IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2016) 7-1

Research article
erd

SWOT Analysis of Systematic Land Registration’s Procedure
under Order 01 for Strengthening Land Tenure Security in
Cambodia
TAINGAUN SOURN*
Faculty of Land Management and Land Administration, Royal University of Agriculture, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia
Email: sourntaingauns@yahoo.com

NARA MAO
Faculty of Land Management and Land Administration, Royal University of Agriculture, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia

NARETH NUT
Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Royal University of Agriculture, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Received 15 November 2015

Accepted 10 May 2016(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract In 2011, the conflicts over economic land concession (ELC) were hardened andbecame more violent than before. Hence, Order 01 on “measures for strengthening andincreasing effective management of economic land concession” was decreed on 07 May, 2012.
The aims of this study were 1) to evaluate the strength and the weakness of the land registration
procedure under Order 01, and 2) to assess the challenges and opportunities for improving land
registration. A qualitative approach, incorporating observations and semi-structural interviews
with 96 local families based on questionnaires survey and 23 key informants, were applied inthis study. Secondary data were collected from Cambodia’s ministry of land and land
administration sub-sector program (LASSP). The results of this study showed that land
conflicts were reduced and solved, measures for preventing land conflicts were taken, illegal
land occupations were regularized and 361,734 titles were provided to the people. The process
was fast. Local people were satisfied and confident on its implementation. Moreover, the local
people’s livelihoods were improved as well as the public awareness of systematic land
registration (SLR) was spread throughout the country. However, the weaknesses of its
implementation were: technical problem, lack of information and quality control, poor
governance, state land decreased and it impacted on educational institutions and on theenvironment, wildlife and indigenous culture. Its opportunities were found that the investment
on land will be more active from now on due to the investors’ confidences and trust on land
titles. Its challenge was identified that financial support of technical assistances was pulled out
from LASSP. In conclusion, its implementation was very useful for the landless people, and thepoor. Quality control should be included into the process and land occupants should beseriously identified. SLR should be sped up to register in hot-issue sites.
Keywords Order 01, Systematic Land Registration, effectiveness, challenges and opportunities

INTRODUCTION
In 2005, one fifteenth of the Cambodian households were involved in land disputes due to the lack oftenure security (LHWGC, 2009). In order to improve the land tenure security, a sub-decree on theprocedures to establish cadastral index map and SLR and sub-decree on sporadic land registration (LR)were formulated. In particular, to solve land conflicts, sub-decree on organization and functioning ofⒸ ISERD

179

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2016) 7-1

the cadastral commission were established as well (RGC, 2002). However, the land conflicts still
occurred throughout Cambodian territory. Furthermore, according to the NGO Forum (2011), ruralcommunities are heavily relied on land and forest resources, but landlessness has become a significant
cause of widespread poverty for rural Cambodians and landlessness has risen to 20%, beside 40% of
rural households have farms that are smaller than 0.5ha (Üllenberg, 2009). Moreover, statistics showedthat out of 282 land dispute cases, 14% or 39 cases have been rooted in development projects,
especially in the granting of Economic Land Concessions (ELCs). Most land disputes triggered by
ELCs can be found in Kratie, Rattanakiri and Kampong Cham (NGO Forum, 2011). Moreover, it wasestimated that in total about 1.5 million hectares of ELCs were granted to investors as of April 2010
(Ngo and Chan, 2012).
Hence, Order 01 on “measures for strengthening and increasing effective management of
economic land concession” was established on 07, May 2012. One part of this Order is a temporary
postponement of granting new ELCs in order to prevent land conflict occurring (RCG, 2012).
Moreover, RCG decided to provide land ownership to people who occupy and use the ELCs land,
forest cover and protected area within the framework of land distribution reform. The campaign of
SLR in 21 provinces of the country was established and it was called “New Action on Existing Policies
for Land Sector”. Volunteer youths were engaged to survey land for people under the ministry of land
management urban planning and construction (MLMUPC)’s instruction and guideline. They weretrained only 2 days about how to register and survey the land (Yeang, 2013).
OBJECTIVE
The objectives of this study were to evaluate the strength and the weekness of the land registration’s
procedure under Order 01 and to assess the challenges and opportunities for improving LR.
METHODOLOGY
The qualitative and quantitative approach, incorporating observations semi-sturture interviews andfocus group discussion had also been done as well as recorder was used to record participants’ point ofview. Survey with questionnaires had been used to know the respondents opinions. The research study
focused on systematic land registration under Order 01 that has been carried out since June, 2012 in Pi
Tnou commune, Snoul disctrict, Kratie province located in forest cover, protected area (National Park)and economic land concession area. Furthermore, 96 local families and 23-key informants were chosen
to be interviwed. Secondary data were collected from Cambodia’s ministry of land and LASSP.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Strength of the Procedure of Systematic Land Registration under Order 01 (SLR BB01)
Land conflict resolution: The study showed that there were 39 people among 96 interviewees
involved in land conflicts. Most of land conflicts were happening to LECs companies and others
occurred with forest and environmental department. 33 cases out of 39 cases were solved by the
implementation of SLR under order 01 (BB01). These were because its implementation had cut theland from ELC company, measured and gave to people who were actual occupants even though thecompany claimed that the areas were belonging to it. Most of the land conflict had been solved, but 6
cases were not solved due to in the fact that they encroached environmental land. According to Müller
(2013) the implementation of SLR BB01 was to solve the land conflicts over forest land and ELCs forthe targeted 700,000 parcels in only one year. The campaign had to speed up the normal titleⒸ ISERD180

