition from traditional land ownership structures
to bring them in line with modern economic and social conditions has not been
smooth. About 80% of Ghana is administered under customary tenure regimes.
An Urban V Project was planned for 2001–2006 to include photo-mapping at 1:2,500
scale over 25 larger towns. This is to be followed in the second phase with
registration and issue of title. A second major project is the World Bank-funded Land
Administration Project which seeks to achieve fundamental re-structuring of land
administration in the country.
Mozambique. Notwithstanding considerable political and economic change during
the last decade, Mozambique is one of the poorest countries not only in Africa but
the world. Present-day land tenure was heavily influenced by the adoption of a
socialist policy following independence in 1975 from Portugal. During the socialist
period (1975-1990) the focus of land administration was on the allocation of land use
rights and although the new 1990 Constitution now allows all forms of private
property, land remains in State ownership and cannot be sold, alienated or
mortgaged.
Mozambique has a strong system of customary tenure, which accounts for about 90
percent of land in the country. This causes a set of land administration problems
common to African countries. Customary land tenure regimes differ markedly from
location to location, depending on population density, kinship organisation,
inheritance patterns, land quality, markets, and historical experience. Customary
tenure is also the framework for the vast majority of every day land-related
transactions and was given formal recognition in the 1997 Land Law.
Law reform aimed at introducing new forms of evidence and approaches was
undertaken, but implementation will require significant effort.

Page 4
Namibia. As a former German colony and administered by South Africa it was not
until 1988 when the South-West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO) guerrilla
group launched a war of independence that the country gained independence.
Independence was formalised in 1990 in accordance with a UN peace plan for the
entire region. The 825,418 square kilometres of land on the south western coast is
largely desert and high plateaus.
The majority of the population of 1.8 million people lives in the north under
customary tenure. The majority of the rest of the land in the country is registered in
full ownership (freehold) in a deeds registry system that is too expensive for the poor
to access. An inferior colonial-apartheid relic system termed Permission to Occupy
also exists in the north of the country where it is the only tenure available aside from
customary tenure. In the case of township proclamation (process of urban
formalization), the current delay is three years. The government is attempting to
address the system’s limitations through the Flexible Land Tenure System, while at
the same time not displacing the existing system.
The total number of families living in informal settlements without secure tenure is
estimated at 30,000 (1994), mostly in towns in the north. Approximately 10 percent
of the Namibian population lives in urban areas on land to which they have no formal
legal rights.
South Africa. At the southern tip of the continent of Africa, the semi-arid climate and
1.2 million square kilometres of land is host to a population of over 44 million people.
The Union of South Africa operated as a British colony under a policy of apartheid
from 1902 to the 1990s. The 1990s brought an end to apartheid politically and
ushered in black majority rule. The apartheid policies skewed South Africa’s tenure
systems and land distribution. Blacks could only own 13 percent of the land and
even then, these were held under inferior titles and not full ownership (freehold) as
held by Whites. The upgrading of inferior titles, such as Permissions to Occupy,
Customary Tenure (which occurs in less than 13 percent of the country in the former
homelands), and informal settlement tenures (gained through adverse possession
after 5 years) is still ongoing.
The conventional land administration system operates under a deeds system of
Roman-Dutch law with a Deeds registry where the state has no liability. There are
nearly 7 million registered parcels, about 8 million surveyed parcels, about 1.25
million registered transactions per year, and about 0.38 million registered transfers a
year. A modern mortgage system is in place and the registry deals with 40,000
requests for information daily through a digital medium.
While about 80 to 90 percent of the national land surface is covered by registered
rights and up-to-date cadastral data, about 25 to 30 percent of the country’s
population live in about 10 percent of the land in the former homelands, on rural land
often held under customary tenure.
Uganda. Uganda is an East African country of 236,040 square kilometres sharing its
water boundaries of Lake Victoria with its Kenyan and Tanzanian neighbours. The
population of over 28 million has a high growth rate of 3.3 percent.
Independence from being a part the British colony was achieved in 1962. However
mixed ethnic grouping and varying political systems and cultures that were a result of
boundary demarcations during colonization have made peace and working political

Page 5
communities difficult to achieve. Since 1986 there has been some stability restored
and a period of economic growth.
There is a pre-dominance of customary tenure, at an estimated 62 percent of the
land and involving an estimated 68 percent of the population. This accounts for
approximately 8 million customary landholders throughout Uganda. Freehold and
leasehold exist, including a local form of freehold called mailo, and covers about 12
to 15 percent of the country with about 700,000 titles (about 40 percent of which are
current). Perhaps only 5 or 6 percent of the country has current titles mostly
concentrated in urban areas and in Buganda (mailo). The conventional titling system
has not been modernized and the regulatory framework is largely a colonial relic.
There is a serious lack of financial and human resource capacity in the central state
to implement even a scaled down version of a titling system. The Land Act of 1998 is
still being piloted and a technical process is under development. According to the
Act, land is vested in the people and not the government. Among a number of
developments such as creating a Land Fund facility and Communal Land
Associations, and processes to decentralize land administration and land disputes
resolution functions, the Act provides for the formalisation of customary tenure
through certification of customary rights.
1.3.2 Asia Country Case Studies
Indonesia. Indonesia is an archipelago consisting of 13,677 large and small islands.
The total land area is 1.9 millions square kilometres. The total population exceeds
200 million, with an average population density of 106 persons per square kilometre.
The population spread in Indonesia is very uneven with some 60 percent of the
population living on the island of Java which is 6 percent of the land mass. There are
about 7,400 urban villages and 60,000 rural villages.
Under the pressure of rapid economic transformation a number of land related
problems have become progressively more severe in Indonesia. Not the least of
these being social conflicts and disputes over rights to land. Indonesia was under
some form of colonial rule for the 350 years before independence in 1945. Land laws
became a dualism between western systems and the traditional unwritten land laws,
based on the customs of various regions. The Basic Agrarian Law (BAL) was
introduced in 1960 to end this situation by creating a national land law based on
traditional concepts, principles, systems and institutions.
Recognition of ‘adat’ or customary land rights and customary systems of tenure is
explicitly acknowledged in Article 5 of the BAL. However, most of the existing
implementing regulations of the BAL fail to elaborate, and are even contradictory to,
the adat principles. There are numerous forms of tenure which are confusing and
open opportunities for abuse.
Karnartaka (state in India). Karnataka is the eighth largest state in India, with a
population of about 53 million. The state covers about 5.8 percent of the country’s
land mass and about 5.3 percent of the population. Karnataka is one of the fastest
growing states. Over the past decade agricultural input has increased based on
diversification and increases in productivity, rapid manufacturing expansion has
contributed to growth in industrial output and there has been significant growth in
services, led by software exports. However despite rapid growth Karnataka is still a
very poor state, poorer than the Indian average.

Page 6
Over the past few decades land records for agricultural land in Karnataka have
become increasingly dilapidated. For urban and non-agricultural land in rural areas
no system clearly sets out rights over land. This uncertainty in rights in land
undermines the objectives of good governance and poses a serious threat to social
stability and economic development. There is a weak spatial framework for the land
records for agricultural land. The original data has low accuracy, the maps are not
up-to-date, there are long delays in sub-division surveys, and changes in land
records are being recorded without surveys. There is a lack of both map and textual
information in urban areas. Many of the field records for settlement surveys are very
old and in fragile form and the records have not been backed-up. The registration of
deeds system does not include the adjudication of rights and the resolution of
disputes, and does not ensure the validity of a transaction. The system is not map
based and there are poor descriptions of property. While the project to computerize
land records in Karnataka (Bhoomi) has been successful, it is essentially a
computerization of a very old land revenue system. A number of issues arise,
including inconclusive records and cumbersome procedures.
Philippines. The Philippines had an estimated 300,000 square kilometres of land.
Nearly 53 percent is reserved for forest cover, minerals and national parks while the
remaining 47 percent is alienable and disposable (A&D) lands. The population of the
Philippines is about 85 million, with about 60 percent of the population living in urban
areas.
At least three key issues impact on land markets in the Philippines: (i) a scarcity of
land for urban development; (ii) informal occupation of urban lands and an active
informal land market; (iii) and a stagnation of formal rural land markets. These three
factors combine to undermine the potential contribution of land to economic and
social development.
The land classification system has been rigid and not responsive to the evolving
needs of agricultural and urban development, and yet has not been effective in
promoting sound management of natural resources. There have been procedural
barriers to the flow of land from agriculture to non-agricultural use, particularly in
urban fringe areas. There has been a fragmentation of responsibilities for land
management and administration, without appropriate mechanisms for coordination.
The major land administration laws are outdated and some are not in accord with
recent land use legislation. Not all privately claimed A&D land is titled. Existing land
record management systems are inefficient and there are limited inventories of land
records. A large proportion of the records have been destroyed through war, theft,
fire and water damage or simply misplaced. Much of the remaining records are in
exceedingly fragile condition and some land records have been illegally altered. The
land registry is not easily accessible and there is a high transaction cost which
discourages registration and is a disincentive to investment. As a result of all of this,
confidence in the entire titling system is being eroded.
Thailand. Contrary to a significant number of other Asian countries, Thailand was
never ruled by a colonial power therefore colonial administration has had no impact
on land structures. Historically, all land belonged to the King but in 1872 procedures
for recognising private rights to land were introduced and in 1901 a titling system
(based largely on the Torrens title system) was introduced.

Page 7
The Land Titling Project commenced in 1984 and is one of the largest land titling
programs in the world. The project accelerated the issuance of titles to eligible land-
holders and over eight and a half million new titles were issued. It is recognised
internationally as being a success and was a model for other countries in the region
and throughout the world.
Land administration and land titling in Thailand has generally taken place in a fairly
orderly and structured manner. It is however confined to non-forest land and leaves
the rights of those living in areas formally classified as ‘forest’ as one of the major
land-related issues faced by the country.
1.3.3 Europe and Central Asia Country Case Studies
Armenia. Armenia is a small land locked country of the former Soviet Union
Republic with an area of 29,000 square kilometres. The population in 2003 at an
estimated 2.5 million has decreased significantly from an estimated 3.68 million in
1997, halving the population of people living in the capital, Yerevan. This mass
population emigration is a result of the poor economic situation in Armenia.
Common to all former Soviet Union republics, prior to independence all land was
held in State ownership and buildings and apartments were allocated for use. After
independence in 1991, private ownership was granted. The transition from State
ownership to private ownership was completed very quickly (between 1991 and
1993) and is thought to have been completed fairly.
Although land and dwellings were privatised at an early date it has only been since
1997 that the titles were surveyed and registered in a reliable parcel based system
that transactions to be recorded reliably. The Land Code, passed in 2001, now
provides overall guidance to all land administration functions.
Kyrgyzstan. Kyrgyzstan is a former state of the Soviet Union, and a very poor
country, with over half of its population estimated to be living in poverty. Before
independence all land was held in State ownership and buildings and apartments
were allocated for use. A new Constitution in 1993 set the path for privatisation and
today, land, the building on the land, and apartments in buildings, may all be owned
and registered separately. This practice of separately registering land and buildings
is a distinguishing feature of the former Soviet Union and its satellite states. Another
prominent feature of the system, unique to the former Soviet Union countries, was
that buildings and their occupiers were recorded separately by a Bureau of Technical
Inventory (BTI). These arrangements were incorporated into the current institutional
structure.
Latvia. Latvia consists mainly of low lying arable plains over 63,500 square
kilometres with a coastline along the Baltic Sea. It has a small population of 2.27
million (2006) with over 30 percent living in the capital of Riga. As a parliamentary
republic, Latvia gained independence in 1991 from the former Soviet Union and
accession to the European Union was granted in 2004.
At independence land ownership rights were restituted on the basis of the old
property boundaries. Cadastral maps and Land Book records from the period 1924 –
1940 were used as evidence for restitution. The transition process granted land use
rights to claimants by Land Commissions or restituted land ownership rights for
former owners or their descendants, or users of land were given rights to purchase
land by paying in vouchers. The vouchers were introduced as compensation and

Page 8
were based on the time that each citizen had lived in Latvia. Vouchers were freely
tradable at a market price.
Latvia liberalized its economy quickly, freeing prices at the beginning of its transition
and now operates with a functioning market economy. Latvia benefited from
involvement in the EU PHARE program (Pologne, Hongrie Assistance à la
Reconstruction Economique) which provided technical assistance to land registration
and privatisation from 1995 to 1998 in support of the transition to democracy and a
market economy. It provided technical assistance and the purchase of some
equipment for further development of the cadastre and Land Book registration
systems transforming existing systems to an Oracle database and implementing
those systems throughout the whole country.
Moldova. Moldova, like Latvia, is small land locked country of the former Soviet
Union. Emigration has not as severe as in Armenia even though the country is in a
similarly poor economic situation with only 34 percent of the population employed.
Moldova has a population of 4.46 million in 2006 with arable rolling steppe land.
Land restitution occurred shortly after independence (1991 – 1993) but was not
completed. Land, which was usually held in very large State or Collective farms, was
sub-divided into shares and allocated en-masse to former collective members as
shareholders. Transformation of these shares into specific pieces of land parcels
was not done until assistance from USAID was granted in 1998 to 2000. Although
land and apartments were privatised at an early date it has only been since 1999
that the titles started to be surveyed and registered in a reliable parcel based system
that allows transactions to be recorded reliably.
The Land Code, passed in 1991, provides overall guidance to all land administration
functions. A new Land Code is being prepared and will provide better prerequisites
to finalise the privatisation process. The Law on Real Estate Cadastre, passed in
1998, establishes the procedure for the creation and maintenance of the Real Estate
Registry, which determines an individual’s rights to real estate in Moldova.
1.3.4 Latin America and Caribbean Country Case Studies
Bolivia. Bolivia has an area of about 1.1 million square kilometres and had a
population of about 8.3 million in 2000. The country is one of the poorest countries in
the Latin American region and has very high income inequality. The country has
three distinct agro-climatic regions: the highland plateau (altiplano) in the west; the
inter-Andean Valleys, some semi-arid and some humid, in the centre and the flat
tropical lowlands in the east. The population has great cultural diversity (about 67
percent of the population is indigenous). About 36 percent of the population is rural,
but this population is unevenly distributed, with the rural population concentrating in
the Andean regions.
In the past, two agencies had responsibility for land titling: CNRA had jurisdiction
over the whole country and INC had jurisdiction over legally declared settlement
areas. The lack of coordination between these agencies and limited mapping often
gave rise to duplicate and overlapping titles. Studies in Santa Cruz in the east have
revealed overlapping claims over about 40 percent of the land. The situation on the
ground also differed significantly from legally recorded land rights. The titling process
in Bolivia has traditionally been extremely slow, typically taking 7 to 10 years or
longer. The backlog of land reform titles from the 1950s took in excess of 40 years to
clear. Only a small proportion of rural land titles issued over the past 40 years have

Page 9
been registered in the Property Registry and land transactions have not been
systematically registered. There is significant insecurity in land tenure, particularly in
the east where population density is lower and community structures are less well
developed. This insecurity is depressing land values and has been a barrier to
investment and expansion of the agricultural frontier.
El Salvador. El Salvador has a total area of 21,040 square kilometres and in 2000
had a population of about 6.3 million. About 60 percent of the population is urban.
Poverty and insecure land tenure in El Salvador have lead to a range of problems
including: low investments in agriculture and real estate, inadequate land
management and severe land degradation. Over the past 30 years various
administrations have recognised that land issues were a serious constraint to
economic development. A major strategy was land redistribution, with 300,000
hectares expropriated in a land reform program initiated in the 1980s benefiting
550,000 families.
Government however did not have good systems to record land rights and land
transactions. In 1996 a World Bank-funded project was started with the objective of
regularizing 1.8 million land parcels and creating an efficient, streamlined,
decentralized and self-sustaining national registration and cadastre agency, the
National Registry Center (CNR).
Peru. Peru has a total area of 1.3 million square kilometres. The country can be
divided into three broad geographic regions: (i) the Costa, or coastal region, that is a
narrow belt of desert lowlands that contains most of Peru’s cities; (ii) the Sierra of the
high and rugged Andes, with average elevations ranging from 2,750 to 6,800 metres;
(iii) the Montaña or Selva, the eastern lowland jungle of the Amazon Basin that
covers 60 percent of the area of Peru but contains only 7 percent of the population.
The population of Peru in 2000 was estimated at 26 million, with about 45 percent
Indian, 37 percent mestizo (mixed Indian and European), 15 percent European and 3
percent other. About 70 percent of the population in Peru is urban. Urban migration
since the 1940s has radically altered the structure and size of Peruvian cities. The
migrants from the rural areas were largely excluded from the established legal and
administrative systems that support the formal sector. The migrants responded by
establishing informal human settlements (asentamientos humanos) in defiance of the
law. A system to formalise real property in Peru was established from the end of the
1980s through studies leading to pilots and legal reform. The World Bank-funded
Urban Property Rights Project issued 1.35 million titles between 1998 and 2004,
which benefited more than 5.7 million Peruvians in marginal areas. The IDB has
funded activity to register rural property.
Trinidad & Tobago. Trinidad and Tobago is a higher middle-income country in the
Caribbean. Although colonized by the Spanish and under their influence for 300
years (1498-1797), the subsequent colonisation by Britain wiped out most of the
Spanish legacy in the land tenure and land administration structures. As a result,
Trinidad & Tobago does not have much in common with the three Latin American
case studies (Bolivia, El Salvador, Peru). Nevertheless, it provides an excellent
example of land administration structures within the Caribbean region. The
population of just over 1 million lives on the two main islands of which Trinidad is the
most populous. The prosperous economy is largely due to the petroleum and natural
gas production and processing.

Page 10
Historical forces have resulted in holdings being concentrated into the hands of a
small number of individuals and corporations, although there still remain large areas
of land that are owned by the state but leased to private individuals. There is no
customary tenure in the country but there are many parcels of land occupied under
commonly accepted tenure regimes known as ‘family land’ (not recognised by law).

1.4 Regional Papers

Four regional papers were prepared as part of the second phase of the study. A
regional paper for Africa was prepared by Clarissa Augustinus in early 2003 based
on the abbreviated country cases studies for Africa and the results of the discussion
in the conference in Kampala in May 2002 (Augustinus 2003a). A regional paper for
Asia was prepared by Anne-Marie Brits et al in May 2002 before the regional
conference in Phnom Penh (Brits et al 2002).
A synthesised regional paper for ECA was prepared by Gavin Adlington before the
regional conference in Hungary in April 2002 (Adlington 2002). Land administration
in the ECA region is so dynamic that statements true at the end of 2001 are not
necessarily true at the end of 2002. For example, in Armenia the time period and
cost of registration have more than halved and the rate of transactions more than
doubled within a year. For this reason each author of the regional studies has
commented on progress and trends five years on. Huge differences remain between
Central Europe, Eastern Europe and the Confederation of Independent States (CIS).
Central Europe and the Baltic are as advanced, if not more so, than some EU
countries. Three of the four studies were from poor CIS countries.
A regional paper for LAC was prepared by Grenville Barnes in October 2002 based
on information in the country case studies and the discussion at the conference in
May 2002 in Pachuca, Mexico (Barnes 2002).
Some of the regional case study papers are available on CD from the respective
regional meetings and through the World Bank Land Policy website:
www.worldbank.org/landpolicy. Critical issues in the four regions is reviewed below
in Chapter 3.

Page 11
Chapter 1 Endnotes

1
Defined in the wider sense of land and the immoveable property fixed to land.
2
World Bank, World Development Report 1989, page 87. The table below shows the greater
proportion of natural capital in land by the poor (World Bank/IBRD 2006:31). Ultimately land ranks as
the highest asset across all three income brackets.
The Composition of Natural Capital (High Oil Exporters Excluded)
Low-income Middle-income High-income
countries countries countries
Land 75 61 50
Timber 8 8 10
Subsoil 17 31 40
3
‘Food security’ is defined by the UN FAO as ‘the access of all people at all times to the food they
need for an active and healthy life’. Refer to FAO website: www.fao.org
4
As ‘land tenure’ is defined as ‘the way in which the rights, restrictions and responsibilities that people
have with respect to land are held’, ‘security of tenure’ can be interpreted as referring to the
recognition and protection of such rights. Robert Foster, PE, PLS, President of the International
Federation of Surveyors (FIG) (refer to website www.pobonline.com) has noted that ‘secure tenure
does not require outright ownership of land. The important issue is access to land; people may have
access and rights to the use of land without direct and exclusive ownership’.
5
Recognising that land administration, as discussed later in the paper, in different jurisdictions can
cover a number of aspects, including land use, valuation and land information.
6
Wachter D, English J, The World Bank's Experience with Land Titling, Divisional Paper number
1992-35, Policy and Research Division, Environment Department, World Bank, March 1992 provide
an assessment of World Bank experience in the rural sector.
7
The Thailand Land Titling project which began in 1984, has a total budget of $350 million over the
15 years of the first three phases supported by World Bank and AusAID funding (Rattanabirabongse
et al 1998). A more recent example is the Ukraine Land Titling and Cadastre Development Project
where an estimated budget of $166 million for a 5 year, one phase project is proposed. http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/external/default/main?pagePK=64193027&piPK=64187937&theSitePK=523679&
menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=64187283&siteName=WDS&entityID=000090341_2003060511
3431.
8

Page 12
2 Land Administration

2.1 Definitions and General Background

Simple definitions of the terms ‘land administration’ and ‘land management’ are set
out in Box 1 and the policy context for land administration and land management is
illustrated in Figure 1. Land administration is a basic tool that supports land
management and operates within the framework established by land policy and the
legal, social, and environmental background of a particular jurisdiction. 1

Box 1. Definitions - UN/FIG (1999:52)

Land Administration: the processes of determining, recording and disseminating information

about tenure, value and use of land when implementing land management policies.
Land Management: the activities associated with the management of land as a resource from
both an environmental and economic perspective towards sustainable development.

Figure 1 Land Management Arrangements (Dale and McLaughlin 1988:4).

Country
Background

Land
Policy

Land Land
Resource
Administration Information
Management
Arrangements Policy

Land
Management

Land Administration is a system implemented by the State to record and manage

rights in land. A land administration system may include the following major aspects:
a) the management of public land;
b) the recording and registration of private rights in land;
c) the recording, registration and publicising of the grants or transfers of those
rights in land through, for example, sale, gift, encumbrance, subdivision,
consolidation, etc;
d) the management of the fiscal aspects related to rights in land, including land
tax, historical sales data, valuation for a range of purposes including the
assessment of fees and taxes, and compensation for State acquisition of
private rights in land, etc; and

Page 13
 e) the control of the use of land, including land use zoning and support for the
development application/approval process.
Typically a land administration system is comprised of textual records that define
rights and/or information and spatial records that define the extent over which these
rights and/or information apply. In most jurisdictions land administration has evolved
from separate systems to manage private rights in land and manage public land.
In countries with a colonial background there is often a dual land administration
system; imported systems based on western models operate in urban areas and
areas formerly occupied by colonial land-holders, and customary systems operate
elsewhere. There are a number of legal sources for colonial systems; English
common law, usually based on law prior to the major changes introduced in England
in 1925, and the Civil Codes of France, Spain and Holland. Some countries
(including Thailand, the Philippines, Kenya, and Uganda) have introduced later
innovations, including systems based on the Torrens title system introduced in
Australia from 1858. Other countries have a mixed colonial legacy which is reflected
in their land administration systems; the Philippines, for example, has a Spanish and
American colonial history and judicially based Torrens system imported in 1901 from
the State of Massachusetts. Post-independence, many former colonies have tried to
unify their systems; Indonesia, for example, took 12 years from independence in
1948 to draft and promulgate the Basic Agrarian Law in an attempt to unify land law.
There is a varied recognition of customary tenure in the land administration systems
throughout the world. With some there is an explicit recognition of customary rights,
as in the Philippines and Bolivia, but these administrative systems operate in a very
complex and conflicting policy, legal and institutional environment and as a result
offer limited security of tenure. In other instances there is a unified legal system
based on customary law; for example, Uganda and Mozambique. Other jurisdictions
do not formally recognise customary rights; Thailand, for example. In other countries
there are religious tenure systems, for example the Islamic systems which
administers Waqf land in the Middle East, as described by Powelson (1988:143-
144).
Land classification 2 plays a major role in land administration, particularly in Asia,
where it was introduced early in some countries (in 1913 in the Philippines), and
more recently in others, (the 1960s in Thailand). In most Asian countries private
rights are only recognised over non-forest land and a lack of clarity in forest
boundaries is often a key factor in insecure tenure. With increasing pressure on land
resources, many countries have set aside land for national parks and wildlife
reserves but this has often resulted in conflict with ‘customary use’. A good example
is the forced removal of the Masai from the Serengeti in Africa. However
governments in many countries either lack the political will or the ability to enforce
land classification or the preservation of national parks and wildlife reserves. As a
result, a significant proportion of the population has the legal status of ‘informal
settlers’ or squatters. Furthermore the rapid urbanisation that has occurred since the
mid twentieth century has resulted in informal settlements in urban areas that most
governments have found difficult to address.
In many jurisdictions the core land administration functions of survey/mapping and
registration operate separately, often in different Ministries, while in others they are
brought together. In much of Europe and Latin America registry offices and cadastral
offices are separated with the former usually linked to local courts or administrative

Page 14
districts. Separate registries and cadastral offices frequently lead to problems with
inconsistent and duplicated records. In some jurisdictions the registry operates
without a reliable survey/map base which creates difficulties with the definition of the
parcel over which a registered right might apply, leading to problems with
overlapping and duplicate rights.
Notaries, lawyers, private surveyors and other intermediaries play a significant role in
many land administration systems, while in others this is not the case. In Thailand
there is a very small private survey industry with virtually all the legal work
associated with registration, including the preparation of contracts, undertaken by the
staff of the Department of Lands.
In most jurisdictions there are agencies that administer both renewable and non-
renewable resources (agriculture, forestry, fisheries, mining etc) and national parks
and wildlife reserves. Sometimes these are linked to a common land administration
framework but in others they operate with varying degrees of coordination. For
example, in Bolivia the military provides a central survey mapping function and there
are departmental (state) registries throughout the country and a number of separate
cadastres including various urban cadastres set up to support decentralisation
(‘popular participation’), a forest cadastre, a petroleum cadastre and others all
operating with little coordination.
Land administration systems vary from single centralised systems in jurisdictions
(most of the states in Australia, for example) to decentralised systems in most Asian
countries. In Thailand, for example, the title register is split amongst 76 Province and
272 Branch Provincial offices, with each office maintaining the land administration
system within its jurisdiction. Centralised systems as in Australia operate
successfully because of established links through intermediaries such as lawyers,
surveyors and financial institutions. There are also well-established systems of data
brokers and electronic access to the registers and services offered by the registries.
The decentralised systems in Asia facilitate direct access by the public.
In most jurisdictions planning and development applications/approvals are managed
separately from the land administration system, with local government often playing
a significant role. Jurisdictions such as Ghana link the planning and registration
function by insisting on compliance with planning regulations as a prerequisite for
registration but others such as Vietnam grant rights only for specific use. 3 In many
developing land administration systems there is a distinction between urban and
rural land administration systems. This is typical of the transition economies where
there are often separate projects, an urban project linked to the privatisation of
apartments and a rural project linked to the privatisation of collective farms. However
this distinction is not common in much of the developed world where it is virtually
impossible to obtain a breakdown of formal land market activity into urban and rural
components.
Finally the term ‘land administration’ can cover a much wider range of systems, from
formal systems established by the state to record rights in land through to informal
community administered systems. The World Bank’s concept paper anticipated that
the comparative study would cover this wide range of systems when it specified the
institutions covered: ‘government versus private sector, central versus local
institutions, formal versus customary.’ (Lavadenz et al 2002:4). This breadth of cover
presented some challenges particularly when the methodology set out in the
objectives for the comparative study was ‘systematically reviewing the

Page 15
characteristics, accessibility, costs, and sustainability of different land titling and
registration options.’ Quantitative information on aspects such as characteristics,
access, cost and sustainability was often available for formal land administration
systems, but was usually not available for customary land administration systems.
This publication has attempted to address the dichotomy by developing a model to
assess the performance of both formal and customary systems.

2.2 Environment for Land Administration Projects

Not only is there great variety in land administration systems, but there is also great
variety in the environments within which the various projects which strengthen such
systems operate. Although there is fairly common agreement on the generic
objectives for an improved land administration system, each project operates within
a specific contextual mix of political, social and economic objectives (see Figure 2).
These contexts vary from transitional economies, evolving market economies
through to very poor countries with strong colonial legacies. There is also variety in
the type and relative importance of the obstacles that the various land administration
projects face. This variety complicates any attempt to undertake a comparative study
of land administration project experience. Project and country development
strategies themselves also undergo re-shaping given the environment they emerge
from. A significant change in land projects in recent times has been a shift in donor
priorities or emphasis. For example, Bloch et al (2006:115) note that USAID has
shifted its focus from land reform in the 1970s to land tenure reform in the 1980s.
Figure 2 Land Administration Project Environments.

Contextual Alternatives Possible Obstacles Generic Objectives

Post-conflict transition Lack of political will Clearly defined and enforceable
(demobilisation, settlement of Legal overlap and ambiguity land rights
refugees, limited government Conflicting/overlapping Accessible, efficient dispute
credibility and authority, etc) institutional mandates resolution
Colonial legacy/poverty (limited Operational constraints (poor Efficient and secure processes
resources, lack of funds, limited land records, poor integration to transfer rights
government credibility, authority and of registry/cadastre, limited Confidence of users, particularly
relevance, confusion between formal access, etc) the public, and their participation
and customary, etc) in the land administration
Corruption/low civil servant
Transition economies (limited salaries system
experience with property, limited Regulation of land use in the
relevance of existing bureaucracy, Limited funding
Limited safeguards for public interest
overstaffing, etc)
vulnerable groups Management of public lands
Evolving market economy (unequal and the commons
wealth distribution, limited Other obstacles
safeguards, limited government Equitable taxation of property
credibility and authority, etc) Equitable access to land
Other (including a mixture of the information
above) Poverty Alleviation

Page 16
As noted in the comparative study concept paper, a number of lessons have already
been drawn from project experience, these include the following:
• Land administration goes beyond the implementation of legal, cost-efficient
cadastral and land registration systems to the set of services that make the
land tenure system within a country relevant and operational;
• Records and recognition are the basis of land tenure security and are
interdependent with the social, cultural and economic conditions of the
respective social groups. Over time, needs evolve and institutions, both
customary and formal, must be adaptive;
• The legal, institutional and technical elements needed to ensure that property
rights are well defined, enforceable and transferable at low cost vary
substantially. From the donor perspective, documents formalising land tenure
arrangements have to be legally valid;
• Information on establishment and maintenance costs is extremely relevant
with respect to the affordability and sustainability of registry systems.

2.3 Archetypical Contexts

An important element in undertaking the comparative study is a clear framework of
archetypical contexts. One possible framework would be a combination of the
contextual alternatives and possible obstacles listed in Figure 2. A critical element in
any land administration system is the institutional arrangements, particularly the role
of central government, local authorities and community or customary authorities. A
strategy matrix mapping security of tenure against the major institution responsible
for land administration is set out in Figure 3, where an attempt was made to
subjectively map the current land administration situation for some the case study
countries in Asia and Africa. 4

Figure 3 Tenure Security/Institutional Although there is considerable

Arrangements Matrix. subjective interpretation in the
preparation of this matrix it
Philippines
demonstrates that the selected country
Level of Land Tenure Security

Ghana
Low

Ghana
case studies cover most of the
Indonesia strategic options. Most of the case
Mo
studies in Asia are decentralised
za
formal land administration systems
Medium

Laos m
bi
qu
e with little recognition of customary
Karnataka systems, whereas customary systems
are a significant influence in Africa.
The key objective of any project to
High

strengthen the land administration

Af uth

Thailand
a
ric
So

system is to move from the top of the

Central Local Community
matrix to the bottom.
Government Authorities Authorities
Level of Land Administration

Page 17
The seven generic strategies identified to do this are (see Figure 4):
1. strengthening a centralised formal land administration system;
2. decentralising the formal land administration system;
3. strengthening and centralising an existing decentralised formal land
administration system;
4. strengthening an existing decentralised formal land registration system;
5. promoting a significant role for community/customary authorities, and perhaps
the community itself, in a decentralised land administration system;
6. transferring an existing land administration role from community/customary
authorities to a strengthened decentralised government
7. Strengthening existing community/customary land administration systems.

Other possible strategies may include

Figure 4 Generic Strategies to Strengthen
Land Administration. combinations of the seven generic
strategies listed above. There are few
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 examples of strategy 1 in the
Level of Land Tenure Security

developing world but many examples

Low

in the developed world where

centralised systems are developed
and improved service delivery models
Medium

such as the electronic searching of

registers and electronic lodgement of
documents and plans are
implemented. There are also few
examples of strategy 3 in the
High

developing world although the current

project to develop a centralised
Central Local Community registration database in Poland is one
Government Authorities Authorities
example of an attempt to implement
Level of Land Administration
this strategy. In future, as technology
improves and becomes more
available, more projects implementing strategies 1 and 3 are likely but they will only
be successful when a basic infrastructure is in place. This includes widespread
computer literacy, ready access to computers and the Internet, reliable
telecommunications systems and, more importantly, procedures and systems that
were tailored to the needs of the general populous and are supported by appropriate
programs to educate users.
There are many examples and a detailed discussion of the other generic strategies
in the developing world set out in the section entitled ‘Sequencing of Land
Administration Interventions’ in this document, in particular, Figure 10 on page 64.

2.4 Global Land Administration Issues

Although the outcomes desired from a system of land administration are frequently
common across regions the means of achieving those outcomes, and the critical
issues encountered differ according to the respective environments depicted in

Page 18
Figure 1. The issues critical to successful projects and viable land administration
were distilled from specific regional issues and are summarised here in a global
context.
Arguably issues relating to the institutional framework present the biggest challenge
to successful land administration reform. All regions face the existence of multiple
organisations, each with legislation empowering them to participate in the delivery of
some part of the land administration cycle. The powers often overlap and add to
bureaucratic ‘red-tape’ which allows agencies to remain self-serving with scant
regard to community needs and demands. Amidst this confusion there is ample
opportunity for cronyism, patronage, informal fees and other forms of corrupt
practices that preclude the least able from participating in the formal land market and
gaining security of tenure. Those who benefit from chaos are reluctant to support
change which results in lack of confidence in the formal system of land
administration and a concomitant growth in informality. In Latin America and much of
Europe the jurisdictional separation of registration and cadastre between the legal
(Ministry of Justice) and surveying (land and/or surveying agencies) fraternities add
an ingredient of professional bias to the institutional mix.
Potential conflicts between customary and/or informal systems of land tenure with
the state supported formal systems of land registration are an issue in all developing
regions except the case studies in ECA. Africa presents a significant challenge
because the traditional authorities (chiefs, clans, families etc) have significant
authority over land in most countries. While not as prevalent in Asia, customary
forms of tenure exist such that care must be taken to protect these interests in
formulating land policy. In the Latin American environment customary ownership is
recognised as having legitimacy in formalising land administration in the region. The
desired outcome is a marriage of the two systems and this presents particular
challenges to the legal and policy framework of land administration.
The legal framework is almost universally characterised by a multiplicity of
overlapping land-related laws compiled over decades with little attempt to rationalise
the ambiguity resulting from successive legislation. Essentially there seems to be the
relative ease of creating new laws compared to the effort required to improve
existing legislation with the legal framework both aiding and abetting the institutional
chaos referred to above. The frequent reliance on a litigious approach in dealing with
land disputes rather than administrative processes extends the time and cost of
resolution to the point where justice is very difficult, if not impossible to achieve and
usually precludes all but the very wealthy.
An issue affecting the administrative processes is the level of fees and charges that
can be reasonably imposed to ensure the land administration system is at least self-
funding. Care must be exercised to ensure that the revenue objectives are balanced
by the capacity of those participating in the market to pay. In the initial stages this
usually means a period of subsidisation until the critical mass of parcels needed to
sustain a land market are registered and the land administration system has the
confidence and support of the community.
Low skill levels and an acute shortage of resources are technical issues common to
all regions studied. Despite this there is a tendency to justify investment at the high
technology/high accuracy end of the technical spectrum based on the benefits of the
multi-purpose application of the spatial data arising from the cadastre. Concepts
such as the National Spatial Data Infrastructure have evolved to provide a vehicle for

Page 19
downstream integration of information. While such concepts are ultimately necessary
they can be confusing to countries struggling to introduce the basic elements of a
land administration framework and are often a distraction from the fundamentals.
Uganda, which is planning to introduce spatial data infrastructure prior to land
registration, is a possible example of this as the cost-effectiveness is unclear.
To explain the evolution of land administration in society the following model, based
loosely on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs (Maslow 1987), sets out a hierarchy
of tenurial concerns where higher tenure concerns will only be addressed when the
lower concerns are satisfied. Spatial Data Infrastructure, a valid concern in many
countries with well-developed land administration systems, addresses the high level
concern of integrating land administration into society. In most developing countries
much work is required to address lower level concerns before focussing on spatial
data infrastructure. This is not to suggest that initiatives to improve land
administration systems need not recognise the long-term objectives of SDI, but SDI
objectives should not obscure the efforts to address lower level tenurial concerns.

Figure 5 Hierarchy of Tenurial Concerns.

Land
admin.
integrated
in society
Information
available for
land management

Access to institutional credit

Formal recognition of tenure security

Individual tenure security

Community tenure security

In all regions the sustainability of the formal system is dependent to a large extent on
the level of community trust in the formal system of land administration and the
affordability of participation. These factors govern the level of registration of
subsequent transactions in land rights after initial registration. Without the
registration of all derivative transactions the accuracy of records will rapidly erode to
the point where confidence disappears, informality grows and uncertainty reigns.
Essentially, the formal land administration system needs to adapt to the procedures
and costs in the informal system and the community needs education and
awareness programs to extend beyond project public relations campaigns.
In ECA there was an urgent need to rapidly distribute land or affect the reinstitution
rights in land and establish means by which rights could be protected. This was
needed to meet immediate demand during the 1990s following the collapse of the

Page 20
communist regimes. The long-term implementation of sound land administration
systems is now beginning to be given the attention it merits.
All the issues above largely contribute to effective maintenance of the land
administration system. Without simple secure forms of tenure, service conscious
institutions, unambiguous laws and enforceable regulations, smooth and inexpensive
administrative processes, the climate of transparency and openness conducive to an
effective land market will not exist.

Chapter 2 Endnotes

1
The word ‘jurisdiction’ is used to recognise the fact that in many countries there are a number
separate land administration systems, often administered at State or Province level. This is the case
in Australia, India and Canada.
2
Land classification refers to the practice of defining land into a limited number of legal land
classifications. For example, Article XII, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines provides
that lands of the public domain are to be classified into agricultural, forest or timber, mineral lands,
and national parks. Alienable lands of the public domain are limited to agricultural lands.
3
Under the Land Law (promulgated in 1988 and amended in 1993, 1998, 2000 and 2001) land is
classed into six uses: agricultural land; forest land; rural residential land; urban land; land for
specialised use; and unused land. Land is always allocated for a certain use. This use is first stated in
the application for land by the applicant/land holder and then inserted in the Land Use Certificate
(LUC). If the land holder does not put the land for the use indicated in the LUC within a year the right
to the land can be cancelled. However, in practice the risk of cancellation of a LUC is very low.
4
For the sake of clarity the information in Figure 3 is restricted to the country case studies for Asia
and Africa. The case studies in LAC and ECA could be included and would demonstrate a similar
range in the mapping of tenure security/institutional arrangements.

Page 21
3 Critical Issues and Current Trends Specific to the
Regions
The individual regional papers describe a wide range of issues which were analysed
and distilled as far as possible to be representative of the respective regions as a
whole. For consistency they are considered under the major headings for the
contextual information for the country case studies: land tenure, institutional
framework, legal framework, technical arrangements, administrative processes and
land market information. These regional papers provide a quick overview of the
context for the country case studies and thus provide a framework for explaining
some of the regional variation in the country case studies. Within each topic
significant changes and trends that have occurred in the regions are included since
the regional workshops conducted in 2002.

3.1 Critical Issues in Africa

Over the last decade more than 13 countries in Sub Saharan Africa have adopted
new land policies and/or laws which are pro poor and gender sensitive. However the
big challenge has been to implement these policies in a general environment of
constrained resources and limited funding. Despite numerous initiatives during the
last decade to implement new land administration systems in sub-Saharan Africa or
to modernise existing ones, limited results were achieved.
While each region has its own particular characteristics, it is apparent that Africa
presents an almost unique case. Where it exists, formal land administration consists
of the conventional approach based predominantly on deeds and title registration.
However, the vast majority of the urban and rural population in African countries
uses customary systems of land administration. Further, due to the complex nature
of the cadastre and property rights, colonial land administration laws and regulations
remain entrenched in many countries.
Like many developing regions, Africa is experiencing rapid urbanization with an
urban population doubling almost every 20 years and the majority of those live in
slums (Augustinus, 2005). With a strong emphasis to realise the Habitat Agenda and
endorse policy options with political support, the African Ministers Conference on
Housing and Urban Development (AMCHUD) was established in 2005. Biennial
meetings will be used as a consultative mechanism on the promotion of sustainable
development of human settlements in Africa, where land plays a central role in
housing strategies. Supporting pro-poor and innovative solutions to land and house
problems, support for the systematic titling option is fading.
Land Tenure. Many parcels in the land registration systems are uncertain and hold
ambiguous information despite attempts to create land registration systems with
certain, highly accurate spatial information.
In many instances customary tenure or informal land administration systems are
sufficiently secure in themselves to make large scale titling programs unnecessary.
Indeed, the formal land registration system in most countries is often not neutral and
where titling is implemented, people with customary tenure may in fact lose their
rights. Women and overlapping rights holders are very vulnerable in these

Page 23
circumstances. It is because of this situation that African countries are introducing
new forms of land tenure which are more appropriate.
Institutional Framework. There are major problems surrounding the flow of spatial
information for land administration purposes within government, between
departments at national level, between national and lower level tiers of government,
and between government and the private sector and users. Coordination is therefore
a critical issue. There are few comprehensive national spatial systems operating
which contain reliable information for land administration purposes and where they
do exist they only include that part of the country covered by the cadastre, typically
formal urban areas.
For a range of reasons, many of which are related to governance issues, it is
extremely difficult to implement large-scale national land titling programs, or to
enforce land use controls. Hence most land titling is confined to the major cities and
usually the capital city areas where cash crops have been/or are being grown.
Legal Framework. In common with other regions, a central issue in Africa is the
proliferation of conflicting and overlapping laws. Many countries have begun legal
reform to address the issues and to introduce new approaches including, amongst
other things, new forms of evidence. For example Tanzania passed two new land
laws in 1999, a Land Act and a Village Land Act to provide a framework for the
formal recognition of land rights throughout mainland Tanzania. Other countries have
also passed recent land laws, including Uganda and Mozambique which are
included in the country case studies. However the scale and comprehensiveness of
change needed is huge and has not yet reached full-scale implementation.
Systematic titling for much of Africa is not considered an option for a range of
reasons, largely related to the experience from the mid 1950s in Kenya, where
systematic land titling led to a range of problems including ‘land grabbing’ by the
urban elite.
In many countries, a lot of existing titles are of doubtful veracity and require complex
legal processes rather than the simpler administrative methods to effect transfer. In
defending their rights people will refer to the paper and to customary evidence,
further adding to the complexity of dispute resolution.
Technical Arrangements. There is a general lack of financial, technical and human
capacity, indeed all resources throughout Africa. Because the systems are under-
resourced many of them are out of date, expensive to maintain and inefficient. Most
countries also retain colonial forms of legal evidence requiring a high standard of
professional input. For example, there are few registered professional surveyors with
many countries boasting less than 30 in total.
Administrative Processes. Even if no dispute occurs land registration in most
countries takes 15 to 18 months on average, while realistically two to seven years is
not uncommon. This lengthy and costly procedure means that tens of thousands of
land titles are usually pending and becoming obsolete as time passes.
Land Market Information. Land markets exist all over Africa, both in rural and urban
areas and they are not a recent phenomenon. However they are not free land
markets and the sale of land is often limited to relatives (by blood or marriage),
ethnic/national groups, religion in certain areas and to men. Many of these sales
generally take place outside the formal land administration system.

Page 24
 3.2 Critical Issues in Asia
A common characteristic of land administration in Asian countries is the influence of
colonial history. With the notable exception of Thailand, colonial administration has
commonly resulted in a duality of systems, one to accommodate western occupation
(usually urban and commercial agriculture areas) and the other covering customary
tenure arrangements.
Rising populations have put pressure on dwindling land resources, leading to
widespread deforestation, land degradation and landlessness. Various land reform
interventions were attempted with limited success. Land administration interventions
have however been successful because of a conscious separation between
respective land administration and land reform programs.
Land Tenure. Recognition of rights is confined to non-forest land, thereby excluding
in many countries a significant proportion of the indigenous population who have
lived on and cultivated land for many generations. In some countries whole
communities (towns) are established in land classified as forest. This is a critical land
classification issue where settled and cultivated land will never return to forest use.
The existing policy, institutional and legal frameworks regarding forest protection
often remain far removed from reality on the ground.
Institutional Framework. The institutional setting is usually characterised by large,
conservative, central agencies with vested interests that resist change. Recent
government land administration policy is almost universally to decentralise services
and devolve power from central to local government. The trend is towards de-
concentration, with central government responsible for policy, maintenance of a
unitary legal and regulatory framework and uniform service standards, and all
operational responsibilities devolved to the regions. In most cases the trend is yet to
become reality.
Multiple agencies with overlapping land administration roles and responsibilities,
each supported by empowering legislation, is a critical issue in some countries.
Attempts to coordinate project implementation through “steering committees” etc.
have invariably been unsuccessful. The compromise arrangement of separation of
the project component parts amongst different agencies results in a disaggregation
into separate projects. Institutional issues remain one of the biggest obstacles to
successful land administration reform in the region.
Legal Framework. The need to rationalise the sheer volume of uncoordinated and
disintegrated land related legislation is a critical issue in many countries. The level of
law enforcement is low and the prevailing culture of consensus makes it very difficult
to reach agreement on the need to amend existing legislation.
A common characteristic of the region is the predominance of title registration over
deeds systems however, with the exception of the Philippines which has some
limited and ineffective rights to compensation by the State, these systems are not
backed by any form of State guarantee.
There is a high incidence of land tenure related conflict with attendant social
disruption in some countries. Dispute resolution is usually subject to court litigation
with the time delays and costs involved effectively removing most citizens from the
process.

Page 25
Technical Arrangements. The critical technical issue is the relatively low level of
technology and the low skill levels of staff coupled with the perception that the lack of
access to technology is at the heart of most land administration problems. In reality,
incorrectly conceived and applied technology is likely to be a much more serious
problem.
Underestimating the need for appropriate human resource training and development
programs and the expansion of programs across the private sector or industry
development is a critical technical issue.
Administration Processes. The existence of a hierarchy of rights over private land
complicates the tenure system in many countries because many of the rights are for
specific and temporary use, so the need for renewal, or conversion to a higher right,
adds to the bureaucratic chain. For example, Indonesia registers separate rights for
ownership, cultivation, building, use and management. When added to an already
complex regulatory system this creates a concentration of power in numerous points
of the process which increases the potential for “informal fees”, discourages
participation and leads to distrust of the formal tenure system.
A parallel issue is the failure to delegate responsibility to an appropriate lower level
of competence. The convoluted chain of officials whose signature is required in
many jurisdictions to approve many routine functions in the land administration
process adds to transaction time and expense, increases backlogs, and discourages
participation in the formal system.
Land Market Information. With the commitment to systematic registration of rights
to land in Asia there is a growing mass of registered land parcels in most countries.
However, the security of title and sustainability of the land administration system
relies on maintenance of the records so a critical issue emerging in many countries
is the relatively low level of registration of subsequent transactions. This reflects low
levels of community understanding of the benefits of formal registration and
highlights the need to simplify procedures and processes, review fee structures and
extend community education and awareness programs beyond project public
relations campaigns.

3.3 Critical Issues in Europe and Central Asia

ECA countries fall into three basic categories dependant on their history and
progress since the collapse of communism. These are generalised into the following
groups:
(a) Central European countries usually maintained their land records systems
and adapted them to their socialist regimes but continued to allow private
ownership and land markets to operate especially in urban areas. Following
the fall of communism the countries had to revitalise and renew their
systems and deal with restitution or compensation for people that had their
rights taken away under those regimes;
(b) The Baltic and Balkan countries wanted the reinstitution of land and
property taken from people during the communist period. This required
complicated and detailed investigation into the history of ownership and the
reinstitution or compensation of the heirs of people who had land or property
taken from them just after the Second World War;

Page 26
 (c) Confederation of Independent States (CIS) countries that were part of the
Former Soviet Union (FSU) and where land and real estate was distributed
based on those that occupied houses or worked for State or Collective farms
and enterprises.
There is great variety in the socio-economic development of ECA countries. Income
levels and development in the Central European and Baltic countries is markedly
different to the poorer countries of the CIS. For example, Latvia demonstrates that
land administration is more affordable to users despite fees being more than ten
times the absolute amount experienced by users in the poorer countries.
CIS countries have often proceeded to allocate rural land without physical boundary
marking or locating rural parcels in any way other than through a plan in the office.
This is because individual owners often continue to farm collectively and any ground
marks would be removed by agricultural machinery. Deliberate steps to delay would-
be private farmers leaving collectives were made by collective directors in Russia
(Barnes 2006). These steps include simple neglect in adhering to legal requirements
to demarcate individual parcels or signing release forms. Both scenarios inhibit the
development of land markets.
Unlike most other regions undertaking land administration reform, there are few
issues in the ECA countries studied relating to informal settlers, customary tenure,
inheritance or special tenure arrangements (eg ownership by religious bodies) to
complicate the tenurial arrangements. Rights are fully protected by civil law and the
countries studied as representative of the region have well developed legal
frameworks in line with best international experience.
The CIS countries studied also provide a useful model for successful land
administration because they have effectively implemented a single agency approach
to the cadastre and registration functions. For example, they have incorporated the
former Soviet style Bureau of Technical Inventory, which registers buildings separate
from land into the current registration offices. At the same time the institutional
framework was strengthened by combining Land Management and Cartographic
agencies into one new organisation.
Land Tenure. Systematic registration has not improved the tenure situation for some
in the urban sector because the approach was to identify problems not resolve them.
Thus the people who built without correct approvals and/or encroached on adjoining
land find themselves unable to acquire a right to land they may have occupied in
good faith for decades. This is the case in Yugoslavia which has led to half the
properties remaining unregistered, leaving owners worse off than before the
systematic program. 1. Armenia and Kyrgyzstan in recent time have made great
efforts to legalize constructions through systematic processes.
A critical question in many jurisdictions is the efficacy of subdividing (on paper) the
large rural holdings into individual parcels when it was evident that parcel sizes were
often too small to be viable and now require consolidation. This approach was
considered necessary for prevailing political and equity reasons. Economic and
agricultural production issues were considered secondary to the need for citizens to
perceive that their rights were restored and to give them a means of subsistence
during the hard economic times of transition.
Institutional Framework. Corruption and staffing problems in cadastre and
registration offices are serious issues affecting the operations of the offices and the

Page 27
public acceptance of the new system. A policy is therefore needed to promote
private sector capacity, reduce staff levels (especially eliminating corrupt and
inefficient officers) and raise the salaries and working conditions of those staff that
remain. In recent years a number of strategies have been implemented to improve
this situation by changing office layouts and workflow procedures and programs are
underway to make use of internet based applications. This will also eliminate the
need for individuals to visit the land office directly.
Legal Framework. Whenever it was decided to privatise rural land and issue titles to
individuals or enterprises in CIS countries, the political emphasis was on speed and
short term results. The extent to which this compromises the accuracy and reliability
of records is a potentially critical issue that will face subsequent generations and
may lead to an erosion of confidence in the system. A risk analysis to determine a
satisfactory compromise between the demand for rapid implementation and the
sustainability of the land administration records should be considered.
Public awareness and understanding is a basic requirement of the registration
system. It is essential in systematic registration systems that a well-publicised and
effective public viewing period is conducted before registration and sufficient time
given so people can examine and understand the location of their land and the rights
recorded in favour of themselves and their neighbours. Concerns remain about the
guarantee where it has often not been provided or there are added implications on
the area in question.
A major issue facing the legal framework is implementing the ‘open’ register with
information publicly accessible as most jurisdictions want to retain a closed register.
Technical Arrangements. The primary objective of boundary demarcation is to
ensure that boundaries can be identified or replaced when in dispute. For the
purpose of registering rights the primary aim was to deliver a secure system which
allows people to transact dealings. Sophisticated geodetic networks, up-to-date
mapping, accurate surveying and modern (expensive) surveying equipment are not
considered necessary to make this possible and in fact a focus on technology has
delayed projects in developing countries.
Administrative Processes. Cost recovery is a major factor in all agencies in the
ECA however fees and charges should be assessed on the basis of the capacity of
users to pay. High costs discourage participation in the formal system of registration
therefore the time and money required to carry out a transaction should be
minimised in order to encourage real estate markets. It is also necessary to ensure
that systems are sustainable by recruiting good quality staff. Countries in ECA are
having mixed results in achieving this objective.
Land Market Information. Experience in the rapidly developing markets of ECA
suggests real estate markets are impacted upon more by effective registration
systems that allow transactions to occur quickly and cheaply than by systematic
titling programs.

