the ilc africa scorecard initiative

THE ILC AFRICA SCORECARD INITIATIVE

Presented by : Eng. Patrick NSABIMANA ALPFG Technical consultant

Scorecard initiative Responding to the commitments made by

the AU Head of States in the Declaration on Land Policy Framework and Guidelines (LPFG), ILC Scorecard is developed to support the implementation of F&G, through monitoring the set Indicators

Scorecard initiative

The F&G Scorecard is a tool initiated by the International Land Coalition (ILC) in Africa Region, and is led by Rwanda Initiative for Sustainable Development (RISD).

Scorecard initiative F&G Scorecard – which is in its piloting

stage - presents a good strategy for strengthening the partnership between government and Civil Society, which is critically important towards the success of the F&G.

Scorecard initiative

The F&G Scorecard process seek to give voice to different viewpoints leading to effective advocacy through stimulating constructive dialogue and policy debate

Scoring is based on a wide range of evidence(Government & Research Institutions & CS) including quantitative data if available, desk review and analysis (e.g. of laws, policies, implementation framework).

Why the Scorecard!

The F&G suggests that land policy development should not be dissociated from the implementation

F&G considers highly important progress tracking in land policy development and implementation as it gives African governments the opportunity to learn from past successes as well as failures, and to make timely re-adjustments.

Why the Scorecard! ….. Consequently, the F&G calls for the

development of a set of benchmarks (Chap.6), targets and indicators to assist African countries assess over time, progress (or lack of it) in the implementation of the F&G ie. national land policy processes.

Why the Scorecard!.....

The F&G Scorecard specifically addresses the need to a set of baseline indicators which are adaptable to local context, with no comparison between countries

The Scorecard puts emphasis on sharing lessons learned from different countries on implementation process with particular attention on: pro-poor; centrality of land in economic development; and protection of women land rights; legal framework

Why the Scorecard!..... Information generated through the ILC

Africa Scorecard will be shared through a website, which will be accessible to other stakeholders in particular the LPI who will use the information as a key source of the LPI performance tracking reports as a contribution to the lessons learnt.

Why the Scorecard!.....

The Scorecard system is using indicators (country specific) to track the performance of 43 dimensions grouped in the 7 Thematic areas.

7 Thematic Area for the Scorecard The land policy development process The land policy implementation process Appropriate institutional framework Adequate resource allocation (financial,

human, technical) Legal framework Strengthening the tenure security of women Centrality of land in the development process

Scoring design Dimension Indicator score#1 score#2 score#3 score#4

A Categories of stakeholders with defined roles written in official documents for the purpose of land policy development process

No roles defined CSO roles defined CSO & indigineous institutions roles defined

CSO, indigenous institutions and land using public roles defined

B Representation of indigenous institutions at relevant admistrative levels during land policy development

No representation Local level Regional level National level

C Categories of stakeholders sharing discussion papers with Land P olicy drafting team

Government Government & Donors Government, Donors & CSOs

Government, Donors, CSOs & Indigenous Organizations

D Number of dialogue forums between Governement and CSOs on land issues during land policy development

1 meeting 2 meetings 3 meetings More than 3 meetings

Rating option

SCORING CRITERIA 1. Score #1 : 0% to 25% progress towards target or output. Target/output is unlikely to

be achieved. Target/output needs concerted effort to be achieved within the stipulated

timeframe.

2. Score #2: 25% to 50% progress towards achieving target or output. Some achievements

have been registered and reinforcement of actions will lead to achievement of the

target/output

3. Score #3: 50% to 75% of progress towards achieving target. The target is very close

to achievement and requires only minor efforts.

4. Score #4 : More than 90% of progress towards achieving target. The target has either

been met entirely or is very close to achievement and requires only minor efforts

)

Thematic Area 1: The land policy development process Dimension 1: Clarification of the roles of

different stakeholders in the land policy development process, such as indigenous institutions, civil society and the land using public. (ALPFG 4.5.1)

Dimension 2: Recognition of the role of indigenous institutions, whilst seeking to ensure equality of access and representation (ALPFG 4.5.2)

Thematic Area 1…. Dimension 3: Stakeholder consultation and

identification of salient problems in the land sector (ALPFG 4.5.3)

Dimension 4: Engagement with civil society organizations during the process (ALPFG 4.5.4)

Dimension 5: Appraisal of institutional and financial/budgetary options (ALPFG 4.5.7)