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2016) 7-1

production levels of 350,000 per year during SLR and went countrywide into 21 provinces where thesetypes of conflicts exist. MLMUPC opted for staffing up and bringing in extra workforce from outside.
Land conflict prevention: The research found that 15.88% of interviewees expressed their opinion
that the implementation of directive BB01 really prevents land conflict occurrences in the future. They
added that its implementation measured the land and provided the titles for them, and no one could
seize their land now.
Regularizing not-yet-legal land occupation and its main achievement: According to Im (2012), theimplementation of SLR BB01 had solved irregular issues: regularizing not-yet-legal land occupation inrural areas through donation of completed land ownership, providing a small-scale economic land
concessions and social land concession in order to improve and guarantee land tenure security, toimprove people’s livelihood and to enhance national economy. The achievement of its implementationfor 12 months (June 2012 - June 2013) was the 361,734 titles with approximately 595,534 hectares
have been granted to probably 200,535 families (MLMUPC, 2013).
Local people satisfaction and confidences: The study found that 94% of interviewees satisfied with
its procedure and were also confident on the land certificate (title) that government issued to them.
They reported that once they have a certificate, no one could seize their land anymore. However, 6% of
the respondents were not satisfied with the implementation of the procedure and they were lessconfident in it. This was mostly because they were occupying the land located in protected area so theirland have not been measured and registered. They further added that if they get the certificate they will
be satisfied with its implementation and they will be confident in the certificate.
Improving local people’s social economic: The implementation of Order 01 provided the fullownership to the people as well as securing on their land. As a result, some villagers could be able touse the land title provided/registered from government to borrow some loan from micro finance orbank which the interest rate is low (1.2% - 2% per month) comparing to the loan borrowing frommoney leder which it is high in interest rate. The bank will not provide loan for villagers if their land
titles would not be appropriately registered, so some villagers had to borrow money from other money
lenders with a high interest (7% - 10% per month). The interest rates varies in accordance with kinds ofland certificates and titles (commune, provincial or governmental level). For instance, if the land
certificate is certified at commune level (from commune chief), the interest rate would be around 4% 5% per month. Consequently, being implemented by this Order, the poople’s social economic would
be improved through borrowing loan with low interest rate for their small business or farming such as
buying crop seeds, seedlings, fertilzers and agricultural equipments etc.
Improving and speeding up the procedure of SLR under LASSP: The research found that it is an
opportunity for the MLMUPC to receive additional modern equipments and materials for land
administration during and after its implementation. Moreover, 600 out of the total youth volunteer wererecruited to be MLMUPC’s new staff. According to Sar (2013), to strengthen the quality, effectivenessof field work management and to continue the smooth and high effective procedure of SLR, the 25
provincial department directors in the department of land management, urban planning, construction,and cadaster have been proposed to readjust and reorganize the SLR team. The team number of SLR
was adjusted from 26 to 15 members per team in order to reduce the expense and to increase thenumber of SLR teams that can be implemented throughout 25 provinces.
Strengthening land concession economic management: Concerning the implementation of Order 01,
the Royal Government has decided to abolish economic land concessions which have not followed theagreements and has given the expropriated lands to the Provincial State Land Management Committee
to manage those lands for social land concession programs. Meanwhile, state land in the area where
RGC implemented SLR BB01, was to be cut off in the form of Leopard’s skin to existing land
occupants using and cultivating it and also to the provincial committee for state land management andbe used for social land concession programs. Therefore, this land can be used in the future for land
distribution program of the Royal Government in a larger scale than before.

