COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT - EU Guidelines to support land policy design and reform processes in developing countries [SEC(2004) 1289]

EU Guidelines to support land policy [1] design and reform processes in developing countries

[1] See Commission staff working paper, SEC(2004) 1289, for key concepts.

1. Introduction

Rural land is an asset of the greatest importance in many parts of the world, both developing and developed. In the former, a high proportion of income, employment and export earnings stems from agricultural production and other land-based activities. Poverty is also particularly marked in rural areas and control of land is a major issue for peasant societies.

Donor engagement with land reform and land policy has changed over time. In the 1940s and 1950s in East Asia, and in the 1960s and 70s in Latin America, agrarian reforms were supported as a means of defusing radical pressures for political change. The political character and complexity of such interventions has led many donors to withdraw from supporting land redistribution.

Growing land scarcity and concern about land-related conflicts and rising rural poverty, especially in Africa, have brought land back to the fore. This growing interest ties in well with the focus on designing effective policy frameworks for poverty eradication, and promoting good governance, decentralisation, and democratic institutions at local and national levels. At the same time, new experiences in recent years have demonstrated the need for and feasibility of designing diverse types of interventions to suit a range of different settings.

It is against this background that the Commission, alongside other donors [2], has developed this communication. Attention to land issues flows directly from the overall objective of the EC development policy on poverty reduction, as sustainable land policies are an essential element of rural development and food security. These policy guidelines are a response to requests for support to land policy reforms from developing countries and countries in transition, without being prescriptive they aim to provide a common understanding to facilitate EU collaboration in developing countries and countries in transition where donors are engaging in support to land policy reforms.

[2] This policy draws extensively on other donors work, in particular WB, FAO, IFAD and EU MS agencies.

This communication results from intensive collaboration with Member States in an EU Task Force which drafted the "EU Land Policy Guidelines", a set of detailed policy and operational guidelines recently submitted for consultation with civil society and closely reflects the results of both these processes [3]. Operational guidelines (see Commission staff working paper SEC(2004) 1289) which provide an example of a practical application of the policy to assess the situation of land issues at a country level, complement this policy document.

[3] Although this paper mainly focuses on rural land, land issues are also crucial in urban/peri-urban areas.

2. Why is land policy important?

Land policy lies at the heart of economic and social life and environmental issues in all countries. The distribution of property rights between people has a tremendous impact on both equity and productivity. Inequitable land distribution, land tenure problems and weak land administration can lead to severe injustice and conflict. Changes to legislation, the distribution of property rights, and administrative structures are likely to have long-term consequences, positive or negative, for political, economic and social development and environmental management.

Land tenure structures mirror the distribution of power within society. While access to land is not recognised as a human right as such, it may be considered as a means to achieve fundamental human rights as defined by international conventions and as illustrated by the case of indigenous people.

The case of indigenous peoples

Most indigenous peoples (including "tribal peoples and pastoralists") have culturally distinctive land tenure regimes based on collective rights to lands and territories. The internationally recognised right of indigenous people to collective identity, survival and self-determination depend upon their access to land and natural resources in their traditional territories. Consequently, some countries' laws and constitutions, as well as certain international laws and jurisprudence, recognise these peoples' rights to their lands (including customary use or occupation) as inherent, based on "aboriginal title" or "immemorial possession". However, effective recognition of these rights and claims is often incomplete, leading to social and political marginalisation, impoverishment and land conflicts. Mechanisms for securing indigenous peoples' rights to their lands are thus important for their cultural survival and for promoting equity and protecting their immediate environment. Ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities other than indigenous peoples may also experience similar situations. The case of indigenous peoples and minority groups illustrates how land rights are closely related to human rights.

Equal rights for both women and men to hold and use property are a cornerstone of social and economic gender equality. Women's human rights require strengthening under both formal and informal systems of tenure, and constitutional and inheritance law has a role to play alongside land law and institutions as well as family and marriage law.