INDICATORS for Thematic Area 1

Indicator score#1 score#2 score#3 score#4

Categories of stakeholders with defined roles written in official documents for the purpose of land policy development process

No roles defined CSO roles defined CSO & indigineous institutions roles defined

CSO, indigenous institutions and land using public roles defined

Representation of indigenous institutions at relevant admistrative levels during land policy development

No representation Local level Regional level National level

Categories of stakeholders sharing discussion papers with Land P olicy drafting team

Government Government & Donors Government, Donors & CSOs

Government, Donors, CSOs & Indigenous Organizations

Number of dialogue forums between Governement and CSOs on land issues during land policy development

1 meeting 2 meetings 3 meetings More than 3 meetings

Thematic Area 2: land policy implementation process Dimension 9: Existence of realistic and

achievable implementation strategies (ALPFG 5.3.2) Dimension 10: Existence of an action plan (ALPFG

5.3.3) Dimension 11: Rationalization of institutional

responsibilities for implementation ( APFG 5.3.3 para 2)

Dimension 12: Mobilization of political commitment (ALPFG 5.3.4)

Thematic Area 2…. Dimension 13: Continuous engagement with the public

through decentralized structures (ALPFG 5.3.5) Dimension 14: Existence of legislative land policy components

(ALPFG 5.3.6) Dimension 15: Domestication of relevant regional and

international commitments through legislation (ALPFG 5.3.7) Dimension 16: Response to new arising challenges (ALPFG

5.3.8) Dimension 17: Monitoring and evaluation of the impacts of

the various components of land policy (ALPFG 5.4)


Indicator score#1 score#2 score#3 score#4 Comprehensiveness of the land policy implementation plan Checklist of activities Checklist of activities

with concrete timeframe

Checklist of activitieswith concrete timeframe and financial planning

Checklist of activitieswith concrete timeframe, financial and resource planning (human and technical)

Timeframe for planning of financial and technological needs, capacity building and mobilization of resources

No timeframe Long term planning Long term andmedium term planning

Long term, medium termand short term planning

P ercentage of Land P olicy Implementation resources raised locally More than 10% of total implementation resources

Between 5% and 10% of of total implementation resources

Between 1% and 4% of total implementation resources

Less than 1% of total implementation resources

Cost of land registration More than 10% of mean monthly rural income

Between 5% and 10% of mean monthly rural income

Between 1% and 4% ofmean monthly rural income

Less than 1% of mean monthly rural income

Existance of a specialized institution responsible for Land P olicy implementation

Ministry of local governance

Ministry of lands Autonomous institutions

P residency

Level at which decisions related to land reform implementation are effected

National level Regional level Local level Village level

Mechanisms to implement land policy strategic plans No existingmechanisms

Enactment of new laws Enactment of new laws and revision/amendment of existing laws

Enactment of new laws, revision/amendment of existing laws and re-/design of institutions

Level of domestication of regional and international commitments Constitution Organic law National P olicy National regulations

Number of meetings per year between stakeholders reviewing policies impementation process

0 meeting 1 meeting 2 meetings 3 meetings

Number of land policy development and implementation components tracked (please see the comment)

1 to 2 components 3 to 4 components 5 to 6 components 7 components

Thematic Area 3: Appropriate institutional frameworkALPFG 3.1.2

Dimension 18: Decentralization Dimension 19: Transparency Dimension 20: Inclusiveness


Indicator score#1 score#2 score#3 score#4P resence of institutions in charge of land related issues at adiminstrative levels

National level Regional level Local level Village level

Ratio of land corruption cases reported compared to overall corruption cases

More than 50% Between 31% and 50% Between 10% and 30% Less than 10%

P ercentage of land disputes resolved in a timely manner by community institutions

Less than 10% Between 10% and 30% Between 31% and 50% More than 50%

Thematic Area 4: Adequate resource allocation

Dimension 21: % GDP devoted to land policy development/implementation.

Dimension 22: Adequacy of budget to particular national needs. (ALPFG 4.4.4)

Thematic Area 4….