3.4 Critical Issues in Latin America and the Caribbean

The distinguishing characteristics of Latin American land tenure and administration
are the large inequities in land distribution and the history of land reform across the
region. While many of the land reforms did not adequately address the inequity

Page 28
problem they did put in place a tenure system and institutional structure that sets
Latin America apart from other regions of the world. It should also be noted that Latin
America contains a significant area of land claimed by indigenous peoples, thereby
introducing both a separate tenure category as well as a land administration
structure entirely different from the mainstream national structures. The large extent
of informal land holdings in both urban and rural areas of the region has elevated the
need for large-scale initiatives that formalise these holdings and re-engineer the land
administration system to prevent the re-emergence of informality.
It was also observed that, other than geographical proximity, there is little similarity
between Latin American and Caribbean countries with regard to regional issues and
approaches to land administration.
Land Tenure. Informality in Latin America and the Caribbean, in both urban and
rural sectors, continues to be a huge challenge to the development of land
administration systems. While the level of indigenous tenure is a factor in the former,
a parallel type of tenure in the Caribbean could be considered to be the extent of
family land holdings. Such family land may have been titled many years ago in the
name of a deceased ancestor but was passed down through subsequent
generations without formal documentation. This issue is further complicated when
descendants with valid claims reside overseas.
The tenurial profile in the Caribbean tends to favour large state owned land holdings
historically leased out as a device to limit the ability of labourers to become peasant
farmers and to ensure the availability of essential labour for the large estates and
plantations. The same leasing system today allows greater control of land use and
has the social benefit of ensuring access to land for resource poor farmers.
Institutional Framework. An issue that pervades almost every Latin American
country is separation at the information and institutional levels between the property
registry and the cadastre. While there is little uniformity across countries the national
land agency is typically separate from the registry offices, which are often under the
Supreme Court. In addition, the national mapping agency is typically located in a
geographic institute, which in many cases is a military entity. With the exception of El
Salvador, which has merged all three entities, these three land institutions are
usually located in completely different parts of the government structure. This is
contrary to the trend in the Caribbean, where these three agencies are often fused
together in a Lands and Surveys Department. National land matters in the Caribbean
are usually handled by the Commissioner of Lands, whose office (in the case of
Trinidad and Tobago) is joined with Lands and Surveys.
Similarly, the legal and fiscal cadastres are typically separated into different
institutions, with an overwhelming tendency to decentralise the latter out to the
municipalities. This has resulted in each municipality developing independent
cadastral systems based on different criteria, philosophies and approaches to
procedures, software etc.
Legal Framework. The legal framework is ‘plagued by confusing and contradictory
norms originating in an exceptional manner and executed by multiple entities that do
not have an integrated vision of the process.’ (Barnes 2002:9, translating Montúfar
2002:95)
Technical Arrangements. The low level of technical skills is a critical issue in Latin
America. Most of the surveying work is done by topographers with little academic

Page 29
training. There is a clear need to strengthen the training/education component of
land administration projects in Latin America. This issue is not relevant to the
Caribbean because it has a body of professional surveyors.
Administrative Processes. The trend in Latin America is to move from an owner-
oriented deeds system to a parcel-based deeds system. This has to do with the
structure of information management rather than a conscious change from a
registration of deeds to a registration of title system, as is the case in the Caribbean.
Another administrative issue is the difficulty experienced in gathering costs for
adjudication, survey and registration throughout the region. The available data varies
considerably reflecting to some extent the different methods of aggregating and
reporting costs.
Land Market Information. Based on the data collected by the consultants in the
four countries it is clear there is an increasingly active formal property market but the
magnitude of the residual informal property market is unclear. One issue is the
difficulty of maintaining property in the formal system once it was initially titled and
registered. This culture of not registering transactions may be related to a perception
of high transaction costs which, in many cases, are beyond the means of the rural
poor.

3.5 Trends in Jurisdictions with Well-Developed Land

Registration Systems
A primary motivation for land administration projects throughout the developing world
is the facilitation of transparent and efficient land markets. Generally, the major
investment is in the acceleration of first time registration of rights to land and the
systematic capture of related records which provide the security and confidence
essential to the operation of the land market. While developed countries still
emphasise this key role of documenting private ownership, the trend in developed
systems is for land administration, particularly the core cadastral components to be
applied to development goals which go beyond the focus on land markets.
In most developed countries the land administration system is so closely woven into
the social and economic fabric of society that it goes almost unnoticed by the
community it serves. Disputes over rights or boundaries are infrequent so that the
continued need for high level safeguards is sometimes questioned, raising issues of
risk management. This is not to suggest that there have not been changes in land
policy in developed countries. In a number of countries there has been debate on the
impact of land use regulations and other public restrictions on private rights in land
(examples include Wiebe et al 1998 considering the debate in the US, Lyons et al
2002 considering the situation in Australia). There has also been recognition of
native title in developed countries including the US, Canada, New Zealand and more
recently in Australia (Bartlett 2004).
The land administration systems in these jurisdictions can deliver the social and
economic outcomes expected, and support land markets which are fair and
transparent for all. Since they are mostly used by professional intermediaries, the
systems of land administration are largely invisible to, and taken for granted by, the
general community.

Page 30
The conservatism apparently attached to land-related institutions in developing
countries has long dissipated in most developed countries, where institutional re-
engineering is relatively common, if not frequent. It would be unusual in Australia, for
example, if land administration agencies, along with other arms of government, are
not subject to functional review and restructure in a 5 year cycle. Early examples
were the amalgamation of cadastral and land registration authorities allowing the
newly combined agency to concentrate efforts on improved data quality, streamlined
processes, improved service levels and at the same time realising the economic
rationalisation (cost savings, staff reductions, etc.) most governments demand. The
trend towards integration of cadastral and registration data over the last few decades
was assisted by technology and the growth of land information systems.
Programs of data conversion are either in progress or in many cases complete,
making it commonplace now for land administration agencies to store and maintain
land parcel details (combined text and graphics) in digital form. Titles are routinely
stored in digital format and in most jurisdictions the laws have been adapted to give
evidentiary weight to digital media and to allow for the electronic submission of data.
This supports the trend to remote data access which facilitates enquires from banks
and other lending institutions. Increasingly remote registration of transactions and
dealings is facilitating the work of accredited agents such as lawyers, notaries and
surveyors and assisting in the maintenance of the primary registries and map bases.
An example of this is the Landonline electronic conveyancy system in New Zealand
where changes in the register are implemented by private lawyers acting for the
parties in a land transaction.
The introduction of digital data has raised policy issues concerned with access to
data resources. Many jurisdictions are examining costs and pricing policies for data
as access via the Internet increases (e.g. Switzerland and Australia). On the other
hand, public opinion that access to cadastral data and other public registries on the
Internet should be free of charge for all citizens is growing in countries such as the
Czech Republic (FIG-Commission 7 – Standardized Country Report 2002). 2 While
the debate on access and charges continues, revenue generation remains a political
driver in land administration reforms. For the majority the immediate goal of cost
recovery is being achieved in the selected jurisdictions with well-developed land
administration systems set out in Table 39, page 175.
This improved efficiency is reflected in the trend toward shortening transaction times
(refer Table 40, page 176) no doubt influenced by the service improvements such as
the remote access mentioned above. There are signs of increasing interest in the
performance of land administration systems and the trend of benchmarking systems
against each other. The International Federation of Surveyors (Kauffman 2002) has
examined a series of national benchmarking initiatives aimed at measuring products,
services and practices in search of best practice in the sector. The dearth of
performance statistics experienced in the compilation of this comparative study
proves that this trend is well overdue.
Despite the capacity to innovate (e.g. via the Internet, value-added applications of
spatial data) and improve the potential ‘profitability’ of providing land administration
services, the trend towards full privatisation of land administration functions has not
been pronounced. Private sector involvement in elements of the process is well
established and the trend is to increase this input. For example, the role of the
private sector in data capture (cadastral surveys) and transactions (lawyers, notaries

Page 31
and settlement agents) was reinforced through licensing arrangements but
responsibility for the overall system and integrity of the core data has generally
remained a state function.
As observed by Williamson and Feeney (2001:14), land administration systems do
not address the complex and dynamic relationship between public and private rights
and the restrictions and obligations in land use that arise from competing priorities
inherent in pursuing sustainable development objectives. In the US there is active
debate on the infringement of property rights by the state through land use planning
and environmental protection (Siegan, 1997 and Jacobs, 1998). Most systems of
land administration and the core cadastral and registration components have
historically supported land market objectives, and as such have primarily protected
the individual buyer or seller operating within that market. As the pressure on land
resources intensifies, especially in expanding urban areas, the land administration
systems need to accommodate an increasing number of rights, responsibilities and
obligations in order to facilitate decisions that will support sustainable development.
The trend is toward the evolution of land administration as part of an integrated land
information infrastructure used to address economic development, environmental
management and social stability. The need to integrate key data sets has seen the
introduction of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure concept as the technical
vehicle needed to maximise integration of all spatial data resources (Ting and
Williamson 2000).

Chapter 3 Endnotes

1
Since writing the paper both Kyrgyzstan and Armenia are in the process of dealing with this problem.
Armenia passed a law to simplify regularisation and in Kyrgyzstan they have developed methods to
regularise through simple and quick administrative process.
2
Available on http://www.swisstopo.ch/fig-wg71/core.htm

Page 32
4 Land Administration System Indicators

4.1 Framework to Assess Land Administration Efficiency and

Effectiveness
The framework used in this study to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the
land administration system in a jurisdiction is set out in Figure 6, as follows:
• a top-level category that assesses the nature of the policy/legal framework
that supports the land administration system, particularly the relative
importance of formal and customary tenure systems;
• where customary systems operate, a second category to assess the
qualitative effectiveness of these systems;
• a third category that is a set of quantitative indicators of the effectiveness of
the formal land administration system.
This framework was developed by the authors in close collaboration with the key
respondents responsible for the regional case studies. The framework assesses the
efficiency of land administration systems in a holistic manner, with a set of qualitative
indicators for customary systems and a set of quantitative indicators for formal land
administrative systems within an overall framework that reviews the policy and legal
framework.

Figure 6 Framework to Assess Land Administration Efficiency and Effectiveness.

Policy/Legal Framework for Land Administration

• Types of rights recognised formally
• Types of rights recognised informally
• % of country and population with formal rights
• Characteristics of population without formal rights
• Level of disputes over land
• Time taken to resolve land disputes

Qualitative Indicators for Quantitative Indicators for

Customary Tenure Formal Land Administration System
• Legal recognition of customary rights • Security
• Clarity in identity of customary • Clarity and simplicity
authority • Timeliness
• Clarity in boundaries of customary • Fairness
authority • Accessibility
• Clarity in customary rights • Cost
• Safeguards for vulnerable groups • Sustainability

Page 33
These three categories are discussed in this chapter. Also a comparative analysis of
quantitative indicators that assess the land administration environment from an end
user perspective follows in section 4.5 based on the Doing Business database. In
spite of the large investment in land administration development over recent decades
the comparative study reveals remarkably little data previously available upon which
to assess the effectiveness of land administration systems. The data herein has
taken significant effort to gather, interpret and present in a comparative form but they
provide a basis for comparing land administration systems and provide parameters
to model land administration systems under varying conditions.

4.2 Policy/Legal Framework

As previously noted, land is a fundamental resource in most societies and there is
great variety in the way land rights are recognised and recorded. Before delving into
indicators of effectiveness it is necessary to gain an overview of the policy and legal
frameworks that support the various land administration systems.
Many of the difficulties or short-comings of land administrations systems throughout
the world are the inability of the civil service and/or local authorities to implement
policy so there is no point strengthening the systems without addressing
weaknesses in governance. In most situations this will require strong political will and
it is no coincidence that significant developments in land administration have
occurred following regime change, for example, the changes implemented after
revolutions in Thailand in 1932 and in Bolivia in 1952. This continues today with
property rights being on the agenda in Afghanistan 1 and Iraq. 2
A less radical approach was gaining the attention of top policy makers and
convincing them of the need for change. Peru is a good example where formalisation
of property of informal settlers in urban areas was investigated and legislation was
enacted with the direct support of President Alain Garcia and then implemented with
mass programs under the supervision of President Fujimori (1990-2000) (Panaritis,
2005). Other countries have developed a comprehensive land policy (for example
Ghana), often with extensive stakeholder consultation. However without good
governance and strong political will and guidance, these policy documents can
become long, unwieldy documents difficult to implement in practice. In other
countries policy development was included as part of a land administration project
(for example, the Land Administration Project in Indonesia 3 and the Land
Administration and Management Project in the Philippines 4). There are projects that
have focussed on dispute resolution as an important aspect of the land
administration environment (e.g. recent or current projects in Cambodia, 5 El
Salvador 6 and Nicaragua 7).
Policy/Legal framework information from country case studies was gathered at a
macro-level as described by the indicators in Table 2. Each of these policy and legal
framework qualitative indicators from the case study jurisdictions are set out in
Appendix 1, Table 25 to Table 29. A comparative summary of the jurisdiction issues
according to each of the indicators are then presented in the subsequent
paragraphs.

Page 34
Table 2 Generic Approach to Indicators for the Policy/Legal Framework.

Indicator Generic Issue/Approach

Types of rights formally Overview of the types and extents of formal tenure regimes and
recognised the tenure security offered by them.
Types of rights informally Overview of the types and extents of informal tenure regimes
recognised (including and the tenure security offered by them. This may cover a range
customary systems) of situations, including informal settlers in both urban and rural
areas and customary tenure systems.
Percentage of the country An estimate of the percentage of the country area and
and population covered by percentage of the population living on land where the rights are
the formal system formally recognised. This includes land held by formal rights in
the past where subsequent dealings have not been registered
(avoiding where possible double counting) but excluding, where
possible, areas long occupied by informal settlers.
Characteristics of population Overview of the major classes of people who do not benefit from
without formal rights the formal recognition of rights in land.
Level of disputes over land An assessment of the level of disputes over land, including
ongoing land-related court cases.
Time taken to resolve land Average time to resolve land disputes, perhaps relying on
disputes anecdotal experience.

Types of Rights Recognised Formally. In the ECA countries of Armenia,

Kyrgyzstan, Latvia and Moldova land ownership rights can belong to the state,
private individuals or be communal. Rights to land and property include full
ownership, leases, permanent use rights, mortgages, easements and separate
ownership of land and buildings. It is therefore difficult to classify the systems as
either registration of deeds or title systems.
The Asian countries reviewed also distinguish between State rights and private
rights. For example, in Indonesia the tenure system provides for a hierarchy of
ownership/use rights, the highest level being confined to individuals, while corporate
entities and foreigners are restricted to lesser forms of tenure. Thailand and the
Philippines have tenure regimes based on the Torrens titling system, while
Karnataka has a registration of deeds system and Indonesia has both a registration
of deeds system and a private conveyancing system that records land rights.
The LAC countries reviewed generally allow private ownership of land and the
registration of rights of possession, with land being categorised as State or privately
owned land, or State-enterprise land (as in Trinidad & Tobago). Bolivia makes a
further distinction between five different forms of private legal land tenure, ranging
from small holdings to cooperative land, but vagueness in the distinction has
contributed to confusion in the administration of the law. Although Trinidad & Tobago
introduced a Torrens title system in 1985 following the introduction of a Registration
of Deeds Act only 10 years earlier, most transactions continue to take place under
the latter. In Bolivia and Peru private land ownership is allowed through an original
title, but to obtain such is a very slow process, especially in Bolivia where it can take
up to 12 years.
The African countries reviewed differ markedly with regard to formally recognised
land rights and land ownership. In Mozambique all land in the country is officially
State land, and no freehold is available. Occupants of land parcels are awarded a 50

Page 35
year lease right. Conversely, in South Africa, Namibia and Ghana it is possible to
distinguish between privately owned, State and communal land. South Africa has a
very sophisticated and accurate deeds system, as does Namibia in parts of the
country. In the communal areas in northern Namibia only customary tenure and a
PTO system (Permission to Occupy), a relic from colonial rule, is in place. Ghana
has both a deeds and title system with the latter only in the major cities of Accra and
Kumasi, while Uganda has only a title system.
Types of Rights Recognised Informally (Including Customary Systems). In the
ECA countries tenure is governed purely in accordance with formal laws and
regulations, and informal tenure is not recognised. Although there are areas where
people occupy land without any legal rights (e.g. Kyrgyzstan) this is not a common
occurrence and informal settlement is very seldom recognised.
In Asian countries where large tracts remain legally classified as forest, there is still
no clarity for the rights of those living in forest areas (Thailand, Indonesia and
Karnataka), and confusion about forest boundaries. Generally, rights cannot be
issued on forest land where many indigenous groups live. In the Philippines)
communal land claims are recognised, as well as individual claims on communal
land, while in Indonesia ‘extralegal’ occupants of State land may in certain cases be
given the opportunity to apply for formal recognition of land rights.
In the LAC countries numerous revolutions and changes of government have had a
fundamental impact on the official approach to land rights. In Bolivia, for example,
those who were working the land prior to the revolution in 1952 have obtained formal
land rights. In most LAC countries informal property rights were not recognised until
fairly recently. Today it is possible for illegal occupants of land to obtain title in many
countries although the process is often a lengthy one. In Trinidad & Tobago the
situation regarding the recognition of informal rights is somewhat different to the rest
of South America. A large number of people occupy ‘family’ land (mostly state owned
land) to which many nevertheless have strong legal claims. Not many squatters live
illegally on private land.
Customary tenure is a very important form of land tenure in Africa (e.g. in Ghana
close to 80 percent of the country is under customary tenurial arrangements) and
legal recognition of customary rights is increasing. Customary land ownership is
legally recognised in Ghana, in certain parts of South Africa, Namibia, Uganda, and
in Mozambique, where such rights were incorporated into the 1997 Land Law.
Percentage of Country and Population With Formal Rights. In Armenia roughly a
sixth of urban land is privately owned while in Latvia 829,205 properties and land
uses are registered in the Cadastre, of which just over 70 percent have ownership
rights registered. In Moldova urban land comprises roughly 316,000 ha, of which
about 30,000 ha (roughly 10 percent) is in private ownership.
With all the confusion regarding forest land in Asia, land rights are generally only
issued on and recognised for non-forest land. In Indonesia registered parcels cover
about 5 percent (about 17 million registered parcels) of the land but a significant
proportion of the population. In the Philippines, where more than half the country is
legally forest, there are about 10 million registered titles, some of which are
duplicated and overlapping. About 6 percent of the country is unclassified, including
parts of Metro Manila, where rights remain uncertain.

Page 36
It is estimated that about 80-90 percent of South Africa is covered by the formal
system, while in Mozambique, Ghana and Uganda respectively, about 10 percent,
20 percent and 38 percent of the country can be classified as areas of non-
customary tenure. They are therefore assumed to represent the formal system, at
least in part. In South Africa up to 75 percent of the population is estimated to be
covered by the formal system and around 32 percent for Uganda.
Characteristics of Population Without Formal Rights. In countries such as
Armenia, Kyrgyzstan and Latvia where there are a limited number of squatters,
illegal occupation is sometimes recognised. If someone illegally occupies land
openly, continuously and in good faith, they may obtain ownership rights after 15
years in Kyrgyzstan, and 10 years in Latvia. None of the ECA countries place any
limitations on the rights of women to own land, and their rights are protected by law.
Informal settlement is a problem in Asia, particularly in areas of rapid urbanisation. It
is generally considered illegal but as a result of socio-political issues it is rare for
informal settlers to be evicted. In Karnataka it is possible for the State Assembly (on
recommendation of the Cabinet) to approve certain land rights being awarded to
illegal occupants of land. In the Asian countries reviewed there are no specific limits
on women’s right to own land but there is evidence to suggest their rights do not
always translate into effective control over land in practice (e.g. Karnataka).
In the LAC countries, peasants and indigenous people are in a weak position when it
comes to land rights and access to land. Some government interventions have
proved disastrous. In Bolivia, logging rights on land inhabited by native groups were
awarded to outsiders, and in El Salvador intervention resulted in the creation of a
landless class, effectively forced to become labourers on large plantation properties.
By introducing a formalisation program for those living in informal communities
largely on State owned land, the Peruvian government has provided assistance to
informal settlers and indigenous groups.
Although the lack of legal recognition for occupying land is still a problem in most
African countries (particularly urban areas), considerable progress during the 1990’s
was made. Following changes introduced after 1994 South Africa now recognises
informal settlement rights and, under certain circumstances, occupancy rights.
Namibia does not recognise occupancy rights in urban areas and the State retains
the right to evict those living informally on State land in urban areas. Similarly,
Ghana does not generally recognise the rights of informal settlers. Although there
are no legal restrictions on women who own or wish to own land, there are various
factors that are believed to impact on women’s right to own land in customary areas.
Level of Disputes Over Land. The level of land-related disputes is relatively low in
Thailand and low to medium in the Philippines, but it is high in both Karnataka and
Indonesia and a substantial number of cases end up in court (in the latter about 60
percent of court cases are land-related).
Conflict over land is considered to be low to medium in LAC countries, with the
greatest problem being conflict over the geographic extent of registered rights. For
example, the consolidated map of land ownership in Bolivia suggests that 40 percent
of the total land area is subject to overlapping claims.
Although the level of land-related disputes is believed to be relatively low in South
Africa and Namibia, the opposite appears to hold true for Ghana, Mozambique and
Uganda. In Mozambique overlapping requests and land use concessions for what is

Page 37
considered some of the best land in the country has contributed to conflict between
communities. In Uganda some 48 percent of plots are reportedly being disputed at
present, with roughly half the disputes related to boundaries, and a further 35
percent related to tenancy issues.
Time Taken to Resolve Land Disputes. Land disputes in ECA countries are
normally dealt with within a week to three months. In Kyrgyzstan disputes are usually
resolved within hours at the local registration offices. In the Asian countries
reviewed, the court systems are congested, causing long delays and high costs. In
Bolivia land disputes in traditional areas of the country are less frequent than in the
urban areas, and are resolved quickly whereas in Trinidad & Tobago legal disputes
may take years to resolve, partly as the result of congestion in the courts. In the
African countries reviewed there appear to be various mechanisms in place to
enhance speedy dispute resolution, with some countries having established special
bodies for this purpose. They are not always effective though, and in some countries
dispute resolution still takes years. In Uganda disputes involving the government
take about five years to resolve. Given the importance and scope of customary land
tenure, traditional authorities and tribunals play an important part in the process of
dispute resolution.

4.3 Qualitative Indicators for Customary Tenure

Policy and legal framework indicators of a formal land administration system are
easier to describe and deliver where concise results are required for comparison.
Customary tenure systems on the other hand follow a less conventional model and
are more qualitative in nature. Approaches to the formal recognition of customary
rights is one aspect of customary systems that has a common theme for comparison.
There is great variety in customary tenure arrangements within a given country so
they will not be reviewed in detail. However a number of factors impinge on the
tenurial security provided by customary systems and this report attempts to
document qualitative indicators on these factors. Table 3 below, sets out the
indicators for the effectiveness of the systems and the approach adopted in
assessing the indicators.
The customary systems in the country case studies were assessed and tabulated in
Appendix 2, Table 30 to Table 34. A comparative summary of issues of each
customary system indicators is set out in the subsequent paragraphs. There is a
notable absence of ECA countries in the following discussion as there were no
issues reviewed in this study with respect to customary land tenure or
inheritance/use traditions that complicate tenurial arrangements.

Page 38
Table 3 Approach to Qualitative Indicators for Customary Systems.

Indicator Approach to Assessing Indicator

Formal recognition of Assessing the legal recognition of customary tenure including the
customary rights checks and balances in place to ensure community rights are not
encroached upon by outsiders.
Clarity in the general The cohesiveness of traditional communities depends on the
community regarding the authority of traditional leaders. Without clear leadership, or if
identity of customary authority leadership is disputed, customary tenure systems usually become
less secure.

Clarity in the general Uncertainty over boundaries of community land decreases tenure
community of boundaries of security.
customary authority
Clarity in the general A number of factors confuse the perception of what customary
community of customary rights rights exist, including inconsistencies between civil and customary
law, internal migration into community land, etc. The level of
disputes and the mechanisms for dispute resolution also impact on
the clarity of rights.
Safeguards for vulnerable Some customary systems provide inadequate safeguards for
groups vulnerable groups such as widows and the young.

Legal (formal) recognition of customary rights. Customary rights are recognised

in the Philippines and Indonesia, with the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines
recognising the land rights of indigenous cultural communities and Indonesia’s Basic
Agrarian law of 1960 stipulating that the national land law shall be based on ‘Adat’
(customary) law and incorporate customary concepts, principles, systems and
institutions. An Indigenous Peoples Rights Act was passed in the Philippines.
Notwithstanding the objective of improving the position of groups living under
customary tenure, just the opposite happened in Karnataka; protection for people
from the Scheduled Castes and Tribes has had limited effect and misguided
attempts at assistance have resulted in many marginal and small farmers becoming
landless labourers. The issues pertaining to customary rights in forest areas remain
unresolved in many Asian countries, including Thailand. Although there is some local
recognition of the rights of tribes that live in the forests and in mountainous areas,
there is no official recognition of the hill-tribes under the Thai Land Code.
In LAC countries such as Peru and El Salvador, since the late 1980s there has been
increasing recognition of the rights of indigenous communities. In 1994 Bolivia,
where some 67 percent of the population is of indigenous origin, amended its
Constitution to recognise traditional indigenous territories and the right of indigenous
people to administer their own land. Although Trinidad & Tobago does not have
customary tenure, it has ‘family land’ that is similar in some respects. In many cases
family land was titled a long time ago and handed down from generation to
generation without formal documentation. ‘Family land’ differs from indigenous land
in Latin America in that structures to deal with functions such as land allocation and
conflict resolution are absent.
Customary tenure is the dominant form of land tenure in most African countries. At
present South Africa and Namibia each have a range of tenure types, as do most of
the other African countries. Customary owners may enter into a full range of land

Page 39
transactions (both commercial and family transactions) in countries such as Uganda.
In Ghana traditional norms and practices are recognised as the legal basis for land
rights and relationships among land users, while in Mozambique customary land
tenure was given formal recognition in the 1997 Land Law.
Clarity in identity of customary authority. In a country such as Indonesia where
there are more than 200 different ethnic groups, the identity of customary authorities
in traditional areas is clearer than urban areas where people from different ethnic
groups live together. In the Philippines there were numerous community level
disputes, with some contending that ethnic identities and ancestral domains are
being ‘imagined’.
Although there was greater recognition of customary rights during recent years, and
although traditional authorities continue to play a formal and informal role in land
administration, political and administration structures have diminished the identity
and power of such authorities in Latin American counties such as Peru, Bolivia and
El Salvador, and African countries such as Namibia and Mozambique. During the
socialist period in Mozambique (1975-1990) the national government vigorously
pursued a policy of reducing and even abolishing the power of indigenous leaders
and administrative structures, yet they remain in place to this day, although their
influence varies greatly throughout the country. In countries such as Ghana there
were problems with traditional leaders pursing their own interests through acting as
the owners of customary land, often taking individual decisions such as selling land
and then retaining the benefits.
Clarity in the general community of boundaries of customary authority. In
Indonesia customary land rights are recognised by law. One of the criteria that the
government uses is that boundaries must be well defined and understood, which is
not always the case. In the Philippines boundary uncertainty and land grabbing seem
to have become common. Uncertainty and confusion over the boundaries of
customary authorities is also something that Latin American countries such as
Bolivia and Peru are grappling with.
The high level of land-related conflict in countries such as Uganda is evidence that
the boundaries of customary authority are not always clear. In Ghana, where both
customary and statutory law apply in urban areas there is much confusion about who
has the right and authority to approve the alienation of particular parcels of land. In
South Africa the duplication of land allocation functions has created some conflict
between traditional chiefs, municipal councillors, the State, and Provincial
Departments of Agriculture, for example.
Clarity in the general community of customary rights. Given the high level of
land-related conflict in Asia, customary rights are not always clear and, as noted in
earlier sections, there is much uncertainty regarding rights, in particular rights in
forests. In Thailand limited recognition (a 5 year renewable usufruct licence) is given
to agricultural users in forest areas.
In Latin American countries such as Bolivia land tenure security and the recognition
of property rights for indigenous people and community organisation remain
problematic issues, although some progress was made in the last decade.
In Africa there is also considerable confusion over boundaries, and rights are not
clear in countries such as Uganda and Mozambique (where overlapping rights have
created problems). There are some issues regarding the differences between legal

Page 40
rights and what happens in practice which also contribute to confusion and conflict
(as is the case in Namibia).
Safeguards for vulnerable groups. In Asia much has been done to safeguard
vulnerable groups, although there is still considerable scope for further assistance. In
the Philippines the 1987 Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law introduced guidelines
for the redistribution of all public and private agricultural lands suitable for agriculture
for farmers and farm workers who are landless. In Indonesia a 1997 amendment to
the land law provided for right to title with proof of 20 years of occupancy ‘in good
faith’ and community recognition. In Thailand, landless squatters may acquire rights
over private land after a period of 10 years provided they occupied the land
‘peacefully’ and ‘openly’ during this time.
Peru recognised the rights of informal settlers in urban areas in 1988 when it
introduced new concepts that provided for the registration of possession rights, set-
up a new registry system with simple procedures to register possession rights and
ownership. In Bolivia a comprehensive agrarian land reform plan distributed land to
roughly a million peasants, unfortunately without any additional assistance in the
form of technical assistance or credit, which greatly diluted the potential for positive
economic impact.
In African countries such as South Africa and Namibia much as been done to
safeguard the position of vulnerable groups since recent major political changes took
place. Although South Africa has been upgrading informal settlements, many
continue to live in shacks without formal land rights, albeit protected to some extent
by anti-eviction laws. It is possible for them to obtain adverse possession rights after
5 years. Specific safeguards aimed at assisting women and the very poor are in the
process of being incorporated into the South African system. In Namibia the rights of
women are protected in the Constitution which has affected the practice of evicting
widows from family land in the communal areas in the north of the country.
Theoretically, the Ugandan land law protects tenants, communal land holding
women, and minors, but practically, budgetary restraints mean this law has not been
fully implemented.

4.4 Quantitative Indicators for Formal Land Administration

Systems
4.4.1 Indicators and Criteria for Success
Considerable effort was devoted in recent years to preparing schedules of
quantitative indicators for the efficiency and effectiveness of formal land
administration systems, with perhaps more effort being devoted to the frameworks
than to the collation of reliable data to apply the framework. Most of this effort was
driven by the International Federation of Surveyors (FIG). In 1995 the FIG, 8 in
preparing its statement on the cadastre, listed criteria that could be adapted and
used in measuring the success of a formal land administration system. This
information is set out in Table 4.

Page 41
Table 4 Criteria for Successful Administration of Legal Rights in Property.

No. Criteria Description of Criteria

1 Security. The system should be secure such that a land market can operate
effectively and efficiently. The geographic extent of the jurisdiction of the
system and the characteristics of the rights registered should be clear to
all players. Financial institutions should be willing to mortgage land
quickly and there should be certainty of ownership and parcel
identification.

2 Clarity and The system should be clear and simple to understand and to use by
Simplicity. administrators and the general public. Complex forms, procedures, and
regulations will slow the system down and discourage its use. Simplicity
is important to ensure that costs are minimised, access is fair, and the
system is maintained.

3 Timeliness. The system should provide up-to-date information in a timely fashion.

4 Fairness. The system should be fair in development and operation and be

perceived as being so. The system should be seen as objective,
separated from political processes, such as land reforms, even though it
may be part of a land reform program.

5 Accessibility. Within the constraints of cultural sensitivities, legal and privacy issues,
the system should be capable of providing efficient and effective access
to all users. This includes providing equitable access to the system
through, for example, decentralised offices, simple procedures, and
reasonable fees. In some jurisdictions the public does not need access
to registries, but access to notaries and lawyers, etc.

6 Cost. The system should be low cost or operated in such a way that costs can
be recovered fairly and without unduly burdening users. Development
costs, such as establishing offices and the adjudication and initial
survey, should not have to be absorbed entirely by the immediate
clients of the system.

7 Sustainability. Mechanisms must exist to ensure the system is maintained over time.
Sustainability implies the organisational and management
arrangements, procedures and technologies, and the required
educational and professional levels are appropriate for the particular
jurisdiction. Sustainability implies that the formal system is understood
by and affordable to the general population.

Page 42
The following table of indicators of the effectiveness and efficiency of land
administration systems was compiled.

Table 5 Indicators of the effectiveness and efficiency of land administration systems.

Indicator
Percentage of total parcels registered
Percentage of transfers that are registered
Annual registered transactions as a percentage of registered parcels
Annual registered transfers as a percentage of registered parcels
Annual registered mortgages as a percentage of registered parcels
Ratio of annual registry running costs/registered parcels
Ratio of annual registry running costs (including cadastre if separate)/registered parcels
Registration staff days/registration
Total staff days/registration
Time to produce certified copy of title
Time to complete registration of transfer (including dealings with private sector suppliers)
Total ongoing land related court cases as a percentage of total registered parcels
Average time to resolve ongoing court cases
Number of registries per 1 million population
Number of registries per 100,000 square kilometres in country land area.
Average working days to pay for average transaction cost
Transaction cost as a percentage of property value
Unit cost of systematic title
Level of government where registration is undertaken
Ratio of revenue/expenditure

The indicators listed above were selected on the basis that the data to support the
determination of the indicator is available in the various country case studies
prepared for the Comparative Study. 9 These indicators have also been validated
against the benchmarks used in well-developed registries.
In Table 6 the indicators are mapped back to the criteria for successful land
administration systems noting that each indicator may be mapped against a number
of criteria. The generic issues and response to these issues in determining each of
the indicators is set out in Table 7.

Page 43
 Table 6 Criteria and Relevant Indicators.

# Criteria Indicator
1 Security. Percentage of total parcels registered
Percentage of transfers that are registered
Annual registered transactions as a percentage of registered parcels
Annual registered transfers as a percentage of registered parcels
Annual registered mortgages as a percentage of registered parcels
2 Clarity and Annual registered transactions as a percentage of registered parcels
Simplicity. Annual registered transfers as a percentage of registered parcels
Ratio of annual registry running costs/registered parcels
Ratio of annual registry running costs (including cadastre if separate)/registered parcels
Total staff days/registration
Registration staff days /registration
Time to produce certified copy of title
Time to complete registration of transfer
3 Timeliness. Total staff days/registration
Registration staff days/registration
Time to produce certified copy of title
Time to complete registration of transfer
4 Fairness. Total of ongoing land related court cases as a percentage of total registered parcels
Average time to resolve ongoing court cases
5 Accessibility. Percentage of total parcels registered
Annual registered transactions as a percentage of registered parcels
Annual registered transfers as a percentage of registered parcels
Number of registries per 1 million population
Number of registries per 100,000 square kilometres in country land area
Time to produce certified copy of title
Time to complete registration of transfer
Average working days to pay for average transaction cost
Transaction cost as a percentage of property value
Unit cost of systematic title
Level of government where registration is undertaken
6 Cost. Ratio of revenue/expenditure
Ratio of annual registry running costs/registered parcel
Ratio of annual registry running costs (including cadastre if separate)/registered parcels
Average working days to pay for average transaction cost
Transaction cost as a percentage of property value
Unit cost of systematic title
7 Sustainability Percentage of total parcels registered
Percentage of transfers that are registered
Annual registered transactions as a percentage of registered parcels
Annual registered transfers as a percentage of registered parcels
Ratio of revenue/expenditure
Ratio of annual registry running costs/registered parcels
Ratio of annual registry running costs (including cadastre if separate)/registered parcels

Page 44
 Table 7 Generic Issues and Approach to Determining Indicators.

Indicator Generic Issue/Approach

Percentage of total The major issue is the uncertainty in determining the total number of parcels. The
parcels registered objective is to assess what percentage of the total number of parcels is included in
the formal registration system. Parcels are not included in the formal registration
system for a range of reasons, including the inability to support registration and the
lack of clarity in policy or entitlement to registration. An estimate of the total number of
parcels is made, qualified as appropriate.
In some jurisdictions there are different types of registration or types of tenure. Decide
how many of these types are to be included in the number of registered parcels and
note the basis/implications of this decision.
Percentage of transfers This is a valuable indicator of public acceptance and sustainability of the system, but
of rights that are will be very difficult to measure. In most jurisdictions there should be information on
registered the number of registered transfers, but activity in the informal sector is often hard to
quantify. This information may be available may be available through data gathered in
sample surveys or pilot studies.
Annual registered This indicator of land market activity should be readily available. The registered
transactions as a transactions relate to the registration of subsequent dealings in registered property.
percentage of registered
parcels 10
Annual registered As above, but relating only to transfers.
transfers as a
percentage of registered
parcels
Annual registered This indicator measures how effectively the formal credit market is operating, but only
mortgages as a relates to the registration of new mortgages without adjustments for discharged
percentage of registered mortgages.
parcels
Ratio of annual registry The total cost of providing the registration function is to be included. There will be
running costs/registered variations in the costs are included, and where these variations will impact on the
parcels comparative analysis the variations are noted.
Ratio of annual registry This ratio is to be used where there is a separate cadastral office or function and
running costs (including where this cost has not been included in the running costs of the registration system.
cadastre if Variations are noted.
separate)/registered
parcels
Registration staff This indicator is to be calculated on the basis of multiplying the total number of staff
days/registration supporting the registration function by the average number of working days in the
year (taken generically to be 227 days 11), and divided by the total number of
registrations undertaken during the year.
Total staff This indicator is the same as the above, but using the total number of staff, including
days/registration any staff in head office or in support, such as the cadastre. Where there are major
variations – such as the deployment of a substantial number of staff on systematic
registration activity – this is noted.
Time to produce certified This indicator is straight forward.
copy of title
Time to complete This is also straight forward. This total registration time includes any preliminary
registration of transfer dealings with private sector service suppliers such as notaries, lawyers or surveyors.
Total ongoing land In many jurisdictions it is difficult to quantify the total number of land-related court
related court cases as a cases. An estimate is made, qualified as appropriate.
percentage of total
registered parcels

Page 45
Indicator Generic Issue/Approach
Average time to resolve This estimate is also difficult to extract from court records and anecdotal evidence is
ongoing court cases used.
Number of registries per A registry is defined as a physical office where the public can lodge and effect the
1 million population registration of a dealing in property.
Number of registries per As above.
100,000 square
kilometres in country
land area
Average working days to The estimate of the average transaction cost includes, where possible, all transaction
pay for average costs, including formal fees and taxes, where applicable the fees of service providers
transaction cost such as notaries and surveyors, and an estimate of informal fees and charges.
Where fees and changes are ad valorem, some assumption will have to be made on
the average price of the property being traded. This assumption is documented.
Assumptions will also need to be made on the average salary. These assumptions
are also documented.
Transaction cost as a The transaction cost is the same as before. In many jurisdictions property values are
percentage of value under-declared. Where this is thought to occur it is to be noted.
Unit cost of systematic There are variations on what costs are included in the total cost of systematic
title registration. Where the systematic registration function is contracted out the costs
should be clear. Where the systematic registration cost is undertaken fully or partially
by civil servants, the civil servant salary costs are often not included in the total
project costs. Where possible an estimate of civil servant salary costs is made. The
cost of technical assistance to support systematic registration is also included in the
estimated costs. Any factors that may impact on the comparative analysis are noted.
In counting ‘titles’, it is suggested that it only be called a title where the land holder
has been issued with the title, the title has been registered in a registry and the land
holder can register subsequent transactions in the registry. Where this is not the
case, factors that impact on the comparative analysis are noted.
Level of government Central, provincial, district or other as appropriate.
where registration is
undertaken
Ratio of The revenue/expenditure, where possible includes the full registration function,
revenue/expenditure including the cadastral function. If a separate cadastral function operates then two
ratios are provided, one for the registration function alone, and one for the total
registration/cadastre function. Any factors that impact on the comparative analysis are
noted.

Page 46
 4.4.2 Comparative Study Results
Some initial parameters are required to determine the indicators and these are listed
in Table 35 and Table 36 (Appendix 3) for the case study countries. As previously
discussed, much of the data was compiled in 2001 and in ECA there were already
significant changes by 2002 and the systems have evolved. Parameters and other
data from the case studies is then used to prepare tables of indicators set out in
Appendix 4, Table 38 and Table 39.
For ease of comparison Table 37 (Appendix 3) sets out the parameters, and Table
40 (Appendix 4) sets out the indicators for the 8 registries in Australia, a selected
number of OECD jurisdictions (England/Wales, Scotland and New Zealand) and for
more developed countries/jurisdictions in Asia (Singapore and Hong Kong).
Before proceeding, a caveat should be made on the data set out in the following
tables because, as noted earlier, there is considerable variation in land
administration systems throughout the world and almost as much variation in
statistics collected by the agencies administering these systems. An attempt was
made to adjust for these variations or at least record them in footnotes. The numbers
gathered for the case studies were used where available. Information for registries in
Australia, selected OECD countries and Singapore and Hong Kong are compiled
based on information collected by the annual Registrars Conference in Australia,
with some subsidiary information gathered as necessary.
There are also many gaps and anomalies in the numerical data gathered in the
country studies to determine the quantitative indicators for the efficiency and
effectiveness of formal land administration systems. This particularly applies to
Africa, for which little numerical data are available. Nonetheless, the indicators do
provide useful information for modelling the resources and funding necessary to
support a formal land administration system under a range of different scenarios.
The results of the analysis for the various indicators are summarised below.
The following paragraphs provide a comparative analysis of the indicators for the
country case studies as well as additional Australian, selected OECD countries and
Singapore and Hong Kong.
Percentage of Total Parcels Registered (Title and/or Deeds Registration). Data
are not available for ECA or Africa. In the developing systems estimates for the
percentage of parcels registered range from 23 percent in Indonesia to 67 percent in
Peru. In the selected jurisdictions with well-developed land registration systems it is
estimated that 100 percent of parcels are registered.
Percentage of Transfers that are Registered. Data are not available for most
developing systems. In the Philippines, based on a very small rural sample, it is
estimated that only 15 percent of transfers are registered. In the registries in
Australia it is estimated that all transfers are registered.
Annual Registered Transactions as a Percentage of Registered Parcels. There
is a wide range in the value of registered transactions expressed as a percentage of
registered parcels – ranging from 0.8 percent in the evolving system in Armenia, 3-4
percent in Kyrgyzstan, Moldova and Karnataka (India), 5-8 percent in Latvia,
Indonesia and Trinidad & Tobago, 11 percent in the Philippines, 13.8 percent in
Peru, 17.8 percent in El Salvador and 21.2 percent in Thailand. The ratio in the
Australian registries range from 24.4 percent in South Australia to 41.8 percent in

Page 47
Queensland and the other developed systems are in the range of 19 percent to 24
percent.
Annual Registered Transfers as a Percentage of Registered Parcels. Data on
the number of registered transfers are not available in many jurisdictions. The ratio of
registered transfers to registered parcels is 3.7 percent for the Philippines, 3.9
percent for Peru, and 13.1 percent for Thailand. The ratio in the Australia registries
ranges from 7.1 percent in Tasmania to 10.2 percent Western Australia. The ratio in
Hong Kong is 9.2 percent, England and Wales is 12.1 percent and Scotland is 6.4
percent. Thailand has the highest ratio indicating substantial market activity despite
having a 3.3 percent fee on transfers of property held for less than 5 years and
despite the decreased market activity resulting from the 1997 Asian crisis.
Annual Registered Mortgages as a Percentage of Registered Parcels. Little data
on registered mortgages are available in the developing systems. The ratio of annual
registered mortgages to registered parcels is 0.7 percent in Moldova, 2.1 percent in
Peru and 4.5 percent in Latvia. In Australia the ratio of annual registered mortgages
to registered parcels ranges from 6.0 percent in Tasmania to 11.1 percent in
Western Australia. The ratio is 6.0 percent in Hong Kong, 7.7 percent in England and
Wales and 7.1 percent in Scotland.
Ratio of Annual Registry Running Costs/Registered Parcels. The average
annual cost of operating the registry per registered parcel is US$0.21 in Karnataka,
US$0.79 in Indonesia, US$1.17 in the Philippines, US$2.70 in Trinidad & Tobago
and US$27.47 in El Salvador. In the developed registries the cost per registered
parcel is US$9.83 in the Northern Territory, US$11.15 in New Zealand, US$15.96 in
Hong Kong, US$25.64 in Scotland and US$26.23 in England and Wales. These
jurisdictions all record separate costs and revenue for the registry offices.
Ratio of Annual Registry Running Costs (Including Cadastre if Separate)/
Registered Parcels. In the jurisdictions where the costs and revenue for a combined
registry and cadastral office is recorded, the average annual running cost per
registered parcel is US$2.10 in Thailand, US$2.46 in Moldova, US$7 in Latvia,
US$17 in Kyrgyzstan and US$46.92 in Armenia. In the Australian registries the
average annual running cost per registered parcel is US$19.76 in New South Wales,
US$20.50 in South Australia, US$22.72 in Victoria, US$28.55 in Queensland,
US$35.14 in Western Australia and US$54.73 in Tasmania.
Registration Staff Days/Registration. The number of registration staff days per
registration is estimated at 0.5 in Thailand, 0.56 in Karnataka, 0.6 in Latvia, 0.76 in
Peru, 0.8 in Kyrgyzstan, 0.9 in Indonesia, 2.5 in Moldova and 10 in Armenia. This
means that an average registration officer in Thailand can complete two registrations
in a day while it takes an average registration officer in Armenia 10 days to complete
a single registration. The high number of staff days in Moldova reflects the number of
staff involved with systematic registration and some level of over-staffing in the
registries. In the developed registries, the number of registration staff days per
registration is 0.069 in Queensland, 0.076 in the Australian Capital Territory, 0.091 in
Victoria, 0.16 in Tasmania, 0.18 in New Zealand and the Northern Territory, 0.21 in
Hong Kong, 0.22 in Western Australia and 0.35 in South Australia.
Total Staff Days/Registration. The total number of staff days per registration is 0.5
in the Philippines, 0.54 in Peru, 0.66 in Thailand, 1.2 in El Salvador and 1.8 in
Trinidad & Tobago. In the developed registries the number of total staff days per

Page 48
registration is 0.05 in Singapore, 0.25 in New Zealand, 0.59 in England and Wales,
0.92 in Scotland and 0.94 in New South Wales.
Time to Produce Certified Copy of Title. The average time taken to produce a
certified copy of a title is 30 minutes in Thailand and Peru, 1 hour in Latvia, 1 day in
Indonesia and Karnataka, 2 days in the Philippines, 2-7 days in Kyrgyzstan, 4 days
in Armenia, 6 days in Trinidad & Tobago, 6-10 days in South Africa and 8 days in El
Salvador. The average time to produce a certified copy of a title in the developed
registries is instantaneous in Victoria, Queensland and the Northern Territory, 2
minutes in Tasmania, less than 5 minutes in New Zealand, 5 minutes to 2 hours in
South Australia, 9 minutes in New South Wales, 10-45 minutes in Western Australia,
less than 15 minutes in the Australian Capital Territory, 30 minutes in Singapore and
1 day in England and Wales.
Time to Complete Registration of Transfer. The average time to complete the
registration of transfer is 2.5 hours in Thailand, 3 days in Latvia, 3-4 days in
Moldova, 4-7 days in Peru, 8-30 days in El Salvador, 10 days in Kyrgyzstan, 15 days
in Armenia and 90 days in Trinidad & Tobago. In the developed registries the
average time taken to complete registration is immediate in New South Wales, 24
hours in the Northern Territory, Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania, 2-5 days
in Queensland, 5 days in Victoria, 5.2 days in Western Australia, 7 days in South
Australia and Singapore, 15 days in New Zealand, 20 days in Hong Kong, 25 days in
England and Wales and 27 days in Scotland. The average time taken in Thailand is
world class and is due to a number of factors, including a very efficient registration
and land records management system and the fact that there is no private
conveyancy industry. All contracts for transfer are prepared in the land office as part
of the process of registering the transfer.
Total Ongoing Land-Related Court Cases as a Percentage of Total Registered
Parcels. There is limited data available on the number of land-related court cases.
The number of land-related court cases per registered parcels is 0.15 percent in
Thailand and 15 percent in the Philippines, with the differences reflecting a range of
issues, including the relative quality of the land administration systems and the
litigiousness of the two societies. Information on court cases is not available for the
developed registries.
Average Time to Resolve Ongoing Court Cases. The average time taken to
resolve land-related court cases is minimal in Kyrgyzstan and Latvia, 3 months in
Armenia, 3 years in Thailand, 7 years in Karnataka and a ‘long’ time in Moldova.
Number of Registries per 1 million Population. The number of registries per
million head of population is 19.2 in Armenia, 11.1 in Latvia and Kyrgyzstan, 6.6 in
Moldova, 5.89 in Thailand, 3.77 in Karnataka, 2.3 in Peru (deeds), 1.96 in the
Philippines, 1.48 in Indonesia and 0.8 in Peru (titles). To some extent these
differences reflect differences in population densities and geography, however it is
clear that ECA has the highest number of registries per million head of population.
For the developed registries the number of registries per million head of population is
3.78 for New Zealand, 3.09 for the Australian Capital Territory, 2.51 for the Northern
Territory, 2.11 for Tasmania, 1.66 for Queensland, 1.58 for Western Australia, 1.32
for Hong Kong, 0.66 for South Australia, 0.51 for England and Wales, 0.39 for
Scotland, 0.37 for Singapore, 0.21 for Victoria and 0.15 for New South Wales. The
differences here also relate very much to population densities and geography,

Page 49
particularly for the Australian registries which, other than Queensland, Western
Australia and the Northern Territory, are centralised.
Number of Registries per 100,000 square kilometres in Country Land Area. The
number of registries per 100,000 square kilometres is 103.76 in Karnataka, 70.94 in
Thailand, 54 in the Philippines, 15.79 in Indonesia, 4.6 in Peru (deeds), 1.6 in
Moldova and Peru (titles), 0.9 in Armenia, 0.4 in Latvia, and 0.25 in Kyrgyzstan. In
the developed registries the number of registries per 100,000 square kilometres is
1,515 for Singapore, 1,315 for Hong Kong, 41 for the Australian Capital Territory,
16.54 for England and Wales, 4.45 for New Zealand, 2.59 for Scotland and 0.1-0.5
for South Australia, Western Australia, New South Wales, Tasmania, Northern
Territory, Queensland and Victoria. The small territorial extent of Singapore, Hong
Kong and the Australian Capital Territory strongly influences the ratios for these
jurisdictions. The low values for the other well-developed registries reflect the
centralised nature of the systems.
Average Working Days to Pay for Average Transfer Cost. Substantial
assumptions were required to arrive at an estimate for the average number of
working days required to pay for an average transfer. The estimate for the average
number of days required to pay for the average transfer is 12 in Thailand, 24 in the
Philippines, 31 in Latvia, 66 in Moldova, 77 in Armenia and 228 in Kyrgyzstan. In the
Australian registries the estimate for the average number of working days required to
pay for an average transfer is 28.0 in New South Wales, 29.9 in Western Australia,
32.3 in Queensland, 32,9 in Tasmania, 39.1 in Victoria and 40.5 in South Australia.
Transfer Cost as a Percentage of Property Value. The estimate for the average
cost of an average transfer as a percentage of property value is 0.5 percent in
Indonesia, 0.4-4 percent in Latvia, 1.5 percent in Armenia and Moldova, 4.5 percent
in Thailand, 5 percent in Kyrgyzstan, 8.2 percent in the Philippines and 13 percent in
Karnataka. The cost of an average transfer as a percentage of property value is 3.24
percent in New South Wales, 3.25 percent in Tasmania, 3.28 percent in Western
Australia, 3.31 percent in Queensland, 4.15 percent in Victoria and 4.19 percent in
South Australia. Largely due to the relatively high transfer costs, property values are
under-declared in Thailand, the Philippines and Karnataka and all three jurisdictions
have great uncertainty in the assessment of property value.
Unit Cost of Systematic Title (US$). Systematic registration applies only to the
developing systems as most property in the well-developed systems is registered
and there is no need for a systematic registration program. The unit cost of a title or
first registration is US$9.90 in Moldova, US$12.66 in Peru (urban), US$15.76 in
Kyrgyzstan, US$18.02 in Armenia, US$24.40 in Indonesia, US$32.80 in Thailand,
US$46.68 in Peru (rural), US$1,064 in Trinidad & Tobago and US$1,354 in Latvia
(sporadic). There is considerable variation in the costs included and to some extent
in what constitutes a ‘title’. The higher rates in Trinidad & Tobago and Latvia are due
largely to the use of sporadic processes and are exceptions rather than the rule. In
Latvia’s case the process involves the restitution of rights existing prior to
communism.
Level of Government Where Registration is Undertaken. Most of the developing
registries are decentralised, usually to an administrative district (Latvia, Indonesia,
Karnataka, the Philippines, Thailand), or to local authorities (Armenia, Kyrgyzstan
and Moldova). Single registries operate in South Australia, New South Wales,
Victoria, the Australian Capital Territory, Tasmania and Singapore. Branch registries

Page 50
operate in Queensland, Western Australia, the Northern Territory, Hong Kong,
England and Wales, and Scotland.
Ratio of Revenue/Expenditure. The ratio of annual registration revenue to the
annual cost of running the registries ranges from 20.7 in Karnataka (Registration
only), 9.8 in Karnataka (Registration plus Survey Department), 5.08 in Thailand, 2.37
in the Philippines, 1.6 in Armenia and Latvia and 0.28 in Kyrgyzstan. The ratio of
annual revenue to expenditure for the developed registries ranges from 2.67 for the
Northern Territory, 2.11 for South Australia, 1.30 for Hong Kong, 1.15 for Victoria,
1.135 for Scotland, 1.023 for England and Wales, 1.00 for Queensland, 0.99 for New
South Wales, 0.95 for New Zealand and 0.84 for Western Australia. Karnataka,
which is a very manual registration of deeds system, demonstrates that land
administration can generate a significant return on investment for the government, as
does Thailand and to a lesser degree the Philippines. The ECA systems are
evolving, generally under a policy of cost-recovery. The fee structures for the
developed registries have generally been prepared under government policies of
restricting fees for services such that the cost of providing the service is recovered.
4.4.3 Summary of ‘Mean’ Indicators
Based on results of the study, a ‘mean’ value was extracted and this has been used
to compare other indicators of the countries studied (see Table 8). The ‘mean’ value
is not an average based on empirical data, it is a perception of a ‘fair level’ based on
an overview of the data and many years experience.
It is not suggested that all systems line up with the ‘mean’ values because there are
valid reasons for variations from them and in some jurisdictions and situations they
may not be appropriate. This particularly applies to the ‘mean’ values expressed in
US$, a unit with significant variation in the various jurisdictions in terms of
purchasing power or average salary equivalents.
An important caveat is required. The targets, methods and ‘means’ will vary in a
given situation depending on the objectives of the intervention. Possible objectives
for intervention might be to rapidly achieve equitable land distribution or to increase
land market activity or to deal with squatters or to clear the courts of land disputes or
to establish a system for property taxes, etc. Factors such as the survey approach,
targets in terms of cost or speed, and end result will vary accordingly. There may
also be constraints on what is legally and publicly acceptable. Historically some
jurisdictions will not accept administratively based systems (for example some
countries with civil law tradition requiring notaries and registration at a court) or will
only accept local administrators (such as the local village headman) or will only
accept systems guaranteed by the central government. Then there is the whole
realm of what is acceptable from a survey and property definition perspective. The
results of this study need to be seen as a first step in undertaking a rigorous analysis
of interventions to strengthen land administration systems.