Population growth, changing economic circumstances and changes to the environment such as desertification and climate change, can increase competition for access to land. Conflict is likely to grow where scarcity of resources is increasing and access is reduced, where tenure rules are unable to adjust sufficiently rapidly, and where different and contradictory rules co-exist. Illegal appropriation of land by political elites and forced displacement of rural dwellers can also lead to land conflicts. Addressing conflicting claims will be a pre-requisite for any land registration programme, to avoid repeated challenges and disputes. In countries coming out of conflict, fair and just handling of land tenure questions will often be central to reconstruction, both to maintain peace and provide conditions under which sustainable economic growth can be re-established.

Land policy has strong links with agricultural and economic policy. Securing access to land is a necessary condition for encouraging investment and improvement in land. However land issues are rarely the only limiting factor in raising productivity. Working to address constraints in prices, inputs, credit, markets and processing may be a greater priority than addressing land matters.

Land has long been considered a key source of revenue for local and national government. It is a particularly easy asset to tax, especially in urban areas. Local land taxes may be legitimate in the eyes of local people when they are accompanied by more effective and secure rights and by effective provision of public services.

Land policy is also crucial for environmental sustainability as it can create incentives for sustainable land use and environmental management. Land provides for a range of ecological services which a sound land policy can contribute to enhancing: water retention, pollution mitigation, soil and coastal protection all depend on the sustainable use of natural resources. Therefore, land policy has a role in preventing environmental degradation. Clear and protected rights, effective rules defining access and regulating use of land, water and other natural resources are essential means of ensuring long-term management of land and resources.

In the absence of trade and agricultural policies to support the small farm sector the predominance of export-oriented agriculture, the liberalisation of agricultural imports and governments' withdrawal from the provision of rural extension services, have often resulted in land re-concentration and in exclusion and/or deprivation of vulnerable groups. Addressing these legacies and promoting both equity and productivity is thus a key issue.

Hence, land policy reform is an essential aspect of the policy and institutional reforms required to empower the poor and promote equitable and sustainable development; it is an essential means to secure social justice and economic development objectives. Drawing up a land policy is the responsibility of the state, but will need to build on and respond to the concerns of many non-state actors. Land policy reform has a key role to play in processes of democratisation, the drive for improved governance, and decentralisation.

3. Different types of land policy reforms [4]

[4] Reform processes differ widely between countries and there is limited scope for generalisation. Commission staff working paper, SEC(2004) 1289, provides an indicative list of components and an overview of issues prevailing in different geographical regions.

In its broadest sense, land policy reform can involve deliberate changes to the distribution of land resources or the forms of tenure under which they are held (land tenure reform), the rules regulating land use, and the institutions which administer and manage land and regulate land use. It may include an action on the distribution of rights itself (agrarian reform).

Land redistribution is a major issue wherever land rights are highly polarised and access is very unequal, land is underused by large owners, or historical injustices are to be addressed. However, land redistribution by itself is not sufficient and may produce a temporary fall in productivity if there are insufficient economic incentives, institutional support and inadequate financial and technical measures to help new farmers develop their holdings and get access to markets. Furthermore, intensification of cultivation in highly fragile lands may be accompanied by environmental degradation in the absence of adequate land use planning. Land redistribution should thus take place within a sustainable agricultural policy that supports family farming.

Historically, governments have implemented land reforms by expropriating large owners. This type of land reform has been criticised as being politically difficult and creating conflicts. "Market assisted land reform" has then been tested, on the principle of willing buyer/willing seller. Both these types of reforms can encourage price escalation, inflated demands for compensation and the disposal of marginal land by landowners, which can in turn lead to significant debt burdens for beneficiaries or high costs to the state.

The case of Zimbabwe

The Zimbabwean land reform illustrates well the linkages between land, governance and productivity. Poor design of the land reform coupled with political motives, have led the Government to enforce a land redistribution scheme which, as much as it may have been necessary, has greatly affected the country's agricultural production capacity.