Dimension 23: Origin of funds (donor-driven, or backed by domestic funds implying commitment and sustainability). (ALPFG 4.4.4 para 2)

Dimension 24: Existence of actions to ensure that human resources are adequate to the reform process (capacity building). (ALPFG 4.4.5)


Indicator score#1 score#2 score#3 score#4P ercentage of National budget allocated to land sector Less than 1% Between 1% and 3% Between 4% and 6% More than 6%

P ercentage of land policy needs covered by the National budget Less than 5% Between 5% and 10% Between 11% and 16% More than 16%

P ercentage composition of donor funds in national lands budget More than 6% Between 4% and 6% Between 3% and 1% Less than 1%

P ercentage of land budget allocated to capacity building of staff dealing with land

Less than 1% Between 2% and 5% Between 6% and 9% More than 9%

Thematic Area 5: Legal framework Dimension 25: Equal distribution and effective

management of land. (ALPFG 3.2.1) Dimension 26: Redistribution of land to those in

need. (ALPFG 3.2.2) Dimension 27: Improved access to land

resources (ALPFG 3.2.3) Dimension 28: Existence of land related services

(ALPFG 3.3.3)


Indicator score#1 score#2 score#3 score#4Percentage of persons owning land that is bigger than the average land size. 30% between 29% and 20% Between 19% and 10% Below 10%

P ercentage of land redistributed to vulnerable groups. Less than 1% Between 1% and 10% Between 11% and 20% More than 20%

P ercentage of landless/homeless/squatting households More than 20% Between 11% and 20% Between 10% and 1% Less than 1%

Existance of formal mechanisms land management and land administration Nonexistence offormal mechanisms

Formal mechanismsare mentioned in policy papers

Formal mechanismsare mentioned in laws

Laws on formal mechanismsare applied in reality

Thematic Area 6: Strengthening the tenure security of women

Dimension 29: Documented claims to land within and outside marriage

Dimension 30: Equal rights for women to inherit land Dimension 31: Co-ownership of registered land by spouses Dimension 32: Promotion of women’s participation in land

administration structures Dimension 33: Shift from seeing the land rights of women

as a private, family issue, to seeing them as a public, human rights issue

Thematic Area 6…..

Dimension 34: Land registration data disaggregated on a gender basis.

Dimension 35: Existence of legal provisions to allow land ownership by women in the law of marriage, inheritance.

Dimension 36: Existence of national advocacy programmes to discourage the discrimination of women ownership on land.

Dimension 37: Proportion of land disputes involved women recorded Dimension 38: Existence of Affirmative action to encourage women

land ownership including allocation, purchase and professionalism

Thematic area 6….

Dimension 39: Legal provisions for spouse consent during the alienation of land

Dimension 40: Protection of women land rights in situations where there is a presumed marriage or no legal marriage


Indicator score#1 score#2 score#3 score#4P ercentage of land disputes involving women More than 50% Between 31% and 50% Between 10% and 30% Less than 10%

P roportion of women with documented land rights Less than 1% Between 1% and 10% Between 11% and 20% More than 20%

P ercentage of parcels legally co-owned by spouses Less than 1% Between 1% and 10% Between 11% and 20% More than 20%

P ercentage of female staff in land administration institutions Less than 10% Between 10% and 20% Between 21% and 30% More than 30%

Number of awareness public campaigns on women's land rightsper year

Less than 2 Between 2 and 4 Between 5 and 7 More than 7

Consideration of gender within official data No - - Yes

Acknowledgment of women's individual land rights in the laws No acknowledgment Women's land rightsacknowledged in land policy without legal implications

Women's land rightsacknowledged secondary in other laws

Acknowledgment ofwomen's land rights due to a specific law

Thematic Area 7: Centrality of land in the development process

ALPFG 3.1

Dimension 41: the importance given to land in the national constitution;

Dimension 42: The importance given to land in the national vision documents;

Dimension 43: The importance given to land in the PRSPs


Indicator score#1 score#2 score#3 score#4Number of articles related to land in the national constitution 1 article 2 articles 3 articles More than 3 articles

Degree of reflection of land in the national vision documents Not mentioned Mentioned secondary Mentioned as a specific chapter

Mentioned as a specific national land vision

Degree of reflection of land in the P RSP s Not mentioned Mentioned secondary Mentioned as a sub-chapter

Mentioned as a specific chapter

Pilot Countries for Scorecard The Scorecard has 6 pilot countries to be

implemented in two phases Phase 1: Rwanda, Kenya, Benin Phase 2: Malawi, Madagascar, South

Africa

BENIN…..ASPECTS SCORE NOTES The land Policy development process

81.3 %

Representation of indigenous institutions at relevant administrative levels during land policy development need to be at all level now they are represented at local level

The country need to increase the number of forums between Government and CSOs on land issues during land policy development