Page 51
Table 8 Comparison of 'Mean' Indicators for Formal Land Administration Systems
Legend
Country indicator substantially better than the ‘mean’
Country indicator near the ‘mean’
Country indicator substantially worse than the ‘mean’
Blank indicates that information was not available to calculate indicator

Trinidad & Tobago

Karnataka (India)

Mozambique

South Africa
El Salvador
Kyrgyzstan

Philippines
Indonesia

Thailand
Moldova
Armenia

Namibia

Uganda
Ghana
Bolivia
Latvia

Peru
Indicator 'Mean'
Percentage of total parcels registered (a) > 50%
Percentage of transfers that are registered (b) high
Annual registered transactions as a percentage of registered parcels > 15%
Annual registered transfers as a percentage of registered parcels > 5%
Annual registered mortgages as a percentage of registered parcels > 5%
Ratio of annual registry running costs/registered parcels (c) < $5
Ratio of annual registry running costs (including cadastre if < $10
t )/ staff
Registration i t days/registration
d l (d) <1
Total staff days/registration <1
Time to produce certified copy of title < 1d
Time to complete registration of transfer < 5d
Total ongoing land related court cases as a percentage of total registered < 1%
l time to resolve ongoing court cases (e)
Average < 5y
Number of registries per 1 million population (f) >2
Number of registries per 100,000 square kilometres in country land area >2
Average working days to pay for average transfer cost < 30d
Transfer cost as a percentage of value < 5%
Unit cost of systematic title (US$) < $30
Ratio of revenue/expenditure >1

(a) Will depend on the objective and approach (systematic or sporadic)

(b) This is often difficult to assess and usually depends on small samples or anecdotal evidence.
(c) / (d) Will depend on the level of development
(e) A little subjective as it is often hard to quantify land disputes in court and to assess how frequent they are. Ideally it would be good
to get the 'mean' to less than 6 months.
(f) Will vary on population density and market activity. A figure <2 is fairly common and not necessarily a good model. With
improved,easily accessed technology more centralised systems will develop.

It is clear that some interventions were more successful than others. The three CIS
countries Armenia, Kyrgyzstan and Moldova successfully produced titles at a unit
cost less than the ‘mean’ and have a relatively high number of registries per capita.
However they have limited registration of subsequent dealings. All three countries
require a high number of average working days to earn the money to cover the cost
of an average transfer. Latvia despite having a high unit cost for titling, using a
sporadic approach with costs largely covered by applicants, has a high level of
registered transactions and is more than covering costs. Thailand and Karnataka

Page 52
have high ratios of revenue to expenditure and efficient registration processes. In
Karnataka’s case this despite a high transfer fee, a relatively long period to affect
transfer and a relatively low rate of annual registrations. In LAC, Peru and El
Salvador have the basis for efficient land administration systems, with high levels of
registered transactions and efficient registration processes. The formal land
administration system in Africa except for South Africa is not well developed,
typically only covering urban areas and little information is available. There are
problems with informal settlement common to other regions such as LAC.
For a rapid appraisal of the efficiency of a formal land administration system four
indicators from the ‘mean’ indicator-set are suggested. These indicators focus mainly
on internal system processes. These indicators are chosen based on the breadth of
internal system efficiency they portray and relatively minimal efforts required to
collect the information:
• Annual registered transactions as a percentage of registered land parcels
• Ratio of annual registry running costs/registered parcels
• Registration staff days/registration; and
• Ratio of revenue to expenditure.
This sub-set of indicators for case study countries is included in a summary of
efficiency indicators in Chapter 6 (Table 24).

4.5 Property Registration as a Business Indicator

In 2004, the World Bank, IFC and Oxford University Press co-published Doing
Business 2004, the first of a series of annual publications that set out simple
indicators of how efficiently the regulatory environment supports business and
private entrepreneurs. In Doing Business 2005 a section on property registration was
added, which recognises the importance of formal registration of property rights in
supporting business and economic growth (World Bank et al 2005). Efficient property
registration strengthens property rights and increases the possibility for
entrepreneurs to obtain credit using a land title as collateral (de Soto 2003). In
Zambia 95 percent of commercial bank loans to businesses are secured by land, in
Indonesia 80 percent, and in Uganda 75 percent. 12 The Doing Business reports
compile indicators for a large number of countries (135 countries in 2004, increasing
to 175 in 2007). Three basic indicators are used to measure the efficiency of formal
registration systems as shown in Table 9. These particular indicators assess the
formal land administration system efficiency from the user perspective which reflects
the ease of dealing in land market transactions for business development. The ease
of use is measured through time, cost and complexity indicators for registering a
property transfer.

Page 53
Table 9 Doing Business Indicators for Formal Land Administration System. 13

Indicator Approach to Assessing Indicator

Number of procedures All interactions of the buyer, seller, agents, government agencies,
required to complete the notaries and lawyers that are legally or in practice required for
registration of a property registering property are recorded. This indicates the degree of
transfer regulation and hence the complexity or streamlining of the service.
Number of days for the Time, recorded in calendar days, captures the median duration
procedure that property lawyers or registry officials indicate is necessary to
complete a procedure. This gauges the process with a regulatory
outcome.
Cost of registration as a Cost is recorded as a percentage of the property value. Only
proportion of the property official costs required by law are recorded. Other taxes, such as
value capital gains tax or value added tax, are excluded from the cost
measure. If cost estimates differ among sources, the median
reported value is used.

The methodology adopted to build the database uses key informants from private
lawyers offering conveyancing services and key individuals within government.
Informants were asked to carry out a mock transaction using a standardised case
where an entrepreneur wants to purchase land and building in the largest business
city for a country or jurisdiction. The assumptions made are that the property is
previously registered and free of disputes.
Specific land administration indicators provide a rapid, simple and objective appraisal
about transacting on commercial property in major cities of up to 175 economies.
Comparative analyses are made in relation to who, what and why countries reform
their registration procedures. New Zealand is ranked the highest performer in terms
ease of property registration where it takes only 2 days and 2 procedures at a cost of
0.1 percent of the property value to register. Armenia is ranked second where it
takes 4 days and 3 procedures at a cost of 0.4 percent of the property value. In
contrast among the worst performers is Uganda. Ranked at 10th most difficult, it
takes 227 days, 13 different procedures and costs 6.9 percent of the property value
to formally register the property transaction.
Using the Doing Business data other analyses can be made. Individual indicators, for
example property registration, can be compared to a country’s generated ease of
business ranking. This is used to indicate areas for reform. Of the countries studied
in this report Kyrgyzstan Republic, Armenia and Ghana made notable reforms during
2005 and 2006 to ease overall property registration procedures. Figure 7 shows
Latvia, Trinidad and Tobago, Namibia and Uganda as having a large gap between
their overall performance and the ease of property registration rankings. Ghana
along with several other African countries contributed to an active property
registration reform agenda by lowering taxes and fees (World Bank et al 2006b).

Page 54
Figure 7 Case Study Country’s Ease of Business Rank against Property Registration
Rank (based on Doing Business 2007 14)

180
Ease of Business Rank Property Registration Rank
160

140
Doing Business Ranking

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
an

ia
ia

va

rú

a
or
s

ia
na
ia

nd

a
a)

go
ne

qu

nd
si

ric
liv
tv

ib
en

ad

Pe
di
do
st

ha
la

ba
ne
La

am
pi

Af
bi

ga
Bo
In
yz
m

ai

lv
ol

G
To
do

ilip

am
Th

Sa
Ar

U
in

h
rg

ut
In

Ph

&
Ky

oz
te

El

So
d
ta

M
a
(s

id
in
a
ak

Tr
at
rn
Ka

Case Study Countries

Generalisations of reform performances based on these indicators are subject to

serious bias because in many cases figures do not encapsulate the entire property
market. For example while reforms may have been significant in Africa only 1
percent of the property market is considered formal. The suggestions for reform are
also questionable because they do not address why and how property transactions
acting outside the formal market could then be revived from being declared ‘dead
capital’.
Although the Doing Business report assumptions 15 are somewhat simplistic and the
reliance on the data capture could be subjective they do provide a framework for
assessing the relative performance of countries.
Another set of indicators are summarised below based on those in Kälin’s
International Real Estate Handbook (Kälin 2005). A select sample of countries and
columns including the Brokers commission, Land register and notaries’ fees, and
purchase taxes have been extracted to provide a comparison to the Doing Business
indicator of transfer costs Table 10. The Broker’s commission is generally paid by
the seller and is an additional transfer fee that is not included in the calculation of the
Doing Business transfer cost indicator. In most countries there is a close comparison
between indicators. Italy, Monaco, and Greece figures differ significantly. It is
assumed that results calculated for the Doing Business database may be based on
under-declared values. The Real Estate figures for the United States make additional
note of title insurance fees, which would appear to have not been considered in the
Doing Business cost percentage.

Page 55
Table 10 Property Transfer Costs.
From Kälin 2005:15-19 Doing Business
Country
2007
Broker’s Land Register and Purchase Taxes Transfer Cost
Commission Notary Fees (% value)
Austria Max. 3% (possibly 1% land register fee Land transfer tax 4.5%
by both buyer and plus authentication 3.5%
seller) fee; 1-3% lawyer fees
Bahamas 6% for developed, 2.5% of value 1-2% of value
10% for (lawyer’s fee)
undeveloped plots
Canada 3-6% Notaries in Varies by province 1.7%
Quebec/lawyers – mostly 0.5 to
elsewhere – hourly fee 1.5%
Croatia 2-5% € 35 register fee, € 10 5% 5%
authentication fee by
notary
France 5-10% 7% Included in land 6.8%
register and notary
fees
Greece 2% from buyer and 1.5% for purchase Conveyancing fee 3.8%
possibly 2% from 7-11%; registration
seller fee 0.5%
Hungary 2-5% Scale of fees – about Conveyancing fee 11.0%
1% total generally 6-10%
Ireland 1.5 to 2.5% Each party pays their Conveyancing tax 10.3%
own fees – generally up to 9%; statutory
1% duties 2%
Italy 2-3% for one € 2,500 to € 10,000, 3-10% 0.9%
intermediary, 5% depending on value
for exclusive broker and notary
Malta 5% 1% Transfer duty 5%
plus € 500 for
authorizations
Monaco 8% for purchase Registration and Total 9%, 7.5% of 4.4%
notaries total about 9% which is registration
and stamp duty
Portugal 2-6% € 300 minimum for Transfer tax 6.5%; 7.4%
notaries and land stamp duty 0.8%
register
Spain 4-7% Ancillary purchasing Land acquisition tax 7.2%
costs about 3% 7%
Sweden 3-5% None Statutory duty 1.5% 3.0%
for individual and
3% for company
Switzerland 2-4% 0.01 to 0.7% 1-3% depending on 0.4%
depending on canton canton
United 2-3% Max £800 registration, Up to 4% stamp 4.1%
Kingdom plus lawyer’s fees duty; up to £150 for
data searches
United 6% developed, None Documentary 0.5%
States 10% undeveloped stamp taxes,
lawyer’s fees, title
insurance 2-5%

Page 56
Experts then use the Doing Business investigations to analyse and identify trends
useful for improving land registration systems. Doing Business (World Bank et al
2006a) publications suggested a number of recommendations to assist practitioners
reform property registration processes:
• Simplify and combine procedures for registering property;
• First link, then unify the agencies involved;
• Provide easer access to the registry;
• A warning: don’t regard technology as a panacea;
• Make registration an administrative process;
• Simplify taxes and fees; and
• Make the involvement of notaries optional.
While the Doing Business indicators are highly subjective the initiative provides
ongoing benchmarking and analysis of simple performance measures and
emphasises the importance of effective and efficient land administration functions for
economies.

Page 57
Chapter 4 Endnotes

1
Article on the Cato Institute web page entitled ‘Promoting Afghanistan’
http://www.cato.org/dailys/01-23-02.html
and the recognition of the need to recognise property rights in the February 2003 Business Round
Table on rebuilding Afghanistan, available on:
http://www.export.gov/afghanistan/events/feb_03_roundtable_030303.html
2
Discussion in the National Review Online article entitled ‘Who Should Own Iraq?’ available on:
http://www.nationalreview.com/ponnuru/ponnuru050503.asp
3
http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDS_IBank_Servlet?pcont=details&eid=000009265_3961006023721
4
http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDS_IBank_Servlet?pcont=details&eid=000094946_00102111360933
5
http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDS_IBank_Servlet?pcont=details&eid=000094946_02021204004320
6
http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDS_IBank_Servlet?pcont=details&eid=000009265_3961008074111
7
http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDS_IBank_Servlet?pcont=details&eid=000094946_02060604011399
8
FIG Publication No. 11, The FIG Statement on the Cadastre, 1995 (ISBN 0-644-4533-1).
http://www.fig7.org.uk/publications/cadastre/statement_on_cadastre.html
9
Although there is a considerable spread in the accuracy and reliability of the data collated during the
country case studies. In preparing this synthesis report, some data has had to be reviewed.
10
A transaction is a trade in rights and includes actions such as the transfer of rights by sale, gift or by
inheritance, mortgage, a discharge of a mortgage and a range of other actions with respect to rights in
land such as leases, caveats, liens, easements, right-of-ways, covenants. A typical transfer may
involve several transactions – for example a discharge of an existing mortgage, the transfer of
ownership and the registration of a new mortgage.
11
Forty eight weeks, by 5 days, less 13 days public holidays.
12
World Bank Investment Climate Assessments (various).
http://www.worldbank.org/privatesector/ic/ic_country_report.htm
13
The methodology and all assumptions are explained on the Doing Business website along with the
database for all Doing Business indicators.
http://www.doingbusiness.org/MethodologySurveys/RegisteringProperty.aspx
14
http://www.doingbusiness.org/EconomyRankings/
15
The Doing Business is based on the purchase by a limited liability company of a hypothetical
property valued at 50 times the annual per capita income on the periphery of the commercial district in
the major capital city in the country. Only official costs are assessed, excluding any capital gains or
value-added taxes. The full assumptions are set out on web page:
http://www.doingbusiness.org/MethodologySurveys/RegisteringProperty.aspx

Page 58
5 Future Challenges
Chapter 4 of this report summarised the experience and lessons from recent efforts
to strengthen land administration systems based on the country case studies. One of
the shortcomings of describing past experience is that critical issues may be
systematically overlooked. A number of potential “blind spots” in the country and
regional studies were identified, most of which are inter-related. This section
provides a systematic discussion of future challenges in the main areas of land
administration development from reform approaches, institutional challenges to
sustainability and land tenure policy. The material presented forms important
components in how land administration systems can be appropriately designed
according to the jurisdiction requirements, budget, and cultural traditions. Country
examples are used to clearly illustrate these concepts.

5.1 Approach to Land Administration Reform

The approach chosen to improve land administration effectiveness depends firstly on
the stage of development of the jurisdiction and secondly on the project objectives.
Land administration reform can take on numerous different roles from small
redesigns within particular sections of the system, for example registry and or
cadastre digitization, to a comprehensive re-engineering of the land administration
system As a consequence reform periods range from short, less than 3 years to
comprehensive national land administration reforms that are proposed over more
than 15 year time frames to ensure new concepts and institutional relationships can
be fostered in a sustainable and amenable environment. Phasing techniques and
beneficiary participation through community awareness programs are also key
implementation factors of the design approach discussed. The final reform factor
discusses the importance of realising decision making responsibilities so that
progress can continue with minimal delays or obstructions.
5.1.1 Long-Term Nature of Land Administration Intervention
'It is important to note that there are no quick fixes to land tenure problems. Except in
particularly favorable circumstances, improvements in this field can only be achieved
in the long run.' (Wachter and English 1992:17).
Any initiative to develop or strengthen a land administration system must recognise
the strong political, legal and social environment it must operate within. There are
many stakeholders and many different points of view that need to be recognised.
Projects will take time and will often have to be phased over many years. The
systems that operate in the developed world took many years to reach their current
status, something often forgotten when designing projects for the developing world.
A key lesson from the review in 1992 by Wachter and English of rural land titling
projects in the World Bank was that many projects, often designed as part of wider
development projects, failed as the complexity of the task of strengthening the land
administration systems was grossly underestimated during design.
With many stakeholders consultation can take a long time and has risks. Delville
(2000:108), in reviewing experience in introducing the Rural Code in Niger, observed
‘…the difficulties in organising [detailed surveys and public debates], coupled with
the potential risks of reform, sometimes gives the impression that the whole process

Page 59
has become bogged down in detail and consultation.’ Some of the activity required to
strengthen land administration systems can take many years. This may impact on
the overall design or sequencing of the intervention, something that is discussed
below (see page 61). A good example is the 15 years it took to reach agreement on
boundaries between regions administered by different chiefs in KwaZulu-Natal in
South Africa. 1 If this activity is included in the design of the project, a long timeframe
needs to be anticipated.
Williamson (2000:597) presented a model of four levels of social analysis (refer
Figure 8), identifying the definition and enforcement of property rights as important
elements in the second level of analysis with emphasis on governance and contracts
in the third level. The frequency ranges nominated by Williamson for levels 2 and 3
(10 to hundreds and 1 to 10 years respectively) contrast sharply with the traditional
land administration project duration of 3 to 5 years, particularly as many projects
cover many of the issues identified by Williamson in levels 2 and 3.

Figure 8 Economics of Institutions (from Williamson 2000:597).

Level Frequency (years) Purpose

Embeddedness:
L1
informal institutions, Often noncalculative;
social 102 - 103
customs, traditions, norms, spontaneous
theory
religion

L2 Institutional environment: Get the institutional

economics of formal rules of the game – 10 - 102 environment right.
property rights/ especially property (polity, 1st order economising
positive political judiciary, bureaucracy)
theory

Governance: play of the

L3 game – especially contract Get the governance
transaction (aligning governance 1 - 10 structures right.
cost structures with 2nd order economising
economics transactions)

L4 Resource allocation and Get the marginal

neoclassical employment (prices and continuous conditions right.
economics/ quantities; incentive 3rd order economising.
agency alignment)
theory

A key feature of the initiatives for strengthening land administration systems in East
Asia was a long planning horizon. The land titling activity in Thailand was planned
over a 20 year timeframe and the activity in Indonesia was planned over 25 years.
The techniques adopted in Thailand are very flexible and relatively low cost, but
even so the Department had 3-5,000 personnel deployed on project activities for
long periods over many years. A project operating over this timeframe requires a
clear vision and a strong political commitment. Both the Thai and Indonesian projects
were designed within overall strategic plans that geographically and technically
phased the activity. Political support can be important in a country such as Thailand

Page 60
where there are frequent changes in government. Often a project has to build wider
political support. The urban land titling project in Peru was very much a part of
President Fujimori’s political agenda, but the titling agency (COFOPRI) and the
project have continued under President Toledo’s administration largely due to their
good reputation and credibility, particularly amongst the urban poor. Many projects
need to build stakeholder support as an important part of project design. Where
major problems exist, initial phases are likely to focus on strengthening the policy,
legal and institutional framework and building stakeholder support, often through pilot
activity.
The long-term focus in Asia contrasts with the focus on short-term objectives in
Europe and Central Asia. In most of the countries in transition the urgent need was
to deal with the sudden change in land tenure for the population and establish a
means by which millions of people could make use of their suddenly acquired
assets. As Adlington (2002:11) notes, in the four countries in transition that were
reviewed ‘…the need for speed has been emphasized. It is not acceptable to
politicians or the public for the process to take tens of years or to cost hundreds of
millions of dollars.’ This emphasis on speed has had problems. In some urban areas
a significant number of beneficiaries could not receive title due to problems that
could not be solved in the field such as the encroachment of buildings or unapproved
construction. In rural areas boundaries were often not marked nor occupied by the
new ‘owners’, and there were at times limited consultation with the public. It is not
surprising that there is little market activity in these areas.
A long time-frame can be a challenge for governments focussed on election cycles
and to donors used to projects with durations no longer than 5 years. Here the
formulation of a long-term strategy with phased implementation can break down the
activity into manageable parts and ensure it is appropriately focussed and not
dissipated by trying to address all perceived issues at the same time.
5.1.2 Sequencing of Land Administration Interventions
'Often too much is expected as a result of the implementation of cadastral mapping
and land registration programs. Claims regarding the potential benefits of these
programs far outweigh those actually realised. ...... in almost all cases estimates of
the time required to complete programs of cadastral mapping and land registration
are unrealistic.' (Kent 1981:413).
Land administration projects in Thailand, Indonesia and Ghana were planned as
long-term projects implemented in a number of 5-year phases. Three phases were
implemented in Thailand. The Thai project builds upon a strong legal and policy
framework with the initial emphasis on increasing capability to undertake systematic
registration and the geographic expansion of systematic registration activity. An
emphasis in later phases was improved service delivery. This change in emphasis
can be seen in Table 11 (from Rattanabirapongse et al 1998:23). There has also
been a geographic spread in systematic titling activity (see Figure 9), with the initial
phase concentrating in the lower North-East of Thailand, the poorest provinces in the
country at the time, and in the North of Thailand, an area with potential for economic
growth. The second phase continued the mix of economic and social objectives, with
extensive work in the Central and North East as well as the Eastern Seaboard, an
area targeted for economic development. The third phase completed the work in the
North, North-East and Central regions and the fourth phase is planned to
concentrate in the South.

Page 61
The situation in 1993 in Indonesia provided a less firm foundation for a program to
strengthen land administration. Following 12 years of preparation the Basic Agrarian
Law was introduced in 1960 but by 1993 only 20 percent of the non-forest land was
registered under the Basic Agrarian Law and articles regularly appeared in the media
highlighting problems such as corruption, multiple certificates over the same parcel,
public mistrust in the land administration system and conflict between formal and
traditional land administration practices. Sporadic registration in the formal system
was not even servicing the predicted demand due to increasing population. To
address this situation a 25-year program was prepared to be implemented in five
phases of 5-years each. Based on tax-mapping it was estimated that at the end of
the 25 year period the total number of parcels in Indonesia would be about 78
million. The nature of the planned phasing is set out in Table 12. Implementation has
not gone as planned with the first phase extended to 7 years but the output for phase
1 of 1.957 million has exceeded the planned target of 1.2 million. Due to a range of
factors, there was a delay in implementing phase 2. The strategic approach adopted
in designing the proposed land administration project in Ghana is illustrated in Table
13.

Figure 9 Geographic Phasing of Systematic Titling in Thailand (updated from World

Bank 1990b).

Page 62
Table 11 TLTP Component Structure (from Rattanabirabongse et al 1998:23).

Item Component - Phase I Actual Cost % Base

2
(output 1,634,533 titles) (US$M) Cost
1 Rural mapping, surveying and systematic adjudication 37.8 60.9
2 Urban mapping 2.8 4.5
3 Land administration (including civil works) 6.0 9.7
4 Valuation 0.7 1.1
5 General institution building (including technical assistance) 14.8 23.8
Total, Phase I 62.1
Item Component - Phase II Actual Cost % Base
(output 2,100,377 titles) 3 (US$M) Cost
1 Cadastral mapping and remapping 25.6 29.9
2 Land Titling and administration 49.9 58.0
3 Valuation 0.6 0.7
4 Institution building 4.2 4.7
5 Technical assistance and training 5.5 6.4
Total, Phase II 85.5
5
Item Component - Phase III Base Cost % Base
(output 4,772,055 titles) 4 (US$M) Cost
1 Land Titling (including surveying, mapping and title issue) 118.9 67.8
2 Improved service delivery 17.1 9.7
3 Strengthening DOL 17.5 10.0
4 Valuation 15.1 8.6
5 Technical assistance and training 6.3 3.6
6 Studies (socio-economic and environmental impact) 0.5 0.3
Total, Phase III 175.4

Table 12 Planned Phasing of Activity in Indonesia (BPN 1993:64-65).

Phase Period Planned Scope

Output
1 1994-1999 1.2 This phase is very much an institution building phase. Significant work on the
million policy framework. Systematic registration activity is confined to Java. Project
areas selected on the basis of assisting in the development of efficient land
markets and the alleviation of social conflict over land, but focussed on offices
receptive to change and keeping the geographic spread of activities
manageable.

2 2000-2004 6.0 This phase will build on the processes and procedures developed in the first
million phase. A major part of the systematic registration output would still concentrate
on Java, the area of most demand, but activities would be carried out to test
and refine procedures to register communal adat (e.g. in West Sumatra). If
socially acceptable, pilots could be conducted in South Sulawesi. Further work
would be required to strengthen BPN as an institution with automation,
computerisation, HRD and training.

3 2005-2009 11.0 This phase would concentrate on the islands of Java and Sumatra. Work could
million commence in South Kalimantan on the basis that efficient procedures have
been developed to mark forest boundaries, reclassify land, and incorporate
customary tenure procedures.

4 2010-2014 13.0 Work in this phase would also concentrate on Java and Sumatra, with
million increasing activity in the outer islands on the basis of the results of social
assessment and clear selection criteria.

5 2015-2019 13.0 This phase would complete the planned 25 year program. Activities would be
million undertaken in most remote provinces, subject to social assessment.

Page 63
 Table 13 Planned Phasing of Activity in Ghana (Ministry of Lands and Forestry 2002:33).
Short- Medium-
Objective Output Pre-Impl. Term Term Long-Term
Model linking land
Disciplined land market use/administration in urban areas Develop Expand
Model linking land
use/administration in rural areas Develop
Delineation, demarcated,
Clearly defined allodial rights surveyed boundaries Pilot Pilots Expand Complete

Register of allodial rights Develop Expand Complete

Problems with compulsory
acquisition resolved Resolution of problem Policy Detail National Institutionalise
Inventory of government-owned
land Complete
Alternatives to land titling in rural
Secure land tenure areas Pilots Expand Complete

Systematic land titling Pilot Pilots Expand Institutionalise

Framework of
Improved access to land incentives/preserving rights Develop Expand Institutionalise
Strengthened, decentralised Strengthened land sector
land administration agencies Strengthen Support Institutionalise

One-Stop-Shop Pilots Expand Institutionalise

Strengthened customary
secretariats Pilots Expand Institutionalise
Engagement with land owners, Communications, Information
customary authorities Education Program Develop Expand Institutionalise
Enhanced coordination of Restructured, strengthened
land sector agencies sustainable system OMO Policy Institutionalise Corporatisation
Effective collection of land- Improved model to identify, value
related fees, taxes, revenue & collect revenue Policy Expand Institutionalise

In breaking down a program into phases it is important to note that not all problems
need be solved at once. Pilot activity is an important strategy to build capacity by
developing and field testing efficient procedures, and building stakeholder support.
To gain support from stakeholders, particularly where there is not a strong policy and
legal framework, one strategy is to select pilot areas with limited difficulty. This may
mean confining initial activity to a sub-set of the problems being faced by the land
administration system. For example, in Indonesia one of the criteria used in selecting
pilot areas in phase 1 was the absence of forests as there was a lack of clear policy
on the delineation and demarcation of forest boundaries. In Lao PDR, where rights to
land are complicated by the unclear rights to the land of Lao nationals who fled the
country after the change of administration in 1975, initial land titling activity was
confined to urban areas of Vientiane.
As illustrated in Figure 2 there is great variety in the contextual environment for land
administration projects and in the obstacles faced in attempting to strengthen land
administration systems. This variety is reflected in the different approaches adopted
for the projects in Thailand, Indonesia and Ghana. A framework illustrating typical
approaches is set out in Figure 10 based upon the seven generic strategies that
were illustrated in Figure 4, but with a foundation.

Page 64
Figure 10 Schematic of Tasks within Generic Strategies.

Objective
Clearly defined and enforceable land rights; Accessible, efficient dispute resolution; Efficient and secure processes to
transfer rights; Confidence of users, particularly the public, and their participation in the land administration system;
Regulation of land use in the public interest; Management of public lands and the commons; Equitable taxation of
property; Equitable access to land information; Poverty Alleviation.

Community/ Community/ Community/ Community/ Registration of Systematic Registration of

stakeholder stakeholder stakeholder stakeholder individual rights, adjudication, individual rights,
dialogue dialogue dialogue dialogue integration with registration integration with
formal system formal system
Development of Systematic Development of Systematic Civil works,
service/access adjudication, service/access adjudication, Civil works, procurement, Civil works,
distribution registration distribution registration procurement, record validation, procurement,
channels channels mapping, computerisation, mapping,
Civil works, Civil works, registration of simplified/efficient registration of
Record validation, procurement, Record validation, procurement, rights at procedures, rights at
computerisation, record validation, computerisation, record validation, community level HRD/M community level
simplified/efficient computerisation, simplified/efficient computerisation,
procedures, simplified/efficient procedures, simplified/efficient Community/ Community/ Community/
HRD/M procedures, HRD/M procedures, stakeholder stakeholder stakeholder
HRD/M HRD/M dialogue dialogue dialogue,
Policy and legal delineation and
Policy and legal framework Policy and legal Policy and legal demarcation of
framework framework framework allodial
boundaries

Policy and legal

framework

1. Strengthen 2. Decentralise 3. Transfer to 4. Strengthen 5. Role for 6. Transfer from 7. Strengthen

a centralised formal system centralised decentralised customary customary to customary
system system System authorities decentralised system

Foundation
Policy framework, legal framework, institutional capacity, primary geodetic network, education and training, funding and
finance, stakeholder engagement

The tasks listed above the foundation, within the generic strategies, are not
necessarily in order of priority. In some cases, such as Thailand, a strong foundation
already existed although effort was required to strengthen the education system in
cadastral survey, land information and valuation. Other countries require significant
effort to build a foundation. For example the need to formulate policy in the
Philippines and Ghana, tasks that Williamson (2000) might call formalising the ‘rules
of the game’ and ‘playing the game’ (refer Figure 8 on page 60).
In other cases pilot activity might be undertaken to help strengthen the foundation
and the land administration system itself. Some tasks can take considerable time, for
example, it took almost 20 years to systematically register 8.5 million titles in
Thailand and 15 years to adjudicate and demarcate customary boundaries in
KwaZulu-Natal. Moreover the emphasis may change as a project is implemented; in
Thailand for instance, the emphasis changed to improving service delivery as the
project was implemented. Strategies that combine the generic strategies might also
be adopted; in Mozambique new innovations are being developed to grant secure
tenure to foreign investors while concurrently securing the rights of local
communities under customary tenure systems.

Page 65
When planning for a phased implementation a key question is often where to start. In
Thailand, systematic titling activity started in the lower north-east, the poorest
provinces, and in the north, where it was considered that farmers would be well
placed to access increased opportunities for institutional credit. In Indonesia,
selection criteria focussed on efficient land markets and reducing social conflict over
land, within the overall constraints of confining activity to areas where customary
rights were not present and avoiding areas that lacked clarity in policy, such as forest
land. In many countries a decision on whether the project starts in urban or rural
areas must be made. In other cases it covers both, as ultimately the land
administration system itself will cover the whole country. A key issue in deciding
where to start systematic titling and registration is the expected demand for titling
and registration services. There is no point in titling areas where the population sees
little benefit in titles and or the registration of subsequent dealings. This often means
placing an emphasis on the urban sector where, as noted above in the case of
Thailand, there are also more opportunities for raising revenue to recover the initial
and on-going investment in a strengthened land administration system.
5.1.3 Community Mobilisation
‘…in every country we investigated, we found that it is very nearly as difficult to stay
legal as it is to become legal. Inevitably, migrants do not so much break the law as
the law breaks them – and they opt out of the system.’ (de Soto 2000:21).
An essential element in any effort to initially register rights in land and then ensure
that subsequent dealings in those rights are registered is building community
confidence in the system and fostering participation. As de Soto (2000:21) indicates,
gaining this confidence may require simplification of existing systems. The need for
community participation applies particularly to systematic titling activity where the
efficiency of the whole process depends on land-holders being in the right place at
the right time with the necessary documents and information. Gaining an
understanding of community practices and concerns is an important first step,
particularly in countries where the formal system is neither efficient nor well
regarded. In Africa extensive multi-stakeholder consultations were necessary in
formulating land policy and legislation (Augustinus 2003a:10). In other countries
focus groups, semi-structured interviews and household surveys were undertaken to
prepare for and implement land administration projects.
A range of terms were used to describe the process of fostering participation during
project implementation; a term used in ECA is ‘Public Awareness’. A description of
this process is set out in the project information document for the proposed Ukraine
Rural Land Titling and Cadastre Project (World Bank 2002b), where ‘… the publicity
campaign would focus on informing small land holders of their rights to individual
title, and their land use rights and obligations after these rights have been granted.
Information would also be supplied on farm management, legal procedures related to
land, and leasing of parcels. This would be achieved through mass media
campaigns, production of pamphlets and leaflets on a mass scale and through
holding public meetings at each farm…’. In Uganda there are ‘sensitisation
campaigns’ with the objective of ‘letting everyone know what the new law says, what
it does not say, what role it plays in the land reform, what is going to change and
how, what kind of timeframes may be expected and what the law means for different
stakeholders’, (Palmer 2000:279). In the Philippines the term Communications,
Information and Education (CIE) is often used.

Page 66
All these terms imply a one-way dialogue in situations which frequently require two-
way communication. A range of tools and techniques were developed to foster
participation, including: posters and leaflets; mass media campaigns (radio,
television); mobile display/announcements; public meetings; web sites, etc.
Establishing temporary field offices in project areas is also a good means of
developing close contact between the community and field staff at times suitable to
the community which is often not during working hours. Often a range of meetings
are required, initially with key local leaders, village meetings and at times special
meetings, for example separate meetings were arranged with women in Indonesia.
Publication of notice for systematic registration in official gazettes or newspapers is
also required in many countries, often with limited impact, and sometimes a
requirement for public display of notice. In Thailand public notice is required in the
Provincial Office, district office, village office, and in some cases on the land itself.
The term Customer Relations and Services (CRS) was adopted in the early 1990s in
the design of the Land Administration Project in Indonesia. This term attempts to
cover public communication requirements of the activity as well as the project
objectives of fostering an ethos of customer focus in land sector agencies. Customer
focus can be developed in a number of ways including simple posters in land offices
explaining registration processes and prerequisites, customer help desks in waiting
areas, the public display of fees and process times and suggestion boxes in land
offices. These can be assessed in a number of ways including customer satisfaction
surveys. While these processes work well in some offices and not in others, they
require a clear commitment of the leadership in the organisation to the concept that
the public is a ‘customer’, definitely not an easy process in some jurisdictions. The
customer’s expectations of land administration are security, clarity and simplicity,
timeliness, fairness, accessibility, cost and sustainability (refer Table 4 on page 42).
A major concern for most users is cost and time. Much can be said about customer
focus by the preparedness to display clear promises regarding cost and time. As
previously noted, the registration system in Thailand is very efficient because all
registrations must be completed on the day they are lodged. This promise of timely
response takes the discussion away from a rationale for delay such as problems with
process, staffing, working hours etc. to the steps needed to ensure the promise is
honoured.
The scope of the term CRS has broadened in Asia and within the Australian Agency
for International Development (AusAID). In the Philippines they now use the term
‘Community Relations and Services’ to reflect the need to engage the community in
the process of reforming the land administration system. It was recognised that a
wider group of stakeholders has to drive the reform agenda including, community
advisory groups, NGOs, academia, and politicians because the bureaucracy is
incapable of reforming the system. This process is also occurring in Africa. The term
Community Education is finding favour in Lao PDR, reflecting the more autocratic
nature of the government in this country.
Two final points are worth noting. Firstly, as de Soto (2000:155) notes ‘…operating in
the underground is hardly cost-free…’ Convincing people to formalise their rights and
to keep their rights in the formal system is not a question of convincing them to move
from a costless informal system. Secondly, despite some very inefficient systems
there is evidence that individuals will put up with a lot to obtain formal recognition of
their rights. A survey of six individuals who had sought to register transfer of title in a
registry in Metro Manila was recently undertaken. The shortest time required to

Page 67
obtain title was 2 weeks, three managed to get a title in 4 to 8 weeks, while another
took over 74 weeks and the sixth person required over 115 weeks. The official
estimate for the time required to process is five days. ‘Facilitation fees’ were asked in
all cases and paid in at least four of the cases. One applicant in desperation wrote to
the President and two months later was surprised to be advised by telegram that her
title was ready to be collected.
5.1.4 Solving Rather than just Identifying Problems
'... it is a cardinal principle of adjudication that it does not, by itself, alter existing
rights or create new ones. It merely establishes with certainty and finality what rights
exist, by whom they are exercised, and to what limitation, if any they are subject.'
(Simpson 1976:195).
Without delegated responsibility for decision making, problems must be identified,
documented and passed to a higher authority. This higher authority may be superior
officials in a remote head office, or, as is often the case, a statutory committee,
convened from time to time in the respective registration district or locality. This
approach destroys targets, alienates beneficiaries, adds to frustrating backlogs, and
creates bottlenecks in a procedure which is meant to be systematic and rapid.
Usually problems leading to disputes over rights and/or boundaries can be classified
and anticipated when designing registration programs. Pilot programs can be used to
identify policy implications of a systematic registration program and identify
mechanisms (decrees, declarations, orders etc) needed to facilitate delegation with
appropriate checks and balances. Small pilot projects can be used to prepare and
test the manual of operations. They are an adjunct to delegation and guide field staff
in the rules applying to evidence and the procedures to be followed in the field when
mediating disputes. Experience in large registration programs in Thailand for
example suggest that the overwhelming majority of disputes are resolved by field
teams, with very few requiring reference to courts or other dispute resolution
authority. Of course the Thai culture is one of conflict avoidance which lends itself
more to conciliation than (say) a similar situation in the more litigious Filipino culture.
Nevertheless, operational manuals can eliminate many problems by simple and fair
application of rules and basic mediation.
Reliance on judicial processes in which evidence is gathered for referral to a court or
other judicial authority, complicates systematic registration programs. The confusing
array of land laws and the delays encountered in the court system are commonly
listed issues in all countries involved in this comparative study. Experience shows
that systematic registration is more affective when an administrative approach is
followed. This allows for registration by appropriately qualified and trained officials
following administrative procedures based on government policy implemented with
appropriate community participation and oversight, and tested under pilot conditions.
The need for documentary evidence exacerbates the tendency to identify rather than
resolve problems and is especially problematic in poor rural areas where documents
are usually sparse and a right is commonly based on long-term occupation.
Prescription, or the acquisition of legal rights by peaceful, community accepted
occupation of land for a specified period of time, is a useful means of ensuring the
formal registration system reflects reality on the ground. It is also a very useful tool in
systematic registration because it shifts the requirement for proof of entitlement from
having to provide documentary evidence to having to prove long-term, community-
accepted and peaceful occupation. Prescription is possible under many jurisdictions.

Page 68
In Thailand under the Civil and Commercial Code, prescription is possible over
private land occupied for a period of 10 years but not over State land. In the
Philippines the reverse is true, with prescription possible over state land held for 10
years, but not over private land.
The need for prescription was evident in the initial pilot study phase of the Land
Administration Project in Indonesia. Subsequently a longstanding regulation of the
Basic Agrarian Law was amended 6 to provide for title issuance on the basis of oral
evidence of occupation provided it was shown to be in good faith, and acknowledged
as such by the community. As an ex-officio member of the adjudication field team,
the village/community head is on hand to attest to the occupation and further
streamline the issue of title to the occupant. The occupation horizon was set at a
conservative 20 years and, since under the negative system of land registration in
Indonesia any right can be disputed after title is awarded, the security of those who
might be adversely effected by prescription was considered adequately safeguarded.
Another innovation in the same amendment was the introduction of a sunset period
of 5 years, after which claims against title could not be made and absolute title was
awarded. This was designed to minimise the level of disputation and clear the way
for the eventual introduction of a positive element into the Indonesia land registration
system.

5.2 Institutional Challenges

Core land administration functions are typically founded within the government
sector where often complex systems exist to coordinate registry and cadastral
services. Opportunities and complications within government institutional
arrangements strongly affect the efficiency of land administration systems and the
services provided. The following sub-sections describe both effective and ineffective
arrangements of state authority and responsibilities, institutional structures
necessary to support and coordinate core land functions and considerations of
accountability and transparency to reduce corrupt activities. Institutional challenges
are best approached when there are good opportunities for long term support and
cooperation and a consensus can be reached on the development direction.
5.2.1 Authority of the State
‘…the state’s capacity to engineer and orchestrate social change and to mediate
social conflicts often falls well short of its ambitions, indeed it may pursue
contradictory strategies.’ (Juul and Lund 2002b:2)
In most societies an early consideration was the establishment of systems to
administer rights in land. Popular political philosopher Jeremy Bentham asserted that
historically the inception of both property rights and law were deeply intertwined
(Mandelbaum 2002). The type of system established will depend on a range of
factors including the type of society and the nature and extent of the land resources
available. Diamond (1997:267-92) sets out a simple classification of societies based
on four classes: band; tribe; chiefdom; and state (see Table 14). Diamond notes that
over the past 13,000 years there was a general trend of the replacement of smaller,
less complex societies with larger more complex units and suggests that population
pressure or population density is a prime driver (Diamond 1997:284). Critical
elements in the classification of the State set out by Diamond are centralised
decision-making, multiple levels of bureaucracy and reliance on laws and judges to

Page 69
 resolve disputes. Similarly The World Bank (1997) suggests there are benchmark
functions for the scope of state. State authority is set in terms of minimalist,
intermediate and activitist function and property rights were prioritised as a
minimalist function of the state indicating the state’s mandatory responsibility.

Table 14 Types of Societies (from Diamond, 1997:268-9).

Band Tribe Chiefdom State
Membership
Number of people dozens hundreds thousands over 50,000
Settlement pattern nomadic fixed: 1 village fixed: 1 or more fixed: many
villages villages
Basis of relationships kin kin-based clans class and class and
residence residence
Ethnicities and languages 1 1 1 1 or more
Government
Decision making, leadership “egalitarian” “egalitarian” or centralised, centralised
big-man hereditary
Bureaucracy none none none, or 1 or 2 many levels
levels
Monopoly of force and information no no yes yes
Conflict resolution informal informal centralised laws, judges
Hierarchy of settlement no no no → paramount capital
village
Religion
Justifies kleptocracy? no no yes yes → no
Economy
Food production no no → yes Yes → intensive intensive
Division of labour no no no → yes yes
Exchanges reciprocal reciprocal redistributive redistributive
“tribute” “taxes”
Control of land band clan chief various

Reliance on laws and judges, or the rule of law, is central to the definition of the
“State”. Neumann (2002:82) observes that if ‘…things are to go according to law,
there must be a lawmaking power whose edicts are enforced over a certain
geographical area in which that power monopolizes violence and controls those
aspects of life important to the (publicly observable) well-being of those who inhabit
the territory.’ Much of the difficulty in establishing land administration systems in
many developing countries has been the limited authority of the State and the
attempt to extend land administration authority beyond the ‘geographical area’ in
which the State ‘monopolises violence’. There are many examples of this, one being
the black communities in Choco and Valle Departments in the lower Atrato river in
Colombia who were displaced by paramilitary shortly after receiving collective titles
in 1997 (Ng’weno 2000:30). The state’s jurisdictional authority is clearly neither
comprehensive, nor uniformly applied. Informal urban settlements are an example of
state’s limited mechanisms for securing property rights. Typically there is an
evolution in a states response to informal settlement. Durand-Lasserve and Royston
(2002) summarised the following typical responses: public authority tolerance of dual
systems; legal adaptations; formal recognition of informal land delivery systems;
reduction in planning and construction norms; integration of land delivery systems;
setting up parallel systems; and tentative, top-down land policy and institutional
reforms. A summary of events in Peru provides an example of the evolution of
responses (see Table 15).

Page 70
 The relationship between formal or State sanctioned systems of land administration
and customary tenure is discussed in the next section. In this section we will
consider the important issues of the rule of law and dispute resolution.

Table 15 Historical Stages of the Evolution of Informal Housing in Peru.

Period Key Events Consequences Laws/Decrees
- late Informal development of residential Negotiable basis of state laws established. First urban
1920s neighbourhoods by the formal sector. development laws.
Late 1920s Period of gradual invasion by migrants. Increasing state recognition of property
to late rights acquired through gradual invasion.
1950s
1945 – Courting of settlement residents by Reduced evictions. Massive growth in the Civil Code, Civil
1960s politicians. informal sector. Procedures Code
First legislative recognition of informal Increasing incidence of invasion and Act 13517,
1961 –
housing (limited to existing settlements). increased expectation of gaining secure February 1961
1968 housing in cities.
Attempt by revolutionary government to Demonstration of the political power of Decree Law 18898,
1968 – impose a standard model on informals as a informals - invasion of Pamplona. Decree Law 19352
1975 condition for state assistance. Creation of a
process to adjudicate state land (207 steps).
Process for informal settlements to become Increasing growth of informal sector. Decree Law 22612,
1975 – formal neighbourhoods. Responsibility for 1979
1980 settlements transferred to Municipalities. new Constitution,
1979
1980 – Increased distribution of titles and Strengthened organisational basis for Council Ordinance
1983 recognition of informal organisations. invasions. 192
Legislative recognition of illegal land sales Weakening of formal system and Act 24071, January
1985 as a means of acquiring property for strengthening of informal system. 1985
housing.
New registry and simplified procedures Demonstration of viability of simplified Leg. Dec.495/496
based on informal rules. Pilot formalisation formalisation methodology. Growing political 1988, SD’s
1988 –
projects in Lima. support. 001/002-90-VC
1994 1990, Leg. Dec.
667 1991.
Creation of COFOPRI, transfer of Raised expectation for titles. Law 803, 1996
1996 responsibility for formalisation from
Municipalities to COFOPRI.
1996 – Implementation of World Bank Urban Issuance of 1.135 million titles in marginal
2004 Property Rights Project. urban areas.
Unification of registration and transfer of Increase risk of losing emphasis of prop- Framework law of
responsibility for formalisation to poor streamline procedures decentralization
2000 –
municipalities. Municipalities
2004 organic law
Formalisation law
Source: initial data based on de Soto 1989.