Lack of participation in the design of the reform led to breakdown of dialogue between parties. Violence and forced evictions have followed in a climate of insecurity and lawlessness which left free rein to the most extremist factions. Government intervention and piecemeal legislation has created a sentiment of insecurity where private property is no longer secured

Reasonable compensation corresponding to the value of improvements to the land and its productive use and potential should be the leading principle in the case of expropriations. Such measures should however never lead to the eviction of indigenous and local peoples from their traditional land or restrain their access to vital resources. Where large land holdings have been created illegally, they should not be eligible for compensation or disposal on the free market. Political will, national consensus on the legitimacy of land redistribution, support from rural social organisations and urban population are thus political conditions. Strong financial and technical support from donors is also needed. Independent monitoring is also necessary to ensure transparent and equitable procedures and avoid political manipulation.

While market-led reforms avoid some of the risks and difficulties of forced acquisition and redistribution, the availability of land for sale and funding constraints greatly limit both the speed and impact of such reforms on the poor. If extensive inequality cannot be corrected through market-based mechanisms, state led agrarian reforms may still be necessary. Other means to influence the distribution of rights may however be explored: land taxation, negotiating long term leases for the landless, regulating land sales markets giving priority to local farmers, subsidised credit for land purchases targeted towards the poor, are all alternative ways to discourage the accumulation of idle land in the hands of few and to favour access for smallholder farmers.

Commission staff working paper, SEC(2004) 1289, provides a set of principles which can help to ensure the sustainability of land policy reform processes.

4. Elements of an EU approach to support land policy implementation

4.1. Securing rights over land and related resources

To improve equity and promote agricultural productivity, policy must improve access to land and security of land-related rights. Rights are secure if they are not contested without reason and if, in case of contestation, they can be confirmed by the legal or arbitration authorities (whether these be customary, or governmental or both). Securing land rights is thus largely a question of having effective institutions and enforcement of rules for the management of land rights, and not merely a question of the formal legal nature of the rights themselves.

Informal tenure systems are generally dynamic and evolving, but they can (although they may not always) be efficient and adaptable, within limits to changing economic and technological conditions. Customary and informal tenure systems should not be assumed to be a constraint impeding agricultural intensification.

4.2. Building on existing rights and practices

Land policy reform aims to change land use practices, but the diagnosis is often poorly informed, so that the policy misses its objective. In-depth qualitative analysis of local practices and regulations over land, problems of insecurity, type of conflicts, and modes of transfer are required to understand the nature of the problems faced and how to address them.

4.3. Titling may or may not be the solution

Land registration or titling was thought necessary to achieve security of rights, increased productivity, and access to credit, but experience shows that titles may be neither necessary nor sufficient to achieve these aims. Firstly, land rights are the product of recognition by both government and local community. Informal land rights may not be insecure if they are locally recognised and not contested.

Secondly, investments in land depend on a favourable economic context, so changes in land rights alone may not make any difference. Moreover, programmes of land titling in a macroeconomic context which undermines the viability of small holders can induce distress sales of land causing landlessness for many, land accumulation and concentration for few and resulting in increased poverty and inequality.

Thirdly, while titles were once considered essential as collateral for accessing official sources of credit, in practice banks, in the absence of a functional market, have been in most countries unwilling to lend money in rural areas. Moreover, land registration programmes are reliable only if the registry is regularly updated. This involves considerable costs that have to be covered by either government or land users.

A broad view of cadastral systems and titling methods is therefore needed to establish reliable and appropriate records of village, family or individual land rights, and register broad sets of rights, at low cost. Innovative systems offer new solutions and alternative options (e.g. official recognition of written contracts drawn up locally) require attention.

4.4. The need to establish sustainable land administration systems

Land administration involves a range of different functions (see Commission staff working paper SEC(2004) 1289) which can be fulfilled at different levels, by a range of different bodies, therefore the design of the land administration system is a crucial issue: too often, centralised land administration is heavy, inefficient, and costly and inaccessible for farmers. Clearly, some degree of subsidiarity helps to achieve more effective land and natural resource management, since more relevant and detailed knowledge regarding land rights is held at local level. The key to any devolution of authority is to ensure that the chosen system includes adequate checks, balances and accountability, including oversight by higher bodies, given the risk of corruption and patronage coming to dominate local land administration.