The Land Policy implementation Process 77.8 %

The country need to increase locally the Percentage of Land Policy Implementation resources from the current percentage (4%) to more than 10%

Decrease considerably the cost of land registration which is currently at 140% of the monthly GDP Decisions related to land reform implementation are currently effected at local level, the country need to decentralize it at

village level

Appropriate institutional framework 50% Institutions in charge of land related issues must be decentralized at village level

The country need to reduce land corruption cases and resolve all reported cases in a timely manner. Adequate resource allocation (financial, human, technical)

25 %

Percentage of National budget allocated to land sector must be more than 6% , the current figure is about 3% Percentage of land policy needs covered by the National budget is still very low and need to be increased For the sustainability purpose the percentage composition of donor funds in national lands budget need to decrease from 60%

to less than 10%. land budget allocated to capacity building of staff dealing with land need to be increased up to 15%

Legal framework 56.3 %

To reach the land access to all, the country must increase the Percentage of land redistributed to vulnerable groups. And reduce the percentage of landless/homeless/squatting households

The country need also design formal mechanisms of land management and administration Strengthening the tenure security of women 60.7 %

There is a need to increase the Proportion of women with documented land rights and the percentage of land registration co owned by the two spouses

The country need also to increase the number of female personnel in land management institutions .

Centrality of land in the development process 75 % This has been emphasized in all development process but there is a need to emphasize it more in the national constitution

KENYA ……ASPECTS SCORE NOTES The land Policy development process 100.0 The land development process has took into consideration all ALPFG recommendations on land policy development

The Land Policy implementation Process 75.0


Decisions related to land reform implementation are currently effected at local level, the country need to decentralize it at village level

Appropriate institutional framework 25.0 The country must put in place Institutions in charge of land related issues at all administrative levels

The country need to reduce land corruption cases Adequate resource allocation (financial, human, technical)

31.3



Legal framework 56.3

To reach the land access to all, the country must increase the Percentage of land redistributed to vulnerable groups. And reduce the percentage of landless/homeless/squatting households

The country need also design formal mechanisms of land management and administration Strengthening the tenure security of women 89.3

There is a need to increase the Proportion of women with documented land rights and the percentage of land registration co owned by the two spouses

Centrality of land in the development process 75.0 This has been emphasized in all development process but there is a need to emphasize it more in the national constitution

RWANDA

RWANDA …….ASPECTS SCORE NOTES The land Policy development process

68.8 %

Representation of indigenous institutions at relevant administrative levels during land policy development need to be at all level now they are represented at local level

Indigenous institutions must be represented under Categories of stakeholders sharing discussion papers with Land Policy drafting team

The country need to increase the number of forums between Government and CSOs on land issues during land policy development

The Land Policy implementation Process 80.6%


Decisions related to land reform implementation are currently effected at local level, the country need to decentralize it at village level

Appropriate institutional framework 75% Institutions in charge of land related issues must be decentralized at village level

The country need to reduce land corruption cases Adequate resource allocation (financial, human, technical)

43.8 %



Legal framework 87.5 % To reach the land access to all, the country must increase the Percentage of land redistributed to vulnerable groups. And reduce the percentage of landless/homeless/squatting households

Strengthening the tenure security of women 85.7 % Public awareness campaigns targeting women's land rights need to increase and the country must set up new strategies to

reduce land disputes involving women Centrality of land in the development process 83.3 % This has been emphasized in all development process but there is a need to emphasize it more in the national constitution

What has been done Identification of Technical Staff Development of the User Guide Development of the System (Indicators, linking

Dimensions, Website) Identification of the national team and focal persons in

pilot countries Adaptation of indicators country specific Training of the Country Team Data Gathering

What to be done till December 15 2012

Continue data gathering Launch of the Scorecard Website Hosting options of the hosting the

Scorecard Website (Independent, RISD) Final reports for 2012 to be published on

the web and shared with LPI and other stakeholders

Scorecard in 2013 - 2015

National workshops to launch Scorecard in 3 PC (Rwanda, Benin, Kenya)

Training and adaptation of indicators in the 3 other pilot countries ( Madagascar, Malawi and SA)

Produce reports two times in a year Add three more countries each year Increase interactive tools on the scorecard

website (forums & social networks)

THANK YOU

the ilc africa scorecard initiative

News & Politics

fg scorecard process

land policydevelopment

land sectoralpfg

scorecard system

csos o n land

land p o licy

propoorcentrality of

theimplementation of