An important aspect in considering the rule of law, particularly where the central
State is weak, is to ensure that the law accords with social customs, is in a form that
can be implemented and the State has the authority and willingness to enforce the
law. Bruce (2003:268) describes the legal framework as a ‘layer cake’ for assessing
the authority and legality involved in common property rights control. Local and
community systems with minimal legal recognition make up the bottom layer of land
use control. Above this layer is communal, state owned and managed natural
resources with national legislative controls originating from colonial or later periods.
The third and fourth layer is for unified national land laws. Lindsay (2002:25-30)
proposes the following design principles for strengthening the legal framework for
land administration:

Page 71
 • be realistic about laws ability to change deeply engrained behaviour;
• make sure that interventions to formalise land rights are tailored to people’s
needs, priorities and practices;
• be realistic about what approvals, permissions, procedures etc. are critical to
policy objectives, and try to eliminate the rest from the law;
• be realistic about government’s financial and institutional capacity to
implement a law;
• be realistic about people’s ability to use the law;
• be aware that laws that seek to empower poor people, if taken seriously, may
engender conflict;
• build “reality checks” into the process of law drafting.
There is a need to strengthen the judicial system in many developing countries and
this is often a necessary prerequisite for a strengthened land administration system.
In many developing countries disputes over land are a major component of the
cases in the court system. In 1995 it was estimated that 60 percent of the court
cases in Vientiane in Lao PDR were related to land. Some countries have
established administrative dispute resolution systems. In Vietnam an administrative
procedure for resolving disputes is set down by law. 7 District- and commune-level
People’s Committees have one day free per week when they can receive complaints
from the community. The District/commune People’s Committee chairpersons settle
complaints or denunciations of their own activities or illegal actions, as well as those
of people and agencies under their jurisdiction. The Fatherland Front and citizens
are responsible for supervising this process. Complainants have the option of taking
unresolved disputes to higher levels of Government. In Cambodia, where the courts
have limited capacity and credibility, a Cadastral Commission was established to
investigate, mediate and arbitrate land disputes and the World Bank-funded Land
Management and Administration Project is supporting the strengthening of the
mechanisms for dispute resolution (World Bank 2002a:37-38).
One strategy for dispute resolution in Africa, where the central State is generally
weak and the traditional authorities too often lack transparency, 8 was to establish
Land Boards. Tanzania introduced a new land policy and Land Act in the mid-1990’s
and when conducting an institutional and legal review, mechanisms for settling land
disputes were investigated. The possibility of creating an administrative or quasi-
judicial machinery located in the executive arm of the State was one of the issues
considered by the Land Commission, but was rejected as it was deemed to be
inefficient and illegitimate. A three tier system (primary, magistrates and the High
Court) was taken on board and it was further decided to provide for village mediation
panels consisting of ‘not less than five, and not more than seven persons’, of which
at least two had to be women. The jurisdiction of such panels was voluntary and
decisions were not binding, which meant most disputes remained unresolved (Shivji
1998:102).
In LAC many registration processes and decisions are undertaken by the judiciary,
leading to delays and inefficiencies. In many countries land disputes can only be
settled in the courts. In Nicaragua under the Land Administration Project (World
Bank, 2002c) a National Directorate of Registries is being formed to oversight the
modernisation of the registries as an administrative arm of the Supreme Court. The

Page 72
project will also strengthen the agency responsible for mediating land disputes by
developing low-cost alternate dispute resolution procedures.
5.2.2 Institutional Arrangements
‘Whatever set of structures is chosen, attention should be paid to providing
information, training and support to those at village level to ensure they know how
powers are meant to be exercised and by whom. This should provide some
guarantee that the potential benefits of decentralisation and land administration
stand a chance of being achieved.’ (Toulmin 2000:244).
Consideration of the institutional arrangements for land administration relates to
many of the other issues, including community/participation, governance,
sustainability and making decisions in the field, all of which are discussed below. In
reviewing institutional arrangements for land administration a number of issues arise,
(i) the organisational structure and roles and responsibilities of the institutions
providing the core land administration functions (registration, and survey/mapping);
(ii) decentralisation; (iii) linkages of the core land administration function to other land
sector agencies/functions; and (iv) the role of the private sector. These issues are
reviewed below.
Core Land Administration Functions. The core land administration functions are
the registration of rights in land and the survey and mapping of the boundaries of the
extent of these rights. 9 A key determinate in the efficiency of a land administration
system is the institutional structure that supports these core functions. In many
jurisdictions the registration function and the survey/mapping function, or the
cadastre, is provided by two different organisations, often in different Ministries. This
is common in much of Europe and in Latin America. It can lead to a range of
difficulties, including additional effort for users of the system, inconsistencies in
records, duplicated effort in records and record management and, in some
developing jurisdictions, an inadequate spatial framework for registration. The
differences in institutional responsibilities can also present difficulties where the two
functions were decentralised to different levels. This is the case, for example, in the
Philippines where there are 162 registries of deeds, one in each province and city,
and each operating without any spatial records. A central office in Manila, the Land
Registration Authority has some of the subdivision plans, and a decentralised
agency the land management sector of the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) has many original survey and subdivision records at 171
community offices, the fourth level in DENR’s deconcentrated structure. 10 Partially as
a result of these complicated institutional arrangements many survey and map
records were lost or destroyed and there are many overlapping and duplicate titles in
the registries of deeds.
One strategy put forward in many jurisdictions to address these problems is to adopt
consistent standards for records management and data models. Another is to
implement clear coordination guidelines supported by memoranda of agreement
between the various institutions. While these work in theory, in practice the
experience in the developing world is that duplication of effort and inconsistencies
are best addressed by institutional reorganisation and bringing the core functions
together in one organisation.
Decentralisation. Although many land administration systems in the developed
world operate as centralised systems, many in the developing world operate as

Page 73
decentralised systems. This is certainly the case in Asia. There is a range of
reasons, but arguably the major reasons are ease of access by users, particularly
the public, to land administration services and support for the information needs of
local authorities. In the developed world most direct users of land administration
services are lawyers, surveyors and staff in financial institutions. Systems have
evolved to provide access for these intermediaries to an often centralised registry,
initially through data brokers/lodgement clerks and remote electronic access to
information and databases, and more recently through the ability to search registers
and lodge documents and plans over the Internet. In the developing world, where
decentralised land administration systems operate they have often developed as
isolated registry offices, usually operating with manual records systems, with each
local office responsible for their own specific jurisdiction. While decentralised
systems can provide efficient local registration services, they have potential
disadvantages, including:
• the requirement that users go to the local registration office to effect
registration;
• a limited ability to integrate the registers into a national system to enforce
limits on land holdings, support land reform programs or collect taxes;
• limited facility for providing other users, particularly other national and local
government agencies, with copies of or access to land administration records;
• the possibility of inappropriate influences and lack transparency; and
• lack of institutional capacity at a decentralised level and lack of oversight.
Steps can and were taken to address these disadvantages and some decentralised
systems have evolved to provide some of the most efficient land registration services
in the world. In Thailand, for example, the average time taken to register a transfer,
including the preparation of the legal contract, is two and a half hours. However in
other jurisdictions, including Indonesia, the Philippines and much of Latin America,
decentralised systems operate significantly less effectively.
Where centralised land administration systems operate, such as most of Africa, the
centralised system often provides very limited geographic cover and decentralisation
is strategically used to extend services. As noted by Toulmin (2000:231) there are
other drivers for the introduction of decentralised land administration systems,
including:
• significant cut-backs in national government budgets;
• increased emphasis on good governance and democratisation, particularly
under strong pressure from donors; and
• clarification of the respective roles of local authorities and customary
authorities and, in particular, the perceived need to provide some oversight
and checks and balances on the powers of customary authorities.
There are a number of possible models for decentralising land administration
functions, including:
• A direct linkage of land administration services to regional and/or local court
system;

Page 74
 • A direct linkage to local administration and/or local government (what Toulmin
(2000:230) calls decentralisation);
• Provision of the land administration services through local representation
and/or offices of a central agency (what Toulmin (2000:230) calls
deconcentration);
• The establishment of new, autonomous or semi-autonomous bodies such as
Land Boards (see Quan 2000b and Toulmin 2000:240);
• The devolution of land administration services to customary authorities (see
Toulmin and Quan 2000c).
Decentralisation models of deconcentration, delegation, and devolution (World Bank
2004) have varying degrees of political, fiscal and administrative features and
respective service accountability. The key administrative features of each model are
shown in the table below with examples of countries from South East Asia that have
adopted these models.
Table 16 Administration Features of World Bank Decentralisation Models.
Degree of Administrative Features South East
Decentralisation Asian Example
Deconcentration • Provider staff working at local level are employees of centre, Thailand
(minimal change) and accountable to centre, usually through their ministries;
weak local capacity is compensated for by central
employees.
• Accountability remains distant: the short route of
accountability may be weak if provider monitoring is weak
and citizens may have to rely on a weak long route
stretching to politicians at the centre; a strong compact
between policymakers and providers can compensate to
some extent.
Delegation • Providers could be employees of central or local Philippines, Laos
(intermediate government, but pay and employment conditions are
change) typically set by centre.
• Local government has some authority over hiring and
location of staff, but less likely to have authority over firing.
• Both long and short routes of accountability potentially
stronger; greater local knowledge can allow better matching
and monitoring of supply with local preferences,
strengthening both the compact and client power.
Devolution • Providers are employees of local government. Indonesia
(substantial • Local government has full discretion over salary levels,
change) staffing numbers and allocation, and authority to hire and
fire.
• Standards and procedures for hiring and managing staff
may still be established within an overarching civil service
framework covering local governments generally.
• Potentially strongest long and short routes of accountability,
but now also more influenced by local social norms and
vulnerable to local capacity constraints and politics.
Source: World Bank 2004:189 (table modified)
There are complications or constraints in adopting any of the proposed
decentralisation models. A complication can be the divergence between policy on
decentralisation/local authority and what actually happens on the ground. In
Indonesia a model of local administration was implemented, based on the village

Page 75
administration that has traditionally operated on the island of Java. This system
operates reasonably well on Java, but has limited success in the outer islands where
there were other models of traditional authority. In India from about 1993 a system of
local autonomy was introduced into the various Indian states (the Panchayati Raj).
The Panchayati Raj was given some authority for raising revenue from land but it
has largely not been taken up. The traditional responsibility for land administration in
India was at State level in the various Revenue Departments and there is lack of
clarity in the responsibilities of the Panchayati Raj and the local offices of the
Revenue Departments on land matters. In Bolivia various urban cadastres are being
established as part of a policy of devolution (‘Popular Participation’), but there is no
coordination between them and other types being implemented such as an agrarian
cadastre, a forest cadastre, etc.
A further complication when considering decentralisation is the difficulty in defining
the actual boundaries of local or administrative areas. This becomes an issue where
corner marks have to be placed and a decision made on who approves them on
behalf of the local authority. This often occurs in an environment where there is no
agreement on local boundaries that can be plotted on medium scale mapping. There
are many reasons for the lack of clarity on administrative boundaries. In the
Philippines the revenue of local government units (LGU) is largely based on the
geographical extent and population of the LGU, and the electoral roll is also based
on population. There is substantial incentive for LGUs extending their boundaries
and many attempt to do so. Also in the Philippines, IPRA makes provision for the
formation of indigenous people’s organisations (IPOs) and the delineation of
ancestral domain. However, as noted by the Asian Development Bank (2002), there
were many community level disputes and suggestions that ethic identities and
ancestral domains are being ‘imagined’. The country case study for South Africa
(Augustinus 2003b:5) notes that it has taken 15 years to reach agreement on
traditional boundaries in KwaZulu-Natal. These examples indicate that when
considering decentralising land administration services, a careful assessment of how
well boundaries are defined or what strategies could be adopted to ensure that
delays in the definition of administrative boundaries have minimal impact on the
overall program should be undertaken.
Another complication is the need to ensure that any plans for decentralisation of
services are financially sustainable. A classic example is the 1998 Land Act in
Uganda which created an array of Land Boards and oversight arrangements which
when costed with other measures proposed under the law, required an increase in
government funding for the land sector from less than 2 percent of government
revenue to approximately 33 percent (Augustinus 2003c:4). Clearly this was not
possible and the requirements were reassessed. Another less dramatic example of
the importance of carefully considering an appropriate model for decentralising land
administration services is Ghana. In the recent preparation for the proposed Land
Administration Project, a request for a long list of survey equipment, costed in the
high 7 figures of US dollars, was submitted, largely in units of 110, the number of
districts in Ghana. This despite the Survey Department having no presence in many
of the districts, in fact little presence outside of Accra and Kumasi, and the fact that
there was no clear model in Ghana for the respective roles and responsibilities of the
central, local and traditional authorities.
Having considered some of the complications, there is value in reviewing some
examples; Thailand and Indonesia, both of which are decentralised and include a

Page 76
comprehensive land administration function in one agency. 11 The Thai Department of
Lands (DOL) has a very strong central office and an extensive network of regional
offices, with the title register distributed amongst 76 provincial land offices and 272
branch provincial land offices. Lesser documents are maintained in 758 district land
offices. There is a local reporting function to district heads and provincial governors,
but the main line of reporting is from district to branch/province and then to Bangkok
(a deconcentration model). In many respects the Land Titling Project centralised,
rather than decentralised functions, creating a large network of branch provincial
land offices and generating about 8.5 million new titles by either field adjudication or
transforming existing land records held at the district level. To support this network of
land offices there is a limited number of office typologies, with standards for offices,
staffing and equipment as well as clear criteria for establishing new branch provincial
land offices based on the number of titles, projected levels of annual registered
transactions and the distance people need travel. The Thai network was not built
from scratch, but has since 1901, when the Department was established, gradually
expanded from Bangkok to the rural cities and then into the rural areas as the
coverage of the title register has gradually expanded. Registration is very efficient, in
part due to regulations that that require registration on the day of application, but
also because there are little if any prerequisites such as compliance with planning
regulations or payment of local taxes.
The land administration system in Indonesia is much less efficient than Thailand.
The National Land Agency (BPN) was only formed in 1988 when several different
functions were brought together, and operates with a weaker central office (than
exists in Thailand) and a network of 27 provincial offices and 273
municipality/regency offices. The main land registration function is undertaken at the
municipality/regency level while the provincial offices are largely restricted to
oversight. BPN had nearly twice the staff of the Department of Lands in Thailand, but
has a range of problems including overstaffing, less well-educated staff, and lower
morale. There is no clear typology of offices, equipment and staff. The 1999
Decentralisation Law is transferring increased responsibility to the
municipalities/regencies, by-passing the provinces (moving from a deconcentration
to a decentralisation model).
Linkages to other Land Sector Functions. The linkage between the core land
administration functions and other public agencies/requirements is a further
challenge. One of the reasons for the efficiency of the Thai system is the lack of
linkages to other systems and requirements. This is not the case in other
jurisdictions; in the Philippines there is a requirement to pay local and national taxes
before registration; in Ghana proof of compliance with planning regulations is
required prior to registration. These linkages should be carefully reviewed and one
strategy might be to incorporate steps into the registration process; for example, the
Department of Lands in Thailand collects a capital gains tax on behalf of the
Revenue Department. In the developed world, concepts of multi-purpose cadastres
and spatial data infrastructure were developed (Williamson, Chan and Effenberg
1998:177). These efforts are relevant for the developing world to ensure there is an
overall vision for developing the system and building future capacity but there needs
to be a clear understanding of project costs and benefits, and systems must be
financially sustainable and user-friendly.
Private Sector. One last factor that needs to be considered is the role of the private
sector. In most jurisdictions land administration is purely a public sector role but in

Page 77
many countries a range of issues arise when using public sector resources to
implement land administration projects. These include limited incentives/rewards,
lack of skills and limited experience with new technology, and a limited ability by
government to adequately fund land administration services. One strategy to
address these problems is to set up the registration system as a government trading
enterprise. This strategy was implemented in England, Hong Kong and the
Australian State of New South Wales, all of which operate off-budget. Another
variant is to establish semi-autonomous agencies that operate under similar
employment conditions to those of private sector; this approach was implemented in
Peru and Greece.
Another strategy to address the public-sector issues listed above is to involve the
private sector in service delivery. In a limited number of jurisdictions the private
sector was formally brought in as a land administration service provider. In 1991 the
Ontario provincial government reached agreement with Teranet Inc to undertake a
major revamp of the land registry system. Under the agreement Teranet Inc was
equally owned by the province of Ontario and a private company Teramira Holdings
Inc, with limits placed on individual shareholdings in Teramira Holdings Inc. This
arrangement seems to be working well and Teranet Inc has since established a
range of subsidiaries offering land administration services internationally and wider
e-commerce services. 12 In the 1990s New Zealand and the Australian state of
Victoria attempted to enter into a partnership with the private sector to enhance their
respective land administration systems. Both attempts failed, due largely to an
inability to reach agreement on fee structures, revenue projections and the costs to
be borne by the private partners. The Philippines is currently implementing a major
upgrade of the land registration system under a Build-Own-Operate (BOO)
agreement with a private sector consortium. This project, which commenced in late
2000/early 2001, is seriously behind schedule and is faced with a number of
difficulties including the inability to agree on arrangements for government access to
land records and an acceptable fee structure.
Another model for involving the private sector is to have the private sector provide a
network of ‘front-offices’ that feed information back into and/or access information
from a government-run central land registration ‘back-office’. This was discussed in a
number of jurisdictions, with options for the private sector partner being an
organisation with an established network of offices, such as a private bank or utility
company. Such an arrangement has many potential advantages, including minimal
public sector staff, most of whom would be specialists focussed on the integrity of
the registration system itself, fewer levels of checking and administration and
increased control over rent-seeking. We are not aware of any jurisdiction that has
implemented this model.
Many jurisdictions have licensed private sector surveyors because public-sector
surveyors can not service market demand. Surveyors can however represent a
particularly strong vested interest, often pushing for high standards for survey and
mapping and often with limited policing of these standards. As the cost of survey and
mapping can be a major element in any land administration system this is a concern,
particularly as most developing countries have great difficulty in supplying the human
and other resources necessary to support an over-specified survey and mapping
requirement. The survey lobby is particularly strong in a number of countries,
including Malaysia, the Philippines, and Greece. In the Philippines, where the cost of
survey is passed onto the public, participants in a recent social assessment

Page 78
undertaken for the Land Administration and Management Project have expressed
strong concerns about the cost.
Public notaries are also a powerful force in a number of countries including much of
southern Europe and former colonies such as Latin America and Indonesia. In Peru,
for example, to overcome a range of problems including high notarial charges and
resistance to using simplified forms, legislation was introduced to broaden the
categories of persons able to prepare and witness transactions.
In Greece the system of deeds registration functions separately from the cadastre in
regional and district offices which are operated independently on a private sector
basis by legally qualified land registrars. A key strategy of the proposed EU
supported Hellenic Cadastre Project was the progressive transition of these deeds
registry offices into Cadastral Offices with responsibility for all aspects of the newly
established parcel based system of title registration.
5.2.3 Corruption and Governance
‘Senior politicians and public servants in cities all over the world manipulate or ignore
the law and administration relating to land allocation and development so as to line
their own pockets and those of their families, friends and political allies’ (McAuslan
2002:27).
Land is a fundamental resource in all countries and systems to administer rights in
land, as McAuslan notes, can be subject to manipulation and corruption. A number
of organisations prepare indices of perceived corruption and an example is set out in
Figure 11. From the chart there appears to be a high correlation between perceived
levels of corruption and perceptions of efficiency in land administration systems. 13
Figure 11 The 2002 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index. 14

Source: Internet Center for Corruption Research

Page 79
In many developing countries the land sector is considered one of the most ill-
disciplined. In 1999 it was reported that research into perceptions of corruption in
Thailand found that the Department of Lands was perceived as the fourth most
corrupt agency after the Customs Department, the Royal Thai Police and the
Revenue Department. 15 Thampi (2002:2), in reporting on public perception of
corruption in seven public sectors 16 in five countries in South Asia, noted that land
administration was perceived as the second sector most prone to corruption in
Pakistan and the third most prone to corruption in India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
Surveyors and local officials (Tehsilders) were named as the major perpetrators of
corruption in all countries except Sri Lanka, where respondents named deed writers
as the major perpetrators of corruption. Lack of accountability and transparency were
cited as the main reasons for corruption although monopoly power was named as a
major cause of corruption in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka (Thampi 2002:29). In 2002,
Transparency International conducted a survey of companies in leading exporting
countries. Asked to identify the business sector in which bribery is most likely to
occur, respondents listed the “real estate/property” sector as the fourth (out of 17)
sectors where bribery was most likely (after the “public works/construction”, “arms
and defence” and “oil and gas” sectors) (Hodess et al 2003:268).
The level of corruption and the size of individual incidents vary greatly. In many
countries, demands for facilitation fees are rife and there is often some degree of
cultural toleration. Isles (2002:18), in researching six recent recipients of titles in the
Philippines noted the comment by one participant that ‘hardly anything moves in this
country without lagay [bribes]’, and that there is some cultural basis for this. He did
note however that for the usually infrequent users of the system ‘…it is difficult to
distinguish between what is illegal and what is just a part of “pakikisama”, or
maintaining good relations with others.’
The types and incidents of corruption in many countries are more significant with the
political elite and those with connections and an understanding of the system using
the land administration system to usurp the legal and customary rights of others and
create conflict and a climate of uncertainty.
There is a high level of perceived corruption in Indonesia, with estimates of the
diversion of loan funds as high as US$13 billion (Harahap 1999:3). The land sector
in Indonesia lacks transparency, particularly in Jakarta. Surveys indicate the primary
causes in Indonesia are low civil servant salaries, lack of controls and accountability,
and poor law enforcement (Partnership for Governance Reform in Indonesia
2002:35). It is suggested however that inadequate pay may be only one factor within
an overall institutional environment that fosters corrupt behaviour. This argument is
supported by wider studies which show that the role of wages is ambiguous, the
impact of democracy and colonialism is unclear, but press freedom and the judiciary
seemed to be important elements in reducing corruption (Lambsdorff 1999:14).
Harahap (1999:4) notes the following recommendations to address corruption in
Indonesia:
• establishment of a national Integrity Workshop as a forum for government and
civil society;
• establishment of a code of conduct for top officials;
• declaration of wealth and income, including a provision for political leaders to
place private interests in blind trusts;

Page 80
 • focussed efforts to improve government programs in high priority areas such
as social safety nets;
• setting up new mechanisms for citizen oversight of government projects.
Various strategies were developed to address bureaucratic inertia and difficulties
with staff reward/incentive systems. In Thailand the Department was able to
substantiate generous budgets based on firm output targets. Initially allowances for
field staff were very attractive, perhaps too much as it impacted on other activities in
the Department. Although these benefits were eroded over time, reward systems for
field staff have never been a real issue in Thailand. In Indonesia where the
allowances were more rigid, a system linking staff allowances, budgeted on a daily
basis to titling output was implemented. This system provided sufficient incentives for
field staff. In other countries more radical approaches are required. In Peru and
Greece semi-autonomous agencies were created outside the formal civil service and
although formally attached to Ministries, operated under more private sector
conditions. This worked well in Peru, but was less successful in Greece where the
design was very weak and the agency had limited autonomy. This is a risky
approach because it usually relies on having a senior political champion so the
whole agency and project is exposed if this champion loses power. Another strategy
is to outsource or sub-contract some or all of the activities to the private sector. This
approach was adopted in Laos, Indonesia and in the Philippines, although in Laos,
where private contractors were hired to work with government officials, problems
with the relative salaries of the contractors and the officials did arise. In some
countries the only alternative is to seek some mechanism to increase staff
conditions. In Latin America and ECA several countries have contracted out large
systematic registration activity. In Cambodia, where government salaries are very
low (US$15-20/month) and there is a well-established tradition of paying allowances
of US$5-10/day to project staff, key staff working on the project must receive an
appropriate reward. During loan negotiations in Cambodia it was agreed that the
government would fund a higher allowance for 70 staff during project
implementation.
Another strategy to improve the transparency of land administration is to build in
community oversight. In the Philippines local advisory groups were formed to
oversight prototype activity, with representation of local government, other agencies
and civil society. NGOs have also been engaged in a number of countries to
undertake project activity such as social assessment, community consultation and
public awareness campaigns. In Peru, the Institute for Liberty and Democracy, and
NGO headed by Hernando de Soto, was responsible for the basic reform 17 that
evolved into the World Bank-funded urban project.

5.3 Focus on Sustainability

When designing land administration interventions it is imperative to ensure the
system is sustainable. Sustainability has at least four dimensions; first it must be
technically sustainable, an issue that is particularly important in Africa as noted by
Atwood (1990:666). Second it must be financially sustainable. Based on experience,
systems that cannot fund their activities are at risk of future funding cuts and/or
donor fatigue. 18 Third it must be sustainable from a community perspective and it
must gain and maintain public confidence. Both separate and integrated to these

Page 81
dimensions is capacity building. Capacity building it is discussed as a fourth
dimension although it is considered an integral theme of all activities for a
sustainable land administration system, not as an add-on (Enemark and Williamson
2004).
5.3.1 Technical Sustainability
'The adjudication, sophisticated recording systems, precise boundary delineation,
and the mapping requirements of land registration or titling are quite costly in the use
of legal, technical, and managerial skills. These skills tend to be needed in a number
of other high priority areas in many African countries' (Atwood 1990:666).
Technical Tools. Technology is a useful tool in improving land administration
systems but there are many situations where technology was pushed on the basis of
capability rather than need, and this has put projects at risk. One example is
proposals in the mid 1980s to digitise and integrate digital topographic data for the
whole country in a GIS being established to computerise leases in Papua New
Guinea. This is despite the fact that the PNG government had great difficulty in
maintaining records for the leases themselves which only covered the 3 percent of
the country that had been alienated from customary tenure. Another example is
proposals in the mid-1990s to establish a 1 millimetre accurate cadastral GIS over
the whole of Peru. This is despite the fact that the network of public registries was
full of registered documents setting out legal rights over often very poorly described
parcels of land and the primary geodetic network in the country would have trouble
supporting a 1 metre GIS of the whole country. There are also many examples of
technology gathering dust because the agency lacks the budget for materials and
maintenance.
Technology has many applications in strengthening land administration. These
applications include: the digitisation of alphanumeric data, data validation and
verification, and the generation of cross-indices; the capture of spatial data and the
generation of mapping; the linkage of alphanumeric and spatial data and the building
of spatial data infrastructures; the computerisation of valuation and tax rolls and the
development of computer-assisted mass-appraisal techniques. It is not possible to
cover all these topics in this paper. Suffice to say information and communication
technology decisions require significant attention, but should be seen as a means to
an end and not an end in itself. In the developing world, the computerization of land
records is often seen as a strategy in its own right that can make a quantum
improvement, independent of process re-engineering or more fundamentally a shift
in focus from processes to service delivery. Two recent examples of projects with a
prime focus on computerization that largely failed to deliver are the Land Office
Computerization Project in Indonesia and the Land Titling Computerization Project in
the Philippines.
Therefore, where a long term vision can be developed it is recommended this be
aligned to an ICT strategy as a more efficient and effective way of doing business
(Todorvoski 2006). Todorvoski (2006) suggests that “as soon as Cadastral and Land
Registration organizations recognize ICT as a discipline properly aligned with their
businesses, they improve their business, business performance, quality of output
and all this with return of investments in ICT”. This ICT/business strategy for
cadastral and land registration recording would greatly support the expansion of geo-
ICT based services of a land administration system particularly in area of land
markets and valuation. However conceptualizing is often easier than operationalizing

Page 82
these strategies, particularly where capacity and resources are low and institutional
arrangements are weak.
The capture and maintenance of spatial data is a major, high-cost component of
most projects to strengthen land administration systems in developing countries. The
following discussion focuses on this important aspect of technology.
Cadastral Concept. Efficient systems to officially record rights in land comprise two
basic sets of information:
• registers comprised largely of textual or alphanumeric data that record rights
in land; and
• maps or a spatial framework that define the boundaries and extent of land
parcels over which these rights apply.
These two basic sets of information constitute the concept of the cadastre, which is
illustrated in Figure 12. Under the cadastral concept there is a close, explicit linkage
between the textual and spatial data. With this link in place, various search/access
mechanisms can be developed to search information on rights in land. These
searches can be from keys in the alphanumeric data or from queries in the spatial
framework and reports can be produced in either or both domains. The spatial
framework can also be a useful tool in validating the textual data, identifying, for
example, parcels where numerical data is not available. An essential prerequisite for
an efficient cadastral system is therefore ensuring that the two datasets are
maintained and up-to-date. No set of rights should exist without a spatial parcel to
assign them to, and all spatial parcels should be linked to a set of rights. This is a
simple concept, but can be very difficult to implement in practice. In many countries
there is a weak or non-existent spatial framework and this is a major cause of
uncertainty in rights in land.

Figure 12 Cadastral Concept (from Williamson, 2002)

Page 83
It is important to consider the social context of land boundaries in assessing the
technical requirements for surveying and mapping. Where there is a simple,
community-accepted system of defining parcel boundaries or where there is a low
social cost in getting agreement on boundaries there is reduced justification for
accurate but costly surveys and comprehensive mapping systems. This is the
situation in Thailand where the prime emphasis in re-establishing boundaries is
agreement by the parties rather than re-instatement from information recorded in the
land records. Most surveys in Thailand are undertaken to lower accuracy, but lower
cost, graphical standards. In other countries, such as Tunisia, there is a higher social
cost in reaching agreement on boundaries. When agreement is reached on
boundaries in Tunisia, accurate and costly surveys are undertaken and the
coordinates determined from these surveys are used to re-instate boundaries. 19 In
England a general boundary system operates with strong community acceptance.
The general boundaries are charted on large-scale topographic maps produced by a
national authority. Registry maps and file plans are produced from these maps. Land
owners have the option of requesting accurate surveys to fix their boundaries, but
few such requests are made.
The cadastral map record is a prime layer in supporting the development of national
Spatial Data Infrastructure (Ting and Williamson 2000). In many countries cadastral
maps compiled to graphical standards that support the index aspect discussed
above provide the foundation for SDI. Many users in these countries express a need
for higher accuracy. These users include utility authorities that want to chart their
assets on the cadastral spatial framework and typical express the need for ‘spade-
width’ accuracy, something that approaches survey-accuracy in the cadastral
framework. Few if any developed countries have been able to implement such a
system, even with significant recent improvements in technology and a range of
innovative approaches to phase the introduction of improved accuracy.
There are two broad aspects to the spatial framework that might support a land
registration system. The first is a topological or indexing aspect that supports a range
of applications, including:
• the identification of land parcels recorded in the register, including support for
the sub-division or consolidation of land parcels;
• identification of parties with an interest in a particular land parcel for a range
of purposes including the identification of adjoining owners for service of
notice;
• the validation and verification of registered land, including the identification of
duplicate or missing records and the identification of possible problems with
overlapping parcels; and
• a spatial framework for data queries and access to the data in the register.
The second is a metric or calculation aspect that supports a second set of
applications, including:
• the accurate re-instatement of parcel boundaries;
• strong evidence to support the resolution of disputes over boundaries;
• the calculation of accurate parcel areas, offsets, etc; and

Page 84
 • the accurate determination of updated parcel dimensions where land parcels
are sub-divided or consolidated.
Many systems restrict the spatial framework to the first aspect. This is the case in
England. In other countries there are accurate individual survey plans that record the
information that supports the second aspect, and this information is used to compile
a series of cadastral index maps that support the topography and indexing of the first
aspect. There is a significant increase in the cost of implementing and maintaining a
system that calculates parcel boundaries. This is the situation in Australia and
Thailand. In other counties, the registry maps precisely define parcel boundaries and
go some way to addressing the second aspect (although most still record more
accurate survey information for at least some properties on the register). This is the
situation in much of continental Europe.
Costing Technology. Cost is an important consideration in looking at the
technology options. In reviewing international experience in strengthening land
administration systems, Dale and McLaughlin (1999:46) provide the following
indicative breakdown in costs where technical options can comprise a large
percentage:
• institutional strengthening: 10-15 per cent;
• mapping: 20-5 per cent;
• adjudication and surveying: 30-50 per cent; and
• registration: 20-5 per cent.
The data from the case studies provides some information on the cost of various
technology options. Table 17 sets out the unit cost breakdown for systematic
registration in the countries studied. Overall the unit costs range from about $10 to
$55 per parcel, although there are some inconsistencies. 20
Table 17 Breakdown of Systematic Registration Costs from Case Studies (US$/parcel). 21
Armenia Kyrgyzstan Moldova Indonesia Thailand El Salvador Perú Perú
(urban) (rural)
Pre-Field 4.89
1 Geodetic Network - - 5.66 - 0.39
2 Cartography 0.20 - 7.08 7.05 0.24 11.26
3 Compilation of existing records 0.02 0.03 1.53 1.30
4 Publicity Campaign 0.02 0.31 0.55 1.94 0.42
5 Acquisition of Government equipment 0.68 0.91 - 1.50
Field 19.32
6 Collection of claimant information 1.00 0.30 3.77 0.23 3.62
7 Boundary investigation, survey, marking 4.57 2.09 7.64 9.67 1.61 10.50
8 Conflict Mediation - - - 0.06 0.08
Post-Field
9 Quality control 0.12 0.14 0.94 0.05 10.00
10 Legal validation 1.00 0.15 0.56
11 Public display of field results 0.02 - 0.02
12 Conflict Resolution - -
13 Prepare land record 1.00 0.04 2.92 2.89 1.40
14 Prepare cadastral maps/plans 0.82 0.04 1.98 1.44 2.37 1.68
15 Cadastral/Registry database design 0.50 1.06 3.77
16 Data entry 0.10 0.03 0.19
17 Register property rights in registry 0.05 0.14 7.55 5.44
18 Issuance of titles to beneficiaries - 0.01 0.94 1.95
19 Administration/management 3.25 5.30 1.89 3.89 7.27 9.28
20 Total per parcel cost 13.35 10.55 46.41 16.30 24.21 29.74 12.68 55.69
21 Amount paid by beneficiaries - - - - 2.55 - - -
Total Cost 13.35 10.55 46.41 16.30 21.66 29.74 12.68 55.69

Page 85
Pre-field costs – mainly the cost of geodetic control and base mapping – can be a
significant cost as indicated in the cases of Moldova, Thailand, El Salvador and the
rural project in Peru. The unit cost for pre-field activity in Thailand, mainly geodetic
control, aerial photography and photo-mapping is relatively small due to the large
number of titles projected in the third phase of the project (over 4.77 million titles). In
the earlier phases of the project, where the titling output was smaller, the unit cost of
pre-field activity was higher ($9.73 in phase II with an output of 2.1 million titles and
$14.86 in phase I with an output of 1.6 million titles). Where a project involves
significant expenditure on geodetic control and mapping there is the risk that unit
costs will blow-out significantly if the planned number of titles is not produced. This
happened with the Northeast Region Land Tenure Improvement Project in Brazil,
which incurred significant expenditure on mapping yet, due to institutional and policy
difficulties, was unable to issue the number of titles planned. This project was
cancelled.
The unit cost in the field of boundary identification and surveying was a significant
cost element in most projects (Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, El Salvador and the
rural project in Peru). In Armenia significant cost saving for the survey activity were
realised by contracting the activity to the private sector. Many countries seek to
improve land administration by large-scale re-survey activity. Dale and McLaughlin
(1999:53) quote the example of Poland where after the move from socialism in the
early 1990s various interests pushed for a re-survey of cadastral boundaries to new
standards of accuracy using new technology. This effort was costed at US$1 billion
and did not proceed. This approach is also evident in various states in India. In 2004
it was noted that the Survey and Settlement Department in Karnataka was pushing
for a full re-survey of the state using new technology, even though the legal basis of
the new surveys was unclear and despite the fact that several pilot projects had
failed to develop efficient, cost-effective methodology. This effort was conservatively
costed at US$200 million (Land Equity International 2004:18) and did not proceed.
Appropriate Technology. No project in the developing world has been able to
implement and sustain high-accuracy surveys over extensive areas of their
jurisdiction. Those countries that have been successful in registering significant
numbers of titles have tended to concentrate on relatively simple, low cost survey
methods and produced graphical standard cadastral index maps. This was the
approach in the urban project in Peru. In Thailand most land parcels were surveyed
graphically as square offsets off break-down control traverses or photo-identified on
rectified aerial photographs. A significant number of titles in Thailand were also
produced by the office conversion of certificates of utilisation that were adjudicated in
a major program starting in the mid-1970s. The low-technology/low-cost approach in
Thailand is reflected in the breakdown of cost components for the systematic
registration activity for phase I and II in Thailand (see Figure 13). Over 70 percent of
the field costs that resulted in registered titles were spent on staff allowances and
incidentals. A further 23 percent was spent on temporary staff salaries. Only 7
percent was spent on materials, equipment and furniture.

Page 86
Figure 13 Thailand Land Titling Project Ground Survey/Conversion Cost Components
(Phase I and II - Burns 1995).

<7% < 1%

23%

70%

Temporary staff Allowances, incidentals

Materials, equipment, furniture Utilities
Expenses (phase I only)

There are trade-offs in the various technical options available for cadastral
surveying. Figure 14 maps four key technical options against the criteria of accuracy,
simplicity, cost, efficiency, utility and flexibility. The two map options (ortho-photos
and maps) provide a base for cadastral maps. Cadastral maps can be produced
from field survey diagrams by connecting to control points. It is more difficult to use
sketch maps to produce cadastral maps. Sketch maps are very simple and have low
cost and are therefore used as the spatial reference in many developing countries.
These maps however suffer from low accuracy and limited use beyond their
immediate application.
Figure 14 Options for Cadastral Surveying (based on Dale and McLaughlin 1988:110).

OPTIONS

Sketch Ortho Map from Field

map photo photo survey
diagram

CRITERIA
Accuracy L H H H

Simplicity H L L L

Cost L H H H

Efficiency H L L L

Utility L H M–L L

Flexibility H M L L

Page 87
An important factor in deciding on appropriate survey technology is the relationship
between equipment cost and positional accuracy. Figure 15 illustrates the relations
in 1999 (from Dale and McLaughlin 1999:55). With improvements in technology, the
relationship is changing. For example, it is now possible to consider 1 metre
positional accuracy with equipment costing about $1,000. Developments with other
mapping technology, such as high-resolution satellite imaging systems and digital
procession work-stations, increase the range of technical options.

Figure 15 Equipment Cost/Accuracy Matrix (from Dale and McLaughlin 1999:55).

10
Accuracy (m)

1.0

0.01

0.001

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000

Equipment Cost US$

Cost / Benefits. There is limited information available on the cost/benefits of various

technical options in a developing country. Alemu (2006) has recently published an
investigation of 8 technical options for one rural village of 154 land parcels covering
120 hectares about 35 kilometres outside Addis Ababa in Ethiopia. The technical
options tested were:
• the use of hand-held GPS equipment to coordinate corner marks to define the
parcel location and area;
• the traditional rope survey technique used at local government (Woreda) level
in Ethiopia to measure parcel areas for registration;
• a combination of the traditional rope technique to determine parcel areas and
hand-held GPS units to measure parcel centroids);
• a tape-and-compass technique to produce sketch maps and determine parcel
areas;
• a combination of tape-and-compass surveys to determine parcel areas and
hand-held GPS to map parcel centroids and corners;
• surveys with electronic total stations to measure parcels corners and
determine parcel areas; and
• ortho-projected IKONAS high-resolution satellite imagery to photo-identify
parcel corners and determine parcel areas.
A key constraint of the study was that the surveys were to be undertaken by staff at
the local government (Woreda) level who have limited training in surveying. The
economic life of the various items of equipment was estimated and the depreciated

Page 88
daily cost of the equipment was included in the cost analysis of the study, as was
estimates for the salary costs of staff and other direct costs of the various methods.
The results of the study are summarized in Table 18 and Table 19.

Table 18 Summary of Cost and Time Estimates in Ethiopia (from Alemu 2006).
Methodology Cost (US$) Survey time/speed
(hours:minutes)
/parcel /ha /parcel /ha
Hand-held GPS 4.98 9.27 00:19 00:34
Rope only 0.81 1.50 00:15 00:28
Rope and hand-held GPS 0.97 1.81 00:17 00:30
Tape and Compass 18.18 33.66 01:34 02:53
Tape and Compass and hand-held GPS 18.29 33.80 01:36 03:00
Total Stations 7.27 13.54 00:23 00:44
IKONAS satellite imagery 14.23 26.52 00:17 00:31

The use of hand-held GPS equipment is relatively cheap and quick, however
significant capacity building was required for this equipment to be used by Woreda
staff. The use of tape and compass was the most expensive option, due to increased
time in undertaking the surveys. The use of total stations was moderately expensive,
largely due to the cost of equipment, and required significant capacity building. The
use of high-resolution satellite imagery was very expensive, largely due to the cost of
the ortho-projected imagery (equivalent to $12.11/parcel). If the imagery cost could
be offset against other users then this had a significant impact on the cost of this
option. The traditional rope survey method is clearly cheaper and requires no
capacity building. This process however will not result in any cadastral maps and will
provide limited information to settle any future disputes over boundaries.

Table 19 Summary of Performance Assessment in Ethiopia (from Alemu 2006).

Methodology Cost Speed Appropriate- Flexibility
ness
Hand-held GPS L F Massive CB Very flex.
Rope only L F No CB Very flex.
Rope and hand-held GPS L F Massive CB Very flex.
Tape and Compass H S Mod CB Very flex.
Tape and Compass and hand-held GPS H S Massive CB Very flex.
Total Stations M M Massive CB Inflexible
IKONAS satellite imagery H F Massive CB Mod. Flex.
Key: L = low; H=high; M, Mod.=moderate; F=fast; S=slow; CB = capacity building

Decisions on technology made in land titling can have a major impact on the
successful integration of the records into the land administration system and its long-
term sustainability. Other factors in the overall success of projects have been the
review of existing manual procedures such as simplifying a dealings form, or the
streamlining of administrative procedures. Experience also shows that investment in
technology will also require significant effort in training and may require support for
the education sector (Toulmin et al. 2005). The following factors should be
addressed:
• the agency concerned has the ability to fund on-going materials and
maintenance of the technology and/or can fund outsourcing to the private
sector;

Page 89
 • there are adequate resources in the public and private sectors to supply the
engineers and technicians necessary to support the technology or there is a
viable funded plan to ensure that resources are available;
• the agency can recruit and keep the necessary staff to use the technology, or
alternative strategies are in place such as outsourcing work to the private
sector; and there is a backup strategy if the technology fails.
In summary, the following factors should be considered in selecting a cadastral
survey approach:
• the social context and legal framework for defining parcel boundaries;
• whether boundaries are fixed, which tends to favour ground survey, or
general, which tends to favour mapping from aerial or satellite imagery;
• the land titling strategy, with mapping tending to be more cost-effective with
mass, systematic land titling and ground survey tending to be more cost-
effective with sporadic, or geographically dispersed activity;
• the land use and land cover. Aerial photography can be very useful in some
types of terrain such as paddy fields and agricultural pastures but less
suitable in other types of terrain such as some plantations, forests and
mountainous country;
• the availability of technology;
• the ability of the government and/or users to fund the initial purchase and on-
going operational cost of using the technology; and
• the human capacity in the country to support the initial use and continued
operations of the technology.
5.3.2 Financial Sustainability
‘While the initial creation or re-engineering of land administration systems may
require subsidies, there is in many jurisdictions increasing pressure to fund some or
most of the ongoing operations through services sold to the public. This is the case
in both developed and developing jurisdictions.’ (Dale and McLaughlin 1999:140)
As demonstrated in the quantitative tables in Appendix 4, Table 38 and Table 39), a
land administration system can generate significantly more revenue for government
than the costs required to fund the various land sector agencies, but not in all
countries. In much of Africa governments are reliant on donor support for the
ongoing operation of land administration. Several countries have undertaken studies
of the financial sustainability of their land administration systems (for example, the
Philippines and Peru) and these studies typically involve an investigation of a
number of factors, including:
• appropriate fee and tax structures, 22 including the balance of transaction-
based and annual fees and taxes.
• the effectiveness of collecting fees and taxes;
• fiscal policy concerning the raising of revenue at the various levels of
government;

Page 90
 • alternatives for land administration service delivery and the costing of these
alternatives, looking at options such as decentralisation which facilitates
access and participation, but increases costs; and
• budgetary support for land administration at the various levels of government
and the availability of funds from government and donors to support the initial
development of the land administration system.
In reviewing the financial sustainability of a land administration system not all
services in a system may be sustainable and there will usually be geographic
variation in the ratio of revenue to expenditure. It has been suggested there is
usually a cross subsidisation from the urban sector, where property is usually higher
in value and there is more market activity, to the rural sector. However it is very hard
to get figures to substantiate this. Table 20 attempts to set out the situation in
Thailand, noting the impossibility of getting a definitive breakdown of the total urban
figures. 23 Based on these figures the ‘return on investment’ in Thailand for the
expenditure allocated for maintaining land offices in urban areas is at least twice that
of the return in rural areas.
Table 20 Land Office Revenue/Allocated Budget in Thailand (year ending 30/09/01). 24
‘Urban’ ‘Rural’ Total
Revenue (US$m) 219.404 130.280 349.684
Allocated Budget (US$m) 16.358 21.377 37.735
Ratio revenue/expenditure 13.4 6.1 9.3

When comparing revenues from land administration in the developing world (Table
38 and Table 39) with those in some of the developed world (Table 40) one notes
that some developing countries have collected significantly higher revenue from land
administration than the cost of supplying the service (Karnataka and Thailand). The
trend in the developed countries is to break-even or aim for cost recovery, as
proposed by Statement 6 of Cadastre 2014 (Kauffman and Steudler 1998). This
largely reflects the greater revenue raising options and effectiveness of tax collection
in developed countries and the general policy in the developed world of setting fees
for service to recover costs. As the private sector gains importance, the inflexibility of
the public sector requires better strategies for cooperating and integrating services
and functions. Creating a business environment within public sector operations
would aim to improve efficiency through better planning, management and
operational standardisation.
5.3.3 Participatory Sustainability
‘[a]ll the photographs and computer inventories in the world cannot tell anyone what
local rules enforce rights or what networks of relationships sustain them.’ (de Soto
2000:202).
Participatory sustainability is a two fold process requiring initial awareness education
and a subsequent shift in attitudes towards a culture of formal registration.
Systematic registration programs will generate an initial register of rights in land but
unless the system captures the subsequent dealings in these rights the register
quickly becomes out-of-date and takes on the characteristics of the Domesday
Book 25 – little more than an historical record or census.

Page 91
Initially it necessary to ensure the personal benefits for participation in the formal
system outweigh costs. The benefits have been studied showing that in addition to
improved tenure security, direct and indirect benefits of titling to the title holder
appear in areas of property value (Jimenez 1984, Alston et al. 1996, and Landjouw
and Levy, 2002); agricultural investment (Besley 1995, Jacoby et al. 2002, Brasselle
et al 2002, and Do and Lyer 2002); household investment (Galiani, 2005); labour
supply (Field 2003); access to credit (Place and Migot-Adholla 1996, Carter and
Olinto 2002, Field and Torero 2003), and education opportunities (Field 2003,
Galiani 2005). Feder’s (1988) benefit-to-cost studies in Thailand revealed that
providing secure ownership for agricultural land produced an extremely high social
rate of return under the assumption of risk aversion. Recent Argentinean and
Peruvian studies continue to strengthen initial predictions of the benefits (Galiani
2005). It was revealed investments in housing improvements, longer working hours
outside the house because it was not necessary to spend the time seeing off
intruders, resulted in children less likely to be put to work (Field 2003). Benefits in
this titling scenario did not directly translate in greater access to credit for poor title
holders against non-title holders (Field and Torero 2006). Evaluating project success
according to social benefit indicators can be subjective, and this produces varied
results between urban and rural settlement scenarios across different regions.
The privileges of title are not without their costs. After initial title adjudication, which
is often heavily subsidised under large scale titling projects, subsequent registration
typically incurs fees. Registration can also provide the basic information for improved
land tax rolls. Registering changes to the title guarantees tenure security and
ensures subsequent market activities remain within the formal market and thereby
protecting the value of the title. Experience shows that transaction costs exceeding 5
percent deter people from registering property transactions or providing under-
declared property values (Burns, 2006). Maharashtra and Karnataka experienced
greater than 20 percent increases in participation of registration after reducing
transaction costs to 5 percent and 8 percent respectively (World Bank et al 2006a).
This equated to a total revenue increase from stamp duty and fees of greater that 20
percent compared with previous years (LEI, 2004).
There is a range of reasons why people may not be inclined to register subsequent
dealings, including:
• perception of high fees and charges;
• conviction that informal rights are secure. For example, there is no need to
register an inheritance, or there are competing customary or informal systems
for enforcing rights;
• difficulty in gaining access to the register;
• perception of complex rules and procedures; and
• lack of awareness of laws, rules and procedures.
There are a number of strategies that can be and were developed to address these
reasons, including:
• a review of fees and charges;
• reduced fees for registration of inheritance;
• decentralisation of registers or registration lodgement points;

Page 92
 • the simplification of laws, rules and procedures both in the register itself and
simplifying prerequisites for registration; and
• public awareness campaigns.
Public and institutional awareness campaigns should be aimed at educating potential
title holders and key institutional agencies, such as the financing sector. Public
support and understanding is essential during initial title adjudication and
registration. To be successful and sustainable a land administration system also
needs to foster a ‘registration culture’ – a culture where registration is undertaken as
a matter of course, something that we take for granted in the developed world.
Education must involve information about benefits and obligations for registering
subsequent title transactions and title alterations and the risks associated with
unregistered interests.
This is often a real challenge in some projects as the public perception of titling is
that it is the basis for taxation and there is often mistrust of land sector agencies. A
major benefit of a strengthened land administration is increased security in tenure.
As de Soto (2000) points out, there is a real cost in informality and the challenge is to
communicate the benefits of registration, and at the same time develop and
implement efficient, streamlined procedures at a cost acceptable to users. This may
sound difficult, but it can be achieved. Experience in Peru showed that different
methods of communication and interaction with the formalised population were
required as it requires a changing of attitudes and practices related to property
registration (World Bank 2006) and not just information dissemination.
5.3.4 Capacity Building for Sustainability
‘There is no point in introducing a system of title registration, for example, where the
capacity continuously to update the registers does not exist.’ (Feder and Noronha
1987:164)
Capacity building within the government sector is critical to sustainability as often
land administration projects are designed where major resource and capacity voids
exist. Capacity building can be directed at societal, organisational and individual
levels (Enemark and Williamson 2004). Capacity building at the societal levels was
dealt with in the initial sections of this report that looked at issues and principles of
policy and legal frameworks, tenure and administration systems.
Capacity building at the organisational level looks more closely at enabling good
governance, institutional strengthening, consideration of spatial data infrastructure
principles, and development of a professional body (Enemark and Williamson 2004).
Sustainability of these elements typically requires a strong mandate, commitment
and good management from the lead agency. Organisational level efforts will
generally return better results where transparent and reciprocal relationships exist
between the concerned agencies. Deficiencies in areas such as customer relations
and surveying were identified early during the Lao Land Titling Project design. As a
result formal links were developed with the Lao Women’s Union and National
Geographic Departments respectively, to meet demands and provide ongoing
services within the project (Virachit and Lunnay 2005). Forging development
partners for networking and implementation contributes significantly to organisational
level capacity building yet this should not be confined to the government sector. The
strengths of involving the private sector need to also be realised and supported by
similar capacity building programs. The political and bureaucratic environment will

Page 93
largely affect capacity building at these two higher levels, whereas individual level
capacity building can be more directly applied as discussed at length below.
Enemark and Williamson (2004) use three indicators to assess capacity building at
the individual level: professional and technical competence; capacity needs; and
educational resources. Strengthening capacity to record, maintain and deliver land
administration services requires short term training approaches for introducing new
systems and technology, as well as longer term education opportunities to ensure
there is a stream of skilled personnel to maintain the system. Short term training
courses that directly apply new skills or theories in the work place are a rapid
response to capacity building. This should be followed up with refresher training or
training reviews to ensure the new skills or theories learnt are being applied in the
workplace correctly and have improved processes or performance. This is
particularly relevant where new technology is introduced, such as GPS or Total
Stations, as most users may not have strong computer skills or a survey background
to troubleshoot problems.
Projects often commence with a small group of dedicated people. This was the case
in Lao PDR which commenced with pilot projects in 1995 through the central level
government department with 11 staff, of which 3 were technically trained (Virachit
and Lunnay 2006). Ten years later 9 provincial land offices and one central office
have been established and operate land adjudication, survey and registration
services with over 600 staff. Thailand, while building from a higher base, needed
comprehensive training and education programs to support the introduction of
modern technology. A considerable success factor for both projects that maintains a
strong impetus on human resource development and training was to establish
divisions within the government department responsible for the management and
monitoring of training programs. Amhara National Regional State in Ethiopia in a
smaller scale rural land administration project with few experienced staff took a low-
cost approach to establishing initial tenure security measures. The project invested
much energy in training regional and district officers in a strong participatory process
with locals using lost-cost survey technology and a paper based registration system.
Over a 3 year period the project was able to train 1000 staff and register 2.4 million
certificates, while recognising the need for upgrading the system for follow-up
activities (Backstrom 2006).
Who benefits from the training is important. While managerial training is very
important, capacity building opportunities should not only be received by higher
ranked officials, up-skilling and information dissemination has to get to operational
staff. This may be cost-effectively implemented by providing effective training of
trainer (TOT) courses. TOT courses double as leadership and managerial training,
while subsequently providing cost-effective training to lower level staff or those in
remotely located offices. Having staff trained as TOT is also useful where re-training
or refresher training is needed, as is typically the case on long-term, mass programs
of systematic registration.
Long term and large financial commitments to establishing education institutions for
land administration, cadastral surveying and computer training is encouraged by
donors as it shows the government’s commitment to developing a sustainable
industry base. In Lao, a lack of national expertise to support the development of the
project’s key initiatives was a serious concern hence an In-Country Course in
Surveying and Land Administration was developed through the existing Polytechnic

Page 94
School. This high diploma course provides an internationally recognised professional
qualification and meets national needs for a skilled workforce to operate a modern
land registration system. Institutional education is more than just training, it develops
the ability of personnel to identify problems relating to the provision of land services,
to analyse these problems and to formulate solutions (Lunnay 2006). During such a
course it is important that there is sufficient time to provide personnel with an
understanding of the social and economic objectives and an overview of the
processes necessary to achieve the project objectives. The need for education
opportunities for sustainable capacity building in the area of land administration and
surveying is receiving more attention internationally. Institutions are expanding
existing programs and courses, and establishing schools, to respond to the demand
for formal land administration education. The recent agreement to establish the
School for Land Administration Studies in the Netherlands in association with the
United Nations University is one example (van der Molen 2006).
However as a consequence of capacity building at the individual level often problems
of staff retention arise. Long term educational opportunities are attractive for staff,
especially where higher educational opportunities to study abroad are offered. ILAP
had provisions for 40 overseas positions emphasising development of management
skills and the majority of staff attending specifically tailored course in land
administration for developing countries. This often leaves positions of responsibility
vacant for a significant period of time and secondly retaining returned staff in low
paid government positions can be troublesome even where contractual agreements
are made to prevent such situations. In both Thailand and Indonesia, staff trained
during major projects at national and international universities, have a bond that can
be as high as twice their education costs if they leave service early. Whilst these
bonds are a disincentive to leaving, in a booming private sector in Thailand in the
1990s many private companies paid out the bonds in order to employ trained staff. In
the long-term the leakage of trained staff to the private sector will help lift the overall
service standards of the land sector, so it is often important to make allowance for
such leakages when designing training programs for land administration projects.
Staff retention can also be problematic in governments that are unstable or regularly
change leadership positions. Other circumstances of staff retention issues occur due
to systematic land titling procedures that can involve staff spending long periods in
the field, working from temporary field offices, over many years. Attention to staff
rewards and incentives are important. In Thailand staff are assigned to the field for
periods of up to 10 months and many have been involved for more than five years.
The work is production orientated, unlike the usual land office situation, so field staff
are required to work to stricter time constraints. There is a higher level of
responsibility and risk in the work and therefore adequate reward is expected. Where
field procedures are kept simple it may be appropriate to contract local staff that
expands a core mobile field team when entering new or remote districts. The Lao
Land Titling Project has been quite successful at maintaining quality work and
expanding field teams through incentive and local hiring approaches. While Thailand
are experiencing difficulties staffing field teams as allowances have become less
attractive over time since they were originally set at twice the base salary.
From the issues and examples raised we can summarise a number strategies for
sustainable capacity building, including:

Page 95
 • Ensure a sustainable capacity building strategy is considered in all design
components, particularly where new systems and technologies are
introduced;
• Use refresher training and training reviews to assess the effectiveness and
sustainability of training and newly applied systems or technology;
• Use of Training of Trainer courses to improve leadership and develop training
base;
• Ensure institutional educational facilities are accessible, preferably in-country;
and
• Staffing strategies should be designed with reasonable incentive schemes
and with the expectation of staff leakages.