Ⓒ ISERD

181

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2016) 7-1

Spreading out the public awareness through country: The implementation of SLR BB01 wascarried out throughout 21 provinces at one time. So far though the rural areas are, the land registration
teams could manage to reach those places. Previously the LSR under LASSP always avoided toprovide registration in those areas, yet the donors (world bank, GIZ, Finmaland and CIDA) always
force LASSP to do so. As a result, its implementation is appreciated by all stakeholders including
donors.
Weakness of Its Procedure and their CausesTechnical problem: The weakness of the LR procedure was divided into three categories, losing ofparcel size, lacking of neighbors’ printed thumbs and losing parcel size and lacking of neighbor’printed thumbs. Fig. 1 illustrates that only 63% of respondents’ neighbor could participate in LR
process and have their thumbs printed while registering the parcels, whereas 37% out of 100% had
some troubles during the land demarcation registration in which 12% of respondents mentioned thatthe area of their parcels showing on the land title had lost some compared to the actual area on the
ground due to handheld global positioning system (GPS) and volunteers and land officers probably did
not accurately measure their land as the respondents said, 19% told that their neighbors were absent toprint their thumb and 6% were losing of parcel size as well as figureprint had not been done. The
volunteers had been trained about its procedure and technical work for only 2 days.

12%

Losing of parcel size

6%
Lacking of neighbos' printed thumbs
19%

Losing of parcel size and Lacking ofneighbors' printed thumbs

63%

Having neighbor' printed thumbs

Fig. 1 Technical problems associated with the land registration procedure
The other weakness of technical problem was that the monument poles have not been installed on
adjudicated boundaries. Installed-boundary poles had been done for parcels which were registered, but
the poles were just small sticks to recognize the boundary, such as a small wooden stick, digging small
holes on boundary, and using color spray as some villagers and some volunteers said.
Lack of information and poor governance: Due to lack of information that implementation under
directive Order 01 could not spread widely across the country, many villagers did not know how to
prepare documents for applying to register their land; as a result, some people haven’t had their landregiestered. According to the survey, it was because of poor governance as some villagers said thatthey could not find the person who was responsible for this registration; for instance, when they cameto meet land officers or students to certify some documents: residential certificate, widow's certificate
or land occupied certificate, they were told that it was not the land officers’ responsibility, but thecommune chief’s responsibility, and when they went to meet the commune chief, they were told that itwas not commune chief’s responsibility, but the land officers’ and students’ responsibilities. Moreover,LR was so fast to follow by people as all people could not have thier land registered because somepeople were absent due to thier personal tasks while LR team implemented the registration. This was
because when the LR teams completed registration of one area they would move to other area and theywould not come back to register the land title of those who were absent during registration process.
Ⓒ ISERD

182

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2016) 7-1

Impact on educational institutions: The implementation of SLR BB01 had used approximately 2,000
volunteer youths who were mostly students which 305 students were from Royal University ofAgriculture (RUA). The registration exercise had caused two faculties of RUA to be closed for one
semester namedly, faculty of land management and land administration and faculty of forestry. Whilestudnets returned to study, their studies were incomplete because some subjects were taught for lesshours than regular curriculum did.
State land loss and negative impact on environment, wildlife and culture: According to Council of
Ministers, (2012), the ownership was donated for the requests of people who actually occupy the land
not exceeding 5 hectares. Furthermore, for people occupying more than 5 hectares, whether the land
contains a residence or not, the part of the land that has truly been cultivated shall be donated asownership. Parts of the land claimed that has not been developed shall be registered as State private
land and the claimant shall be given the right of “small economic concession”. In such a case, the land
shall be registered in the name of the Governor as the chairman of the provincial state land
management committee, and the Governor shall be granted the mandate to establish the contract of“small economic concession” with the concessionaire. However, the researcher found that the actual
implementation has not followed guideline above and the more than 5 hectares land where are not only
the clear land but also forest land have been registered via SLR BB01 as well as sporadic land
registration. Consequently, some area of forest cover were lost during its implementation and the land
cover has changed very fast. According to Rabe (2013), the Directive BB01 caused numerous issues
for indigenous people in Ratanakiri Province. Moreover, it would cause loss of indigenous land,
livelihoods, identity, and culture and it divides communities. For example, for those who received theprivate land during this implemenaiton, will stop doing the slah and burn cultivation because they do
not have the reservation land.
Lack of quality control of the parcel and land owner: The research showed that the quality controlof the implementation of SLR BB01 was not mentioned in the guideline. Particularly, most of thestudents were not skillful in technical and practical work such as, using of GPS, geographic
information system (GIS) and land law. As a result, some people had taken this chance to claim thestate land as their own land. According to the guideline of SLR under LASSP, it claimed that 5% ofparcels which have already been registered, have to be selected to cross check in the field suchresurveying parcels, database of parcels owners.
Opportunity of the Procedure of SLR BB01
Positive external influences can be taken advantage from this implementation in order to solve land
conflict in city because some development partners provide funding for urban land dispute conciliation.
Furthermore, communal land registration for indigenous people is implemented because ofdevelopment fund. For instance, GIZ not only supports the implementation of circular 03 “resolution of
temporary settlements on state land illegally occupied in the capital, municipal and urban areas” butalso supports communal land registration for indigenous people. Land policy will be successfully
established because all stakeholders understood about the importance of land. It is still supported by
the politic and development partner, GIZ. Investing on land will be more active from now on because
investors have confidence and trust on land title. Hence, land price will be increased mostly in ruralarea.
Threat of the Procedure of SLR BB01
According to Rabe (2013), in Rattanakiri province, the students and local government officials
threatened indigenous people who said that a regular statement was from the Commune Councils,
District Governors, and Provincial Governor, who told villagers, “If you do not choose the private titles
and if you have a conflict with the company in the future, we will not help you resolve the issue.” ThisⒸ ISERD