The objective of a land administration system should be to offer effective security to the rights to land and natural resources, held by rural people and to promote sustainable land management. Key aspects to consider in land administration include removing contradictions between norms; offering simple, accessible procedures, with well known rules that address the problems faced by farmers; promoting efficient arbitration systems which are accessible to people; removing inefficiencies in land administration and ensuring accountability; maintaining an open public record of land claims; ensuring effective publicity of land claims prior to their registration and conversion to title; avoiding opportunities for corruption presented by difficult and complex procedures; and providing avenues for appeal.

Provided that they are seen as tools to further a user-oriented system, new technologies (e.g. GPS and GIS) can improve the quality and efficiency of land information systems and reduce costs. Similarly, communal/village participatory mapping combined with customary land administration systems can significantly cut costs while providing a useful tool for land use planning and the management of local disputes.

4.5. The role of rental markets to enhance productivity and access

Land transactions transfer rights to land between users. However, land sales markets may be inaccessible to those with limited purchasing power and are distorted by imperfect information and lack of financial services in rural areas. As a result, land sales markets can lead to greater inefficiency and inequality through speculation, acquisition of rural land by urban or outside entrepreneurs, and distress sales by the poor.

By contrast, land rental markets can be more efficient and fair. Rental markets, given adequate guarantees of security for the transacting parties, provide flexible means whereby users can increase or decrease land holdings according to changing needs. Sharecropping arrangements may also be an efficient way to address increased risks or cash shortages. Procedures for legal validation by local authorities of written contracts by farmers can help in securing land rental agreements, as attempted in Bangladesh.

However, these solutions are limited in case of high asymmetry between owners and tenants. Therefore, clarifying the rules (e.g. level of fees, duration of contracts), giving access to credit and advice to the poor contributes to encouraging the emergence of effective rental markets.

5. The role of EU donors

In the past, many donors, including the EC and the EU Member States, have been reluctant to get involved in the politically highly sensitive field of land policy reform. Donor support has often been limited to promoting titling and land information systems, non-contentious activities believed to be technical, neutral and universal. This neutrality is only apparent, and this position has often led to choices unsuited to local realities, thus excluding the poor.

While land policy reform is a long and complex process, requiring broad political debate inside the country, donors can make a major contribution, if they play a cautious role. They can facilitate public debate, support processes without forcing the pace, and offer to fund the costly parts of preparing and implementing land policy reforms, including in particular the purchase of land for redistribution, without taking over from government. They can contribute to research, institutional and capacity building for the different actors involved (local/central government, farmers' organisations, etc.) and monitoring and evaluation.

Key principles for donor engagement drawn from experience:

Land policy reforms are extremely case specific. Donors should support tailor-made solutions, strongly linked to the local social and institutional context and avoid blueprints.

Land policy reforms are complex undertakings which require firm political commitment by the state and support from society at large. Donor support must be non-dogmatic, non-intrusive and well informed on the situation prevailing locally. Programmes must be appropriate to the local social and institutional context.

Donor support must be accompanied by an in-depth dialogue with the state at the highest level, and must encourage large inter-ministerial coordination and debate.

Land policy reforms are long-term processes, going through a series of successive phases requiring an iterative approach. Donors should stand ready to accompany such processes over a long period. Sector approaches can provide some safeguards against the risk of one or the other donor discontinuing support.

Gender-aware legislative reforms are essential, though not sufficient to secure enforceable access to, control over and use of, land resources by both women and men.

Information and awareness are key. Donors must contribute to the understanding of different stakeholder interests and strategies and should encourage the search for consensual solutions.

Research can be a powerful tool for understanding and steering national processes. Donors can be instrumental in accompanying implementation with research and encouraging feedback and debate on emerging issues.

Donor support for land reform should in no case result in further deprivation for women and poor people from access to and control over land nor in the dispossession or eviction of ethnic minorities or tribal and indigenous peoples from the territories they traditionally occupy.