5.4 Land Tenure Policy

To this point the main emphasis of this report identified practical approaches to
improving land administration system efficiency. The final section is dedicated to
tenure policy issues that can form a critical platform for land administration systems.
Land tenure policy issues are one of the most highly debated areas of land
administration. Friction between customary and formal tenure systems are often
caused by regularisation attempted in full or in part and the resulting social costs and
benefits of either system. The following section initially deals with the common
confusion between land administration and land reform. It then digresses further into
social issues of customary tenure systems particularly focussed on African
examples, followed by options that compliment and challenge the private land title
model with alternative and interim steps of tenure security.
5.4.1 Land Administration and Land Reform
‘A land tenure system can be likened to a prism through which government policy
must pass on its way to delivering a product or service to the recipient farmer. In
traditional Latin American land-tenure systems the government policy is so refracted
that most benefits go to an elite group – the larger and more capitalised landowners.
…. Agrarian reform changes the shape of the prism so that the rays fall on a wider
group of people, including at least some of the poor’ (Thiesenhusen, 1995:12).
In the context of this paper, agrarian reform is a blanket process covering the key
issues of production relationships, socio-economic structures, the role of institutions
and vertical socio-cultural divisions. Land reform is considered an element of
agrarian reform and, in turn, land tenure (or land administration) reform is considered
to be one element of land reform.
Prosterman et al (1990:3) note that the term ‘land reform’ is often misunderstood,
that its meaning is limited to referring to the transfer of agricultural landholdings to
landless tenants hoping it will alter inequitable power structures, encourage long
term investment and increased agricultural production, and assist greater economic
growth. It is important to recognise that redistributing land assets is not complete
without supporting measures to build on land reform, so providing secure ownership
is, in itself, generally not enough to achieve the goal of increased and diversified
agricultural production (e.g. Mexico). To achieve agrarian reform it is essential that

Page 96
complementary services such as access to credit and access to inputs are offered
and a supportive marketing environment is created.
There are numerous examples of countries where agrarian reforms were carried out
on an institutional basis and failed disastrously, leaving the poor in a worse position
(e.g. Nicaragua, USSR, Africa, Peru, Mexico). Other countries have difficulties
because inadequate compensation for expropriation is a major factor of tenure
insecurities. In the majority of failed reform examples the driving force for the
planning of agrarian reforms was re-distribution of agricultural land and the
amalgamation of small plots (Dixon-Gough 1999:7). Christodoulou (1990:xv) quotes
Paul Baran who noted many dangers in agrarian reform and warned that it may
‘retard rather than advance’ the economic development of some countries.
Even where there may be benefits associated with agrarian and land reform, such
benefits may not necessarily be distributed evenly, as was the case in Peru.
Following the 1968 revolution, large scale expropriation of large enterprises such as
farms and processing plants took place, and large commercial enterprises were
turned into workers’ self-managed cooperatives. But only those people who already
had a stake in land benefited, i.e. mainly those who were permanent employees of
the large estates. Others such as seasonal labourers were not made members of the
new cooperatives. Their position markedly deteriorated as they ended up working
longer hours and for ‘considerably lower wages’. Ethnic communities such as the
Indians living in the highlands benefited least from the post-revolutionary land
reforms (Christodoulou 1990:148).
Land titling interventions are aimed at providing tenure security as a basis for
improved access to investment credit and fostering commercial land markets. The
process of adjudication which underpins a titling program is specifically and by
definition, employed to recognise an existing right to land. The process results in the
issuance and registration of a title and is generally performed in an environment
where there is minimum disputation surrounding the land parcel being adjudicated.
Land Reform on the other hand usually seeks to re-assign rights to land, a process
which has far greater potential for disputation and usually attracts a significant
degree of political attention and community sensitivity. It may be driven from the top-
down through expropriation and nationalisation of land by the state (ECA) or by
peasant mobilisation in a bottom-up approach to correct inequitable land distribution
(Latin America). In either case land reform objectives are inherently more
problematic and the track record is universally poor. For example the long running
land reform programs in Thailand and the Philippines (Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program – CARP) are yet to impact on distribution or recognition of informal
occupation by communities over many generations of forest or other protected land
areas. It was no accident that the land titling programs which address land
administration reforms in these countries were implemented at arms length from the
respective land reform programs.
Notwithstanding the undesirability of linking land reform and land administration in a
project intervention, the former clearly relies on a determination of existing formal
and informal rights to land which result from the latter. In cases where the reform
involves a restitution of rights, such as in some of the former communist countries of
ECA, the rights that previously existed need to be established. Similarly the
unrecorded rights which exist in customary form in African countries are a starting
point for land reform.

Page 97
Thus the system of land administration provides a foundation upon which successful
land reform can be built without necessarily offering a solution to the problems of
rural development in itself. For example, governments may use tools such as land
ownership ceilings to break up large holdings and distribute land to small producers
and prevent accumulation by re-aggregation of smaller holdings. These tools
obviously rely on good ownership records. In a similar way the title registry can be
used to impose and enforce restrictions on land transactions by the beneficiaries of
land reform to prevent selling and/or mortgaging their land prematurely. While the
effectiveness of land ownership ceilings, transaction restrictions and the like may be
open to debate, the tools, effective or otherwise, demonstrate the inherent links
between the system of land administration and land reform.
Finally, on the link between land administration and land reform, the 1992 Divisional
Working Paper on the World Bank’s Experience with Rural Land Titling (Wachter and
English 1992:9) made some interesting observations. In a comparison of rural titling
projects undertaken in various regions up to that time the paper concluded that only
a small handful had successfully achieved their objectives. The paper observed that
in all cases except one, the land tenure objectives were attached as an adjunct to
the primary objective of a larger multi-component project often aimed at productivity
improvement or a wider agrarian/land reform outcome. The exception was Thailand
where the titling effort itself was the primary objective of the project. Since it is almost
universally accepted that the Thai project reflects best practice in the sector this
separation provided an early lesson concerning clarity of objectives in the design and
implementation of subsequent projects. There were of course other characteristics of
success, such as political will, institutional focus and capacity, etc, however the
separation of programs remains a basic platform for successful intervention in land
administration.
5.4.2 Customary Tenure
‘'The key to understanding the apparent contradictions between what is said to be
customary and what is actually practiced under the guise of 'customary' land tenure
lies in the difference between custom as unconscious, generally understood and
accepted practice, and custom as objectified, codified and proclaimed as part of the
essential character of one body of people against others.” (Ward and Kingdon
1995:251).
There is ongoing debate in the development community about the relationship
between formal land administration systems which have traditionally focussed on the
formal recognition of individual rights in property, and informal customary systems of
land tenure. Much of this debate has centred on the situation and experience in
Africa (see Toulmin and Quan 2000a and Juul and Lund 2002a), but also involves
other regions such as Eastern Europe, Latin America and Asia (de Janvry et al
2001a). The focus of this report is land administration systems, not land policy, so it
is not proposed that a detailed review of the background, history and current status
of the policy debate be undertaken. However, it is important that an overview of the
current debate, focusing on land administration aspects and on Africa, be set out. 26
The situation in Africa is coloured by the long history of the interaction of formal
western systems and customary systems. McAuslan (2000:80) identifies five
overlapping phases in the introduction into Africa of western land law and concepts
regarding property rights: 27

Page 98
 1. Acquisition in the 19th century of territory and the allocation of individual
rights to this territory under ‘a semi-feudal process’ (page 80).
2. Destruction of the indigenous law and its partial displacement by the
received western law.
3. Reconstruction, a term used by McAuslan to describe a phase where
‘colonial authorities attempted to adapt customary law largely for their own
ends’ (page 84).
4. Substitution, dating from the mid-1950s, where policies were adopted to
rapidly move to a system of individual tenure for indigenous populations.
5. Integration, the attempt to develop a new common land law in a country
based on the disparate parts of existing law.
Post-independence initiatives to rearrange land administration matters have tended
to add complexity in the administration of land. Peters (2002:49) notes that the ‘post-
independence years of the 1960s and 1970s have been described as “the land
reform decades”, … a period when often more problems were caused than solved.’
In Ghana and Mozambique there were unsuccessful attempts to assert State
authority over land administration in place of traditional authorities. Revolutions in a
number of countries has also added complexity – Lund (2002:25) notes that in
Burkina Faso ‘the revolution meant a period where both “traditional” and “bourgeois”
institutions had to keep a low profile and “revolutionary” institutions had tremendous
discretionary powers.’
The evolution of western land administration systems and land markets is illustrated
in Figure 16. An increased focus on individual rights was suggested as necessary for
economic development. It was argued that as land scarcity increases, society will
demand greater security of tenure and as a result private property rights will
emerge. 28 Various arguments were presented to suggest that economic efficiency
requires individual rights to be recognised in a way that provides sufficient security
(Feder and Feeny 1987:136) and arguments were presented in the past that suggest
that customary tenure arrangements are a constraint to agricultural intensification in
Africa (Dorner 1972, World Bank 1974). These earlier studies provided a policy
framework for various government initiatives to introduce formal land administration
systems. Unfortunately, the introduction of formal land administration systems in
Africa has become associated with ‘mass, systematic land titling’. Criticism of the
initiatives to introduce formal land administration systems tend to focus on the words
‘systematic’ and ‘title’, rather than on process and implementation, or more
fundamentally, policy. The economic arguments for individual rights were
reassessed and it is now suggested there is little evidence that customary tenure
arrangements are a constraint on agricultural productivity (Migot-Adholla et al
1991:155). As noted by Delville (2000:118), ‘[o]nce the allocation of formal title is no
longer seen as absolutely vital to the process of agricultural intensification, the
tenure issue shifts from the economic to social arena.’ A number of studies have
highlighted the adverse social effect of programs that formally register individual
rights, including the impact on or exclusion of holders of secondary rights in land
such as migrants, pastoralists, women and young men (Hilhorst 2000, Platteau 2000
and Toulmin and Quan 2000c), increased landlessness as land markets develop, the
fact that people may be encouraged to sell their land for short-term returns, and ‘land

Page 99
grabbing’ by the social elite or those with privileged access to information and formal
institutions (Peters 2002:57).

Figure 16 Evolution of Western Land Administration Systems (from Ting and Williamson
1999:2).

Much of the current debate therefore focuses on the integration of informal and
formal land administration systems rather than replacing the former with the later.
When comparing customary tenure systems with modern land administration
systems, it was noted that there is not a dichotomy of rigid, ancient customary
systems and modern, adaptable formal systems. Peters (2002:51) notes that ‘..the
actual patterns of landholding in Africa have not been static or rigid but have been
dynamically transformed over time by rural people through hard work and social
creativity’. The informal systems have evolved to support land markets (Feder and
Noronha 1987:163, Platteau 2000:64). However, there have also been examples
where customary systems have failed to provide adequate protection. Toulmin
(2000:236) cites examples where customary chiefs in Cameroon have sold land held
in trust for the larger clan to outsiders, and cases in peri-urban areas in Ghana
where customary chiefs have colluded with developers to take land for commercial
purposes with little or no compensation. The deficiencies of formal land
administration systems are noted by many (Delville 2000:97, Cousins 2000:170).
Cousins (2000:170) notes that ‘[l]and administration structures in Africa suffer from
the same weaknesses as other components of the state: they are often highly
centralised in structure and attempt to implement decisions in a top-down manner,
yet are ineffective in practice because of resource constraints, corruption and
“capture” by private interest groups.’ In reviewing the current policy debate, Cousins
suggests there is general agreement to the need for: (i) greater legal recognition for
rights under customary systems; (ii) strengthening of local institutions for land
administration and management; and (iii) support for institutions and procedures for
mediation, arbitration and negotiation, particularly at the local level. However, he also
notes there is no consensus on how these objectives might best be achieved.
McAuslan (2003:16) notes that the following policies are of particular importance
when addressing land issues in traditional societies:

Page 100
 • investigate and record customary rights to assist with administration;
• encourage group and cooperative rights to make clear what land is available;
• ‘graft’ on to customary law ways to make it more acceptable for one ethnic
group traditionally occupying and using land in a certain area to accept
people from other ethnic groups entering that area for the purpose of
occupying and using land; and
• that land-related policies do not operate in isolation.
Despite significant reform efforts, land administration systems in much of Africa
remain dual tenure systems characterised by ambiguity and inconsistency (Cousins
2002:68). As Shipton (2002:x) notes ‘… more often [the norms and procedures
under imported land administration systems] seem to crowd together with
[indigenous systems] to produce a wider range of options and strategies for the
wealthy or well-connected, and new vulnerabilities for others.’ Delville (2000:102)
argues that one cannot really contrast “traditional” local practices with formal
systems as ‘[s]takeholders are often opportunistic, and make use of various systems
to back up their land claims.’ It was argued that the negotiability of rules and
relationships is one of the fundamental characteristics of African societies (Juul and
Lund 2002b:5) and Lund (2002:33) details a case in Burkina Faso that supports the
statement that ‘[a]pparently fixed titles, rules, rights, and authorities are constantly
negotiated and re-interpreted.’ Others suggest that placing an emphasis on
ambiguity and negotiation downplays the role of the State and perhaps there was too
much emphasis on negotiability and ambiguity and we need look at limits on
negotiability, where claims to property “stick” (Peters 2002:47). Delville (2000:104)
notes that it is the possibility of conflicting claims, not uncertainty in customary tenure
systems that is responsible for the unpredictable nature of land disputes in Africa.
There are therefore considerable challenges in formulating policy to clarify rights in
land and in particular ‘… to move beyond the safe, reliable conclusions that
(whatever the problem) it always depends, or that every local community is unique.
Such conclusions seldom help real decision makers, be they bureaucrats,
revolutionaries, or humble farmers or herders’ (Shipton 2002:x). Nonetheless, there
is considerable interest in land matters in Africa due to a range of factors, including
mounting evidence of conflict over land, concern with increasing inequity in access to
land (Peters 2002:45), and declining agricultural productivity. 29
A critical question in the ongoing debate is the form of tenure that may best ensure
access to and achieve efficient use of land. De Janvry et al (2002b:2) suggest there
is no dominant form of tenure in terms of efficiency, and that all major options,
common property resources, usufruct licenses through community/lineage, tenancy
agreements, and ownership have relative merits under varying circumstances. Whilst
the benefits of ownership may have been overstressed it is the best option where
feasible. However, due to high cost, market failures and institutional gaps the option
of titles is unlikely to be available to most rural households. This question relates
particularly to the strategic approach in strengthening a land administration system,
through either the formal system or the customary system. The World Bank attempts
to answer the question in the World Development Report (1990a:65), where it states
'... this shift toward individual rights tends to undermine the ability of traditional
systems to ensure that all members of the extended family have access to land. This
feature of their land system has helped some countries in Africa to avoid the
extremes of poverty and landlessness that are common in much of Asia and Latin

Page 101
America: traditional systems have provided secure land tenure and encouraged
farmers to invest in their land. In such cases, encouraging individual land registration
and titling may be undesirable. Where traditional systems have failed to provide clear
land rights, land titles and registration are useful.' This advice lacks clarity and as
Quan (2000a:36) notes, two questions are critical in reforming tenure arrangements:
• under what circumstances do existing tenure arrangements fail? and
• where there is failure, what sort of intervention is appropriate?
These two questions are considered in the following paragraphs.
When have Existing Tenure Arrangements Failed? The circumstances in Africa
where existing tenure arrangements (usually a blend of formal and customary
systems) fail was discussed by a number of authors (Quan 2000a:34, Platteau
2000:51, Toulmin and Quan 2000b and Cousins 2002), and include:
• where there was a breakdown in customary tenure systems, or when
traditional lines of authority were severed and loyalties to lineage and
communal groups eroded;
• where land encroachment by outside interests is common or increasing;
• where defensive registration is needed to safeguard individual or group rights;
• in areas where there are high levels of fragmentation, disputation, and
inheritance problems;
• where there are inter- or intra-ethnic conflicts over land; and
• where there is a demand for titles, as a result of a range of reasons, including
changing social norms, the need for credit, etc.
These indicators of failure are likely to be evident in areas subject to resettlement or
colonisation or in development programs such as projects improving irrigation
infrastructure, and in areas subject to acute land pressure such as urban and peri-
urban areas. These indicators are not definitive, but provide some guidance. A
discussion on the general failure of existing systems in Greater Accra is set out in
Box 2.
Where there is Failure, what Sort of Intervention is Appropriate? A range of
strategies were identified in the literature, many of which have at some time been
implemented. Central to many proposed approaches is the focus on the community
and the devolution of responsibility for tenure administration to local levels. As Quan
(2000b:197) notes, one strategy for devolving responsibility is to establish local Land
Boards. This was tried initially with success in Malawi and Botswana and more
recently in Namibia and Uganda. Land Boards have a number of advantages. They
provide a vehicle for decentralising land policy and a means of balancing the role of
traditional chiefs without rejecting customary tenure systems. They also provide the
flexibility to devise simple methods that service both formal and customary tenure
systems, and they can facilitate a gradual means to implement a local rather than
central focus to land tenure administration. However, experience indicates a number
of weaknesses. Land Boards can be subject to bureaucratic intervention and
domination by local elites and they can be poorly equipped to resolve overlapping
claims and claims between different ethnic groups. They also can be very costly to
establish. The cost of Land Boards was a real issue in Uganda, where the cost of

Page 102
implementation of the 1998 Land Law was not properly considered as the law was
finalised. Subsequent investigations have indicated that the cost is neither viable nor
sustainable and changes in the legislation had to be developed.

Box 2. Land Administration in Greater Accra

Greater Accra, with about 10 percent of the population of Ghana, was estimated in 1990 to have produced
about 17 percent of GDP. There is considerable disputation over land in Greater Accra. About 20 percent of
Ghana has been alienated from customary tenure and most of this is in Greater Accra. However much of this
land is not being used for the purpose it was alienated by the State and in many cases compensation has not
been paid. A lot of vested land has been informally reclaimed and there is much informal settlement in Accra.
Customary authority over land in Accra is unclear – late in 2001 nine of the nineteen Stools covering Greater
Accra were unoccupied, one due to disputation for a period approaching 25 years, and many clans, families
and individuals claim rights over land independent of the Stool authority.
In 1986 the Land Title Registration Law was put in place to improve tenure security and provide certainty
about land ownership and land transactions. The existing process operated by the Land Titles Registry is a
sporadic rather than systematic process – despite the fact that the 1986 law specifically sets out the basis for
a systematic process. Some 20 districts have been declared under the 1986 law covering most of Greater
Accra, and this widespread coverage requires the survey department to cover large areas with cadastral
survey plans to meet the sporadic applications for title registration. In the past 13 years some 348 section
maps have been plotted comprising the survey and mapping of more than 400,000 parcels. The process of
land titling is also overly complex and not well understood by the various actors involved. There have been
about 45,000 applications for title since 1986, and just over 11,000 titles have been issued, all except one in
Greater Accra. In a recent survey of the land holding public two-thirds of respondents were unaware of the
Land Titling Law, 30% had land applications outstanding for more than one year, with 20% still awaiting
registration after 10 years. Dispute resolution took between 2 -10 years in most cases. Thus public
perception is that acquiring land in Ghana through formal channels is a daunting task.
Systematic land titling seems appropriate for Greater Accra:
• Customary authority has broken down;
• Although there is sound legislation, the formal system is inefficient, not understood by users and not
responsive to their requirements;
• There is demand for titles and much of the survey and mapping work has been completed to
support a systematic registration activity.

Another key strategy identified in the literature is the integration of customary and
formal land tenure systems. McAuslan (2000:94) identifies two approaches to doing
this: (i) the enactment of a unified national law, perhaps supported by strengthened
dispute resolution procedures at the local level; and (ii) leaving it to the grass-roots
and replicating the evolution of the English common law. As Delville (2000:107)
notes, there are difficulties in codifying customary law and failure to reflect the
diversity evident in customary law in the Rural Code of Niger has increased the risk
that the new law may be deemed inappropriate.
The registration of local rights is another strategy that was identified. Toulmin and
Quan (2000b:35) note here that careful consideration needs to made of the
cost/benefit case for establishing such systems in all areas and that there may be a
better case to register rights at a community level, with individual registration
reserved for areas of conflict. One means of providing legal recognition for
customary rights is to offer the option for the legal and administrative registration of
transactions (Delville 2000:115). As Delville notes, such a system would provide
great flexibility, cover a wide range of rights and could be implemented at
significantly less cost that a land title system. However, such a system raises a
number of questions, including the legal status accorded to registered rights and how
priority is assigned to rights registered at various levels of traditional authority. A

Page 103
system to register transactions is also basically a registration of deeds system which
suffers from many of the same potential difficulties; inadequate spatial reference to
the parcel covered by the registered rights set out in the deed; inconsistencies with
previous deeds; and lack of certainty in rights. These and other difficulties could be
addressed by a range of initiatives, including undertaking surveys or mapping to
provide a spatial reference for the deeds, establishing and maintaining indices, and
examining deeds against prior deeds (Dale and McLaughlin 1988:23 and discussed
below on page 105). But these initiatives will add to the overall cost of the system.
Difficulties with programs to implement mass titling through a country were noted by
several sources including Atwood (1990:668). However, such programs may be
appropriate for part of a jurisdiction, as noted above in Box 2 for the case of Greater
Accra. In addition to the indicators listed above systematic land titling should only be
considered where the costs are affordable and acceptable to beneficiaries, where
there are appropriate incentives to register subsequent dealings in rights, and where
there are appropriate institutional arrangements to register subsequent dealings in
rights. Implementing systematic titling in only part of a jurisdiction will mean there are
at least two tiers in the land administration system however this was managed in
most other jurisdictions as land administration systems have evolved.
As previously noted, the above discussion on customary tenure has focused on the
situation in Africa. Customary land tenure systems are also widespread in Latin
America and constitute an important form of community tenure (Barnes 2002:2). The
2001 census in Bolivia reveals that approximately 67 percent of the population is of
indigenous origin and indigenous tenure may be formalised as a TCO (Tierras
Comunitarias de Origen) or simply as community property titled collectively to an
indigenous group. Most of the 8 million indigenous people of Peru live in
“comunidades nativas”, many of which have been titled to indigenous groups.
Although there has been increasing recognition of indigenous people and their rights,
much more remains to be done to resolve overlaps with protected environmental
areas and encroachments by private farmers seeking land.
Customary tenure is also a feature in Asia (Brits et al 2002:2). However the land
administration system in most countries, which frequently covers only that part of the
country deemed non-forest, does not usually or explicitly recognise customary rights.
Thailand, which has a good land administration system, only covers the 37 percent
of the country deemed non-forest, even though satellite land classification shows
that Thailand only has 20-26 percent tree-canopy cover. The rights of hills-tribes are
not recognised under the Land Code. In Indonesia, the Basic Agrarian Law, although
theoretically based on the customary ‘adat’ law only covers that part of Indonesia
that is deemed non-forest, and the rights of customary groups have been eroded by
encroachment on forests, forest concessions and other programs such as
transmigration. The Philippines is one of the few countries in the region with a law
explicitly recognising customary rights, but the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA)
has not been fully implemented and many issues remain to be resolved, including
how the rights recognised under IPRA fit within the already complex and conflicting
policy, legal and institutional framework for land administration in the Philippines.
5.4.3 Alternatives to Titles
‘… there is not one dominant form of tenure. Common property resources (CPR),
access to land in usufruct via community membership and lineage, tenancy

Page 104
contracts, and ownership (private, community, corporate, or public) all have their
relative merits under particular conditions.’ (de Janvry et al, 2001a).
At least three basic types of systems to formally record rights in land exist: (i) private
conveyancing; (ii) registration of deeds; and (iii) registration of title (Dale and
McLaughlin 1999:36). Under a system of private conveyancing, deeds recording
dealings in rights in land are handled by the parties involved and witnessed by an
independent intermediary such as a public notary. In some countries the
intermediaries are restricted to geographic areas and maintain registries for these
areas; this, for example, is the case in Greece. There is limited security in such a
system and the role of the State is typically limited to registration of the
intermediaries.
Registration of Deeds is a system administered by the State under which
documents setting out dealings with respect to rights in land (‘deeds’) are officially
registered. A registration of deeds system has a number of limitations. The deed in
itself does not prove rights of ownership or possession, it is merely a record of an
isolated transaction. If properly drawn up the deed is evidence that the dealing took
place, but it does not prove that the parties to the dealing were legally entitled to
carry it out and without further investigation it does not prove that the dealing itself
was valid. Also, systems to register deeds often do not efficiently enable individuals
or the government to readily ascertain rights in land. Despite these difficulties,
efficient systems to register deeds were developed; in South Africa, for example.
There is a range of strategies for improving a registration of deeds system (based on
Dale and McLaughlin 1988:23):
• Standardised forms and procedures;
• Improved indices for deeds, possibly including the generation of a spatial
index;
• Better records management, document storage and access to records;
• Back-up of records for archival and access purposes;
• Simpler and more flexible arrangements for survey and mapping;
• Partial examination of surveys and dealings;
• Compulsory registration of dealings;
• Automation of indices and the computerisation of abstracts.
Registration of Title systems were introduced in many countries to overcome the
limitations of systems for registering deeds. The main characteristics of a registration
of title system are:
• It is based on parcels of land (i.e. the register is divided into units of property,
with a record for each individual land parcel);
• Transactions are set out in simple documents and are recorded with
reference to the land parcel; and
• Registration of transactions is essential for their validity and a transaction
becomes valid and effective by virtue of registration.
Title registration systems are generally based on comprehensive survey and map
records (often called a ‘cadastre’), which provide a spatial framework and index for

Page 105
the registration system. These systems readily enable rights in land to be
ascertained simply and with certainty. The title registration system introduced by Sir
Robert Torrens in South Australia in 1858 was a model for many such systems in
other jurisdictions and is based on three main principles (Dale and McLaughlin
1999:38):
• The ‘mirror principle’, where the register reflects accurately and completely
and beyond all argument the current facts that are relevant to the rights in a
parcel of land;
• The ‘curtain principle’, where the register is the sole source of information for
interested parties in ascertaining rights in land;
• The ‘insurance principle’, where, if through human frailty the register fails to
give an absolutely correct reflection of rights in land, anyone who suffers a
loss is entitled to an indemnity from the government.
A term that Torrens introduced with his legislation was ‘indefeasibility of title’, used to
describe the indestructibility of the title (Hepburn 1998:212). There are exceptions to
indefeasibility of title 30 but this aspect and the application of the insurance principle is
one of the major benefits for users of title registration systems. Harpum et al
(2000:278) observe that one ‘…of the attractions of registration of title is the general
principle (nowhere made explicit in the Act [the UK Real Property Act of 1925]) that
the registered proprietor has a title which is indefeasible without compensation. In
other words, there is State guarantee of title, so that the registered proprietor and
those dealing with him may rely on his title being as it appears on the register, and
will normally be able to claim compensation if it is not. But the principle as it emerges
from the Act, is a principle of partial compensation rather than indefeasibility.’
Where it is applied, the ‘insurance principle’ is usually funded by either an Assurance
Fund funded by a levy on registered dealings or is funded out of operational funds. In
New South Wales in Australia the Assurance Fund is funded by a levy of A$2 (about
US$1.20) per registration and is comfortably in surplus. 31 The Land Registry in
England and Wales maintains an Indemnity Fund of £4 million (about US$6.4 million)
which is replenished annually from fee revenue. 32 A number of lesser developed
countries have indemnity funds. The Philippines has an Indemnity Fund limited by
budget allocation but this fund has never successfully been claimed against and
therefore has limited effectiveness. Ghana has provision for an Indemnity Fund
under the 1986 title legislation but this fund has never been put into operation. A
number of other countries have looked at setting up Assurance Funds, including the
Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan, but this activity has not been implemented. 33
In the United States of America a model of title insurance evolved in the 19th century
in an environment of poorly organised State-run deeds registries at a county-level
and the rapid expansion of settlement. Private insurers entered the market offering
insurance against defective title. The private insurance industry expanded greatly
after the Second World War, largely in response to the demand for title guarantees
by institutional providers of credit and particularly by private buyers of securities in
the secondary mortgage market. The US title industry seeks global expansion. 34 In
countries with effective title registration systems, title insurance is often marketed to
lenders through existing intermediaries 35 but the insurance industry faces a number
of difficulties including potentially higher costs and the fact that title insurance will not
cure a defective title (Morgan 1999: 176-177). 36 The US title insurance companies

Page 106
have sought business in developing countries. 37 However as noted by Jaffee and
Kaganova (1996:18), in comparing the “European/Torrens” model of title registration
and the “American” model of private title insurance as options for Russia, but the
perception is that the American system is ‘fast but expensive for users.’ 38 With
increased cost a title insurance system also increases the risk of the exclusion of
disadvantaged groups. In addition to cost, a difficulty faced in many developing
countries is the difficulty in assessing risk where there is usually a very poor land
administration system within an environment of limited rule of law.
It is also worth noting that there tends to be few ‘pure’ deeds registration or title
registration systems. There are deeds registration systems that operate with very
good spatial frameworks and provide certainty in rights (South Africa, Netherlands).
The American system is a deeds system that operates well with the support of title
insurance and without a cadastre, although surveys are required in most states.
There are title systems that operate without State guarantee. In Indonesia
registration of rights is only ‘strong evidence’ of rights. The Thai system is a title
registration system that operates without a State guarantee and a dealings file is
maintained for every parcel. This information is often referenced in any court
proceedings so the system has elements of a deeds registration system. As
previously noted, it is difficult to classify the systems in ECA as either registration of
deeds or registration of title systems. Therefore, one needs to be careful in pushing
one ‘model’ against the other, albeit there is a general trend towards title registration.
The apparent emphasis on titles in many initiatives to strengthen land administration
systems has been criticised by some (Augustinus 2003a:4, Payne 2002:9, de Janvry
et al 2001a:2). Part of this criticism has resulted from experience in Africa and the
adverse social impact and lack of economic impact of mass titling in countries such
as Kenya. Others take issue with Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto, who in his
latest book (de Soto, 2000) is seen as advocating individual titles as the foundation
of capitalism (Payne 2002:10, Home and Lim 2004). Payne (2002:9) seems
particularly concerned about the impact of titling (formalisation) on the ability of the
poor to access land close to employment centres in major urban areas. 39 This is a
theme taken up by Angel (2001:2) who noted that in the last half of the twentieth
century informal settlers benefited from weak governments and legal frameworks.
Angel wonders whether the projected 2 billion increase in the urban population over
the next 30 years will ‘confront a pattern of ownership that is more rigid, more
regulated, better enforced, and hence less affordable than before?’ This point is
taken up later when the pro-poor emphasis is discussed. Payne (2002:18)
documents investigations of innovative alternatives to full titles throughout the world.
Examples, some of which are interim steps in obtaining a full title, include:
• accretion of rights in Cairo through the acquisition of documents such as
receipts for payment of property taxes;
• intermediate rights such as ‘Declaration of Possession’, ‘buying and selling
rights for future use’ and ‘communal tenancy’ in Colombia, supported by a
program to supply services based on the ability and willingness to pay for
services rather than tenure status;
• dynamic informal land delivery systems tolerated and partly controlled by the
State in Benin;
• Occupancy Permits in Burkina Faso that can be upgraded to titles;

Page 107
 • ten-year licences granted to residents of unauthorised settlements in New
Delhi;
• appropriating and building on State land in Turkey;
• the ‘anticretico’ tenure system in Bolivia, where a property owner grants the
use of a property for a fixed period in return for a sum of money refunded at
the end of the period;
• Certificates of Rights in Botswana;
• Concession of the Real Right to Use land in Brazil;
• Temporary Occupation Licences in Kenya;
• Land rental systems for low income communities occupying private land in
Bangkok.
Implementing titling approaches is considered even more difficult than institutional
design components in land administration projects as they are highly conditional to
their social and cultural context (Fukuyama 2004).
Of the options mentioned above it should be noted that it is usually more difficult to
establish and maintain a system to reveal leasehold or temporary occupancy rights.
Such a system requires that leases/licenses be re-negotiated as they expire and
typically requires on-going oversight to ensure that lease/occupancy conditions are
observed. These additional steps which are not required in a system that recognises
ownership will increase the risk of system failure. In Papua New Guinea where a
leasehold system operates in the approximate 3 percent of the country that has been
alienated from customary tenure, there are a number of significant problems
including lost and duplicate records.
A comparative study conducted by the International Food Policy Research Institute
of six African land reform processes analysed the opportunities and constraints of
rights characteristics as presented in Table 21. The paper suggests that titles offer
the most flexibility and security and it contentiously adds that “land resources
managed under customary tenure must evolve toward titling in a stepwise process,
transiting through the registration of customary rights” (Ngaido 2004). This is
contrary to the African-based land debate that request a greater focus on options for
alternative titles based on customary tenure systems. There are some who wish to
avoid any grey area in title and ask the question ‘why should legitimate people
receive rights to their land that are lesser than a full title?’
While tenure systems in developing countries attempt to create full rights for their
citizens, the private property rights movement in developed countries, typically used
as the model, is gaining momentum as people have to challenge authorities to retain
their full bundle of rights and freedom of decision making in land use (Jacobs 1998).
Private land owners of developed nations are clenching fewer rights in the bundle of
sticks since authority from federal to local levels increasingly impose regulations over
private property ownership through restrictive covenants, land use zoning and
environmental and planning regulations.

Page 108
Table 21 Land reform processes and the values and characteristics of associated land
rights.

Land reform process

Maintaining Registering Titling State Subsidized Market-
customary land rights land ownership / land based
Characteristic
rights rights redistributing ownership land
land rights access
None or
Role of the
limited Strong state intervention
state
intervention
Objective Improving bundle of land rights Reducing imbalances in landownership
Registered Registered
Customary Limited
Land Rights private Titles use rights Titles
use rights titles
rights (titles)
Tenure
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Security
Sales Limited Yes Yes Very Limited Yes Yes
Rental and
Share Yes Yes Yes Limited Yes Yes
cropping
Informal / Cooperative /
Credit Access Yes Yes Yes Yes
Parastatal parastatal
Source: Ngaido 2004

Payne (2002:17) reviews the results of two conventional approaches to increasing

security of tenure by issuing titles, including the urban project in Peru where
COFOPRI has issued over 1 million titles to informal households in the peri-urban
areas of major Peruvian cities. Payne considers the experience in Peru is not an
appropriate model for other countries as most of the titles were issued to informal
households occupying public land, despite an earlier observation that ground-
breaking studies indicated that informal settlements generally ‘consisted almost
completely of organized invasions of per-urban, often state-owned, land.’ (Payne
2002:5). Recent studies also indicate that significant informal settlement elsewhere
occurs on public land. A recent Asian Development Bank study, for example,
suggests that only about 15 percent of the informal settlement in Metro Manila is on
private land. 40 Perhaps there is some relevance in the Peruvian experience for other
countries. However, an important point made by Payne is there is a continuum of
rights ranging from illegal occupation through to full titles and many of the
innovations or alternatives listed above are entry points along the continuum to avoid
the social, economic and environmental penalties of illegality.
McAuslan (2002:36) notes that Namibia is considering legislation to provide for
‘starter’ titles and landholder titles. Starter titles are rights held in perpetuity by an
individual to a parcel within a larger block, administered by a defined community and
administered under the rules of the community, while a landholder title is more
formal, approaching the formality of a full title. In some jurisdictions there is the
possibility of issuing titles that are provisional with respect to boundaries and/or titles
provisional with respect to rights (‘provisional titles’). There are usually procedures
for provisional titles to mature into full titles, typically by subsequent survey if the
provisional nature of the title relates to boundaries or by the passage of time without

Page 109
conflicting claim if the provisional nature relates to rights. In other jurisdictions a
lesser document may be issued which may mature into a full title under specified
conditions. For example, in Thailand the district land offices, under the authority of
the district head, can issue a pre-emptive right (NS2) which is not transferable
except by inheritance and is not accepted as collateral by institutional credit
providers. NS2s are issued with very simple, local surveys. If an NS2 holder uses a
specified percentage of the parcel for a specified period of time then an application
can be made for either a certificate of utilisation (NS3/3K) or title (NS4) both of which
are fully transferable and accepted as collateral by institutional providers of credit.
Both the NS3K and NS4 parcels are mapped onto cadastral maps. There are thus
alternatives to titles within established formal systems, but ‘starter’ titles, provisional
titles and pre-emptive rights are only real options within the framework of a
functioning system that supports full titles.
Delville (2000:115), as an alternative to titling, advocates a ‘lighter approach’ where
plots are mapped and a land tenure register and system for recording dealings in
rights is created over time, particularly in areas where customary rights might exist.
Toulmin et al., (2005) also supports this view for upgrading rights of the urban poor
overtime as they become increasingly vulnerable to market forces. Delville’s system
may have merit but funding must be established for the survey and mapping activity,
which can be a major cost element in establishing any registration system. Delville
also suggests that an alternative to titling might be to grant some legal recognition to
transactions, or a registration of deeds system. This is a lower cost alternative to
titles that has some weaknesses, some of which could be addressed by having
survey/map records available.
5.4.4 Pro-Poor Emphasis and Safeguards for Vulnerable
Groups
‘Tenure also means different things to different people. For the very poor, it is
primarily a matter of being able to access any space where they can obtain a basic
livelihood, such as street trading, without fear of eviction. Location is therefore more
critical than the form of housing they occupy and long-term security of tenure may be
less important than the ability to move when livelihood changes’ (Payne 2002:300).
There is considerable discussion and debate in the development community on the
impact of initiatives to improve land administration on the poor. There are arguments
that restrictions on land rights reduce land values and therefore their asset
endowment. 41 There are arguments that reducing restrictions and securing rights
with titles will increase land values and thus restrict the ability of the poor to access
land (Payne 2002:9). However as Payne (2002:300) notes, secure tenure, while an
essential condition, is not sufficient in itself to achieve the broad policy objectives of
benefiting the poor and ensuring they have access to affordable shelter under
reasonable conditions. The following policy action is suggested by Payne to benefit
the poor:
• taxing land at market value to increase the cost of holding land for speculative
reasons;
• creating a legal framework that protects the rights of all citizens, including the
poor (including dispute resolution and improved registries);
• simplifying planning, building and other administrative regulations;

Page 110
 • mandating that utility companies supply services irrespective of tenure status;
• setting objectives to encourage social and spatial integration of urban areas;
• strengthening the capacity of public sector agencies to perform their roles.
Using tax as an instrument of land policy was raised many times but this strategy
has difficulties. It was argued that such policies had little impact where they were
introduced in countries such as the Philippines and that ‘…the time and effort
devoted to designing land taxes intended primarily to achieve non-fiscal purposes
has detracted from the more important task of implementing an effective and efficient
revenue source for local governments.’ (Bird and Slack 2002:33).
A number of countries have implemented schemes to protect informal settlers from
eviction and to provide some tenure security as is the case in the Philippines. 42
Payne (2002:18) quotes the case of Colombia in mandating that utility companies
provide services based on the ability and willingness of residents to pay for services
rather than their tenurial status. Land titling was reported as increasing the
availability of land for lease by reducing land owner concerns that the land would be
granted to tenants (Sadoulet et al, 2001:224). It is also noted that land titling can
lead to land concentration and the expropriation of common property, therefore it is
recommended that titling be undertaken systematically with broad publicity
campaigns rather than sporadically in response to individual request for title. This
runs counter to the approach advocated for Uganda that land tenure should be
systematically mapped and adjudicated with titles issued only on individual request
(Augustinus 2003c:6).
There is strong momentum to continue developing these innovative tools and
experiences through The Global Land Tools Network (GLTN) 43 recently established
by a UNHabitat, World Bank and Swedish International Development Agency
initiative. Working through 17 partner organisations with local to global research,
documentation and dissemination capacity, the GLTN focuses on pro-poor land tools
that improve the security of tenure for the poor. During the launch of the GLTN six
themes on land tool development were introduced: land rights and records; land
information/planning; land management/administration; land law and enforcement;
land tax/valuation; and cross cutting issues (GLTN 2006). Mechanisms that address
gender, eviction, conflict and Islamic specific land were raised as requiring
immediate attention in the tools typology (Fergus 2006).
Gender. Although the legal status of women was the object of considerable attention
in many studies, few deal extensively with the rights of women to land. There are
various arguments on the gender impact of land administration. Some noting the
adverse impact in Laos of issuing forms in the name of ‘head of household’ rather
than land holder (Viravong 1999:159) and others noting (in the African context) that
the ‘…registration process may also run the risk of maintaining and reinforcing the
traditional male dominated control of access to land’ (Hilhorst 2000:189). Yet others
advocate that any project should be gender neutral. Hilhorst notes that “gender
aware” land tenure policies may also mean changes in constitutional rights and
reform in family law. Women in Africa, particularly those divorced or widowed, often
suffer from limited protection and increased vulnerability because of gaps in land
ownership laws that are typically a legacy of colonial administration and inheritance
traditions under customary laws (Gopal 1999). However, legal reform is not the full
answer. In India where women’s right of inheritance were significantly strengthened

Page 111
by the Hindu Succession Act of 1956, there was limited impact on actual inheritance
practice due largely to very strong local customs (Agarwal 1994:175). Religious law
can also have a gender impact. For example, under Islamic law women are entitled
to a lesser share of an inheritance than any children of the marriage, which often
conflicts with modern civil law that is generally gender neutral. This is the case in
Indonesia. The arguments presented by Agarwal (1994:27-42) for ensuring that
women have a ‘field of their own’ are:
• a welfare argument that increasing women’s rights in land reduced a woman’s
own and her family’s risk of poverty;
• an efficiency argument, based on a range of evidence, including the
experience of micro-credit agencies that women have higher rates of loan
repayment; and
• an equality and empowerment argument.
Agarwal (1994:478-493) presents a range of strategies to address the issue of
women’s access to land, some of which such as dowry reform are specific to South
Asia, but others have broader implications, including:
• law reform – both in land and family law, supported by community awareness
campaigns;
• strengthening land claims through channels other than inheritance;
• exploring joint management and promoting infrastructural support;
• building group support among and for women.
Some progress was made in improving women’s access to and control over land
during the past twenty years. Table 22 from Deere and León (2001:185-187, 294)
summarises the main changes in favour of women’s land rights incorporated in
recent agrarian codes in Latin America. It was found that seven countries now state
that the land rights of men and women are equal. In four of these (Brazil, Bolivia,
Costa Rica and Nicaragua) land rights are considered independent of marital status,
while in Peru, Ecuador and Mexico this is only implied. The authors acknowledge
that important advances were made in achieving gender equity, and note that in six
of the countries they studied (Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Honduras, Nicaragua
and Guatemala) provision for joint allocation and titling of land to couples were
among the most important. Deere and León (2001:187) note that ‘…the joint
allocation and titling of land to couples is an advance for gender equity for it
establishes explicitly that property rights are vested in both the man and woman
forming a couple…’ and that ‘… it serves to reinforce the principle that both spouses
represent the family and may administer its property.’

Page 112
Table 22 Changes in Agrarian Codes with respect to Gender (Deere and León 2001: 186).
Country Explicit Non- Joint titling Priority to Special
Equality Sexist female Groups
language household
heads
Bolivia, 1996 Yes No No No -
Brazil, 1988 Yes No Optional No -
Chile No new code - - Land titling -
project
Colombia
1988 No No Yes Yes -
1994 Yes No Yes Yes Unprotected
women
Costa Rica, 1990 Yes No Yes No Women in
consensual
unions
Ecuador, 1994 Natural persons No PRONADER No -
project
El Salvador No new code - - - Women
combatants
Guatemala, 1999 Yes Yes Yes Women -
refugees
Honduras
1991 Yes No Yes No -
1992 Yes Yes Optional No
Mexico -
1971-92 Yes No No No
1992 Natural persons No No No
Nicaragua -
1981 Yes No No No
1993 Yes No Yes Yes
Peru, 1995 Natural persons No No No -

In Ecuador joint titling to couples was adopted in a rural development project in

twelve different zones of the country. In Chile female household heads were given
priority in the country’s titling program despite there being no legal provision for joint
titling to couples. In Honduras where land titling projects have been ongoing since
the 1980’s, a primary factor preventing women from obtaining titles was lack of
awareness of their rights due to scant publicity regarding the rights of women under
the 1992 Law for the Modernisation of Agriculture (Deere and León 2001:294).
Regarding vulnerable groups, the 1994 Colombian law gives priority to rural women
without protection because of internal political violence. Another country where
special attention was given to women within vulnerable groups is Ecuador, where
there was a strong focus on women who fought in the civil war as well as female
informal settlers in conflict areas. The land rights of women in this country were
honoured irrespective of their civil status, so individual allocations were made to men
and women who formed a couple.

Page 113
The Lao PDR studies commissioned by AusAID (among others) for the Lao Land
Titling Project focussed on the legal aspects of the names noted on the existing land
documents. It was initially established that ‘men may be over-represented and joint
titles under-represented’, but later figures suggest a move towards a ‘truer recording
of land ownership’ (Lao Land Titling Project 2002:40). There were practical problems
to recording the ownership of a jointly owned parcel of land on forms, but this was
identified and the format of the titles was reviewed. Considerable attention is also
now being given to informing women of their legal rights relating to land.
Gender equity has not been a specific objective in the agrarian legislation of
countries such as Peru. Deere and León (2001:303) contend that women who own
land are often disadvantaged in the land titling process because among other things,
they have a low level of literacy and do not possess legal documents. Also, to
participate in the land titling program in Peru one must be a registered voter and
many women are not registered.
In most Latin American countries women’s organisations have not pushed hard for
independent land rights for women in couples for three main reasons (Deere and
León 2001:226):
• structural; in view of the limited land available for distribution in most countries in
the region and in view of political constraints;
• strategic; joint titling is in principle supported by all sides because to some extent
it seems to promote family stability;
• the development level of women’s organisation in rural areas, most of which is
still fairly new.
There was considerable discussion on using the name appearing on registration
records as a safeguard for women and vulnerable groups. There is the criticism
mentioned above of the term ‘head of household’ rather than ‘land holder’ on the
land tax declaration forms in Laos. Various people have suggested that the use of
joint names is a way of protecting the rights of women and similar proposals are
advocated for land owned by customary groups. These steps are appropriate in
some jurisdictions, but other strategies were adopted elsewhere. In Kenya there is
an insistence on the agreement of family members before the title-holder sells or
mortgages land (Platteau 2000:63). This practice constrains the market and delays
land transactions and in some respects harks back to the complex nature of English
land law before the late 19th century where family members could block land
transactions (McAuslan 2000:78). 44 A simpler approach is the situation in Thailand
where, to affect registration, a married person has to produce approval by the
spouse to the land transaction regardless of whose name appears on the title. 45 This
provides some protection and does not seem to impact on a very efficient land
registration system.
Inheritance Rights of Women. Deere and León (2001:284) noted that in Peru and
Bolivia widows are in a relatively strong legal position regarding inheritance rights,
and within peasant and indigenous communities usufruct rights are governed by
traditional customs and practices enforced by the governing board of ‘comuneros’,
chosen by and consisting of a group of male household heads. When the head of a
household dies, the usufruct parcel normally reverts back to the community as a
whole and then the governing board decides whether to give the rights to the widow
or the eldest son. Although widows in the highlands of Peru have mostly been

Page 114
treated favourably there were cases where the widow’s rights had been restricted by
being given access to less land than had previously been the case, or to the poorest
land. Widows in many of the indigenous communities of Bolivia were not treated as
well, with many permanently losing their rights as the land rights reverted back to the
community.
Plaza’s 1999 study (Deere and León 2001:284) which discussed changes in
inheritance patterns over the past 30 years established that wives and partners are
increasingly designated as the main heirs after the head of the household dies. This
change was partly attributed to the increasing recognition of the role of women in
agriculture, brought on because sugar cane is increasingly being replaced with
coffee production in the Veracruz region where the study was conducted. It is argued
that ‘…in these circumstances, the titling of a parcel to a woman is not just a formal
affair but rather, gives her real prerogatives. Once a widow is in possession of the
agrarian certificate, she effectively assumes control of family production’.
Deere and León (2001:284) note the difficulty of identifying ancestral inheritance
practices in view of the many different forces of change impacting on indigenous
communities. It is also difficult to isolate the impact of ‘gender-equitable civil codes’
in fostering more equitable inheritance patterns over time. Furthermore, in Peru,
Ecuador, Bolivia, Mexico and Brazil it was found that inheritance of land becomes
more equitable as agriculture becomes less important as the main source of
household income.
Customary Tenure. In Africa there was a push for recognising and formalising
customary systems (rather than introducing new systems) in spite of the fact that the
rights associated with such systems generally favours males. Toulmin and Quan
(2000a:23) note that ‘gender issues loom large in the current policy debate, cutting
across discussion of customary and formal tenure systems, both of which have
marginalised women’s rights’. They acknowledge that women ‘tend to have
subordinate roles in relation to land in both customary and statutory systems’. In
customary systems women are normally relegated to secondary users with access
rights to land closely related to their social connection with those who hold primary
rights. Toulmin and Quan (2000a:24) however, also note that there is evidence of
changing conditions with women obtaining firmer rights under traditional systems.
Although women are generally treated more favourably under statutory law than
under customary law, there is often an implementation problem. Toulmin and Quan
note that issues such as access to services and economic opportunities (credit,
markets) are also very important, and that it may be necessary for a government to
consider affirmative action towards women to ensure they are informed about legal
changes in formal processes.
In the African context, Tinker and Summerfield (1999:17) note that during
discussions about the new constitution in South Africa there was conflict between
customary rights over women and civil rights, giving women equality with men. The
authors (1999:16) argue that many programs meant to aid women have in fact
increased the burden on them. They refer to the example of Julius Nyerere’s Ujamaa
village efforts that increased the workload of women but did not better their financial
situation as men continued to in effect control the sale of their produce. They also
note that in this example that ‘… women tried to save their access to land by
appealing to customary rights, which were considered stronger than land titles.’ Such
rights were considered ‘malleable and responsive to power’.

