upholding customary land rights through formalization · upholding customary land rights ......
TRANSCRIPT
Elizabeth Fairley Ph.D. Candidate
Department of Geography,
University of Minnesota
Upholding Customary Land Rights
Through Formalization: Evidence from Tanzania’s Program of Land Reform
Global Views of Customary Land Rights
• Customary land rights were once seen as a hindrance to economic development.
• The last 15 years have seen a shift in our general understanding.
• Protecting customary rights is now seen as one of the most important keys to ensuring security of tenure, particularly for the poor.
• Recent legislation in numerous countries purports to protect customary land rights.
The Village Land Act (1999)
• “A customary right of occupancy is in every respect of equal status and effect to a granted right of occupancy “ (VLA IV.A.18.1)
• Upholding customary land rights = Upholding current land use patterns
• Village lands account for ~ 80% of all land; security of tenure crucial for poverty reduction
Tanzania’s Hybrid Approach
• “Bringing the informal into the formal”
• Upholding customary land tenure through devolving authority to local institutions
• Flexibility in localized land management encouraged
Implementation Spread
Implementation of VLA
• Two major forms of registering / certifying village land – Certificate of Village Land (CVL)
– Certificate of Customary Right of Occupancy (CCRO)
• Other implementation activities include – Land use plans / maps
– Dispute resolution mechanisms
Certificate of Village Land (CVL)
• Purpose: delineate boundaries of each village so that village
authorities know precisely which lands they are administering.
• Impact: CVLs are in demand. Villages want them because they are
seen to secure village land. Process of delineating boundaries sometimes clears up decade-old conflicts between villages.
• Challenges: Policy allows for flexible arrangements, such as
common resources with management shared by multiple villages.
Practice – one village to one piece of land – creates conflict.
Members of the Village Council in Mitengwe (Kisarawe District) (notice the land use plan behind them)
Certificate of Customary Right of Occupancy (CCRO)
• Purpose: uphold rights of customary land users through registration and formal “titling”.
• Benefits (in theory): access to bank loans; fewer land disputes; protection from losing land without recompense (imminent domain); women’s rights protected when registered.
• Impact: Initial support by villagers tapers off when promised benefits are not realized. CCRO as “family security” is gaining traction.
• Challenges: Policy allows for flexibility but practice is extremely standardized. This works well when tenure patterns are already individualistic.
A family at their homestead in Halungu (Mbozi District)
Is the Hybrid Approach Working?
• Security of village lands is enhanced, and authority is devolved to local institutions.
• Practical applications of flexibility in land reform implementation are not pursued. Formalization isn’t enough for security.
• The overbearing focus on CCROs for collateral may derail the entire project.
Implications
• Titling alone is not sufficient for improving tenure security.
• Hybrids allow flexibility for local institutions to manage lands in consonance with existing tenure patterns, including communal land use.
• Pilot projects focus on top-down, one-size-fits-all solutions that are failing.