The growing importance of land policy reform processes, and land issues in general, for rural development and poverty eradication provide strong grounds for enhanced engagement by and coordination among Member States and the EC. Given Europe's experience and substantial funding in land policy, land management, support to family farming and regulation of land markets, the EU has a major role to play in international debates and in development policy regarding land tenure and land regulations. Such a role needs to take a balanced approach, recognising that markets are not the only means to achieve social ends.

The EC has a comparative advantage in initiating and accompanying the creation of flexible donor consortia drawn from EU Member States to tackle land issues in partner countries. More generally, options to be considered include:

* initiating a common approach to land policy and tenure reform, encouraging the sharing of experience between the EC and Member States and supporting greater coordination and common understanding of land issues;

* advocating for a more balanced approach to land policy reforms by multilateral institutions and for stronger integration of land tenure issues into national development processes (PRSPs, national/rural development strategies, etc.);

* actively encouraging coordination and collaboration of other donors in particular within the UN family (FAO, IFAD and UNDP), in support to national reform processes in line with each agency's comparative advantage, specific field of expertise and in-country presence;

* developing initiatives for applied research and development on the linkages between land, equality and social development, land agricultural development and poverty and between land tenure and the environment, as well as for independent monitoring/evaluation of land policy reforms.

More specifically the EC and the EU Member States can strongly improve the impact of land policy reforms by jointly supporting national reform processes and, in particular, by:

* supporting debate and sharing of experience on land issues and land policy, in relation with economic policies in particular at the regional level;

* contributing to make the design of land policy and reforms a truly participatory endeavour by encouraging government to stimulate the participation of civil society, minority groups and indigenous peoples and local communities in the debate and supporting their participation, and making available to them the results of knowledge and international experience;

* supporting the design and implementation of sector approaches to implement participatory land policy and land tenure reforms which take into due account institutional development and are attentive to issues of sustainability and recurrent costs implications;

* supporting land reform and land redistribution, in particular where high inequality persists. This may involve, where conditions allow, the funding of transparent and accountable land acquisition schemes by the state, or the beneficiaries, or other agencies on their behalf depending on what is most appropriate in local circumstances.

* supporting capacity development in land administration at all levels, including local communities;

* supporting monitoring and evaluation of the impact of the reform and encouraging proper dissemination and discussion of research findings, so as to make land policy reform a dynamic process.

6. Conclusions

With this Communication the Commission outlines a new reference framework to support land policy reform in developing countries. It is expected that this will facilitate support to national reform processes and enhance coordination and collaboration with MS and other donors.

The Commission adopts the present Communication and transmits it to Council and Parliament for endorsement. It further notes that the operational guidelines (see Commission staff working paper SEC(2004) 1289) provide a practical tool to guide the Commission and Member States in designing and implementing programmes in support of land policy reform processes in developing countries and countries in transition.

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

Annex to the

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament

"EU Guidelines to support land policy design and reform processes in developing countries"

{COM(2004)686 final}

ANNEX 1 Key definitions

ANNEX 2 Elements of land policy reform and regional overview on trends

ANNEX 3 Key principles for Governments for successful land policy design

ANNEX 4 Operational guidelines

ANNEX 1 - Key Definitions

1. Land Policy

A land policy aims to achieve certain objectives relating to the security and distribution of land rights, land use and land management, and access to land, including the forms of tenure under which it is held. It defines the principles and rules governing property rights over land and the natural resources it bears as well as the legal methods of access and use, and validation and transfer of these rights. It details the conditions under which land use and development can take place, its administration, i.e. how the rules and procedures are defined and put into practice, the means by which these rights are ratified and administered, and how information about land holdings is managed. It also specifies the structures in charge of implementing legislation, land management and arbitration of conflicts. Land policy is contained in texts issued by governments, and is further developed through legislation, decrees, rules and regulations governing the operation of institutions established for the purposes of land administration, the management of land rights, and land use planning. To be effective, land policy must propose a practical and coherent set of rules, institutions, and tools, which are considered both legitimate and legal, and are appropriate for different context and interest groups.