Page 115
In Latin America there is evidence of indigenous female leaders increasingly
challenging the structure of decision-making within traditional communities,
demanding greater input into how ‘customary’ rules are determined and defined. As
the land rights of women are closely connected to the broader struggle for
indigenous land and territory, it is perhaps understandable the demands have not yet
had much impact (Deere and León 2001:262). Recognising indigenous territories
was one of the main demands put forward by indigenous communities in Latin
America. Deere and León (2001:236) note there is a distinction between this and the
concept of land rights as a territory is associated with the right to ‘self-determination
and self-government’.
Indigenous groups in Latin America have mainly focused on obtaining recognition for
their historical land claims, collective property rights and the inalienability of
collective property, including recognition of customary law. Indigenous women in turn
focused on establishing equality between the sexes regarding adjudication and titling
of land. This was mainly by way of joint adjudication or titling to couples ‘irrespective
of their marital status’, as well as prioritising female household heads (Deere and
León 2002:53).
Deere and León (2002:53, 54, 67) argue that countries with some of the largest
indigenous populations in Latin America (Mexico, Guatemala, Peru, Bolivia and
Ecuador) have made the least progress regarding land rights of women. They also
acknowledge there is some tension between the rights of women and the rights of
indigenous communities of which the future is arguably first and foremost based on
communal access to land. ‘To question how that communal land is then going to be
distributed…is seen to be divisive and a threat to indigenous unity’ and ‘The primary
demand of indigenous women must be for the defence of the community, which they
see as being based on collective access to land. …’
In many rural areas women’s lack of legal rights to land was highlighted because
many men work elsewhere as migrant workers while the women who remain close to
the land have no access to technical assistance or credit. Indeed their insecure
position is exacerbated because seasonal male migration often turns into permanent
migration and abandoned women do not necessarily retain usufruct rights to the land
they work (Deere and León 2002: 72). Women are increasingly beginning to address
not only ‘practical’, but also ‘strategic’ gender issues within women’s organisations at
the local and/or regional level and have raised concerns about their access to land
(Deere and León 2002: 71).
Table 23 below summarises the main ‘gains and losses’ of indigenous peoples in
Latin America. Much has been achieved since the late 1980’s in recognising historic
indigenous land claims and collective property rights, with the exception of Brazil,
where, although indigenous communities have been granted collective land use
rights, their land has remained federal property.

Page 116
Table 23 Collective Land Rights in New Constitutions and Agrarian Codes (Deere and
León 2001:238).
Country Constitution Recognition of Recognition of Possibility of
Collective Customary Law Privatising
Indigenous Lands Collective Land
Bolivia 1994 Yes Yes No
Brazil 1998 No No No
Chile No No No Yes (1979)
No (1993)
Colombia 1991 Yes Yes No
Costa Rica No - - -
Ecuador 1998 Yes Yes Yes (1994)
No (1998)
El Salvador No - - -
Guatemala 1998 Yes Yes No
Honduras No Yes No No
Mexico 1992 Yes Partial Yes
Nicaragua 1987 Yes Yes No
Peru 1993 Yes Yes Yes

Page 117
Chapter 5 Endnotes

1
One of the lessons noted in the Africa regional paper.
2
From Brits et al 2002.
3
ibid
4
ibid
5
Budgeted base cost as per Staff Appraisal Report for the Thailand Land Titling Project III.
6
The first amendment to the regulation in 30 years.
7
Law on Complaints and Denunciations (No. 09/1998/QH of December 2, 1998), Government of
Vietnam.
8
Diamond (1997:276) in reviewing chiefdoms, observes that: ‘At best, they do good by providing
expensive services impossible to contract on an individual basis. At worst, they function unabashedly
as kleptocracies transferring net wealth from commoners to upper classes.’
9
In a global review of land administration systems there is always a risk in talking about ‘core land
administration functions’. In Australia valuation would also be considered a core function. In countries
in transition and other countries, land use is often a core function. In other countries, the management
of public land is a core function. In this report the two main functions – the registration of rights and
the survey and mapping of the boundaries of these rights – have been labelled as the ‘core’ land
administration functions as these functions would be included in virtually all jurisdictions.
10
DENR has a central office in Manila, 15 Regional Offices, 74 Provincial offices and 171 Community
offices, with land records nominally maintained at the community level, but with some records
maintained in the central office.
11
The Department of Lands in Thailand includes a survey, registration and valuation function. The
National Land Agency in Indonesia has a survey, registration and land use function – land valuation is
undertaken in another agency.
12
http://www.teranet.ca/
13
de Soto (1993:8) for example claims that only 25 countries have made the jump to a developed
market economy and that the countries to join these 25 ‘…will be those that spend their energies
ensuring that property rights are widespread and protected by law…’. These 25 countries all have low
perceptions of corruption.
14
Prepared by the Internet Center for Corruption Research, a joint initiative of Goettingen University
and Transparency International. http://www.gwdg.de/~uwvw/2002graph.html
15
In a report on research by academics in Chulalongkorn University of government corruption in
Thailand, corruption was found ‘… most widespread in the Customs Department, followed by the
Royal Thai Police, the Revenue Department, the Land Department, and the Bangkok Metropolitan
Administration…’, as reported in the Bangkok Post,
http://search.bangkokpost.co.th/bkkpost/1999/october1999/bp19991002/021099_news20.html
16
The sectors were Education, Health, Power, Land Administration, Taxation, Police and the
Judiciary.
17
Including the social research, pilot activity, establishing of a new registry based on the cadastre,
and the legal reform.
18
Hughes (2003) in her recent provocative analysis of aid in the Pacific states (page 12) ‘Pacific
Islanders who want to cling to communal land ownership rather than command individual property
rights have every right to make that choice. They have to accept, however, that their living standards
will not rise, and that the present levels of male underemployment, alcoholism and crime, will
increase. Young men will continue to drift in and out of urban areas, spreading HIV/AIDS. There is no
reason moreover, for Australian or other taxpayers, to underwrite such choices with aid.’ Much of this
sentiment is based on the statement that ‘Communal land ownership has held back indigenous
entrepreneurship in the Pacific as it has everywhere in the world’ (page 11) a statement that would
not be accepted in many quarters. However one of the prime aims of Hughes paper is the fact that the
‘…time for a well-informed public debate on aid to the Pacific to support policy change is long
overdue’ (page 1).
19
This is not without issue. There are inaccuracies in any measurement technique. Systems that rely
on coordinates will need to address a range of issues, including: the selection of the coordinate datum
and what happens when the national datum is changed; the impact on cadastral coordinates of re-
adjustment of the primary geodetic network and densification of the control network; the impact of

Page 118
destruction and reinstatement of cadastral control points; and the significant impact of changes in
survey and mapping technology.
20
The unit cost of $46.41 for Moldova is for the World Bank-funded component of the first Cadastre
Project. The case material only provided the cost breakdown for this component. The overall unit cost
of the titling activity in Moldova is $9.90, due in large part to the significantly lower unit costs realised
in the USAID-funded second Cadastre Project. The unit cost for the urban project of $12.68 as
documented in the Perú case study is significantly cheaper than reported in the Project Appraisal
Document for the subsequent Real Property Rights Consolidation Project (World Bank 2006). This
document reports that the unit cost of titling in Perú increased from $43.30 in 2000, to $49.80 in 2001,
to $55.40 in 2002 and to $62.00 in 2003 (World Bank 2006:78). This increase in cost is attributed to
increasing complexity in the properties being formalised.
21
This table has been prepared setting out the unit cost breakdown of systematic registration from the
case studies. Latvia and Trinidad & Tobago have been excluded as the title issuance in these
countries has been undertaken on a sporadic basis with substantial costs borne by the beneficiaries.
In the case of Latvia, the process involves restitution of property nationalised under socialism.
Information is not available from the case studies to provide a detailed breakdown for Indonesia or
Thailand. The figures for Thailand are for phase III of the project and the actual field costs of $13.45
have been inflated by $5.87 an estimate of the cost of the salaries of government officials. The figures
quoted for Moldova are for the titling activity which was funded by the World Bank as part of the First
Cadastre Project. The overall unit cost of the titling activity funded by a range of donors in Moldova is
US$9.90, substantially less than that the unit cost of the activity under the World Bank activity for
which detailed activity costing is provided in this table.
22
Bearing in mind that fees and taxes can be a major disincentive for participation in the formal land
administration system. This investigation would typically look at a range of factors.
23
The figures in the column ‘urban’ correspond to the figures for the Bangkok metropolitan area, the
Banglamoong Branch of Chonburi Province which includes Pattaya, and the Haad Yai Branch of
Songkhla Province which include Haad Yai, and the figures in the column ‘rural’ are the residual
figures. The urban figures exclude other major urban centres such as Chiang Mai and Korat and
therefore understand the true situation. Note also that the total ratio of revenue/expenditure of 9.3
overstates the actual figure as there are considerable costs not recorded in the table for head office.
The ratio of revenue to expenditure for the whole department, as recorded in the country case study
for the year ending 30 September 2001 is 5.08.
2424
Information provided by the Director of the Land Titling Project Office, converted into US$ at the
average rate for the year ending September 2001 of 44.2805 as published by the Bank of Thailand.

Revenue/Expenditure Collection in FY 2001 (Thai Baht)

Urban Rural Total
Revenue 9,715,303,065 5,768,863,163 15,484,166,228
Expenditure 724,337,606 946,593,212 1,670,930,818
Note:
1. Revenue excludes 205,822,265 baht in specific business tax, leaving total revenue of
15,689,930,493 baht.
2. From the Statistics of Revenue Collection by Planning Division, Specific Business Tax
can not be categorized into Urban and Rural Revenues.
3. Urban Revenue consists of revenues collected in Bangkok Metropolitan Area and
revenues from 75 Provincial Land Offices, together with revenues at Chonburi Provincial
Land Office – Banglamoong Branch where Pattaya Municipality’ s revenues is included
and Songkhla Provincial Land Office – Haad Yai Branch where Haad Yai Municipality’s
revenue is included. This is the best approach using the data available at Planning
Division. The revenue collection reported from Land Offices throughout the country to
Planning Division was recorded by each individual land office, but Muang District Land
Office showed no revenue because the revenue collections were made at Provincial Land
Office. The classification of land offices was based on type of land documents, Provincial
Land Office and its branches are responsible for collection of revenues from transactions
on Title Deeds whereas District Land Offices do for the other type of land documents i.e.
NS 3, NS 3K etc. except for Muang District.
4. Rural Revenue is derived from Total Revenue subtracted by Urban Revenue showed in
the above table.

Page 119
 5. The expenditure records by the Planning Division in the year ending September 30 2001
of Baht 1,670,930,818 is slightly less that the 1,762,976,100 recorded in the Thailand
country case study, using figures supplied by the Department of Lands. The figures in the
above table are based on the best information available in the Planning Division in
February 2003.
25
The Domesday Book was commissioned as a basis for raising tax revenue in December 1085 by
William the Conqueror, who had successfully invaded England in 1066.
http://www.domesdaybook.co.uk/
26
This separation between policy and land administration is not straightforward, as noted by Delville
(2000) the major issues relate to policy not to the administrative arrangements and technical
procedures required to implement policy. ‘In any event, emphasising rights (via registration) or rules is
more a matter of making political choices about systems of authority and regulatory mechanisms than
a technical issue.’
27
There is a degree of subjectiveness in the classifications used by McAuslan and some might object
to the use of the terms ‘semi-feudal’ and to the suggestion that colonial authorities acted largely for
their own ends.
28
The evolutionary theory of land rights is discussed by Platteau (2000).
29
The agricultural statistics for Africa are not strong, but the following table of food production per
capita index drawn from the African Development Indicators 2001, published by the World Bank (p
221) indicates the basis of concern.
Average annual % growth
75-84 85-89 Since ‘90
Ghana -4.0 0.9 2.9
Senegal -6.3 5.5 -1.3
Mozambique -4.1 0.3 0.8
Namibia -5.2 2.5 -3.1
South Africa -1.6 2.1 -1.4
Uganda -4.5 1.5 -1.4
Kenya -1.6 3.6 -1.9
30
Although provisions vary in the Australian States, the major exceptions are: fraud; a prior folio or
certificate of title; erroneous description of land; paramount interests that are unaffected by the
statutory regime and are enforceable against a registered proprietor; easements; adverse possession;
leasehold interests (Hepburn 1998: 221-226) . All States also provide powers for the registrar to
correct the register, limited to the extent that it cannot prejudice any rights that may have been
acquired by a bona vide purchaser prior to the error being noticed.
31
In the year ending 30 June 2002, A$1.962 million (US$1.14 million) was collected as revenue for
the Assurance Fund and A$1.218 million (US$0.71 million) was paid out in claims for compensation
(including legal fees and other costs). The A$1.218 million in expenses was about 1.0% of the
revenue collected by LPI of A$124.185 million in the year ending 30 June 2002. Even with the
payment of A$1.218 million in 2001/2002, the balance in the Assurance Fund at the end of June 2002
was A$8.142 million (US$4.72 million). Data from the DITM Annual Report for 2001/2002 -
http://www.ditm.nsw.gov.au/department/publications/ar2002.pdf
32
In the year 2001-2002 the Land Registry paid out about £2.5 million in indemnity claims, about
0.7% of the fee revenue of £342 million.
33
Private communication with Gavin Adlington.
34
Hick M, Going Global: the US Title Industry’s Next Big Frontier, available on
www.alta.org.store/ttlenews/98/9806_03.htm and McKenna B, American Title Insurance: An
Emerging Presence in Canada, available on http://www.alta.org/store/ttlenews/98/9801_03.htm
35
Morgan identifies the following advantages to lenders in the UK: title insurance can cover a number
of defects including failure to register, conveyance of the wrong property, improper execution of a
mortgage deed, failure to get local authority charges etc; potentially addressing the current situation
where lenders have largely had to prove negligence rather than breach of contractual duty against
conveyancers and have not always recovered costs; potentially reduced costs; potential income
through the sale of insurance products. Lavelle (2202:50-51) identifies the potential benefits to
lawyers in Australia who have traditionally provided conveyancy services, but she also discusses the
potential impact on the government registries and the likelihood of government changes to indemnity
cover under the title registers in response to increased private title insurance activity.

Page 120
36
Wilcox (2005), an article questioning the value of title insurance notes that it generally costs 0.5 to
1% of the mortgage amount, except in the State of Iowa where the state has established a system
where title insurance is available at a cost of 0.1% of the mortgage value, plus US$150-300 for a
lawyer to prepare a transaction history for the property.
37
Arruñada (2002:33), based on a data available on company web pages, press articles and contact
with title insurance companies lists the presence of the six major title insurance companies in:
Australia, Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, England, France, Guam and
Marianas, Ireland, Israel, Korea, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Scotland, Spain and the Virgin Islands.
38
Jaffe and Kaganova (1996:19) note that, despite a policy preference for a state registration system,
a hybrid system is developing in St. Petersburg ‘…which unfortunately means it is borrowing the
shortcomings of the two “pure” models: the slowness of state registration and the high cost of title
insurance. Indeed, in the middle of 1995, registration of a standard apartment transaction in St.
Petersburg took 2 days, cost 0.2-0.4 percent of the market value of an apartment, and title insurance
would cost another 1-3 percent.’
39
In ECA there is an old tradition for a dacha or garden plot. These were designed even in communist
times to allow people to grow food for support in dire times and as a supplement to their salaries.
Virtually everyone still has such a plot. They are being included in registration systems but are seen
as low priority being added when the time and finances permit.
40
The following table was prepared by an ADB study team, based on surveys undertaken by the
National Housing Authority in April 2000.
Magnitude of Informal Settlers in Metro Manila
(by area type as at 11 April 2000)
Areas Number of
Families
Danger areas
Waterways 72,102
Railroad Tracks 28,993
Pasig River 9,731
Sub-total 110,826
Government Infrastructure
Right-of-Ways (RoWs) 73,836
Public Utilities 20,405
Sub-total 94,241
Government Owned Lands 315,406
Private Lands 110,956
Tourism Areas 5,650
Designated Housing Sites 66,869
Areas for Priority Development (APDs) 22,960
Grand Total 726,908
41
An observation in the draft Policy Research Paper, page 90, that notes claims that land values in
Sri Lanka have been depressed by 50% due to restrictions on land ownership and that these have
impacted on the endowment of the poor.
42
RA 7279 (Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992, otherwise known as the Lina law, enacted
March 24, 1992) provides for protection to informal settlers in the Philippines.
43
Global Land Tools Network was formally launched at the World Urban Forum, Vancouver, June
2006. Partners and participants are from governments, non-government organisations, donor
agencies, representatives of the UN system, universities and the private sector - www.gltn.net
44
As McAuslan (2000) notes, the reforms in English land law from the late 19th century simplified the
law, introduced a system of registration of title and eliminated the rights of family members to block
commercial transactions in land.
45
This system works well as there is both a good system of personal identification cards and a good
land records system. A person’s martial status is recorded on registration and it is clear where a
spouse’s agreement to a subsequent transaction is required.

Page 121
Page 122
6 Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1 Conclusions
The efficiency and effectiveness of land administration is constrained by the political
and social environment within a regime and largely determined by the ability of the
civil service/local authorities to implement policy. Key elements in assessing the
environment for land administration are:
• Clarity and social congruence in formally recognised rights and the ability of
the regime to implement systems which recognise these rights as indicated by
the proportion of the population and jurisdictional area that benefits from
formal land administration services;
• Recognition afforded by the regime to informal land rights covering, where
appropriate, both informal settlers and populations living under customary
arrangements;
• The level of disputes over land rights, the formal and alternative dispute
resolution mechanisms available to resolve these disputes and the efficiency
and effectiveness of them. The land administration system with its information
and records can be critical in dispute resolution.
Section four of this publication presented detailed indicators that can be used to
systematically assess the land administration environment. A comprehensive
framework of qualitative indicators was developed. However, a subset of the
indicators can be used to assess the efficiency of a land administration system of a
range of different perspectives. These include:
• customer perspective: number of steps; time required; and cost as a
percentage of property value;
• community acceptance/market activity perspective: number of registered
transactions as a percentage of registered parcels;
• internal efficiency perspective: number of registration staff days per
registered transaction;
• sustainability perspective: annual running costs per registered parcel; ratio
of revenue to expenditure.
Based on the data from the country case studies and wider experience in the sector,
indicative ‘mean’ values were developed for these indicators. These ‘mean’ values
provide a basis to assess the efficiency of a land registration system, and provide
some metrics that can be used in the design of land administration projects. Table 24
summarises, where available, data from the country case studies.
While very useful for formal land administration system settings, it is notably more
difficult to make comparative assessments of customary systems. The behaviour
and components of these systems, while considered responsive and fluid within the
hetrogenous environment in which they exist, are far less predictable when based on
regulatory assessment indicators.

Page 123
Table 24 Summary of Land Administration System Efficiency Indicators

# of reg'd transfers as a %
Annual reg'd transactions

# of reg. staff days / reg'd

as a % of reg'd parcels

Ratio of annual running

Transfer cost as a % of
Time required to reg.

Ratio of revenue /
cost / reg. parcel
of reg'd parcels
transfer (days)

property value

expenditure
transaction
‘MEAN’ <5 days <5% >15% >5% <1 <$5-$10 >1
Armenia 15 1.5% 0.8% 10 $49.62* 1.6
Kyrgyzstan 10 5.0% 3.1% 0.8 $17.00 *
0.3

Latvia 3 0.6-4% 7.7% 0.6 $7.00* 1.6

Moldova 3-4 1.5% 4.0% 2.5 $2.46*
Indonesia 14 0.5% 5.8% 0.9 $0.79
Karnataka 20 13.0% 3.9% 0.56 $0.16 20.7
Philippines 14 8.2% 11.0% 3.7% 1.56 $1.17 2.4
Thailand 1 4.5% 21.2% 13.1% 0.5 $2.10 *
5.1*
El Salvador 30 17.8% 1.20 *
$27.47
Peru 4-7 13.8% 3.9% 0.76
Trinidad & Tobago 90 6.7% 1.80* $2.70
* figure includes registration and cadastral functions

6.2 Recommendations
The following major recommendations are put forward to assist in future efforts to
strengthen land administration systems. 1 There is some overlap in the rationale for
the recommendations so the recommendations should be viewed as a framework for
achieving an efficient and sustainable land administration system rather than a suite
of individual recommendations.
6.2.1 Approach to Land Administration Reform

Recommendation 1: Prepare a framework for the long-term development of the

land administration system.

Efforts to strengthen land administration systems typically occur over long periods of
time. This framework should set out a ‘vision’ for the land administration system,
preferably expressed in terms of service delivery or outcomes for users of the
system rather than the perspective of land sector agencies or inputs to support
service delivery. The framework should also identify strategies and actions required
to achieve the vision, in the near-term, mid-term and the long-term and thus provide
a guideline for government and donors to plan specific interventions. A critical
element in the development of the framework is an assessment of the ‘foundation’

Page 124
for the land administration system, in at least the areas of: policy, legislation,
institutional arrangements and capacity, human resources, funding and finance and
stakeholder engagement (see Figure 10 on page 64). In many developing countries
there is a weak legal framework and limited capability for dispute resolution. In
developing the legal framework a realistic assessment of the current social
environment and the government’s ability to implement laws in a manner that is
acceptable to the general population needs to be undertaken. With limited capacity
and credibility in the court system in many countries, efforts to develop efficient and
responsive alternate dispute resolution procedures are often a necessary part of
strengthening land administration systems (page 71).

Recommendation 2: Broaden the geographic extent of land administration services

only where the legal framework reflects reality on the ground and where there are
appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms.

Some countries have developed a comprehensive land policy (for example Ghana),
often with extensive stakeholder consultation, which can be an important input into
the framework for the long-term development of the land administration system.
Reform in land administration faces many vested interests and requires strong
political will.

Recommendation 3: Raise the institutional profile of land issues in formal

political/administration structures.

In Cambodia there is a Land Policy Council comprising of ministries concerned and

chaired by the Minister of Lands (Malaysia has a similar arrangement). Forming a
Ministry of Land with the head having a seat in Cabinet is one of the best ways to
raise the profile of land matters and have a strong impact on policy formulation. In
the ECA countries reviewed it was critical to have support at a high political level and
to have directors of projects or agencies that were influential and motivated to
achieve good results.

Recommendation 4: Before implementing a formalised systematic registration

activity do the following:

● Determine whether there is a demonstrated demand for registration;

● Ensure the registered right will reflect the existing social tenures;
● Ensure the process will not have major adverse social impacts;
● Ensure the costs are affordable and acceptable to beneficiaries;
● Ensure there are appropriate incentives to register subsequent dealings in
rights; and
● Ensure there are appropriate institutional arrangements to register subsequent
dealings in rights (page 91).
Generally, land rights and obligations exist but are not supported by the formal
system, thereby turning the system into one of ‘formal illegality’ (McAuslan 2003:18).
Although a land market exists, official laws are often ignored because they are seen
as too complicated, subject to official interpretation and generally do not
accommodate user needs. For the policy to be effective and enforceable, it must

Page 125
reflect reality on the ground and therefore should be fixed on the basis of
consultation, while according with the considered input of the community. In many
Asian countries, for example, forest boundaries are based on jurisdictional control
rather than reality on the ground. It is a simple technical matter to determine
boundaries based on macro land use classifications or technical standards relating
to features such as topographic slope. Resolving this issue calls for a political
decision and political will to determine and adopt a policy of land classification which
removes doubt in determining rights and guides land administration in a fair and just
way. The guidelines for formalising informal rights should specify a fast, efficient and
participatory methodology that reflects reality on the ground, without necessarily
compromising accuracy. 2 As demonstrated in the comparative study, many
jurisdictions were able to develop efficient and cost-effective methods to
systematically register rights in land. Systematic processes have a number of distinct
advantages. They are cost-effective and when implemented with strong community
participation they are more transparent than traditional sporadic registration
procedures. However, as demonstrated in many countries in Africa, systematic
registration is not appropriate in all situations. In planning land administration
interventions the question of support for sporadic registration will often arise. Some
jurisdictions adopt a policy of ‘user-pays’, others provide infrastructural support for
sporadic registration (buildings, equipment, operations, etc.) and others support
sporadic registration activity.

Recommendation 5: Adopt a customer rather than process focus and where

possible make clear promises on quality, time and cost of key procedures.

A mass program to systematically register rights in land is only a first step in

strengthening a land administration system. It is essential that an efficient,
community accepted system be developed to register subsequent dealings in rights
in land. The limited impact of the first phase of the Indonesian Land Administration
Project was largely due to the failure of the Indonesian project to develop an
efficient, community-accepted system for the registration of subsequent dealings in
land. This was despite the fact that the project exceeded targets in issuing titles.
It is important that a registration culture is fostered, a culture where the community
appreciates the benefits of keeping their record of their rights within the formal
system. This will involve public awareness campaigns and assurance that the
benefits of registration outweigh the costs. Simple, cost effective procedures and
accessible lodgement points will also be important. There also needs to be a shift in
focus on internal processes and workflows to a focus on service delivery, with
individuals seeking to register dealings in land considered as ‘customers’ rather than
merely ‘applicants’ at the beck and call of officials.
Customer focus can be developed in a number of ways including simple posters in
land offices explaining registration processes and prerequisites, customer help desks
in waiting areas, the public display of fees and process times and suggestion boxes
in land offices. These can be assessed in a number of ways including customer
satisfaction surveys. The customer’s expectations of land administration are security,
clarity and simplicity, timeliness, fairness, accessibility, cost and sustainability. A
major concern for most users is cost and time. Much can be said about customer
focus by the preparedness to display clear promises regarding cost and time. As
previously noted, the registration system in Thailand is very efficient because all

Page 126
registrations must by regulation be completed on the day they are lodged. This
promise of timely response takes the discussion away from a rationale for delay such
as problems with process, staffing, working hours etc. to the steps needed to ensure
the promise is honoured.

Recommendation 6: Where possible, adopt administrative rather than judicial

approaches for formally recognizing rights in land.

In most developing countries the judicial system is overloaded and struggling to cope
with the number of cases presented to the courts. In many countries disputes over
land rights are a major proportion of court cases. In Vientiane, Lao PDR, 60 percent
of cases in the court were land disputes. Often there are separate judicial reform
projects to address issues of transparency, access for all, wide scale legal
education, and efficiently operating legal systems. Land projects should therefore
seek to reduce the need to use the court system by determining rights and resolving
disputes through administrative rather than judicial processes.
Clear and simple administrative processes aim to encourage participation in the
formal system rather than avoidance. Administrative procedures should be
implementing government policies with the backing of trained and qualified staff. An
example of this is establishing systematic registration using an administrative
approach which permits greater flexibility and ease of implementation with a
participatory community focus. South Africa can attest to having success using
administrative procedures for upgrading titles. However, administrative procedures in
Philippines and Bolivia remain complex and conflicting. It is therefore essential that
administrative procedures, with the objective of reducing delays and expenses for
the public typically experienced in judicial processes, impose reasonably set fees
and charges while aiming for cost recovery.
6.2.2 Institutional Challenges

Recommendation 7: Form a single land administration agency or coordinate policy

between existing government agencies, with concrete mechanisms to support and
encourage coordination. This coordination should define the charter of the respective
agencies, clarify roles and responsibilities, define lines of communication, set a
framework for coordination with land management agencies and lay a foundation for
institutional reform.

Many jurisdictions have struggled with a lack of integration at the information and
institutional levels between the property registry and the cadastre. Experience has
demonstrated the benefits of having a single agency; Thailand, El Salvador,
Armenia, and Kyrgyzstan for example. In other jurisdictions there is a complex web
of overlapping institutional roles and responsibilities. In the Philippines, for example,
19 agencies have some role in land administration and at least four agencies issue
documents evidencing rights in land. 3
Decentralisation can be a major factor in facilitating access to the land administration
system but can also affect the cost of providing land administration services. Having
flexible arrangements for decentralisation and linking decentralised offices to the
level of expected demand for services is usually better than adopting a blanket policy
of providing land administration services at a set administrative level (see the

Page 127
discussion of the potential cost implications of the latter approach in Ghana on page
76).

Recommendation 8: Make an early policy decision on the level of decentralisation

of service and the devolution of decision-making responsibility.

Decentralised service delivery requires inter-agency co-ordination between lands,

local government and (sometimes) justice, as well as vertical co-ordination.
Generally, the responsibility for decision making should be devolved to the lowest
practicable operational level, leaving the central level responsible for policy, legal,
standards and quality, personnel training and discipline. It is not easy to arrive at a
policy consensus in these matters and political will, backed by a strong resolve to
change, will be needed in the face of entrenched interests. Whilst land administration
is invariably a public sector activity, the private sector has a role in most jurisdictions.

Recommendation 9: Develop a framework for private sector involvement in land

administration services, including arrangements to regulate and oversight private
sector service suppliers.

There is almost universal acceptance of the role of professional intermediaries who

interface between the public land administration agency and the customer
community. Through careful quality assurance (licensing etc) the private sector can
assume much of the burden for maintaining spatial and other records necessary to
sustain the system. Using the private sector to prepare documentation for
registration with legal liability can dramatically lower the costs of land registration to
the State. However, it can also make the system unaffordable to the poor if land
professionals undertake routine rather than just management operations (Namibia).
6.2.3 Focus on Sustainability
Sustainability is a critical issue with land administration interventions and has at least
three dimensions: (i) technical sustainability; (ii) financial sustainability; and (iii)
community participation (see page 81). To develop these elements requires a
carefully planned capacity building strategy. It is important that technology does not
drive the process and that the technology proposed is appropriate in terms of the
available human and financial resources and is affordable by users. Mistakes made
during policy development by not tying policy development sufficiently closely to
technical implementation strategies, and costing this implementation properly, can
potentially derail the entire land reform process (Uganda). Systems should be
financially sustainable in the near to medium term.
The importance of costing land administration services, particularly on
decentralisation and/or where significant new resources are proposed is illustrated in
the case of South Africa and Uganda. Major changes in land administration policy
were costed and as a result South Africa stopped a draft Bill and the Uganda scaled
back implementation to pilot activity. In some countries land administration services
are being provided by independent agencies running on a self-supporting basis. In
Moldova and Kazakhstan the registry offices had to be self-funding from the start
and the business plan for Moldova even provided for repayment of the World Bank
loan. The ‘independence’ of these agencies means they can provide many different
types of service, maximise income and pay staff well enough to substantially
decrease corruption.

Page 128
Recommendation 10: Make a decision very early in the design stage on the
registration model and the approach to the cadastre; this may be a hybrid model,
perhaps with a title registration system supported by a graphical cadastre being
developed in project areas, and less sophisticated systems operating elsewhere.
Adopt simple, low-cost survey mapping technology depending on sustainability of
capacity and resources.

Registration systems, particularly registration of deeds and title registration, were

reviewed (see page 104). As noted there was criticism that land administration
interventions have tended to concentrate on registration of titles, particularly based
on experience in Africa. One strategy suggested in Africa is to set up systems to
register transactions (page 110), basically a form of deeds registration. In ECA it was
observed that the development of land markets were impacted upon more by
systems that allow transactions to occur quickly than by systematic titling efforts
(page 28). Some countries that currently operate deeds registration systems are
looking at moving to title registration (India, Peru, El Salvador). As systems have
developed over many decades taking into account the country’s own particular laws
and history, there tends to be few pure ‘deeds’ or ‘title’ registration systems (page
107). There is, however, an almost universal emphasis on using property identifiers
to link legal and spatial records to minimise errors and provide better information to
users.
A spatial framework or cadastre supported by appropriate surveying and mapping
methodology is essential for title registration and a key strategy for strengthening
deeds registration (refer page 104). Survey and mapping however, are usually major
cost elements in establishing and maintaining a land administration system and are
considerations for assessing technical sustainability (refer page 68). Despite
advances in survey, mapping and computer technology one needs to avoid over-
specifying technology. No country has implemented a digital cadastre in support of
mass a systematic titling program. Most titling systems were introduced on the basis
of graphical cadastres. This has happened in the developed world; for example
England, Australia, Sweden; and in the developing world; for example Thailand,
Indonesia. Graphical cadastres provide adequate spatial frameworks in many
jurisdictions and can be upgraded at a later stage on the basis of careful cost-benefit
analysis.
This will almost certainly mean that there may be two or more tiers in the registration
system but this should not be a concern because all existing well-developed land
administration systems have developed in this manner. Close consultation with key
stakeholders is often necessary in making decisions on registration models and
cadastres, particularly with lawyers and surveyors who usually have strong vested
interests. Although some assessments of land administration systems emphasise a
jurisdiction-wide cover, 4 it is important to ensure that interventions are implemented
within the framework of a long-term development plan and where more than one
registration process operates, be clear about what process applies in a given case or
situation.

Page 129
Recommendation 11: Prepare a financial model of the land administration system
under a range of market and service delivery/technology scenarios before basic
parameters are agreed.

In looking at financial models for land administration (see page 90) it is important to
model the geographic phasing of interventions. When preparing financial models it is
important to ensure that the schedule of fees and charges are not a major barrier to
on-going community participation in the land administration system. The comparative
study provides some information on what people seem prepared to pay. 5 It is
important to acknowledge the social impact of land administration projects and the
need for maximum community inclusion at all stages of the project. In some
jurisdictions it can be critical to look at oversight arrangements and governance
issues. Public support and understanding is essential and to be successful a land
administration system needs to foster a culture where registration is undertaken as a
matter of course, something that is taken for granted in the developed world.

Recommendation 12: The design must consider existing human and technical
resource capacities of the implementing agency, potential service providers, and its
users. Appropriate land administration system design and capacity building
strategies involving short to long term training and education are necessary from
project inception, preferably using local solutions (see page 93).

One of the major challenges in developing countries is implementing systems that

are sustainable once external assistance has pulled out. Three key areas of human
resource development need to be addressed including the implementing agency
staff, both, higher authority and local decentralised levels, the private sector, and the
users. Societal and organisational capacity building should be underwritten in the
project design, however individual capacity building typically requires additional
programs to train and up-skill providers, suppliers and users operating the system.
Short term training and up-skilling inputs address immediate short-comings but the
design should also seek to develop or tap into more sustained avenues of education
in the field of surveying and land administration that will supply both the government
and private sectors with trained and qualified employees. Leveraging off existing
education institutions as was the case in Lao (see page 93) will be easier than
establishing an entire new facility. In addition engaging existing skills in the private
sector can help fill service and resource deficiencies as long as reciprocal capacity
building opportunities exist to support new systems or technology.
Participation and capacity building in the community through awareness and
education programs can be effective at ensuring they play an active role in using the
system..
6.2.4 Land Tenure Policy

Recommendation 13: Assess the need to intervene in customary tenure by

understanding the community’s needs and concerns, to ensure tenure certainty for
all.

Countries where customary land tenure systems operate face a number of

challenges. There are examples such as Indonesia and Ghana where developing
countries have sought to dismiss traditional forms of tenure and customary land

Page 130
practices in the belief this would speed the path to development. This fails to
recognise reality and ultimately presents more problems than solutions. As
previously discussed (page 102) where customary systems operate two key
questions need to be addressed:
• under what circumstances do the existing tenure arrangements fail? And
• where there is failure, what sort of intervention is appropriate?
Some countries have recognised customary tenure, but the systems that were
implemented to recognise this have limited integration with the formal land
administration system (Bolivia, the Philippines). Other countries do not formally
recognise customary rights (Thailand). The experience from the comparative study
shows that customary and State systems of land tenure are not necessarily mutually
exclusive and the evolution of a land administration system can be based on co-
existence or the integration of the two. Integrating customary and formal land tenure
systems is one intervention approach but it must ensure there is certainty in what
rules apply in a given situation and ensuring any attempt to codify customary law
must reflect the diversity evident in customary law. Customary practices relating to
marriage, divorce and inheritance should not be codified for the purposes of a land
registration system because even a superficial overview indicates various existing
approaches as well as modifications stemming from the pressure of urbanisation and
the legal framework of the country in relation to gender etc. (Namibia, Mozambique,
Uganda).
Strategies to integrate customary and formal land administration systems include:
• registration of rights at a community level, with individual rights reserved for
areas of conflict;
• registering rights at a local or community level through local institutions such
as Land Boards, but this strategy needs to be cost-effective;
• granting legal recognition of transactions, perhaps supported by cadastral
mapping, the ‘lighter approach’ (page 110) proposed by Delville, but such
systems need to address the issue of assigning priority to customary
transactions undertaken at the various levels of customary authority. Again,
these systems need to be cost-effective.

Recommendation 14: Build into the design strategies to collect gender

disaggregated data and data related to other disadvantaged groups and monitor
gender impact during project implementation.

Consideration of sensitive social impact issues such as women and vulnerable

groups is important to project success and sustainability. “Gender aware” policies,
family, inheritance and land law reforms and active support groups and networking
are important strategies, however these require monitoring and evaluation of their
impact. Without the need for additional social impact studies, recording of data which
reflects the involvement of women and vulnerable groups in registration processes
would be beneficial. Having this gender disaggregated data and data related to
disadvantaged groups will enable the development impact on these vulnerable
groups to be monitored and ensure these groups are appropriately targeted. It is
important that evaluations consider what a fair representation of these groups are,
recognising demographic variations from war widows, the impact of HIV (particularly

Page 131
African women forced into divorce) and gender distribution, for example total female
populations in Laos are recorded at 51 percent.

Recommendation 15: Adopt a phased approach to recognising rights to assist the

poor and vulnerable groups in both urban and rural areas gain security of tenure.

It is often a real challenge to design a project that addresses the issues of the
various stakeholders, poverty alleviation, gender equity, environment sustainability,
in a country that cannot adequately fund government services and where the land
sector is often perceived as one of the most corrupt government sectors. One
strategy to build a sustainable system is to target areas of potential development.
However, such strategy can be difficult to defend against the criticism of designing
projects to benefit the urban elite rather than the most vulnerable in society. An
important point to note is that improvements in land administration infrastructure are
part of a long-term strategy. What is often being debated is the initial emphasis or
starting point, not the overall rationale for the activity. However, strategies can be
developed to focus on the needs of the poor, including:
• creating a legal framework to protect the rights of all citizens, including the
poor (including dispute resolution and improved registries);
• simplifying planning, building and other administrative regulations;
• mandating that utility companies supply services irrespective of tenure status;
and
• setting objectives to encourage social and spatial integration of urban areas.

Page 132
Chapter 6 Endnotes

1
These recommendations concentrate on the recognition of rights and do not cover associated areas
such as property valuation or taxation, areas not specifically covered by the Comparative Study.
2
Although it should be noted that many of the successful systems have flexibility in survey and
measurement methodologies, often specifying high accuracy techniques for expensive urban land
ands less accurate and hence less expensive techniques for lower value land. This is the case, for
example, in Thailand.
3
Various types of patents (public land grants) are issued by the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources to applicants, Certificates of Land Ownership are issued to land reform
beneficiaries by the Department of Agrarian Reform, the National Commission for Indigenous Peoples
administers ancestral domain for indigenous peoples and the Courts issue decrees on land rights.
4
Dale and McLaughlin (1999:39) note the five criteria proposed by Palmer for considering the registry
function: jurisdiction-wide cover; quality control; currency; guarantee; and indemnification. Jurisdiction-
wide cover was seen as important as the registration system becomes more effective as more parcels
are registered.
5
As noted in Table 8 on page 52, for example, the study seems to suggest that the cost of registering
a transfer should be less than 5% of the property value and should cost less than an amount that
users can earn in about 30 days.

Page 133
Appendices

• Appendix 1 – Policy/Legal Framework Indicators

• Appendix 2 – Customary Tenure Indicators

• Appendix 3 – Land Administration Parameters

• Appendix 4 – Formal Land Administration Effectiveness Indicators

Page 135
Page 136
 Appendix 1 - Policy/Legal Framework

Indicators

• African Country Case Studies - Tables 25

• African Country Case Study (Uganda) – Table 26
• Asian Country Case Studies – Table 27
• European and Central Asia Country Case Studies – Table 28
• Latin America Country Case Study – Table 29

Page 137
 1
Table 25 African Country Case Studies

Indicator Ghana Mozambique Namibia South Africa

Types of rights formally There is a deeds and title system in No freehold is available. All land Most of the population lives in the north South Africa has a deeds system with
recognised place, with the latter only in Accra belongs to the State and cannot be of the country under customary tenure. compulsory registration. Title to land
and Kumasi cities. The registration of sold, transferred, mortgaged, or offered An inferior colonial relic system termed and other real rights is not
titles has not been very popular – as collateral. However, improvements ‘Permission to Occupy’ exists in the guaranteed by law. Liability for
most people appear to find the on the land may be mortgaged, and north as the only tenure available apart compensation for errors is assumed
system of registration of deeds may even be sold provided approval is from customary. Most of the remaining by private sector land conveyancers,
adequate. Only the title system has given by the public administration. land is registered in full ownership and land surveyors, who produce
legal liability. Fifty year leases (renewable for a (freehold) in a deeds registry system for documents that are registered.
Some 78% of land in Ghana is under further 50 years) are available for which the private sector has legal The system is sophisticated and
customary tenure, with the remaining commercial investors and small holders liability. highly accurate. It primarily registers
22% belonging to the State. (for Mozambicans and foreigners who One part of the country –Rehoboth– full ownership (freehold), title in land
Generally, customary law and have resided in the country for more has a local level deeds registry system and sectional title units, long term
statutory law operate alongside in the than 5 years and for companies where full ownership (freehold) is leases, leasehold rights, servitudes,
customary tenure areas. registered in the country). Inheritance of registered, also in undivided shares with mineral cessions, mineral leases,
such right is possible, provided no cadastral boundaries. prospecting contracts etc.
customary and occupancy rights had
already been taken into account.
Types of rights informally Customary land ownership rights are The new 1997 Land Law holds that Customary landownership rights are After the 1994 reforms, the following
recognised (including recognised. In areas of customary customary rights and land use rights recognised in some parts of the country. rights are recognised: customary
customary systems) tenure, land management is acquired through ‘good faith’ occupation Namibia does not recognise occupancy tenure; informal settlement rights; the
community based, with communities over a minimum of 10 years are rights and does not have anti-eviction rights of squatters; occupancy rights
ranging from small families to entire recognised (not yet in urban areas). rights in urban areas. (under certain circumstances);
tribes (Stools/Skins). Customary law Customary rights and unregistered adverse possession; anti-eviction
does not prevent land sales to occupancy rights can be registered, but rights.
strangers but does not encourage it. a registered customary right is not The Interim Protection of Informal
A few informal settlements have been stronger than an unregistered one. Land Rights Act (1996) has given
recognised but squatter rights are Group customary rights can also be informal occupants land rights,
generally not recognised. delineated as community land. This is including a right to compensation if
recorded in the Surveyor General’s moved (State retains freehold title).
office not as a registered right, but as a
land use designation.
Percentage of the country not available About 10% not available Estimated to be about 80-90% of the
and population covered by 78% of the country is under Customary tenure accounts for roughly area and about 70-75% of the
the formal system customary coverage 90% of land tenure rights. population nationally.

Page 138
 Indicator Ghana Mozambique Namibia South Africa
Characteristics of Squatter rights are generally not The 1997 Land Law has incorporated Most people live in the north of the In urban areas, inferior titles to land
population without formal recognised under the law and no customary rights into the formal legal country under customary tenure. In rural owned by Blacks have been
rights particular provision has been made framework. The need to protect the areas where people have not settled upgraded to freehold through
for their registration. rights of poor occupants has been according to prior planning, authorities administrative processes. Rural land
There are no gender specific recognised by law, and the new Land did not give residents legal land rights. in the former homelands must still be
provisions in the law and no Law notes that women could be land Around towns in commercial areas, addressed. The Communal Land
restrictions on women who wish to use right holders. squatting informally on land belonging Rights Bill currently under discussion
th
register interests in land. to the local authorities or private (in its 8 draft) can significantly affect
individuals has become common. the land registration system and
Around 10% of the population lives in customary tenure in the former
urban areas on land to which they have homelands.
no formal rights.
Level of disputes over Land disputes are considered to be Conflict over land appears to be a Information not readily available but the There have been only 3 court cases
land numerous but data on conflict problem. Conflict stems mainly from level of disputes relating to land is in 46 years in relation to the records
resolution is not reliable. Between numerous overlapping land requests thought to be reasonably low. of the Deeds registry. Of 67,314
August 1999 and the end of 2001, 17 and land use concessions, most of restitution cases since 1994, 35,137
disputes were recorded in the Accra which were in competing with existing were settled through a separate
title registry, but the title registry only community lands. Such concessions judicial mechanism (the Land Claims
covers about 13,000 properties. The cover large parts of the best land in the Commissioners Court).
most common source of conflict country. Many applicants have exploited Although the number of disputes over
appears to be boundary disputes. of resources etc. after only submitting registered land records is low, there
The non-performing nature of the an application (i.e. without prior is estimated to be a fair number and
Land Title Adjudication Committee is approval). This resulted in confusion range of disputes over land in
probably the main obstacle to dispute and exacerbated existing conflict general.
resolution. between them and local communities.
Time taken to resolve land Various mechanisms are in place to Information not readily available. The Court system in the urban areas is Information not readily available.
disputes enhance speedy dispute resolution. Note: The 1997 Land Law did not fairly efficient so the time to resolve
The ability of Traditional Authorities to include a special body to undertake disputes is estimated to be reasonably
resolve land disputes appear to be conflict resolution because customary short
good but adjudication procedures of institutions and judicial and community In traditional areas local authority and
the Land Title Registry need tribunals already exist and are traditional authorities resolve land
improving. adequate. Conflicts are resolved by disputes. Disputes are thought to be
judicial tribunals, other tribunals and resolved fairly quickly but no statistics
local level structures. are available.

Page 139
 Table 26 Uganda Country Case Study

Indicator Uganda
Types of rights formally Uganda has a title system in place but no deed system. The registration of titles (Torrens) was first introduced in 1908. The State has legal liability for
recognised the title system. Only about 40% of the Torrens titles (roughly 280,000) are thought to reflect the rights of the current owners and lease-holders.
There are four types of land tenure in Uganda: customary, mailo, freehold and leasehold.

The following rights are recognised: occupancy rights, anti-eviction rights, group/family titles, modern ‘starter’ type titles, informal settlement rights.
Types of rights informally Uganda has a range of forms of legal pluralism, which also contributes to land disputes. Theses include customary and/or statutory forms of
recognised (including evidence, customary kings and/or public land owned by the state, pastoralists and/or land gazetted as game reserve, and customary rights holders
customary systems) and public land.
Percentage of the country Freehold and leasehold covers about 12-15% of the country. Customary tenure covers about 62% of land.
and population covered by
the formal system About 5-6% of the country has current titles mostly concentrated in urban areas.
Only about 40% of titles (280,000 of the roughly 700,000 titles issued) realistically reflect the rights of current owners and leaseholders.
Customary tenure covers ±68% of the population.
Characteristics of Rights obtained by the poor include the right to sell, lease, mortgage, inherit, and to claim compensation if moved (not an individual right, but that of a
population without formal family/group).
rights
There is partial protection of the rights of women in that transfers can be prevented.
Level of disputes over land Implementation of the Land Act of 1998 has been slow, and the delay between the removal of old mechanisms and structures, and failure to
introduce new measures in a timely manner has left a vacuum, in particular with regard to dispute resolution. Land disputes that were previously
settled quickly at local level are now being drawn out. Disputes have become numerous and long lasting.
A total of 48% of all plots are in some way being disputed at present, with about half of all disputes relating to boundaries, and roughly 35% relating to
issues of tenancy. Over 70% of conflicts that have been resolved have been subject to formal processes.
Time taken to resolve land The average dispute has a duration of about 3.5 years, with family conflicts estimated to last about 2.5 years on average. Disputes involving the
disputes government could take up to 5 years to resolve.

Page 140
 Table 27 Asian Country Case Studies 2

Indicator Indonesia Karnataka Thailand Philippines

Types of rights Land rights are recorded in two The land registration system in A titling system was introduced in The judicial-based Torrens system
formally recognised systems: (i) private conveyancing and Karnataka is a registration of deeds 1901, based largely on the Torrens was introduced to the Philippines
(ii) registration of deeds. The system. There is a fairly high title system operating in the state of through the Land Registration Act 496
Indonesian system of title registration participation rate, despite a fairly high New South Wales, Australia. of 1903. Approximately 20% of
is not guaranteed by the state. transaction tax, but there are problems privately owned land is now “registered
with under-declaration of values. The tenure regimes recognised in land” under the Torrens system, with
The tenure system provides for a Thailand include the private rights some of the balance relying on deeds
hierarchy of ownership/use rights. There is a separate system of recognised under the Land Code (pre- to establish rights in property and most
There are five basic forms of tenure registration of rights based on old emptive (NS2) rights which are not of the remainder relying on informal
each with levels of restrictions: systems implemented by the British to transferable, certificates of utilisation systems.
raise revenue. They record tenancy in (NS3/3K) and titles (NS4), both of
• Hak Milik – ownership rural areas (RTC) and rights in urban which are transferable and accepted
• Hak Guna Usaha – cultivation areas (Property Cards) supported by as collateral, State land under the
only reasonably complete survey map Land Code (NSL). There are other
records. The technology for survey rights that are not recognised under
• Hak Guna Bangunan (HGB) – and mapping is very low and there are the Land Code, including rights issued
nominally a renewable 20-30 problems with completeness, to land reform beneficiaries (ALRO 4-
year lease particularly in areas subject to 01), and usufruct, renewable 5-year
development. There are linkages licenses issued to agricultural land
• Hak Pakai – use only
between the registration system and users in forests (STK).
• Hak Pengenolaan – land the rights systems (RTC/Property
management only. Cards), but there are gaps.

Ownership (Hak Milik) is confined to

the individual, while corporate entities
and foreigners are restricted to lesser
forms of tenure.