183

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2016) 7-1

made villagers believe that dispute resolution mechanisms would be unavailable to them, and that theBB01 titling was the only solution to protect their land against the companies.
Financial support from another development partner will be pulled out from Cambodia for
instance, Finnmap, Finland and CIDA, Canada. The government thought that Cambodia can implementby itself but MLMUPC still needs the development partner’s assistance of technical issues. The
database of parcels has been stored in Microsoft office Access, so all parcels throughout country
cannot be used as one database because the data of parcels in whole country is bigger than 2 GB while
Microsoft office Access enables to store only 2 GB.
CONCLUSION
It could be inferred that the implementation of SLR BB01 was very useful for landless people, and thepoor. It was also the crucial chance to devide land from the rich and the companies in order to grant tocitizens in the rural areas. The land conflicts were reduced and solved, measures for preventing land
conflicts were taken, illegal land occupations were regularized and 361,734 titles were provided to thepeople. The local people’s livelihoods were improved as well as the public awareness of SLR was
spread throughout the country. However, the weaknesses of its implementation were: technicalproblem, lack of information and quality control of the parcel and land owner, poor governance, stateland decreased and it impacted on educational institutions and on the environment, wildlife andindigenous culture. The opportunities of its implementation were: land policy which will be
successfully established and investing on land which will be more active from now on due to land title.
Enventually, the financial support of technical assistances was pulled out from LASSP.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author would like to thank to Univ. Prof. EoE Dr.-Ing. Holger Magel and Dipl.-Ing. MSc Jorge
Espinoza for their best advice, support and encouragement. Last but not least, I am grateful to DAAD
for the financial support during my study.
REFERENCES
Council of Ministers. 2012. Request in principle for land registration in target areas to implement the Order BB01
dated 07 May 2012 on measures strengthening and increasing effectiveness of ELC management. Phnom
Penh, MLMUPC.
Im, C.L. 2012. BB01. Retrieved 12 15, 2013, from MLMUPC: http://www.cdc-crdb.gov.kh/cdc/gdcc/nineteenth/agenda5_gov_en.htm
Men, P. 2011. Land acquisition by non-local actors and consequences for local development: Impacts ofeconomic land concession on the livelihoods of indigenous communityies in northeast provinces of
Cambodia. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
MLMUPC. 2012. Manual on implementation of Order 01 dated 07 May, 2012 on measures strengthening andincreasing effectiveness of ELC management. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
MLMUPC. 2013. Report summary of situation and the result of the implementation of Directive BB01
theroughout country (stat from the first day of implementation until 20.06.2013). http://mlmupc.gov.kh/?
page=detail&menu1=118&ctype=article&id=118&lg=kh. Retrieved 01 12, 2014, from http://mlmupc.gov.
kh.
Müller, F.V. 2013. Old policies – New action: A surprising political initiative to recognize human rights in the
Cambodian land reform. The World Bank, Washington D.C.
Ngo, S. and Chan, S. 2012. Economic land concessions and local communities. The NGO Forum on Cambodia’s
Forestry Rights Project of Land and Livelihoods Programme. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Ⓒ ISERD

184

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2016) 7-1

Rabe, A. 2013. Directive BB01 in Ratanakiri Province, Cambodia, Issues and impacts of private land titling in
indigenous communities. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
RGC. 2012. Order 01 on Measure to strengthen and increase sufficiency of economic land concession
managment. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
RGC. 2002. Interim paper on strategy of land policy framework. Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Sar, S. 2013. Adjusting the structure of systematic land registration team under LASSP. Phnom Penh.
The NGO Forum. 2011. Statistical analysis on land disputes in Cambodia 2010. Research and Information Centre(RIC). Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Üllenberg, A. 2009. Foreign direct investment (FDI) in land in Cambodia. Eschborn: Deutsche Gesellschaft fürTechnische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH.
Yeang, D. 2013. Improving tenure security in urban informal settlements: The case of Battambang province inCambodia. Munich, Germany.

Ⓒ ISERD

185