2. Land Policy Reform

In its broadest sense, land policy reform can involve deliberate changes to the distribution of land resources or the forms of tenure under which they are held (land tenure reform), the rules regulating land use, and the institutions which administer and manage land and regulate land use. It may include an action on the distribution of rights itself (agrarian reform, regularisation, etc.).

3. Land tenure

Land tenure should be defined broadly as the "system of access to and control over land and related resources". It defines the rules and rights which govern the appropriation, cultivation and use of natural resources on a given space or piece of land. Strictly speaking, it is not land itself that is owned, but rights and duties over it.

4. Land Rights

Land rights are not limited to private ownership in the strict sense, but can be a very diverse balance between individual rights and duties, and collective regulations, at different levels (different levels of family organisation, communities, local governments or state), private or family ownership being one possible case. The rights and duties that individuals or a family hold are themselves embedded in a set of rules and norms, defined and enforced by authorities and institutions which may be those of rural communities and/or of the state. No system of land tenure can work without a body with the power and authority to define and enforce the rules, and provide arbitration in case of conflict.

In many countries, indigenous and tribal peoples as collective entities are holding native title through various forms of sui generis systems. The rights and duties attributed to individuals or other entities within the people holding the native title will often be administered through their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions.

5. Land Tenure System

A land tenure system is made up of rules, authorities, institutions and rights. Land administration itself (maps, deeds, registers) is only one part of a land tenure system.

6. Common Property Resources

Common property resources refer to land or other natural resources held in common by a group of people such as a village or a community. Group members normally have defined use rights to the resource and individual members cannot appropriate it individually. Community rules allow the group to exclude non-members from using the resource or determine the rules under which they are allowed to access it.

7. Land Administration

Land administration involves a range of different functions: information on rights and transfers, adjudication and arbitration supported by systems for:

- land survey,

- mapping,

- land information,

- land valuation,

- registration of rights,

- recording of transactions,

- issue of title, and

- collection of fees or rents.

These functions can be fulfilled at different levels, by a range of bodies, such as customary and traditional authorities, village level committees, district assemblies, local officials from the national administration, private sector operators, NGOs, and so on, under the supervision and control of national bodies.

ANNEX 2 - Elements of a Land Policy Reform programme and Regional Trends

In its broadest sense, land policy reform can involve deliberate changes to the distribution of land resources or the forms of tenure under which they are held ("land tenure reform"), the rules regulating land use, and the institutions which administer and manage land and regulate land use. It may include an action on the distribution of rights itself (agrarian reform, regularisation, etc.). This includes changes in policy and legislation and the programmed actions required to direct, implement and manage the reforms. Land policy reform must be based on a clear analysis of the problems to be dealt with, shared agreement amongst the principal stakeholders on aims and objectives and good knowledge of field situations. There is a consequent need to support debate within civil society, to build social and political support to the reform, and promote cross-ministerial discussion and coordination.

Although processes differ widely from one country to another, there are some broad trends which include:

(1) a desire to correct historical inequities or inefficiencies, and to bridge legality and legitimacy, by recognising legitimate informal or customary rights;

(2) the withdrawal of tight state control over land and establishment of individual or family property rights and associated legal and administrative systems to recognise and manage them;

(3) an increasing level of cash-based land transactions with greater attention paid to ways of encouraging tenancy and other forms of enabling access to land; and

(4) recognition of the need to provide more secure rights for women and other vulnerable groups using an approach based on pragmatism rather than ideology.

(5) Recognition and/or restitution of native titles.

These trends lead to legal, institutional and technical innovations in the type of rights gaining legal status and in the way to register and manage them. Insofar as common property resources are concerned, their status in law often remains weak, with continued processes of encroachment and privatisation. Many governments are now adopting the principle of subsidiarity and developing decentralised approaches to land administration. While land taxes provide a major source of local government revenue in most OECD nations, they remain limited in many poorer countries.