Page 141
 Indicator Indonesia Karnataka Thailand Philippines
Types of rights A differentiation is made between Karnataka has a number of tribal Rights under the Land Code cannot be Communal claims can be made on
informally recognised squatting and extralegal occupation. communities that live in varied issued systematically in forest land land, resources and rights thereon,
(including customary Squatting applies to occupation on environments, including the forests. and this includes most of the land held belonging to the whole community
3
systems) land where a right had been granted The tribal communities view the by hills-tribes and indigenous groups. within a defined territory. Individual
but the rightful owner has neglected concept of property differently and Although there is local recognition of claims can be made on land and rights
the land, or the person trusted to have difficulty in substantiating claims the rights of hill-tribes, there is no thereon which have been devolved to
watch the land has informally leased it under law, which have been based on official recognition under the Land individuals, families and clans,
to other persons. old revenue laws. However, squatters Code. including, but not limited to, residential
in the forests may get land ownership lots, rice terraces or paddies and tree
Extralegal occupation concerns under special considerations. lots.
cultivation or occupation of state land
where in certain cases the occupants In north Karnataka a Tibetan refugee There are two types of Certificates that
are given the opportunity to apply for colony was given ‘permanent may be issued:
the land right. residence’ status.
1) Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title
Extra-legal tenure is an issue that formally recognise the rights of
especially in forest areas where there possession and ownership over
has often been occupation for ancestral domains identified and
generations. Forest boundaries are delineated according to the law and
unclear and often gazetted without
consultation with ‘residents’. 2) A Certificate of Ancestral Lands
Possession (adverse possession) is Title that formally recognises rights
not considered a legitimate source of over ancestral lands.
title or a cure for title defects.
Percentage of the Private rights in land can only be not available It is not known what percentage of Private rights in land can only be
country and recognised on non-forest land. About parcels is held with rights that are recognised on non-forest land. Forest
population covered by 70% of the total area is legally recognised as eligible for title deeds. land covers about 16 million ha of the
the formal system classified as forest land with the land DOL records show that in December total land area of about 30 million ha
administration system only covering 2001 there were 18,629,088 titles (about 53%). There is uncertainty
about 30% of the country. Registered covering 11.3 million ha, 1,894,960 about issuing rights to occupiers of
parcels represent about 5% of the total NS3 covering 2.69 million ha, forest land. There are about 10 million
land mass of Indonesia, but covers a 7,332,669 NS3K covering 6.34 million registered titles but problems with
significantly higher proportion of the ha and 368,033 NS2 covering 0.576 duplicate and overlapping titles exist,
population – the island of Java, which million ha (some duplication in these particularly in urban areas. About 6%
4
has about 60% of the total population numbers likely). Earlier records show of the Philippines remain unclassified,
2
of Indonesia constitutes only about 6% about 37% (189,120 km ) is eligible for including much of Quezon City in
of the total area of the country. There private rights and of the above total Metro Manila, where rights are
are about 17 million registered parcels. 209,100 km2, about 110% of eligible uncertain.
land, is covered by a registered
document indicating that there is
significant double counting in DOL
records.

Page 142
 Indicator Indonesia Karnataka Thailand Philippines
Characteristics of Squatting is considered illegal and Squatters present a big problem in A substantial number of people in rural Has had a long history of Agrarian
population without treated accordingly. Karnataka. The State Assembly (on areas have the legal status of reform and redistribution of land to
formal rights the recommendation of the Cabinet) squatters occupying State land – assist landless farmers. The
There are no specific limits on land can however legalise squatters and predominantly land considered legally Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law
ownership by women. Property allow them to obtain rights. forest land. Due to socio-political (CARL) of 1987 covers the
brought to a union by the woman can constraints, it is very rare for squatters redistribution of all public and private
be registered solely in her name. Two categories of Tribals (nomads to be evicted. Squatting also exists in agricultural lands suitable for
Some parts of Indonesia (e.g. South and forest dwellers) co-exist in urban areas and it is estimated that in agriculture to farmers and regular farm
Sumatra) are matrilineal and Karnataka without private ownership 1993 there were about 1.256 million workers who are landless. “Landless”
inheritance is affected accordingly in on communal land. Tribal people are informal settlers in Bangkok (Mohit, is now defined as owning less than 3
favour of women family members. badly affected by the loss of land and 2002). These squatters also have no hectares.
Joint registration of property acquired restricted access to forest produce. legal recognition, but evictions can be
during marriage is possible and difficult. Rapid urbanisation is causing squatter
encouraged. By law, women have been granted problems. The informal settler
rights concerning land. However, there population in Metro-Manila is
is proof that it seldom translates into estimated to total 4 million, with about
effective control over land in practice. 80% of these settlers illegally
occupying public land.
Level of disputes over There is a fairly high level of land- There is a high level of litigation in The level of land-related disputes is The level of land-related disputes is
land related conflict in the country (60% of the courts (particularly the High considered to be low. Generally, Thai considered to be medium to low.
court action involve land issues). Court) related to land disputes. people tend to avoid social conflict. Generally, about 15% of court cases
Disputes arise mainly from cultivation Statistics on the number of land are land related.
by communities on plantation/State dispute cases are not available. Under the systematic land registration
and forestland; non-compliance with program that forms part of the Land Conflicts in rural areas are few in
land reform rules; land acquisition for Titling Project, very few disputes arise number; in the project area in Leyte
development and excessive allocation that cannot be settled in the field and about 4.5 % of the parcels in the pilot
of “location permits”, an exclusive right few, if any, appeals are made to the of 850 lots have been noted as being
to acquire land to develop large tracts; court system. involved in some form of dispute.
civil claims about entitlement;
customary rights issues; failure to
recognise long occupation as a right;
and level of compensation.
Time taken to resolve Most disputes are handled by the Court cases over land can take many Statistics are not available. Although the Registration Act notes set
land disputes General and Administrative Courts, years to resolve – there are some periods for matters to be dealt with by
with a limited number being handled family disputes that have even taken The standard procedure is for a ruling the courts, these specifications have
by Civil Court. Appeals can proceed to decades to resolve. The “average” to be made by the Provincial Land little bearing on what actually happens.
the High Court and ultimately the time taken to resolve a land dispute in Officer, with parties then given 60 days Land matters typically have low priority
Supreme Court, contributing to long court is anything between 2 to 25 to take the matter to the court. in the courts. Routine matters can take
delays and very high costs. Only the years. (Informed sources from the years to complete and disputed cases
best informed and wealthy can avail Court premises have indicated an decades to resolve. The court process
themselves of the court system to average period of seven years). also lacks transparency.
resolve disputes.

Page 143
 Table 28 Europe and Central Asia Country Case Studies 5

Indicator Armenia Kyrgyzstan Latvia Moldova

Types of rights formally Land ownership rights can belong to Land ownership rights can belong to the Land ownership may be private, Land ownership may be private,
recognised the State, private individuals or be State, private individuals or be municipal or State. Private ownership communal or State.
communal rights. Rights to land and communal rights. rights may be registered in the name of
property include full ownership, lease, a private or legal person; joint Rights include full ownership, lease,
permanent use, mortgages, Rights that must be registered include ownership is also often registered. permanent use, temporary use,
easements and other restrictions. full ownership, leases (more than 3 Rights include full ownership, lease, mortgages, easements and other
years), mortgages, easements and mortgages, easements and other restrictions.
Land and buildings may be owned other servitudes. restrictions.
separately. Land and buildings may be owned
Land, the building on the land and the Land and buildings may be owned separately.
apartments in a building may be owned separately.
separately.
Types of rights Tenure is governed purely in Tenure is governed in accordance with Tenure is governed purely in Tenure is governed purely in
informally recognised accordance with formal laws and formal laws and regulations. Informal accordance with formal laws and accordance with formal laws and
(including customary regulations. Informal tenure is not tenure is not recognised. There are regulations. Informal tenure is not regulations. Informal tenure is not
systems) recognised. many areas where people occupy land recognised and any form of informal recognised.
to which they have no legal right. occupation is very rare.
Informal tenure may be through
squatting (fairly rare), erecting Squatters or extralegal tenure is very
unapproved buildings, or encroaching rarely recognised. Extralegal (or non-
into adjoining land. registered) land occupation law permits
10 year acquisitive prescription.
In rural areas there are traditional and Squatters are considered to be mainly a
customary processes which may be matter of strict policing.
utilised in the transfer of immovable
properties.
Percentage of the not available not available 99.7% of the total area of Latvia is Urban land comprises about 316,000
country and population registered in State Land Cadastre. ha, and approximately 30,000 ha is
covered by the formal Urban land comprises 36,620 ha, legalised in private ownership. Most
system 6,987 ha is in private ownership. Most The total number of real properties and household land is privately occupied
urban land is privately occupied, but land use registered in the Cadastre is but not officially privatised and
not officially privatised. 829,205. Ownership rights are registered.
registered for 70.4% of this.

Page 144
 Indicator Armenia Kyrgyzstan Latvia Moldova
Characteristics of Encroachment into neighbouring land There are many areas where people Squatters are allowed to acquire land There are no problems with
population without and illegal construction of buildings occupy land to which they have no legal and buildings through ‘acquisitive squatters.
formal rights will prevent registration. Occupation right. Someone who openly and prescription’ after 10 years possession. There are no limitations to the rights
is recognised but cannot be legally continuously and in good faith Illegally constructed buildings must be of women to own land. Spouses are
transacted. This is a serious problem possesses immovable property as an legally regularised or removed. protected by law and through notarial
on private and public land but 10-year owner for 15 years shall obtain There are no limitations with regard to practice.
‘acquisitive prescription’ is permitted. ownership right. the rights of women to own land.
During systematic registration up to There are no limitations on land
20% of land encroachments are ownership by women. Rights are
regularised free of charge to the protected through normal notarial
owners. Others acquire the land they practice. However, in some rural areas
have encroached by sale or lease. women are reluctant to use official
There are no limitations with regard to procedures to claim their rights (after
the rights of women to own land. divorce or separation) because of social
Spouses are protected by law and pressure.
through notarial practice.
Level of disputes over Conflict over land is not a serious There are few serious disputes over Conflict over land is not a serious issue The rapid mass registration program
land issue in Armenia. land. Over 95% of disputes are resolved in Latvia. meant that several hundred thousand
There are very few court cases at the local registration office or Centres During the early stages of the land cases needed resolving because of
relating to land. for Land and Agrarian Reform (CLAR) reform process conflicts were resolved minor problems with name spelling or
without the need for legal counsel. early on by the Land Commission. matching documented parcel
During 2001 over 20,000 cases were boundaries with the existing ground
resolved by CLAR, and a similar situation. Courts are not well
number by GosRegister, the State equipped to deal with more serious
Agency that deals with registration of cases but the large number of less
rights to real property. serious cases is being corrected
administratively.
Time taken to resolve Disputes are normally dealt with by Most conflicts are resolved within hours The local government deals with land Cases involving technical problems
land disputes the local community within a week. at the local registration and CLAR conflict prior to land registration. are dealt with locally by registration
Court cases are normally resolved offices. A very small number of disputes Disputes are normally resolved within 1 offices and local Mayors.
within a 3 month period. are taken to court. week to a month. Nevertheless, most take a long time
If taken to court, it may take up to 6 to solve. Cases that go to court take
months for a case to be judged. The even longer.
decision of a judge may be appealed in
the Senate of the Supreme Court.
There are few appeal cases – only 5 to
6 on average per year and they are
normally quickly resolved.

Page 145
 Table 29 Latin America and the Caribbean Country Case Studies 6

Indicator Bolivia El Salvador Peru Trinidad & Tobago

Types of rights formally Bolivia allows private ownership of El Salvador is one of the most densely Rapid and unplanned urbanisation has A Torrens title system (through a
recognised land through the issue of an original populated countries in Latin America. resulted in large informal settlements in Real Property Ordinance-RPO) was
title. Titling has, however, been a The Government acknowledged the Peru. About two thirds of the population introduced in 1895, 10 years after the
slow and complicated process (on importance of land issues in the late now live in urban areas. The country introduction of a Registration of
average, it used to take up to 12 1970’s, but rather than taking a does have a formal titling system, but Deeds Act that regulated the
years to process a title). comprehensive view, it focused only on much of the established areas of the registration of deeds.
one aspect: land redistribution. country are covered by a separate
The Agrarian Reform Law of 1953 Although roughly 14% of the land in the registration of deeds system. Given the high costs and
provides the legal framework for rural country was subsequently redistributed administrative problems associated
land ownership and administration. it did not markedly improve tenure Since the early 1990’s, but in particular with the RPO, most land transactions
The Law identifies 5 forms of legal security as incomplete land records since 1996, there has been a strong continue to take place under the ‘old
land tenure: 7 prevented the formal completion of push for mass titling. Private ownership law’ deeds system.
1) smallholdings; many transfers. 8 of land is allowed through the issue of
2) medium sized holdings: farms an original land title. A title may also be Land can be classified as State,
larger than (1), capable of producing Private ownership of land is allowed. acquired through a supplementary title. State-enterprise or privately owned
for the market; Possession rights can be registered. land. Actual tenure is in fact quite
3) commercial farms: large farms with Possession rights can be registered. complicated; and private individuals
wage employees, modern technology Peru has done more to consolidate its have strong legal claims to State
and equipment etc. (confusing) land laws during the past lands through adverse possession.
4) community holdings: legally decade than any other country in Latin
America but, the formal legal framework Approximately 55% of farmers have
recognised Indian community land no formal, documented rights to their
worked by them; does not cope with the large and
consistent influx of people to the urban land.
5) cooperative land: land worked 9
jointly by individual farmers. centres.

The vagueness of these descriptions

has confused administration of the
law.

Page 146
 Indicator Bolivia El Salvador Peru Trinidad & Tobago
Types of rights The Agrarian Reform Act of 1953 not available Property rights associated with informal There are parcels of land occupied
informally recognised determined that those who had been arrangements were not recognised until under commonly accepted tenure
(including customary working land prior to the reform fairly recently. It is now possible to regimes, especially family land that is
systems) program would be the new owners. In obtain legal recognition of informal not recognised by law.
this way land invasions prior to and settlement and clear title (registered in
just after the 1952 revolution ended the Property Registry), although the Many occupiers of State lands
up being legitimised. Land was not process is protracted. without valid leases have strong legal
given to its rightful owner and claims to land. The number of ‘illegal
landlords lost those parts on which Between the 1930’s and 1960’s informal squatters’ on private land is
peasants were raising subsistence settler rights were strengthened by considerably less; most not having
crops. There were many problems shortening the prescription period from documentary evidence to support
with the process, e.g. the target for 30 to 10 years. Officially, settlers were claims of ownership or tenancy.
expropriation was ‘areas which given ‘expectative’ property rights, i.e.
the State acknowledged the validity of Only 10% of agricultural (state
inefficient landlords hold in excess’, owned) leasehold parcels are
but ‘inefficiency’ was never clearly their rights and took responsibility for
10 resettling them but prohibited the estimated to be occupied by lessees
defined. with valid leases. Many are squatters
establishment of new informal
The Agrarian Reform Act was settlements. Since the late 1980s the with informal rights, but there are a
replaced in 1996 by the INRA Act law has been amended to simplify the significant number of landholders with
(Law for the National Agrarian formalisation of informal settlements either expired or irregular leases.
Reform Service). This new law made and about 1.2 million titles have been
conceptual progress, eliminated land issued to informal settlers in urban
gifts, separated administration and areas under a World Bank project
justice, created automatic commenced in 1997.
mechanisms based on taxation
instead of visual inspection of land
use, and established procedures for
public auction of lands and
preferential access for those
11
belonging to indigenous groups.
Percentage of the During a 1984 census, about 20% of not available not available not available
country and population land in the country (22 million ha) was
covered by the formal identified as having owners.
system

Page 147
 Indicator Bolivia El Salvador Peru Trinidad & Tobago
Characteristics of Peasants and Indian indigenous In the late 1800s a landless class was The State regularises the rights of those There are no limitations on land
population without people are in a weak position for ‘purposely’ created by government to living in informal communities on State ownership and women’s rights are
formal rights access to land and land rights. provide workers for coffee plantations. owned land. Recognition is only given protected under the standard
The expansion of plantations and the where the community has already constitutional provisions (rights to
It has been estimated that native subsequent foreign exchange earnings accepted the situation, or given the enjoy property etc.).
groups claim about one third of the through coffee export was seen as a impression that it will. Regulation of
eastern lowlands of the country (the solution to the economic problems of informal rights on State owned land has
government recognises less). Since the country. This resulted in the transfer given some legal safety for those living
the late 1980s there have been many of much Indian land and that of other on ’collectively owned’ urban land
problems there with regard to peasants to private framers, as well as parcels, without granting a right to
government concessions to forest communal land being outlawed. ownership of the land. Squatters on
logging companies. Settlers often State land may also be relocated.
13
move in when the loggers move out, Rural landlessness and skewed land
and there has been trouble between distribution are still serious problems. In
loggers and indigenous groups living the early 1970s, 2% of the agricultural
in the forests. population owned 60% of agricultural
land. It was also established in the early
1970s that 65% of the rural population
was landless or land poor. Following the
civil war, and a land reform program,
about 54% of the agricultural work force
has remained landless, land poor or
12
without work.

Level of disputes over A consolidated map of land not available There are a fair number of disputes There are none of the structural
land ownership (based on descriptions among informal settlers and between conflicts between landlords and
registered in the cadastre) suggests informal settlers (living on State owned tenants that prevail in the rest of Latin
that there are overlapping claims on land), and the State. America.
about 40% of the total land resource.
This has contributed to disputes. The most common conflicts are
between neighbours over boundaries.
Various groups claim rights and Statistics are not available.
interest in the ownership and use of
land. The main groups are logging
companies, land title holders, large
and small scale farmers,
environmental groups and indigenous
people. As economic activity
increases, conflict over land, and in
particular forest resources, is
intensifying. 14

Page 148
 Indicator Bolivia El Salvador Peru Trinidad & Tobago
Time taken to resolve Tenure insecurity is less prevalent in not available not available Disputes can only be resolved
land disputes traditional areas where community through the Court system, leading to
organisations have remained strong. severe delays. Legal disputes over
Land disputes there are less frequent land often take years to resolve, in
than in other areas and are resolved part as a result of congestion of the
relatively quickly through community Court system.
mechanisms.
Officially land disputes are resolved
by officers of the National Land
Institute, and on appeal by the
Agrarian Judiciary (which still has
many shortcomings). Municipalities
and natural authorities have no part in
15
dispute resolution.

Page 149
Appendix 1 Endnotes

1
Information taken directly from relevant case studies compiled by Clarissa Augustinus; additional information for Ghana taken from Seth Opuni Asiama’s
paper that formed part of the World Bank Project Preparation Report for the Ghana Land Administration Project 2002.
2
Information taken directly from relevant case studies prepared for the Comparative Land Administration Study by Land Equity International Pty Ltd.
3
Rights under the Land Code can be issued in forest lands on an individual basis, provided the applicant proves entitlement.
4
See attached table based on Burns (1985) and Brits et al (2002) .
Rai (1 Rai Square % Number Area M Area % private
=1,600 m2) Km ha Square land
Km
Public land 202,500,000 324,000 63.1% NS4 18,629,088 11.30 113,000 59.8%
Private land 118,200,000 189,120 36.9% NS3 1,894,960 2.69 26,900 14.2%
Total 320,700,000 513,120 100.0% NS3K 7,332,669 6.34 63,400 33.5%
Source: Burns (1985) NS2 368,033 0.58 5,760 3.0%
Total 28,224,750 20.91 209,060 110.5%
Source: Brits et al (2002) , based on DOL records
5
Information taken directly from relevant case studies prepared for the Comparative Land Administration Study by Gavin Adlington, with the assistance of
Daninge Danielson, Baiba Ziemele and Elisabeth Lundgren.
6
The information has been taken directly from the relevant case studies. As the case studies for Latin American countries are only available in Spanish, the
main source of information was the regional paper on Latin America compiled by Grenville Barnes. The case study for Trinidad & Tobago was written by
Thackwray Driver. Information was also extracted for various other sources as specified in the endnotes.
7
Thiesenhusen, William C., 1995, Early Revolutionary Reforms: Bolivia, Broken Promises – Agrarian Reform and the Latin American Campesino, Westview
Press, Boulder, Colorado.
8
World Bank, 31 January 1996, Staff Appraisal Report El Salvador Land Administration Project, p 3, Natural Resources and Rural Poverty Division, Latin
America and Caribbean Region.
9
Information taken from addendum to the World Bank Urban Property Rights Project in Peru, Project Preparation Report (PPR), section on ‘The Legal and
Institutional Framework’, which was prepared by Watermark Industries Inc (Canada) during a mission to Peru in 1997.
10
Thiesenhusen, William C., 1995, Early Revolutionary Reforms: Bolivia, Broken Promises – Agrarian Reform and the Latin American Campesino, Westview
Press, Boulder, Colorado.
11
Justiniano, J., 2002, Country Case study for Bolivia. Paper presented at a World Bank Regional Workshop on Land Issues in Mexico during May 2002.
12
ibid
13
Information taken from addendum to the World Bank Urban Property Rights Project in Peru, Project Preparation Report (PPR), ‘The Legal and Institutional
Framework’, which was prepared by Watermark Industries Inc during a mission to Peru in 1997.
14
The World Bank, 1995, IDA Staff Appraisal Report, Bolivia National Land Administration Project, Resources Management and Rural Poverty Divisions,
America and Caribbean Regional Office
15
Justiniano, J., 2002, Country Case study for Bolivia. Paper presented at a World Bank Regional Workshop on Land Issues in Mexico during May 2002.

Page 150
 Appendix 2 –Customary Tenure

Indicators
• African Country Case Studies – Tables 30
• African Country Case Study (South Africa & Uganda)
– Table 31
• Asian Country Case Studies – Table 32
• European and Central Asia Country Case Studies (no
relevant issues) – Table 33
• Latin America Country Case Study – Table 34

Page 151
 Table 30 Customary Tenure Indicators for African Country Case Studies 1

Indicator Ghana Mozambique Namibia

Legal recognition of Traditional authorities own and control Customary tenure account for over 90% of land Most of the population lives in the north of the
customary rights nearly 80% of the land resources. In the tenure rights. Under the new land policy, country under a range of customary tenures. Rights
customary system traditional norms and participatory approaches and the variety of are recognised in some of the customary areas.
practices are recognised as the legal basis customary land rights are recognised. The
for land rights and relationships among land customary land tenure administration system
users. was given formal recognition in the 1997 Land
Law.
Clarity in the general The identity of customary authority as such During the socialist period (1975-1990), the In the north where customary tenure is in place,
community of identity of seems reasonably clear. In urban areas, national government pursued a policy of traditional authority structures play a formal and
customary authority customary authorities no longer administer reducing and abolishing the power of indigenous informal role, but their powers of land allocation
land on behalf of communities. They have leaders and administrative structures. and transfers has greatly diminished.
virtually become the owners as they take all Notwithstanding such attempts the indigenous
decisions and retain benefits. structures remain in place today. As a result of Tension between the role of the traditional authority
this policy such power and the relationships of officials in the new civil society of Namibia and the
In customary areas traditional leaders also traditional leaders with their communities and policy of the new national government is mirrored
remain very influential, although there are local government officials today are varied in structures operating on the ground. For example,
often disputes within groups about throughout the country. people prefer to take inheritance problems to
leadership; leaders/chiefs may be headmen, who do not have the power to enforce
challenged and so lose their position. In decisions. Although involved in all aspects related
such event all land grants made by the to inheritance etc., headmen operate in a ‘legal
incumbent chief may be annulled by his vacuum’.
successor and re-negotiations would need
to take place. In some cases, even where
the State acquired customary land,
customary tenure still prevails because
compensation has not been paid.

Clarity in the general Where both customary and statutory law Please refer to information below. Around towns in the former ‘homelands’ most
community of boundaries of apply confusion exists over who authorises informal settlers were allocated land by traditional
customary authority the alienation of particular parcels of land. leaders. They cannot really be described as
squatters.
Stools may be different from land owning
institutions, and adjacent stool may be
uncertain about their boundaries.

Page 152
 Indicator Ghana Mozambique Namibia
Clarity in the general Social and political institutions (such as the Because of the high level of conflict during recent Customary rights seem clear. Issues regarding the
community of customary extended family system, chieftaincy, etc.) years over numerous overlapping land requests differences between legal rights and what happens
rights that guide customary rights, and which and land use concessions in customary areas, in practice create some confusion and
existed under the traditional regime, have clarity and clear guidance by the authorities is disagreement. Customary rights are not always in
continued to exist. However, their functional lacking (institutional capacity is considered to be line with the new 1990 Constitution.
significance has been curtailed and modified weak).
to some extent. Nevertheless, their influence
remains strong enough to affect modern
land tenure relations.
Laws relating to land are well respected.
Confusion over land rights and the real
status of land takes place mainly when the
State acquires land but does not pay
compensation to owners, or does not utilise
the land.
Safeguards for vulnerable Squatters who illegally occupy lands to Customary rights are firmly entrenched in the In the north among the Oshiwambo speaking
groups which they have no title was virtually new Land Law of 1997. There is ongoing donor- people (40% of the population), there is conflict
unknown until recently. Squatting has not assisted work to ensure that tenure security is between the law and what happens in practice in
become a common occurrence because of given to customary rights holders. relation to matrimonial property regimes. This
the diligence of land-owners. should be considered in any future system that
The 1997 Land Law specifically notes the rights may replace the customary systems.
Only one example of squatters being evicted of women to be land use rights holders.
from State land has been noted: in late The rights of women are protected in the
2001, the Accra Metropolitan Assembly Constitution. This has encouraged a move away
ejected squatters who camped and from, for example, evicting widows from family land
established an informal settlement on a road in the Oshiwambo speaking areas in the north.
reservation in the city to make way for a
road. Social land tenure issues regarding, for example,
inheritance, marriage, informal unions, group rights
and the role of customary functionaries in land
designated as urban should be considered when
changing the system.

Page 153
 2
Table 31 Customary Tenure Indicators for South Africa and Uganda Case Studies

Indicator South Africa Uganda

Legal recognition of At present the country has a range of tenure types. Customary Customary tenure is the dominant tenure system in the country.
customary rights tenure per se is not a land right but the rights of occupation are
protected. Informal settlement tenure is not a land right but the The Land Act of 1998 (LA 98) vests land in the citizens of Uganda, rather
occupants can obtain adverse possession after 5 years and can be that the state as was previously the case. It also formalises customary
evicted only in terms of specific procedures. tenure while simultaneously recognising customary law. In addition, it
establishes a new independent for land administration and dispute
resolution, and creates a Land Fund with a number of compensation and
lending responsibilities.
LA98 allows persons occupying land under customary tenure to obtain a
certificate of customary ownership as documentary evidence of entitlement
through the process of adjudication and demarcation of boundaries. Third
party rights may also be recovered at the time of adjudication, and be
protected.
Customary owners may enter into a full range of land transactions, both
commercial and family transactions (sale, lease, mortgage, gift, devises).
Clarity in the general Some people are still disputing the role and authority of traditional It is not clear from the case study whether the authority of the customary
community of identity of leaders. leaders is clear to the people.
customary authority
Customary structures remain prevalent in the former homeland A Traditional Rulers Statute was introduced in 1993. This statute was
areas, including KwaZulu- Natal, where the majority of State owned meant, among other things, to restore to Traditional Rules assets and
land belongs to the King of the Zulus. This land is covered in properties previously owned by them or connected to them, and confiscated
customary tenure, and chiefdoms, and is being managed through by the State. The Traditional Ruler was to have the same estate or interest
the ‘Ingonyama Trust’. as was previously held by the Uganda Land Commission. The state created
a degree of uncertainty for occupants on Traditional Rulers land, which
Problems being faced include the fact that there has been no needs to be clarified in light of the new Constitution that was passed after
authoritative list of tribes/clans linked to proclamations of the areas 1993, as well as through LA98 that curtails and limits the role and interest of
of jurisdiction of a traditional authority, and that it has been hard to the Uganda Land Commission.
obtain agreement between adjacent traditional authorities.

Page 154
 Indicator South Africa Uganda
Clarity in the general There is duplication of land allocation functions with conflict Given the large number of land-related conflicts (see information below)
community of boundaries of between chiefs, municipal councillors, the State, provincial these boundaries do not always appear to be clear.
customary authority Departments of Agriculture and/or Traditional Affairs all involved.
KwaZulu-Natal is an example of where the lack of a complete
description of all the boundaries of the different clans/tribes made it
impossible to identify the complete boundary of the Ingonyama
Trust land (belonging to the Zulus). The boundary has become a
combination of the chiefs’ areas, plus the area that belonged to the
former homeland of KwaZulu.
Agreements with Traditional Authorities about areas of jurisdiction
must be finalised. Although agreements are presently reached
based on the notion that the Traditional Authority representatives
have seen beacons marking boundaries, such representatives
should accept boundaries and stop claiming neighbouring lands.
Clarity in the general In spite of confusion over boundaries (see above), rights appear to The 1998 Land Act has led to a significant increase in the number of land-
community of customary be reasonably clear in customary areas. related conflicts, rather than a decrease. It may be argued there is confusion
rights regarding rights.
Safeguards for vulnerable South Africa has numerous large informal settlements in urban LA98 initially focused on providing a basis for the emergence of a
groups areas. Notwithstanding the progress the State has made in functioning land market, but as public interest grew the focus shifted
upgrading settlements, many people continue to live in shacks, towards a more equitable system in which the rights of the poor and
without formal land rights, but protected to some extent under anti- vulnerable were protected. Today the law protects tenants, communal land-
eviction laws. After 5 years they may obtain adverse possession holding women, and minors, Although rights are noted in LA98, the law has
rights. not been fully implemented because of budgetary constraints (the full
implementation of the law would have cost government about a third of the
Safeguards for vulnerable groups such as the poor and women are national budget).
presently being incorporated into the system. More needs to be
done to accommodate the poor, those living with customary tenure, Following pressure by women to include a provision dealing with land
occupants of the former homeland areas, those living in family ownership rights between spouses, an amendment to LA98 was proposed,
groups, as well as those without any personal documentation, stating that land acquired by either spouse before marriage remained the
many of whom are illiterate or women. property of that spouse. Although published for debate, the amendment was
never passed in parliament and therefore not included in the published
version of LA98.

Page 155
 Table 32 Customary Tenure Indicators for Asian Country Case Studies 3

Indicator Indonesia Karnataka Thailand Philippines

Legal recognition of The Basic Agrarian Law – BAL – There is protection under the law Reservation in the 1960s of over To date the Philippines is the only
customary rights (UU 5/1960) is the basis for land for Scheduled Castes (SCs) and 50% of the country as forest is an country in Asia that has used the
administration. Article 5 stipulates Scheduled Tribes (STs), including important land issue. People have term ‘indigenous peoples’ and
that Indonesian national land law priority under the land reform continued to develop land under acted to recognise their rights.
shall be based on ‘Adat’ (customary) program and protection from customary practices, but can no Article XII of the 1987 Constitution
law. Implementing regulations are alienation of land - however this longer be certain their rights in land creates a formal legislative basis for
still based on the old Dutch Civil protection has been of limited will be recognised. recognition and establishment of
Code. Most existing implementing effect and evidence that land rights for indigenous cultural
regulations fail to elaborate or even landlessness is increasing Rights under the Land Code cannot minorities. The Government
contradict the adat principles. amongst SCs and STs at a faster be issued systematically in forests enacted an Indigenous People
rate than others due to pressure as and this includes most of the land Rights Act (IPRA) RA 8371 in 1997
The BAL was aimed at creating a more marginal and small farmers held by hills-tribes and indigenous and formed a National Commission
National Land Law based on the become landless labourers. Where groups. Although there is local on Indigenous People (NCIP). The
utilisation of traditional concepts, SCs and STs have been allocated recognition of the rights of hill- NCIP is mandated to identify,
principles, systems and institutions. land they have often been evicted tribes, there is usually no official delineate, recognise and ultimately
Many feel the BAL has been used to 4 recognition under the Land Code. issue title to ancestral land claims
and persecuted.
dilute customary rights and has now In 1995 it was noted that the (of individual, family or class) and
outlived its usefulness. government estimate for hill tribe ancestral domain claim (community
population was 554,172, compared or large group). According to NCIP
5
to NGO estimates of 700-800,000. in 1998 there were 12 to 15 million
indigenous people in the
6
Philippines.

Page 156
 Indicator Indonesia Karnataka Thailand Philippines
Clarity in the general There are more than 200 ethnic and not available not available IPRA provides a mechanism to
community of identity of sub-ethnic groups in Indonesia with establish and manage indigenous
customary authority the major groups being Javanese, people’s organisations (IPOs).
Sundanese, Minangkabau, Batak, There are indications that IPRA has
Melayu, Bugis, Makassar, Banjar, lead to a proliferation of IPOs and
Manadonese, Achehnese, engender disunities amongst
Madurese, Balinese, Ambonese, indigenous peoples. There have
Timorese, Dayak, and Papuans or been many community level
Irianese. Each group consists of disputes and suggestions that ethic
several sub-ethnic groups, each with identities and ancestral domains
7
their own dialects. There are also are being ‘imagined’.
other sub-ethnic groups like the
Baduy, Kubu, Sakai, and Suku Laut.
Traditionally there are inter-island
migrations among those ethnics.
There is migration from Java to the
outer islands and reverse migration
from the outer islands to Java, partly
because of a better economic
infrastructure.
Clarity in the general ‘Adat’ or customary land rights and not available not available Considerable uncertainty on the
community of boundaries of customary systems of tenure are extent of ancestral domains (see
customary authority acknowledged by law. The comments above) with a lot of past
government recognises the pressure from mainstream
existence of customary land, development projects,
provided certain criteria are met; i.e. ‘militarisation’, and land grabbing by
that boundaries must be well settlers and migrants. Procedures
defined and understood. It would to define and protect ancestral
appear that boundaries are not domain and to resolve
always clear. inconsistencies with other laws and
regulations is still to be established.

Page 157
 Indicator Indonesia Karnataka Thailand Philippines
Clarity in the general Rights do not seem clear, given the not available There is very limited recognition of As noted above, there is much
community of customary high level of land-related conflict rights to land in forests – limited to uncertainty surrounding the issuing
rights throughout the country. 5 year, renewable usufruct licences of rights to occupiers of forest land.
for agricultural users. There is no
recognition of customary law.

Safeguards for vulnerable There are not many safeguards for The provision of legal assistance to Landless squatters may acquire IPRA provides significant protection
groups vulnerable groups. poor farmers and the protection of rights over private land after 10 for indigenous peoples when it is
socially disadvantaged groups, years of peaceful and open implemented and operational
Persons who occupied state land including Scheduled Castes and possession of the land. issues resolved.
since the early years of Scheduled Tribes, form part of one
independence may apply for Hak of the four phases of land reform There are no restrictions on land The Philippines has had a long
Milik (freehold), except in DKI and is currently receiving attention. ownership by women. The Civil and history of Agrarian reform and
Jakarta where they may only be However, as noted above, this Commercial Code protects women redistribution of land to assist
issued HGB (‘building only’). To assistance is limited. from their husband’s selling landless farmers. The
underpin the systematic registration property without their consent. Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
program of ILAP, an amendment Land held as ‘common property Registration also enhances Law (CARL) of 1987 covers the
(regulation PP24 /1997) was made resource’ (CPR) is essential to protection of spousal rights as the redistribution of all public and
st
recently, the 1 amendment in 30 support the rural poor. DOL registration processes require private agricultural lands suitable
years. It provides for right to title spousal consent for a transfer of for agriculture to farmers and
after proof of 20 years occupancy. rights, regardless of who is regular farm workers who are
The occupancy must be in ‘good registered on the actual title. landless. “Landless” is defined as
faith’, and recognised by the adat owning less than 3 hectares. The
community. law and its implementation is
strongly supported by the public.

Page 158
 Table 33 Customary Tenure Indicators for Europe and Central Asia Country Case Studies 8
Indicator Armenia Kyrgyzstan Latvia Moldova
Legal recognition of There are no issues with respect to There are no issues with respect to There are no issues with respect to There are no issues with respect to
customary rights customary tenure or inheritance/use customary tenure or inheritance/use customary tenure or inheritance/use customary tenure or
traditions that complicate tenure traditions that complicate tenure traditions that complicate tenure inheritance/use traditions that
arrangements. arrangements. arrangements. complicate tenure arrangements.

Clarity in the general not available not available not available not available
community of identity of
customary authority
Clarity in the general not available not available not available not available
community of boundaries of
customary authority
Clarity in the general Tenure arrangements, particularly in Tenure arrangements in the rural sector Tenure arrangements in the rural sector Tenure arrangements, particularly
community of customary the rural sector, are clear, with few in particular are clear and there are few in particular are clear and there are few in the rural sector, are clear, with
rights problems with regard to ownership. problems with regard to ownership. problems with regard to ownership. few problems with regard to
ownership.
Safeguards for vulnerable not available not available not available not available
groups

Page 159
 Table 34 Customary Tenure Indicators for Latin America and Caribbean Country Case Studies 9

Indicator Bolivia El Salvador Peru Trinidad & Tobago

Legal recognition of Bolivia amended its Constitution in Recognition is now being given to There has been increasing In Trinidad & Tobago (as well as
customary rights 1994 to recognise traditional indigenous groups and their rights. recognition of indigenous groups some of the other Caribbean
indigenous territories (TCO) and the Up to the 1980s, successive and their rights in the country. nations) ‘family land’ has some
rights of indigenous people to governments limited the power of Most of the 8 million indigenous similarities to indigenous tenure.
administer their own land according to peasants and perpetuated the people in Peru live in ‘comunidades Family land may have been titled
their own customs. Indigenous tenure existence of a landless peasantry nativas’, many of which had been many years ago in the name of
may be formalised as a TCO (Tierras labour force to work on the coffee titled to indigenous groups. some deceased ancestor of the
Comunitarias de Origen) or as a plantations. Land reforms during present holders, and has
community property titled collectively In agrarian reform, no agricultural subsequently been passed down
the 1980s aimed at improving their parcels smaller than 3 ha could be
to an indigenous group. lot had little input from the peasants through several subsequent
adjudicated. The property registry generations without formal
Indigenous land tenure is widespread regarding design or implementation was forbidden to register transfers
and constitutes an important form of so it was met with strong opposition documentation; many of the living
or subdivisions involving parcels of family members with a valid claim
community tenure. Approximately 67% from the militias working for smaller than 3ha. This resulted in
of the population is of indigenous 10
landlords. Since then land reform to the land now tend to reside
massive informality, estimated at overseas.
origin so this is a key point for tenure has been a very slow process, around 700,000 parcels and
and land administration initiatives. marred by violence. affecting more than half of the Family land is distinct from
farmers in the country. indigenous land in Latin America
in that structures (formal
/informal) to deal with functions
such as land allocation and
conflict resolution are absent.
Clarity in the general The identity and power of customary The identity and power of The identity and power of not available
community of identity of authorities appears diminished by customary authorities appears customary authorities appear to
customary authority political and administrative structures. diminished by both pre- and post- have been diminished by political
Although unlikely to be as strong as it revolutionary political and and administrative structures in the
used to be, the formal recognition of administrative structures. Despite country.
the right of indigenous people to this there has been increasing
administer their own land according to recognition of customary rights
their own customs may re-establish after the revolution.
the identity of traditional leaders.

Page 160
 Indicator Bolivia El Salvador Peru Trinidad & Tobago
Clarity in the general Prior to the revolution, Indians spread not available Much remains to be done in terms not available
community of boundaries of their risk by farming on land both in the of addressing overlaps with
customary authority highlands and lowlands. The 1954 law protected environmental areas and
determined that they would only be encroachment by private farmers
able to formally obtain the right to one seeking land.
such plot of land, i.e. not two different
11
plots in different geographical areas.
Land tenure security and recognition
of property rights for indigenous
people and community organisations
remain problematic issues.
Rights are understood by not available not available not available
the people

Page 161
 Indicator Bolivia El Salvador Peru Trinidad & Tobago
Safeguards for vulnerable Agrarian reform resulted in land being not available The rights of urban squatters was not available
groups granted to approximately a million recognised in 1988 with the
peasants. Although peasants were introduction of 3 novel concepts to
given parcels, they did not receive the legal framework surrounding
inputs, credit or any technical land administration:
assistance which limited the economic
impact of the land reform. 1) it provided for the registration of
possession rights;
Following protest of the government’s
granting of lumber concessions in 2) it set a new registry system with
forest land on which indigenous tribes simple procedures to register
live in 1986, land on the outer fringes ownership and possession rights;
of the forests was conceded to the 3) it legalised the concept of a
Indians. This was not accepted by the mortgage based on possessory
Indians, and lead to the government rights. In 1991 Decree 653 was
complying with native territorial passed, removing many remaining
demands and a cessation of the restrictions, most notably those on
awarding of logging rights in 1990 until the free transfer of land.
more studies had been conducted into
the impact of forest reserves and
12
policies.
Due to lack of enforcement, the INRA
Act (Law for the National Agrarian
Reform Service) of 1996 has been
criticised for not radically changing the
pattern of access to land. It has
significantly changed the distribution of
Original Community Lands for lowland
indigenous groups. Ethnic
communities have been given land for
free, and awarded rights similar to
permanent usufruct. Land has not yet
been given to individuals nor has the
mechanism of ‘public collation’
necessary to create a transparent land
13
market been implemented.

Page 162
Appendix 2 Endnotes

1
Information taken directly from relevant case studies compiled by Clarissa Augustinus; additional information for Ghana taken from Seth Opuni Asiama’s
paper that formed part of the World Bank Project Preparation Report for the Ghana Land Administration Project 2002.
2
The information has been taken directly from the relevant case studies.
3
The information has been taken directly from the relevant case studies.
4
National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, ‘Issues of Social Justice: Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward
Classes – An Unfinished Business’ http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/programs/constitutionalism/publications/issues_of_social_justice_scst_obc.pdf
5
The missing figures – www.signposts.uts.edu.au/articles/Thailand/Population/357.html
6
Asian Development Bank 2002.
7
ibid
8
Information taken directly from the relevant case studies compiled by Gavin Adlington, with the assistance of Daninge Danielson, Baiba Ziemele and
Elisabeth Lundgren.
9
The information has been taken directly from the relevant case studies. As the case studies for Latin American countries are only available in Spanish, the
main source of information was the regional paper compiled by Grenville Barnes. The case study for Trinidad & Tobago was compiled by Thackwray Driver.
Information was also extracted for various other sources as listed in the footnotes.
10
Thiesenhusen, William C., 1995, Reforms of the 1980s: El Salvador, p 139-158, Broken Promises – Agrarian Reform and the Latin American Campesino,
Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
11
ibid
12
ibid
13
Justiniano, J., 2002, Country Case study for Bolivia. Paper presented at a World Bank Regional Workshop on Land Issues in Mexico during May 2002.

Page 163
Appendix 3 – Land Administration

Parameters

• Land Administration Parameters for Africa and Asia

- Tables 35
• Land Administration Parameters for Europe and
Central Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean
– Table 36
• Land Administration Parameters for Selected
Jurisdictions with Well-Developed Registries
– Table 37

Page 165
 Table 35 Land administration parameters African and Asian Country Case Studies

Parameter Ghana Mozambique Namibia South Africa Uganda Indonesia Karnataka Philippines Thailand
2
Area (km ) 239,460 801,590 825,418 1,219,912 236,040 1,919,440 191,791 300,000 514,000

Population (in millions) 20.2 m 19.6 m 1.8 m 43.6 m 24.6 m 231 52.7 84.5 62.6

Estimated number of not available Millions still to be not available ± 8 million 700,000 titles; 75 million not available not available 20-30 million
land parcels registered surveyed parcels
Kumasi region
– 36,000
parcels
surveyed (only
one title
registered =
over palace
ground)

Registered land parcels Accra: 11,383 Roughly 1,000 not available 6,996,658 an estimated 5 ± 17 million >15 million > 10 million ±19 million
parcels valid ‘old’ titles in million still to titles (2001)
registered over country. For be registered
13 years; 1991-96, with
foreign aid, 69
Accra: an
titles had been
average of
issued, with 800
3,956 p/a for
being pro-cessed
1st
at the end of
registrations
1996. Titling to
re- commence in
2003, after
restructuring.

Annual transfers not available not available not available 379,839 (2001/02 not available not available not available not available not available
financial year)
Many of State’s
subsidised
houses are
transferred
‘informally’

Page 166
 Parameter Ghana Mozambique Namibia South Africa Uganda Indonesia Karnataka Philippines Thailand
Annual registered not available not available Rehoboth 1,240,778 not available 540,200 589,000 in ‘Very low level’ ±4m
transactions registry - registrations in 1999/00
(for year
rough 2000 (but
ending 30
average of 5 records
Sept 2001)
transactions incomplete)
per day
909,000 in
1999

Annual registered 1,368 in total not available not available 380,000 unknown 252,200 not available 368,068 2.44 m
transfers (1990-2000)
± 300,000 (1998 sales, (2000) (for year
(registration of
current titles mortgages ending 30
subsequent
and leases) Sept 2001)
transactions)

Annual registered 797 in total no registered not available 249,656 not available not available not available 398,195 not available
mortgages (1988-2000) mortgages (2000) –
(registration of Registrar of
subsequent Deeds
transactions)

Annual budget for not available not available not available R173 million not available 650 m Rupiah 367.5 m Rs in 1,184.6 million U$69.8 m
registry (±U$19.3 million) (1999) 1999/00 Pesos for
(for year
2002
(±U$92,198.00 (US$7.9 ending 30
at Dec 1999 million) (±U$22.3 Sept 2001)
rate) million at Dec
2002 rate)

Annual budget for not available not available not available R70 million not available 134,000 m 403.1 m Rs in Nil not available
cadastre (if separate) (2001/02 budget Rupiah (1999) 1999/00
for Surveyor
(±U$19 (US$8.7 m)
General)
million)
(±U$7.8 million at
Oct 2001 rate)

Page 167
 Parameter Ghana Mozambique Namibia South Africa Uganda Indonesia Karnataka Philippines Thailand
Annual revenue not available not available not available R217,086,000 not available 2,070 m ±7.6 million Rs 1,146.7 million U$354.3 m
(2001/02) revenue Rupiah (1998) in 1999/00 Pesos (2000)
(for year
for information
351 m Rupiah (±US$163.4 (±U$22.9 ending 30
supplied by the
(1999) * million) million at Dec Sept 2001)
registry (not
2000 rate)
cadastre) * registration
(±U$24.1 million fee revoked by
at Oct 2001 rate) law
Note: Surveyor
General revenue
figure not
available

Number of registry staff 55 Registry office not available not available not available not available 1,546 2,408 (2002) ±8,500
still under legal
development

Total number of staff ±700 in Survey 326 in not available not available not available 25,000 2,863 not available 11,834
(registry/cadastre) Dept DINAGECA
(National
±755 in
Directorate of
registry
Geography and
Cadastre)

Number of registration Headquarters Registry office Country: not 9 (provincial) not available 273 199 162 registries 76 Provincial
offices in Accra; still under legal available of deeds land offices
Municipal/ sub-registries
branch offices development and 272
Rehoboth – Regency Land at city/Taluk
in Kumasi and Branch
only 1 offices level
Tema Provincial
Offices (title
register)
758 district
land offices
keep registers
for lesser
documents

Page 168
 Table 36 Land administration parameters for European and Central Asian and Latin American, Caribbean Country Case Studies

Parameter Armenia Kyrgyzstan Latvia Moldova Bolivia El Salvador Peru Trinidad &
Tobago
Area (km2) 29,800 198,500 64,589 33,843 1,098,581 21,040 1,285,215 5,128

Population 3.3 4.8 2.4 4.4 8.3 m 6.3 m 26.7 m 1.262 m

Estimated number of 0.65 m 1.8 m 6m 0.5 m

not available not available not available 5 million
land parcels (approximate,
with some
overlap)

Registered land parcels 2.5m not available 0.58m 3.08m not available not available 3.2m (deeds ±250,000
registry) parcels
registered under
0.8m (title traditional
registry) registry system;
another 50,000
registered under
new system

Annual transfers not available not available not available not available not available not available not available not available

Annual registered 30,228 (2000) – 33,374 (2001) – 121,010 714,000 (2001) not available 284,920 471,000 (deeds ±30,000
transactions excl. systematic Sporadic (2001) – systematic registrations on registry) 1999 transactions
average for registered
131,901 (2001) – 187,000 (2001) 2000/01 82,784 (title annually
Systematic – sporadic registry) (deeds system)

Annual registered 19,774 (2000) – 31,161 44,801 71,000 (2001) not available 313,355 133,530 (deeds 33,526
transfers (sales, (Sales- 2001) registry)
mortgages &, (2001) – (sales, (sales, (sales,
leases) leases, gifts) 26,290 mortgages &, 26,356 (title mortgage and
(Mortgages- leases) registry) lease
2001) transactions)
Leases on ± 2,000 sale
average transfers
1,000 p.a. registered
annually under
RPO

Page 169
 Parameter Armenia Kyrgyzstan Latvia Moldova Bolivia El Salvador Peru Trinidad &
Tobago
Annual registered Only above total 17,407 (2001) 26,290 (2001) 7,346 (2001) not available not available 5,749 (deeds not available
mortgages available registry)
26,356 (title
registry)

Annual budget for Nil U$471,768 (2001) U$1.25 Nil not available Nil (self- not available U$1,369,380
registry million sustainable by (2001)
law)

Annual budget for Nil Nil U$9.1 million Nil not available not available not available U$637,000
cadastre (if separate) (2001)

Annual revenue U$2,250,000 U$604,738 U$26.9 U$ 1,293,000 not available not available 44,790,272 U$15,022,000
(U$1.39 m from (includes million (deeds registry) (registry) 1997
fees, estimated revenue
U$585,000 from for 2002 for all 3,226,365 (title
EU and offices that are not registry)
U$920
U$275,000 from self-financed) +
WB project) 8% of the revenue (cadastre) 1998
at self-financing
offices

Number of registry staff not available 128 160 700 not available ±800 1376 (deeds not available
registry)

Total number of staff not available not available not available not available not available not available 174 (title not available
(registry/cadastre) registry)

Number of registration 1 central office 1 central office 8 regional 1 central office not available not available 60 (deeds not available
offices (HQ); 47 local (HQ) plus 50 local offices for (HQ), 12 registry)
level offices registration offices cadastre regional offices,
throughout the 17 local level 20 (title registry)
country that (24 of these are offices
hold the legally already self-
valid records. financing) Copies of
registers are
kept centrally.

Page 170
 Table 37 Land administration parameters for selected jurisdictions with well-developed registries

New Aust.
South Western Queens- Northern Hong New England Singa-
Parameter South Victoria Capital Tasmania Scotland
Australia Australia land Territory Kong Zealand & Wales pore
Wales Territory
Area (km2) 0.984m 2.525m 0.801m 0.227m 1.727m 1.346m 2,400 67,800 1072 0.268m 0.151m 636 78,772
Population 1.5m 1.9m 6.5m 4.8m 3.6m 0.2m 0.3m 0.5m 5.9m 3.9m 50m 3.5m 5.2m
Estimated number of land not not not not not not not not not not not not
not avail.
parcels available available available available available available avail. avail. avail. avail. avail. avail.
Registered land parcels 1
0.82m 0.96m 3.66m 3m 1.7m 0.06m 0.16m 0.3m 2.5m 3m 22.3m 0.26m 2.59m
(Title and/or deeds registration)
not not not not not not
Annual transfers 0.10m 0.27m 0.28m 0.02m 0.230m 2.70m 0.16m
available available available available avail. avail.
Annual registered transactions 0.20m 0.34m 0.98m 0.80m 0.83m 0.02m 0.04m 0.09m 0.6m 0.67m 4m 0.45m 0.49m 2
not not not not 3 not
Annual registered transfers 0.10m 0.27m 0.28m not avail. 0.02m 0.230m 2.70m 0.16m
available available available avail. avail.
not not not not not
Annual registered mortgages 0.11m 0.30m 0.24m not avail. 0.018m 0.149m 1.72m 0.18m
available available available avail. avail.
not $16.42 $39.9m $33.46 $425m not $66.56
Annual budget for registry 4 $16.81m 5 $33,74m 6 $72.34m 7 $67.26m 8 $34.94m 9 $0.59m 10 11 12 13 14 15
available m avail.
Annual budget for cadastre (if not not not not not not not not not not not
not avail. not avail.
separate) available available available available available avail. avail. avail. avail. avail. avail.
not not not
Annual revenue $35.50m $28.32m $72.03m $77.30m $34.94m 1.58m $52m $31.81 $535.6 $75.76
available avail. avail.
not not not
Number of registry staff 274 236 280 223 14 16 49 525 8,600 117
available avail. avail.
Total number of staff not not Not not not not not not not
920 not avail. not avail. 647
(registry/cadastre) available available available available avail. avail. avail. avail. avail.
Number of registration offices 1 3 1 1 6 2 1 1 9 6 25 1 2

Page 171
Appendix 3 Endnotes

1
There are 17.3 million computer titles, and an unknown but estimated number of 5 million old system parcels.
2
Comprising 335,406 dealings with registered title and 160,965 Sasines.
3
These figures are a projection based on data for 6 months.
4
Australian figures have been converted into US$ at the rate of 0.58.
5
Annual Report for the Department of Administrative Services and Information
http://www.landservices.sa.gov.au/pdf/Annual_Report_2001.pdf
6
Annual report for the Department of Land Administration 2001-2002
http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/publications/tabledpapers.nsf/displaypaper/3620440a3bcd138e36fa82a048256c68002741f3/$file/dola_annual_report_lowres.pdf
7
Includes the cost of cadastre and valuation functions. Expenditure information from the DITM Annual Report for 2001/2002 -
http://www.ditm.nsw.gov.au/department/publications/ar2002.pdf
8
Department of Natural Resources Annual Plan for 2000/2001.
http://www.nre.vic.gov.au/web/root/domino/cm_da/nrenar.nsf/frameset/NRE+Annual
9
Annual report of the Department of Natural Resources and Mines 2001-2002 – Land Services
http://www.nrm.qld.gov.au/about/pdf/annual_report/annual_financials-02.pdf
10
Department of Justice Annual Plan 2001-2002
http://www.nt.gov.au/justice/docs/depart/dojannrep0102.pdf
11
Annual report for Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment 2002
http://www.dpiwe.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/Attachments/LBUN-5GF3JX/$FILE/Annual%20Report%20FinState.pdf
12
Hong Kong Land Registry Annual Report 2001-2002
http://www.info.gov.hk/landreg/en/public/annual.htm converted into US$ at the exchange rate of 7.80.
13
Expenditure for 2001-2002 from the LINZ Annual Report
(http://www.linz.govt.nz/staticpages/pdfs/linzpublications/0203annualreport.pdf) converted to US$ at the rate of $0.4816, the rate published by the Reserve
Bank of New Zealand for July 2002 http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/exandint/b1/hb1.xls.Expenditure includes functions such as valuation, hydrographic
survey and Crown land management.
14
Annual report for 2002 lists the total costs at UK 291.9 million pounds
(http://www.landreg.gov.uk/ar2002/default.asp?id=13) which is converted into US$ at the exchange rate of 1.5546 for July 2001 as published by the Bank of
England
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/mfsd/rates/MEx_02jul.xls
15
Registry of Scotland Annual Report 2001-2002
http://www.ros.gov.uk/pdfs/general/annualreport2002.pdf which is converted into US$ at the exchange rate of 1.5546 for July 2001 as published by the Bank
of England http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/mfsd/rates/MEx_02jul.xls

Page 172
Appendix 4 – Formal Land Administration

Effectiveness Indicators

• Land Administration Indicators for Africa and Asia - Tables 38

• Land Administration Indicators for Europe and Central Asia
• and Latin America and the Caribbean – Table 39
• Land Administration Indicators for Selected Jurisdictions with Well-
Developed Registries – Table 40

Page 173
 Table 38 Indicators of Formal Land Administration Effectiveness for the country case studies (Africa and Asia)

Indicator Ghana Mozambique Namibia South Africa Uganda Indonesia Karnataka Philippines Thailand
not avail. likely 1
Percentage of total parcels registered 23% 30% 63% 2
to be high
not available
Percentage of transfers that are not available but 3
not available 15% but likely to
registered likely to be high
be high
Annual registered transactions as a
5.82% 3.9% 11% 21.2%
percentage of registered parcels
Annual registered transfers as a 4
not available not available 3.7% 13.1%
percentage of registered parcels
Annual registered mortgages as a
not available not available not available not available 5
percentage of registered parcels
Ratio of annual registry running
0.79 0.16 1.17 not available 6
costs/registered parcels
Ratio of annual registry running costs
(including cadastre if separate)/registered not available not available not available 2.1
parcels No Data Available for African Countries
Registration staff days/registration 0.9 0.56 1.56 0.5 7
Total staff days/registration not available not available 0.5 0.66 8
Time to produce certified copy of title 1 day 1 day 2 days 30 min.
Time to complete registration of transfer 14 days 20 days 14 days 2.5 hrs.
Total ongoing land related court cases as 9
not available not available 15% 0.15% 10
a percentage of total registered parcels
Average time to resolve ongoing court
not available 7 years 11 not available 3 years
cases
Number of registries per 1 million
1.48 3.77 1.96 5.89 12
population
Number of registries per 100,000 square
15.79 103.76 54.00 70.94
kilometres in country land area
Average working days to pay for average
not available not available 24 12
transfer cost
Transfer cost as a percentage of value 0.5 13 8.2 4.5 13
Unit cost of systematic title (US$) 24.4 not available not available 24.21
Provincial &
Level of government where registration is Provincial not
not available District City & Taluk District Sub-
undertaken level 14 available
Provincial
20.68 (reg.)
Ratio of revenue/expenditure No Data Available not available 9.84 (Registry+ 2.37 5.08
Survey Dept.)

Page 174
 Table 39 Indicators of Formal Land Administration Effectiveness for the country case studies (ECA and LAC)
Trinidad &
Indicator Armenia Kyrgyzstan Latvia Moldova Bolivia El Salvador Peru
Tobago
Percentage of total parcels registered not available not available not available 61% not available not available 67% 53%
Percentage of transfers that are registered not available not available not available not available not available not available not available not available
Annual registered transactions as a percentage
0.8% 3.1% 7.7% 4% not available 17.8 13.8% 6.7
of registered parcels
Annual registered transfers as a percentage of
not available not available not available not available not available not available 3.9% not available
registered parcels
Annual registered mortgages as a percentage of
not available not available 4.5% 0.7% not available not available 2.1% not available
registered parcels
Ratio of annual registry running costs/registered 15
not available not available not available not available not available 27.47 not available 2.70
parcels
Ratio of annual registry running costs (including
49.62 17 7 2.46 not available not available not available not available
cadastre if separate)/registered parcels
0.76 deeds
Registration staff days/registration 10 0.8 0.6 2.5 not available not available not available
registry
0.54 title
Total staff days/registration not available not available not available not available not available 1.2 1.8
registry
Time to produce certified copy of title 4 days 2-7 days 1 hr 10 days not available 8 days 30min 6

Time to complete registration of transfer 15 days 10 days 3 days 3-4 days not available 8-30 days 4-7days 90
Total ongoing land related court cases as a not available not available not available not available
not available not available not available not available
percentage of total registered parcels likely to be low likely to be low likely to be low likely to be high
Average time to resolve ongoing court cases 3 mths minimal minimal long not available not available not available not available
2.3 (deeds)
Number of registries per 1 million population 19.2 11.1 11.1 6.6 not available not available not available
0.8 (titles)
Number of registries per 100,000 square 4.6 (deeds)
0.9 0.25 0.4 1.6 not available not available not available
kilometres in country land area 1.6 (titles)
Average working days to pay for average
77 228 31 66 not available not available not available not available
transfer cost
Transfer cost as a percentage of value 1.5 5 0.6 - 4 1.5 not available not available not available not available
12.66 Urban
Unit cost of systematic title (US$) 18.02 15.76 13 16 9.90 181.40 29.74 1,064
46.68 Rural
Level of government where registration is
Local Local Region Local not available not available not available not available
undertaken
Ratio of revenue/expenditure 1.6 17 0.28 1.6 18 not available 19 not available not available not available not available

Page 175
 20
Table 40 Indicators of Formal Land Administration Effectiveness for selected jurisdictions with well-developed registries
New Australian
South Western Queens- Northern Hong New England Singa-
Indicator South Victoria Capital Tasmania Scotland
Australia Australia land Territory Kong Zealand & Wales pore
Wales Territory
Percentage of total parcels
registered (Title and/or deeds 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
registration)
Percentage of transfers that not not not not not
are registered 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
available available available available available
Annual registered transactions
as a percentage of registered not
24.4% 30.3% 26.7% 25.8% 41.8% 39.8% 35.8% 30.0% 24.00% 22.61% 20.52% 19.1%
parcels available
Annual registered transfers as
a percentage of registered not not not not not not
10.24% 7.37% 9.26% 7.1% 9.20% 12.11% 6.36%
parcels available available available available available available
Annual registered mortgages
as a percentage of registered not not not not not not
11.08% 8.19% 7.96% 6.0% 5.96% 7.69% 7.1%
parcels available available available available available available
Ratio of annual registry
running costs/registered not not not not not not not not
$9.83 $15.96 $11.15 $26.23 $25.64
parcels available available available available available available available available
Ratio of annual registry
running costs (including not not not not not not not
cadastre if separate)/ $20.50 $35.14 $19.76 $22.72 $28.55 $54.73
available available available available available available available
registered parcels
Registration staff not not not not
days/registration 0.35 0.22 0.091 0.069 0.18 0.076 0.16 0.21 0.18
available available available available

Total staff days/registration not not not not not not not not
0.94 21 0.25 0.59 22 0.05 0.92
available available available available available available available available
Time to produce certified copy 10-45 not
of title 5 min-2hr 9 min Instant Instant Instant <15 min 2 min 25 min < 5 min 1 day 30 min
min available
Time to complete registration 23 15 days 25 days 1 week
of transfer 7 days 5.2 days Immed. 5 days 2-5 days 24 hrs 24 hrs 24 hrs 20 days 27 days
(95%) (80%) (85%)
Total ongoing land related
court cases as a percentage of not not not not not not not not not not not not not
total registered parcels available available available available available available available available available available available available available

Page 176
 New Australian
South Western Queens- Northern Hong New England Singa-
Indicator South Victoria Capital Tasmania Scotland
Australia Australia land Territory Kong Zealand & Wales pore
Wales Territory
Average time to resolve not not not not not not not not not not not not not
ongoing court cases available available available available available available available available available available available available available
Number of registries per 1
million population 0.66 1.58 0.15 0.205 1.66 24 2.51 3.093 2.112 1.32 3.78 0.51 0.37 0.39
Number of registries per
100,000 square kilometres in 0.101 0.119 0.125 0.439 0.347 0.148 40.97 1.463 1,315 4.45 16.54 1,515 2.59
country land area
Average working days to pay not not not not not not not
for average transfer cost 40.5 29.9 28.0 39.1 32.3 32.9
available available available available available available available
Transfer cost as a percentage not not not not not not not
of value 4.19% 3.28% 3.24% 4.15% 3.31% 3.25%
available available available available available available available
Unit cost of systematic title not not not not not not not not not not not not not
(US$) available available available available available available available available available available available available available

Level of government where National,

National, National, National,
registration is undertaken State State State State State Territory Territory State & 24 National
branch branch branch
districts

Ratio of revenue/expenditure not not not

2.11 0.84 0.99 1.15 1.00 2.67 1.30 0.95 1.023 1.135
available available available

Page 177
Appendix 4 Endnotes

1
Very approximate estimate.
2
The total number of parcels in Thailand is estimated at 30 million. Only the titled property has been included in the estimate for registered parcels, even
though there are many millions of certificates of utilisation (NS3/3K) which are transferable and accepted by banks as collateral. Many of the current parcels
cannot be registered under the current legal and policy framework as the land parcels are considered forest land.
3
Based on a very small sample of a rural pilot in Leyte province.
4
The number of registered titles is not known. This figure is based on an estimate of 10 million titles.
5
Number of mortgages registered annually is not available.
6
Land Office staff include both registry and cadastral staff.
7
Includes all Land Office staff.
8
Includes Central Valuation Authority staff as well as Head Office staff.
9
Based on preliminary information on LAMP.
10
Based on an estimate of the total number of civil cases that were land related.
11
Estimate only.
12
The number of registries in Thailand is only the number of title registries (provincial and branch land offices), not the district land offices which maintain the
registers for lessor documents.
13
Value based on declared price not valuation.
14
A national function delegated at provincial level to organisations belonging to the National Department of Land Affairs.
15
Annual running cost (US$7.335m) divided by annual registrations (267,048).
16
The titling program in Latvia is a sporadic redistribution program. The unit cost per title under the program is $13, but in addition the beneficiaries have to
contribute $426 to the cost of the survey.
17
Budget expenses derived entirely from donor funds.
18
Includes registry and cadastral office.
19
Expenses not known, however system is entirely self funded.
20
The data from this table was largely sourced from the Data Matrix produced by the Land Registrars Development Officers Conference, Australia, 2002.
21
The total number of equivalent full-time staff is 920, which includes all the staff in titling, survey and valuation, as well as DITM corporate services, and the
Office of the Director General.
22
The Data Matrix lists a total number of 8,600 staff, but notes that some are part-time.
23
The standard registration service is immediate for face-to-face lodgement, or within 2 days for bulk lodgement.
24
Based on the 6 lodgement and processing locations and does not take into account the 34 search locations.

Page 178
References

Adlington G, 2002. Comparative Study of Land Administration Systems with

Special Reference to Armenia, Moldova, Latvia and Kyrgyzstan. Synthesis
paper for Eastern and Central Europe region prepared for World Bank, April.
Agarwal B, 1994. A Field of One’s Own: Gender and Land Rights in South Asia,
published by the Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
Alemu, D, 2006. “Comparative Performance Assessment of various Cadastral
Surveying Methodologies: Case-study of the Hordofi Village Cadastral Surveying
Exercise”, unpublished report prepared by ARD Inc in collaboration with LALU and
LAUD, April 2006.
Alston, L, Libecap, G and Schneider, R,1996. “The Determinants and Impact of
Property Rights: Land Titles on the Brazilian Frontier.” Journal of Law, Economics
and Organisation, Volume 12, pages 25-61.
Angel S, 2001. Comments on Hernando De Soto’s The Mystery of Capital,
contribution to an electronic round-table arranged by the International Division of the
American Planning Association.
Arruñada B, 2002. ‘A Transaction-Cost View of Title Insurance and its Role in
Different Legal Systems’ published in The Geneva Papers of Risk and Insurance,
volume 27 number 4, October 2002, pp 582-601.
http://www.econ.upf.es/docs/papers/downloads/565.pdf
Asian Development Bank, 2002. Indigenous Peoples/Ethnic Minorities and
Poverty Reduction – Philippines, published by the Environment and Social
Safeguard Division, June 2002.
http://www.adb.org/Documents/Reports/Indigenous_Peoples/PHI/default.asp
Atwood D A, 1990. 'Land Registration in Africa: The Impact on Agricultural
Production', World Development, volume 18, number 5, pages 659-671.
Augustinus C, 2003a. Comparative Analysis of Land Administration Systems:
African Review with Special Reference to Mozambique, Uganda, Namibia,
Ghana, South Africa. Synthesis paper prepared for the World Bank, January 2003.
Augustinus C, 2003b. Comparative Analysis of Land Administration Systems:
South Africa. Summary and Case Study. Paper prepared for the World Bank,
January 2003.
Augustinus C, 2003c. Comparative Analysis of Land Administration Systems:
Uganda. Summary and Case Study. Paper prepared for the World Bank, January
2003.
Backstrom, L, 2006. ‘Look at Ethiopia! A Simplified and Result Orientated
Development and Implementation of a Low Cost Land Administration System’ paper
presented XXIII FIG Congress, Munich, Germany, October 8-13.
http://www.fig.net/pub/fig2006/papers/ts61/ts61_01_backstrom_0312.pdf
Barnes A, 2006. Owning Russia: The Struggle over Factories, Farms and
Power, published by Cornell University Press, Ithaca/London.

Page 179
Barnes G, 2002. Latin America and the Caribbean – a Synthesis Report.
Synthesis paper prepared for the World Bank, October 2002.
Bartlett, R H, 2004. Native Title in Australia (2nd Edition), published by LexisNexis
Butterworths, Australia.
Bekure, S, 2006. “Benefits and Costs of Rural Land Titling: The International
Experience”, paper presented National Conference on Standardization of Land
Registration and Cadastral Surveying Methodologies, United Nations Conference
Center, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, March 20-24, 2006.
Besley, T, 1995. “Property Rights and Investments Incentives: Theory and Evidence
from Ghana.” Journal of Political Economy, volume 103, pages 903-37.
Bird M, Slack E, 2002. Land and Property Taxation around the World: A Review
2002, paper presented in Hungary and Mexico at World Bank Policy Seminars.
Bloch, P, Lastarria-Cornhiel, S, Stansfield, J, 2006. ‘The Contribution of Foreign
Assistance to the Development of Land Markets and the Strengthening of Property
Rights: The Case of USAID’, in Dixon-Gough, R, Bloch P, C (editors), The Role of
the State and Individual in Sustainable Land Management, published by Ashgate
Publishing Ltd, Aldershot.
BPN, 1993. Land Administration Project – Project Preparation Report,
unpublished report produced by BPN, May 1993.
Brasselle, A, Gaspart, F, Platteau, J-P, 2002. “Land Tenure Security and Investment
Incentives: Puzzling Evidence from Burkina Faso.” Journal of Development
Economics, volume 67, issue 2, pages 373-418.
Brits A, Grant C, Burns A, 2002. Comparative Study of Land Administration
Systems with special reference to Thailand, Indonesia and Karnataka (India).
Synthesis paper for Asian region prepared for World Bank, May 2002.
Bruce, J, 2003. ‘Property Rights Issues in Common Property Regimes for Forestry’,
in Ko-Yang, T, The World Bank Legal Review: Law and Justice for
Development, published by the World Bank, Washington.
Burns A F, 1985. Report on Land Adjudication in Thailand. Report R1,
unpublished report, Land Titling Project, Bangkok.
Burns, A F, 1995. “Systematic Registration”, Report Number H1, Thailand Land
Titling Project, November 1995, Bangkok.
Burns, A F, 2006. “International Experience and a Framework for Monitoring of
Pilots”, paper presented at the National Workshop on Land Policies and
Administration for Accelerated Growth and Poverty Reduction in the 21st Century,
New Delhi, January 5-6.
Carter, M and Olinto, P, 2003. “Getting Institutions Right for Whom? Credit
Constraints and the Impact of Property Rights on the Quantity and Composition of
Investment.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, volume 85, pages
173-86.
Christodoulou D, 1990. The Unpromised Land: Agrarian Reform and Conflict
Worldwide, Zed Books Ltd, UK.

Page 180
Cousins B, 2000. ‘Tenure and Common Property Resources in Africa’, in Toulmin C,
Quan J (editors), Evolving Land Rights, Policy and Tenure in Africa,
DFID/IIED/NRI, London.
Cousins B, 2002. ‘Legislating Negotiability: Tenure Reform in Post-Apartheid South
Africa’, in Juul K, Lund K, (editors), Negotiating Property in Africa, published by
Heinemann, Portsmouth.
Dale P F, McLaughlin J D, 1988. Land Information Management: An Introduction
with Special Reference to Cadastral Problems in Third World Countries,
published by Oxford University Press, New York.
Dale P F, McLaughlin J D, 1999. Land Administration, published by Oxford
University Press Inc, New York.
De Janvry A, Cordillo G, Platteau J-P, Sadoulet E (editors), 2001a. Access to Land
– Rural Poverty and Public Action, published by Oxford University Press, London.
De Janvry A, Platteau J-P, Cordillo G, Sadoulet E, 2001b. ‘Access to Land and Land
Policy Reforms’, in de Janvry A, Cordillo G, Platteau J-P, Sadoulet E (editors),
Access to Land – Rural Poverty and Public Action, published by Oxford
University Press, London.
De Soto H, 1989. The Other Path, published by Harper & Row, New York.
De Soto H, 1993. 'The Missing Ingredient: What Poor Countries Need to Make Their
Markets Work', The Economist, volume 328, number 7828, Special Supplement for
the Economist's 150 years, pages 8-12, September 11 1993.
De Soto H, 2000. The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West
and Fails Everywhere Else, published by Basic Books, New York.
Deere C D, León M, 2001. Empowering Women: Land and Property Rights in
Latin America, published by University of Pittsburgh Press, USA.
Deere C D, León M, 2002. ‘Individual versus Collective Land Rights: Tension
Between Women’s and Indigenous Rights Under Neoliberalism’, in Chase, J (ed),
The Spaces of Neoliberalism: Land, Place and Family in Latin America,
Kumarian Press, Connecticut, USA.
Deininger K, 2003. Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction, co-
published by the World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2003, and available on
http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/ESSD/essdext.nsf/24ByDocName/PRRe-
DiscussionDownloadPRR
Delville P L, 2000. ‘Harmonising Formal Law and Customary Land Rights in French-
Speaking West Africa’, in Toulmin C, Quan J (editors), Evolving Land Rights,
Policy and Tenure in Africa, DFID/IIED/NRI, London.
Diamond J, 1997. Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies,
published by W. W. Norton & Company Ltd, London, UK.
Dixon-Gough R (editor), 1999. Land Reform and Sustainable Development,
Ashgate Publishing Ltd, London, UK.
Do, Q T, and Iyer, L, 2002. “Land Rights and Economic Development: Evidence from
Viet Nam.” Mimeo, MIT.
Dorner P, 1972. Land Reform and Economic Development, published by Penguin,
Harmondsworth.

Page 181
Durand-Lasserve, A, Royston, L, 2002. ‘International Trends and Country Contexts –
From Tenure Regularization to Tenure Security’, in Durand-Lasserve A, Royston, L
(editors), Holding their Ground: Secure land tenure for the urban poor in
developing countries, published by Earthscan Publications Ltd, London.
Enemark, S, Williamson, I, P, 2004. ‘Capacity Building in Land Administration – A
Conceptual Approach’, Survey Review, volume 39, number 296, pages 639-650.
http://www.geom.unimelb.edu.au/research/SDI_research/publications/Capacity%20B
uilding%20(SurvReview04).pdf
Feder G, Feeny D, 1991. 'Land Tenure and Property Rights: Theory and Implications
for Development', World Bank Economic Review, volume 5, number 1, pages 135-
153.
Feder, G Onchan, T, Chalamwong, Y, Hongladarom, C, 1988. Land Policies and
Farm Productivity in Thailand, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and
London.
Feder G, Noronha R, 1987. 'Land Rights Systems and Agricultural Development in
Sub-Saharan Africa.' World Bank Research Observer, volume 2, number 2, pages
143-169, July.
Fergus, M (editor), 2006. ‘The Global Land Tool Network: Development of Innovative
Pro-Poor Land Tools’, minutes from GLTN Workshop, Oslo, 23-24 March, 2006.
http://www.gltn.net/images/stories/NEWS/gltn_minutes_oslo_23-2403061.pdf
FIG, 1995. The FIG Statement on the Cadastre. FIG Publication No. 11, 1995
(ISBN 0-644-4533-1).
http://www.fig7.org.uk/publications/cadastre/statement_on_cadastre.html
Field, E, 2003. “Entitled to Work: Urban Property Rights and Labour Supply in Peru”,
Research Program in Development Studies, Princeton University, Working Paper
No.220.
Field, E and Torero, M, 2006. “Do Property Titles Increase Credit Access Among the
Urban Poor: Evidence from a Nationwide Titling Program”, mimeo Harvard
University.
Fukuyama, F, 2004. State Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st
Century, published by Cornell University Press, USA.
GLTN, 2006. ‘Minutes from the Network event on: Global Land Tool Network (GLTN)
Development of Pro poor Land Tools’, Land and Tenure Section, UNHabitat, Nairobi.
http://www.gltn.net/images/stories/NEWS/060620_minutes.pdf
Gopal, G, 1999. Gender-Related Legal Reform and Access to Economic
Resources in Eastern Africa, published by The World Bank, Washington.
Harahap R M, 1999. Strategies for Preventing Corruption in Indonesia, working
paper on governance, Asia Pacific School of Economics and Management,
Australian National University.
http://eprints.anu.edu.au/documents/disk0/00/00/01/54/
Harpum C, Grant M, Bridge S, 2000. The Law of Real Property, Sixth Edition,
published by Sweet & Maxwell, London.
Hepburn S, 1998. The Principles of Property Law, published by Cavendish
Publishing (Australia) Pty Ltd, Sydney.

Page 182
Hilhorst T, 2000. ‘Women’s Land Rights: Current Developments in Sub-Saharan
Africa’, in Toulmin C, Quan J (editors), Evolving Land Rights, Policy and Tenure
in Africa, DFID/IIED/NRI, London.
Hodess, R, Inowlocki, T, Wolfe, T, 2003. Global Corruption Report 2003: Access
to Information, published by Profile Books Ltd/Transparency International, London.
Home, R, Lim, H (editors), 2004. Demystifying the Mystery of Capital: Land
Tenure and Poverty in Africa and the Caribbean, published by Cavendish
Publishing, London.
Hughes H, 2003. ‘Aid has Failed the Pacific’, Issue Analysis, number 33, 7 May
2003.
http://www.cis.org.au/IssueAnalysis/ia33/ia33.pdf
Internet Center for Corruption Research, 2002. The 2002 Transparency
International Corruption Perceptions Index, a joint initiative of the Center for
Globalization and Europeanization of the Economy in Goettingen University and
Transparency International, available on:
http://www.icgg.org/corruption.cpi_2002.html
Isles C, 2002. Transfer of Titles: Realities on the Ground, report produced as part
of the Land Laws and Regulations Policy Study, Land Administration and
Management Project, July 2002.
Jacobs, H M, 1998. Who Owns America? Published by the University of Wisconsin
Press, Madison, US.
Jacoby, H, Li, G, Rozelle, S, 2002. “Hazards of Expropriation: Tenure Security and
Investment in Rural China.” American Economic Review, volume 92, issue 5,
pages 1420-47.
Jaffee D, Kaganova O, ‘Real Estate Markets in Urban Russia’, published in Journal
of Transforming Economics and Societies, Volume 3, number 3, Summer 1996,
accessed on:
http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/jaffee/Papers/UrbanRussia.pdf
Jimenez, E, 1984. “Tenure Security and Urban Squatting.” Review of Economics
and Statistics, volume 66, issue 4, pages 556-67.
Justiniano J, 2002. Country Case study for Bolivia. Paper presented at a World
Bank Regional Workshop on Land Issues in Mexico during May 2002.
Juul K, Lund K (editors), 2002a. Negotiating Property in Africa, published by
Heinemann, Portsmouth.
Juul K, Lund K, 2002b. ‘Negotiating Property in Africa: Introduction’, in Juul K, Lund
K, (editors), Negotiating Property in Africa, published by Heinemann, Portsmouth.
Kai-sing Kunk, J, 2003. ‘The Role of Property Rights in China’s Rural Reforms and
Development, in So, A, China’s Development Miracle: Origins, Transformations,
and Challenges, published by An East Gate Book, New York.
Kälin, C H, 2005, “International Real Estate Handbook: Acquisition, Ownership and
Sale of Real Estate Residence, Tax and Inheritance Law”, published by John Wiley
& Sons Ltd, Chichester, 2005.

Page 183
Kauffman J, 2002. ‘Benchmarking Cadastral Systems – Results of the Working
Group 7.1 of FIG Commission 7’, pages 9-17, published in Benchmarking
Cadastral Systems, compiled by Steudler D, Kauffman J, and available on:
http://www.swisstopo.ch/fig-wg71/benchmarking.htm
Kauffman, J, Steudler, D, 1998. Cadastre 2014: A Vision for a Future Cadastral
System, published by FIG and available on:
http://www.fig.net/cadastre2014/
Kent R B, 'Land Registration and Cadastral Mapping in Less Developed Countries:
An Overview', Surveying and Mapping, volume 41, number 4, pages 409-417,
1981.
Lambsdorff J D, 1999. Corruption in Empirical Research – A Review, paper
presented 9th International Anti-Corruption Conference, 9-15 October 1999, Durban,
South Africa.
http://ww1.transparency.org/iacc/9th_iacc/papers.html
Lao Land Titling Project, March 2002. Land Administration Review, Attachment 6,
Project review conducted for the World Bank by Land Equity International Pty Ltd.
Lanjouw, J and Levy P, 2002. “Untitled: A Study of Formal and Informal Property
Rights Urban Ecuador.” Economic Journal, volume 112, pages 986-1019.
Lavadenz I, Sanjak J, Barnes G, Adlington G, 2002. Concept Paper and Annexes -
Comparative Study of Land Administration Systems, unpublished report
prepared by the World Bank, January 2002.
Lavelle K, 2002. ‘Title Insurance: Is it Wanted Here?’ published in Law Society
Journal, New South Wales Law Society, November 2002.
Lindsay J, 2002. ‘Ensuring Land Access in Post-Conflict Situations’, comments on
paper presented by Jean Daudelin at the Regional Workshop on Land Issues in
Asia, 4-6 June 2002. Published on CD-ROM of proceedings. Overhead available on:
http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/ESSD/ardext.nsf/24ByDocName/PolicyResearchRepor
tAsiaWorkshop
Lund K, 2002. ‘Negotiating Property Institutions: On the Symbiosis of Property and
Authority in Africa’, in Juul K, Lund K, (editors), Negotiating Property in Africa,
published by Heinemann, Portsmouth.
Lunnay, C, 2006. ‘Surveying and Land Administration – Sustainable Education for
Developing Countries’ paper presented XXIII FIG Congress, Munich, October 8-13.
http://www.fig.net/pub/fig2006/papers/ts15/ts15_03_lunnay_0362.pdf
Lyons K, Cottrell E, Davies K, “The Case for Re-Focussing & Re-Engineering Land
Administration to Better Meet Contemporary and Future Needs in Property Rights
and Markets”, presented paper at a Joint AURISA and Institution of Surveyors
Conference, Adelaide, 25-30 November 2002. Paper accessed on:
www.anzlic.org.au/get/2381206196.pdf
McAuslan P, 2000. ‘Only the Name of the Country Changes: The Diaspora of
“European” Land Law in Commonwealth Africa’, in Toulmin C, Quan J (editors),
Evolving Land Rights, Policy and Tenure in Africa, DFID/IIED/NRI, London.
McAuslan P, 2002. ‘Tenure and the Law’. In Payne G (editor), Land, Rights &
Innovation: Improving Tenure Security for the Urban Poor, published by ITDG
Publishing, London.

Page 184
McAuslan P, 2003. ‘Bringing the Law Back In: Essays in Land, Law and
Development’, published by Ashgate Publishing Limited, England.
Mandelbaum, M, 2002. The Ideas that Conquered the World: Peace, Democracy,
Free Markets in the Twenty First Century, published by PublicAffairs, New York.
Maslow A, 1987. Motivation and Personality. Third Edition, published by Harper
and Row, New York.
Migot-Adholla S, Hazell P, Blarel B, Place F, 1991. ‘Indigenous Land Rights Systems
in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Constraint on Productivity?’, The World Bank Economic
Review, Volume 5, Number 1, pages 155-175, January.
Ministry of Lands and Forestry, 2002. Project Preparation Report: Ghana Land
Administration Project, Design and Implementation Plan, March 2002.
Mohit R S, 2002. ‘A Level Playing Field: Security of Tenure and the Urban Poor in
Bangkok, Thailand’, in Payne G (editor), Land, Rights & Innovation: Improving
Tenure Security for the Urban Poor, published by ITDG Publishing, London.
Montúfar G, 2002. ‘Los Sistemas de Administración de Tierras en el Peru.’ Final
Report prepared for the World Bank, 197p.
Morgan G, 1999. ‘Title Insurance: Its Relevance to Lenders’, in Jackson P and Wilde
D (editors) Contemporary Property Law, published by Dartmouth Publishing
Company Limited, Aldershot UK.
Neumann M, 2002. The Rule of Law: Politicizing Ethics, published by Ashgate
Publishing Limited, Aldershot, UK.
Ng’weno B, 2000. ‘Titling Collective Property, Participation, and Natural Resource
Management: Implementing Indigenous and Afro-Colombian Demands’. A Review of
World Bank experience in Colombia, World Bank report, accessed on:
http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/ESSD/essdext.nsf/24DocByUnid/E7B2E7F4C75458F6
85256BE6006D8003/$FILE/colombia_nrm.pdf
Ngaido, T, 2004. “Reforming Land Rights in Africa.” Brief prepared for Assuring Food
and nutrition security in Africa by 2020: Prioritizing Actions, Strengthening, Actors
and Facilitating Partnerships, Kampala, Uganda, April 1-3, available on:
http://www.ifpri.org/2020africaconference/
Palmer R, 2000. ‘Land Policy in Africa: Lessons from Recent Policy and
Implementation Processes’, in Toulmin C, Quan J (editors), Evolving Land Rights,
Policy and Tenure in Africa, DFID/IIED/NRI, London.
Panaritis, E, 2005. ‘Is Informality An Enigma? Informal Urban Property In Peru’, in
Insead Euro-Asia Centre Research Paper No. 79, France.
Partnership for Governance Reform in Indonesia, 2002. A Diagnostic Study of
Corruption in Indonesia. Final report, February, 2002.
Payne G (editor), 2002. Land, Rights & Innovation: Improving Tenure Security
for the Urban Poor, published by ITDG Publishing, London.
Payne G, 1997. Urban Land Tenure and Property Rights in Developing
Countries – a Review, IT Publications, ODA.

Page 185
Peters, P, 2002. ‘The Limits of Negotiability: Security, Equity and Class Formation in
Africa’s Land Systems’, in Juul K, Lund K, (editors), Negotiating Property in Africa,
published by Heinemann, Portsmouth.
Place, F and Migot-Adholla, S, 1998. “The Economic Effects of Land Registration for
Smallholder Farms in Kenya: Evidence from Nyeri and Kakamega Districts.” Land
Economics, volume 74, issue 3, pages 360-73.
Platteau, J-P, 2000. ‘Does Africa Need Land Reform?’, in Toulmin C, Quan J
(editors), Evolving Land Rights, Policy and Tenure in Africa, DFID/IIED/NRI,
London.
Powelson, J P, 1988. The Story of Land: A World History of Land Tenure and
Agrarian Reform, published by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge.
Prosterman R L, Temple M N and Hanstad T M (editors), 1990. Agrarian Reform
and Grassroots Development a Policy Study by the Curry Foundation, Lynne
Rienner Publishers, London, UK.
Quan J, 2000a. ‘Land Tenure, Economic Growth and Poverty in Sub-Saharan
Africa’, in Toulmin C, Quan J (editors), Evolving Land Rights, Policy and Tenure
in Africa, DFID/IIED/NRI, London.
Quan J, 2000b. ‘Land Boards as a Mechanism for the Management of Land Rights in
Southern Africa’, in Toulmin C, Quan J (editors), Evolving Land Rights, Policy and
Tenure in Africa, DFID/IIED/NRI, London.
Rattanabirabongse V, Eddington R A, Burns A F, Nettle K G, 1998. ‘The Thailand
Land Titling Project - Thirteen Years of Experience’, Journal of International Land
Use Policy, volume 15, number 1, pp 3-23, 1998.
Sadoulet E, Murgai R, de Janvry A, 2001. ‘Access to Land via Land Rental Markets’,
in de Janvry A, Cordillo G, Platteau J-P, Sadoulet E (editors), Access to Land –
Rural Poverty and Public Action, published by Oxford University Press.
Shivji I G, 1998, Not Yet Democracy: Reforming Land Tenure in Tanzania.
Published jointly by the International Institute for Environment and Development
(iied), HAKIARDHI, Land Rights Research & Resources Institute, and the Faculty of
Law, University of Dar Es Salaam.
Siegan B H, 1997, Property and Freedom: The Constitution, the Courts and
Land-Use Regulation, published by the Social Philosophy Policy Center and by
Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick.
Simpson S R, Land Law and Registration, published by Cambridge University
Press, 1976.
Thampi G K, 2002. Corruption in South Asia: Insights & Benchmarks from
Citizen Surveys in Five Countries. Report published by Transparency
International.
http://ww1.transparency.org/pressreleases_archive/2002/dnld/south_asia_report.pdf
Thiesenhusen W C, 1995. Early Revolutionary Reforms: Bolivia, Broken
Promises – Agrarian Reform and the Latin American Campesino, published by
Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
Ting L, Williamson I P, 1999. ‘Cadastral Trends: A Synthesis’, published in The
Australian Surveyor, Volume 4, Number 1, pages 46-54.

Page 186
Ting L, Williamson I P, 2000. Spatial Data Infrastructures and Good Governance:
Frameworks for Land Administration Reform to support Sustainable
Development. 4th Global Spatial Data Infrastructure Conference, Cape Town, South
Africa, 13-15 March.
http://www.sli.unimelb.edu.au/research/publications/IPW/ipw_paper40.pdf
Tinker I, Summerfield G, (editors), 1999. Women’s Rights to House and Land:
China, Laos, Vietnam, published by Lynne Rienner Publishers Inc.
Toulmin C, 2000. ‘Decentralization‘Decentralisation and Land Tenure’, in Toulmin C,
Quan J (editors), Evolving Land Rights, Policy and Tenure in Africa,
DFID/IIED/NRI, London.
Toulmin C, et al (editors), 2005. Land in Africa: Market Asset or Secure
Livelihood, Issue paper no. 136, March 2005, IIED/NRI/RAS, London.
Toulmin C, Quan J (editors), 2000a. Evolving Land Rights, Policy and Tenure in
Africa, DFID/IIED/NRI, London.
Toulmin C, Quan J, 2000b. ‘Evolving Land Rights, Tenure and Policy in Sub-
Saharan Africa’, in Toulmin C, Quan J (editors), Evolving Land Rights, Policy and
Tenure in Africa, DFID/IIED/NRI, London.
Toulmin C, Quan J, 2000c. ‘Registering Customary Rights’, in Toulmin C, Quan J
(editors), Evolving Land Rights, Policy and Tenure in Africa, DFID/IIED/NRI,
London.
UN/FIG, 1999. Report of the Workshop on Land Tenure and Cadastral
Infrastructures for Sustainable Development, 18-22 October, Bathurst.
http://www.sli.unimelb.edu.au/UNConf99/sessions/session1/bathurstdec.pdf
Virachit, V, Lunnay, C, 2005. ‘The Lao Land Titling Project - Innovative Land Tools in
Lao PDR’ paper presented Expert Group Meeting on secure land tenure: new legal
frameworks and tools, UNESCAP- in Bangkok, Thailand, December 8-9.
http://www.fig.net/commission7/bangkok_2005/papers/6_2_virachit.pdf
Viravong M, 1999. ‘Reforming Property Rights in Laos’, in Tinker I, Summerfield G
(editors), Women’s Rights to House and Land: China, Laos, Vietnam, published
by Lynne Rienner Publishers Inc, Colorado.
Wachter D, English J, 1992. The World Bank's Experience with Land Titling,
Divisional Paper number 1992-35, Policy and Research Division, Environment
Department, World Bank, March.
Ward, R, Kingdon, E, 1995. Land, Custom and Practice in the South Pacific,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Wiebe K D, Tegene A, Kuhn B, “Land Tenure, Land Policy, and the Property Rights
Debate”, in Jacobs H M (editor), Who Owns America? Published by the University
of Wisconsin Press, 1998.
Wilcox M D, 2005. Cut Your Title Insurance Costs, December 2005 available on;
http://www.kiplinger.com/basics/managing/insurance/title.html
Williamson, I P, 2002. ‘The Cadastral “Tool Box” – a Framework for Reform’, paper
presented, Session TS7.2 on Cadastral Innovation, FIG XXII International Congress,
Washington DC, April 19-26 2002.
Williamson I P, Chan T O and Effenberg W W, 1998. ‘Development of Spatial Data
Infrastructures – Lessons Learnt from the Australian Digital Cadastral Databases’,
GEOMATICA, Vol. 52, No. 2, 177-187

Page 187
Williamson I P, Feeney M E 2001. Land Administration and Spatial Data
Infrastructures - Trends and Developments. Proceedings of the 42nd Australian
Surveyors Congress, Brisbane, Australia, 25-28 September, CD-ROM.
http://www.sli.unimelb.edu.au/research/publications/IPW/2_01Williamson_Feeney_S
urvCongressBris.pdf
Williamson O E, 2000. ‘The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking
Ahead’, Journal of Economic Literature, Volume 38, pages 595-613.
World Bank, 1974. Land Reform, World Bank Development Series, Washington DC.
World Bank, 1990a. World Development Report 1990 - Poverty, published for the
World Bank.
World Bank, 1990b. ‘Thailand: Second Land Titling Project’, staff appraisal report,
report number 8538-TH, 7 August 1990.
World Bank, 2002a. ‘Kingdom of Cambodia Land Management and Administration
Project’, project appraisal document, Report 22869-KH, 29 January 2002 and
available in the project database on the World Bank website:
http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDS_IBank_Servlet?pcont=details&eid=000094946_020
21204004320
World Bank, 2002b. ‘Ukraine Rural Land Titling and Cadastre’, project
implementation document, PID5331, prepared 19 March 2002 and available in the
project database on the World Bank website:
http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/external/default/main?pagePK=64193027&piPK=64187937&theS
itePK=523679&menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=64187283&siteName=WDS&e
ntityID=000094946_99032505581868
World Bank, 2002c. ‘Republic of Nicaragua: Land Administration Project’, project
appraisal document, Report 22399-NI, 17 May 2002 and available in the project
database on the World Bank website:
http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSServlet?pcont=details&eid=000094946_0206060401
1399
World Bank, 2004. World Development Report 2004: Making services work for
Poor People, Oxford University Press, Washington.
World Bank, 2006. ‘Peru: Real Property Rights Consolidation Project’, project
appraisal document, report number 34998-PE, February 16 2006 and available in
the project database on the World Bank website:
http://www-
wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/IW3P/IB/2006/02/27/000012
009_20060227100939/Rendered/PDF/349880REV0pdf.pdf
World Bank/IBRD, 2006. Where is the Wealth of Nations? The World Bank,
Washington.
World Bank, IFC, and Oxford University Press, 2005. Doing Business 2005:
Removing Obstacles to Growth, published by IBRD/World Bank, Washington.
World Bank, IFC, and Oxford University Press, 2006a. Doing Business 2006:
Creating Jobs, published by IBRD/World Bank, Washington.
World Bank, IFC, and Oxford University Press, 2006b. Doing Business 2007: How
to Reform, published by IBRD/World Bank, Washington, available on the Doing
Business database website:
http://www.doingbusiness.org/
.

Page 188
Index
Accra, 36, 76, 102, 103, 104 indigenous land, 1, 25, 29, 39, 40, 104, 116,
Africa, 2-12, 14, 17, 19, 21, 23-24, 35, 36, 38, 118
40, 47, 53, 54, 55, 66, 67, 72, 74, 76, 81, Indonesia, 3, 14, 26, 53-79, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64,
90, 97, 98-104, 115, 117, 119, 126, 129 66, 67, 69, 74, 75, 76, 80, 81, 82, 95, 104,
Argentina, 1 107, 112, 117, 126, 130
Armenia, 3, 11, 27, 32, 35-37, 35-37, 47, 48, insurance principle, 106
52, 127 Islamic law, 112
Asia, 2, 3, 11, 14, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23-27, 36, Japan, 1
37, 40, 41, 60, 61, 67, 74, 80, 98, 101, 104, Karnataka, 3, 35, 36, 37, 47-51, 52, 91
112 Kenya, 14, 24, 107, 108, 114, 119
Australia, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 KwaZulu-Natal, 60, 65, 76
benchmarking, 31 Kyrgyzstan, 3, 8, 27, 32, 35, 36, 37, 38, 47-51,
Bolivia, 3, 10, 14, 15, 53-57, 114-22, 131 52, 106, 127
Botswana, 102, 108 LAC, 3, 11, 21, 53-57, 53
boundaries, 14, 28, 37, 60, 61, 63, 64, 68, 73, land
76, 109, 117, 126 grabbing, 24, 40, 100
boundary, 40 law, 71
Bureau of Technical Inventory, 8, 27 market, 15, 18-21, 30, 32, 42, 45, 64, 125
Cambodia, 72, 81, 125 reform, 25, 28, 41, 42, 66, 74, 61-62, 99, 128
Capacity building, 82 tenure, 4, 10, 17, 19, 25, 28, 35, 36, 59, 61, 64,
CIS, 11, 27, 28, 52 96, 98, 102, 103, 104, 110, 111
COFOPRI, 61, 109 Land Boards, 72, 75, 76, 102
Colombia, 70 land ownership ceilings, 98
colonial administration, 7, 25 land tenure, 12
Community Relations and Services, 67 Lao PDR, 1, 64, 72, 114
conflict, 1, 14, 19, 25, 37, 62, 63, 66, 68, 80, Laos, 94
101, 102, 103, 112, 113, 115 Latin America, 2, 3, 14, 19, 28, 29, 30, 40, 73,
corruption, 62, 79, 80, 100, 117 74, 79, 81, 97, 98, 102, 104, 112, 116
Cuba, 1 Latvia, 3, 27, 35, 36, 37, 47, 52
customary Malawi, 1, 102
rights, 14, 36, 39-40, 54, 66, 80, 101, 103, 104, Malaysia, 78, 125
110, 115 mass titling, 104, 107
systems, 4, 11, 13-18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 27, 33-38, Mexico, 1
70, 92, 97, 98-104, 115, 130, 131 Mexico,, 120
tenure, 14, 23, 25, 27, 35-38, 38, 39, 63, 65, 82, Moldova, 3, 35, 36, 47-51, 52
98-104 Mozambique, 3, 4, 53-57, 65, 99, 119, 131
disputes, 19, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 68, 72, 76, Namibia, 3, 5, 53-57, 102, 109, 119, 131
101 New Zealand, 47, 48-51, 49, 50, 78
Doing Business, 53-57 Nicaragua, 72
dual tenure systems, 101 OECD, 47
East Asia, 2 overlapping claims, 37, 102
ECA, 3, 11, 19, 20, 21, 26, 27, 28, 35-37, 47, Papua New Guinea, 82
49, 51, 66, 81, 97, 107, 120, 125, 129 Perú, 1, 3, 10, 35, 39, 40, 41, 47-51, 53, 78,
El Salvador, 3, 10, 29, 37, 39, 40, 47, 53, 113, 79, 81, 97, 104, 109, 112-17, 129
117, 127, 129 Philippines, 3, 14, 21, 25, 53-57, 36, 65, 69,
England/Wales, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 73-76, 110-12, 80, 81, 82, 97, 104, 106,
English common law, 14, 103 131
Europe, 2, 3, 11, 14, 19, 26, 61, 73, 79, 98 pilot programs, 68
Family land, 11, 29, 39, 41 Poland, 18
forest, 14, 15, 21, 25, 36, 39, 40, 62, 63, 64, private conveyancing, 35, 105
66, 76, 97, 104, 126 quantitative indicators, 33, 41, 47
Fujimori, A, 34, 61 registration of deeds, 30, 35, 51, 103-6, 107,
Garcia, A, 34 110, 129
Ghana, 3, 15, 34, 36, 37, 64-69, 61, 64-69, 76, registration of title, 30, 104-7, 121
77, 119, 125, 128, 130 rule of law, 70, 71
Greece, 78, 79, 81, 105 Scotland, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 120
Hong Kong, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 78 Singapore, 47, 49, 50

Page 189
South Africa, 3, 5, 36, 37, 40-41 Thailand, 1-16, 25, 34-36, 37, 57-79, 48, 52,
Soviet Union, 8, 27, 97 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 76, 80, 81, 91, 95,
sporadic registration, 62 97, 98, 104, 110, 114, 117, 118, 119, 126,
stakeholder consultation, 125 127, 131
starter titles, 109 Toledo, A, 61
survey and mapping, 73, 78, 105, 110, 117 Torrens title system, 7, 35
sustainability, 2, 16, 17, 20, 26, 28, 42, 45, 67, Trinidad & Tobago, 3, 10, 35, 36, 38, 39, 47-
73, 89, 90, 91, 126, 128 49, 50
systematic land titling, 24, 99, 104 Trinidad and Tobago, 54
Taiwan, 1 Uganda, 3, 14, 20, 34, 36-38, 66, 76, 102,
Tanzania, 1, 72 111, 119, 125, 128, 131
tenure security, 14, 21, 35, 39, 97, 99, 109, Ukraine, 66, 106
111 Vietnam, 15, 72
women, 37, 41, 67, 99, 111-16

Page 190
Author Index

Adlington, G, 11, 61 Hepburn S, 119

Agarwal, B, 112 Hepburn, S, 106
Alemu, D, 88, 89 Hilhorst, T, 99, 111
Alston, L et al, 92 Hodess et al, 80
Angel, S, 107 Home, R and Lim, H, 107
Arruñada, B, 120 Hughes, H, 118
Asian Development Bank, 109, 120, 163 Internet Center for Corruption Research, 79
Atwood, D A, 81, 82, 104 Isles, C, 80
Augustinus C, 150, 163 Jacobs, H, 32, 108
Augustinus, C, 4, 11, 66, 76, 107, 111 Jacoby, H et al, 92
Backstrom, L, 94 Jaffee, D and Kaganova, O, 107
Badan Pertanahan Nasional (BPN), 63, 77 Jimenez, E, 92
Barnes, A, 1, 27 Justiniano J, 150, 163, 183
Barnes, G, 11, 29, 104 Juul, K and Lund, K, 69, 98, 101
Bartlett, R,, 30 Kai-sing Kunk, J, 1
Besley, T, 92 Kälin, C H, 56
Bird, M M and Slack, E, 111 Kauffman, J, 31
Bloch et al, 16 Kauffman, J and Steudler, D, 91
Brasselle, A et al, 92 Kent, 61
Brits et al, 117 Lambsdorff, J D, 80
Brits, A et al, 11, 104, 150 Landjouw J and Levy P, 92
Bruce, J, 71 Lao Land Titling Project, 114
Burns, A F, 92, 150 Lavadenz, I et al, 2, 3, 15
Carter, M and Olinto, P, 92 Lavelle, K, 120
Christodoulou, D, 97 Lindsay, J, 71
Cousins, B, 100, 101, 102 Lund, K, 99, 101
Dale P F, McLaughlin J D, 133 Lunnay, C, 95
Dale, P F and McLaughlin, J D, 85, 86, 88, Lyons et al, 30
104, 105, 106 Mandelbaum, M, 69
De Janvry, A et al (eds), 101, 105, 107 Maslow, A, 20
De Soto H, 117 McAuslan P, 121
De Soto, H, 2, 53, 66, 67, 81, 91, 93, 107 McAuslan, P, 79, 98, 99, 100, 103, 109, 114,
Deere, C D and León, M, 112, 113, 114, 115, 125
116 Migot-Adholla, S et al, 99
Deininger, K, i, 1, 2 Ministry of Lands and Forestry, 64
Delville P, 119 Mohit, R S, 143
Delville, P L, 59, 99, 100, 101, 103, 110, 131 Montúfar, G, 29
Diamond, J, 69, 70 Morgan, G, 106, 120
Dixon-Gough, R (ed), 97 Neumann, M, 70
Do Q T, and Lyer, L, 92 Ng’weno, B, 70
Dorner, P, 99 Ngaido, T, 108
Durand-Lasserve, A and Royston, L, 70 Palmer, R, 66, 133
Enemark, S and Williamson, I P, 94 Panaritis, E,, 34
Feder, G and Feeny, D, 99 Partnership for Governance Reform in
Feder, G and Noronha, R, 100 Indonesia, 80
Feder, G and Noronha, R,, 93 Payne, G (ed), 107, 109, 110, 111
Feder, G et al, 2, 92 Peters, P, 99, 100, 101
Fergus, M, 111 Place, F and Migot-Adholla, S, 92
Field, E, 92 Platteau, J-P, 99, 100, 102, 114
Field, E and Torero, M, 92 Powelson, J P, 14
Fukuyama, F, 108 Prosterman, R L et al, 96
Galiani, S, 92 Quan, J, 102
Global Land Tools Network, 111 Rattanabirabongse, V et al, 63
Gopal, G, 111 Sadoulet, E et al, 111
Harahap, R M, 80 Shivji, I G, 72
Harpum, C et al, 106 Siegan, B, 32

Page 191
Simpson, 68 Virachit, V and Lunnay, C, 93, 94
Thampi, G K, 80 Viravong, M, 111
Thiesenhusen, W C, 96, 150, 163 Wachter, D and English, J, 12, 59, 98
Ting, L and Williamson, I P, 32, 100 Wiebe et al, 30
Tinker, I and Summerfield, G (eds), 115 Wilcox, M D, 120
Toulmin, C, 73, 74, 100 Williamson, I P and Feeney, M E, 32
Toulmin, C and Quan, J, 102 Williamson, I P et al, 77
Toulmin, C and Quan, J (eds), 98, 99, 103, Williamson, O E, 60, 65
115 World Bank, 53, 54, 57, 62, 66, 70, 72, 75, 92,
UN/FIG, 13 93, 99, 101, 119, 150

Page 192