Depending on the context and objectives, a land policy reform programme may include one or several of the following elements:

* new tenure legislation and revision of codes, to recognise and regulate new types of rights or forms of transfer (including women's, small farmers', pastoralists', minority groups or indigenous peoples' land rights);

* land registration and titling of existing rights;

* regularisation (updating formal records to take account of changes and informal transactions) of existing land rights;

* land redistribution;

* the creation of new opportunities for land access;

* restitution of land rights alienated from the original owners or users;

* privatisation of collective or state land;

* improvements to the efficiency and accountability of existing land administration systems;

* establishment of (new) institutions and structures with responsibility for land acquisition, administration and conflict resolution;

* setting up a land-based tax system;

* designing and enacting new land use and planning rules and procedures.

For each component, there is a broad set of options. Due to this diversity, there can be no blueprint approach to land policy reform: the objectives, the political choices they reflect, and the legal and institutional options chosen are highly dependent on the specific economic, social and political context and its historical background, the institutional framework, the main issues to be dealt with, the type of agriculture and relations between government and people. Effective implementation of the options chosen depends on the institutional capacity of the public, private and community-based organisations involved. An assessment of these capacities must be taken into account in the design of the land tenure system.

The design of policy and institutions has also significant consequences for equity and fairness, since the choice of technology and institutions for land administration is not just a technical issue. Wrong assumptions on methods for customary registration may lead to the exclusion of youngsters, women and herders. A system of land registration based in the capital city, requiring payment of a substantial fee and based on formal survey techniques, will be much less accessible to more distant, and poorer rural populations than low cost land registration procedures handled at district or village level, and which are based on simple maps. The choices made must be pertinent (i.e. providing answers to the problems faced, and built on a sound knowledge of local conditions), affordable (i.e. coherent with the financial means of farmers, local government and state) and sustainable (i.e. provide a long term framework at acceptable recurrent costs); hence the need to specify political objectives before designing the policy and institutions.

Land administration is a public good and governments must cover the recurrent costs of land administration, drawing on a combination of public expenditure, donor funds and user fees. The advantages of a fair and efficient land administration system justify public financing. While donor funds are often necessary for preparing, designing and implementing the reform, relying on them for land administration systems would impede sustainability. On the other hand, too heavy a reliance on user fees may discourage poor people from following legal procedures, excluding them from the benefit of the law, and leading to unregistered land transactions and to a rapid obsolescence of land information systems.

There is very limited scope for generalising between different land policy reform processes, given the great differences in land relations across different countries and regions of the world. An overview of the differences between regions is given in the table below.

>TABLE POSITION>

ANNEX 3 - Key principles for Governments for successful land policy design

Experience of land reforms across the world leads us to identify some key principles that Governments and national administration should consider when designing and implementing land policy reforms so that such reforms may enhance growth, equity and environmental sustainability of land policies.

(1) Long term processes. Processes of land policy reform, changes to legislation, land rights registration and establishment of new structures with responsibility for land management and administration are likely to be long-term, complex and highly political.

(2) Promote inter-ministerial work, with in-depth analysis of current situations. Land issues are multidisciplinary, and involve different ministries and institutions.

(3) Promote a participatory approach to policy making. Governments need to listen to and engage with different actors, and understand the diverse range of interests at stake.

(4) Take into account the distance between statutory law and local practice. New legislative provisions need to take into account the broad range of current land practices, aiming at their progressive adaptation rather than their mere replacement.

(5) Identify key principles and allow for diverse solutions within them. Different situations require solutions appropriate to their specific circumstances.

(6) Take implementation costs (investment and recurrent) into account in design of land tenure reform measures. Costs of new structures and procedures can be very substantial

(7) Carefully craft the rules and tools. Rules, tools and procedures have to be carefully discussed, designed and tested, to avoid loopholes. Procedures to resolve land claims must be established.

(8) Recognise that the impact of reform depends on changes in practices and not on the legal texts alone.

(9) Ensure widespread dissemination of information on the scope and content of the reform as well as on the policy, legislation and procedures.

(10) Carefully address gender issues. Policy provision to increase access by women must be accompanied by the necessary support mechanisms (e.g. credit, information, training) to enable them to access, control and utilise land successfully

(11) Adequately recognise the rights of minorities and indigenous peoples. Measures to secure the rights of minorities and indigenous peoples must be based on respect for their own laws, customs, practices and tenure systems. The lands that these peoples traditionally occupy must be identified and their rights of ownership effectively guaranteed.

(12) Include sound land use planning in land policy. Land policy needs to take the diverse quality of land into account and tailor rules and procedures for particular settings.

Annex 4 - Operational Guidelines to assess national policies and design an EU response strategy

These operational guidelines are intended to guide the user, in a logical sequence, through a comprehensive check list of questions/issues to be considered when assessing national policies/strategies and devising an EC/EU response.

1. Situation analysis. Land and natural resources and key development challenges

Land policy and reform programmes do not exist in a vacuum. This section is intended to provide the background and information required to understand how land is related to wider development issues and objectives, and the constraints which problems of land tenure or land access may impose.

1.1. Identification of the main land issues in terms of forms of land tenure, mechanisms for land access, structure of land ownership and land holding, responsibilities for land management and management of the associated rights, proportion of land subject to formal title deed and registration, public land ownership, and the development of land markets. In addition the presence of customary or traditional forms of land tenure and management, tenure and other problems faced by different social/ethnic groups in securing access to land, and the factual background highlighting gender and other social disparities and regional differences in access to land and security of land rights. Identification of the most vulnerable groups, their claims and the specific problems they face.

1.2. What is the relation between land tenure and poverty? What are the main development challenges being faced by the country, how and to what extent are they related to questions of land tenure and access?

* In political terms: interests in questions of land policy, access, security and equity in government, amongst political parties and other political forces in society; current and recent political debate about land policy and law; existence and nature of conflicts, social, ethnic and regional disparities involving land, and potential risks of wider (possibly violent) conflict where the land issues involved are not dealt with.

* In economic terms, how land issues relate to productivity, investment and employment: what changes in land policy may be needed to improve productivity and investment, such as greater security of land rights, improvements in land distribution, easier access to land, land-based opportunities to access credit and to facilitate the operation of land markets etc. A particularly important issue is whether or not land scarcity can be offset by agricultural diversification and creation of non-agricultural employment opportunities.

* In relation to equity, social justice and poverty: extent of landlessness, evictions, land tenure or access problems faced by particular social groups including women, pastoralists, minority groups and indigenous people or regions, land grabbing and illegal appropriations of natural resources, degree of landownership concentration, share of idle land.

* In terms of environmental sustainability: the role of land policies and laws, planning and regulation of land use and other natural resource use, land management.

1.3. Fiscal and financial issues: Value of land and property, taxation either by (local) government or customary rulers, role of land purchase and rental markets in the economy, cost of agrarian debt.

1.4. Physical characteristics. Land quality assessment and land use planning. Trends in land use and land degradation.

1.5. Existing research and documentation.

2. Policy, legislation and institutional framework

New land policies should be integrated into efforts by states to establish more democratic forms of governance at national and local levels, and should offer all citizens a guarantee of their rights together with ways of addressing the land related problems they face. A genuine and inclusive participatory policy design is a condition of broad acceptance of a new policy which must respect the rights of minorities and provide equal rights to men and women.

Historical Background to Land Issues and Policies

2.1. What has been the past experience with land issues, legislation and interventions concerning land, in the more distant past as well as over the last 10-20 years? Is there analysis available of how such interventions have affected actual practice in different areas? What impact have these interventions had on vulnerable groups and gender equality? What implications does this have for policy design and implementation?

2.2. How have major areas of policy changed over the last 10-20 years, especially economic strategy and tenure policy? How have these changes affected the role of central and local government, and the various institutions responsible for administering land? How far have policy measures been able to address the main recent/current economic challenges? Have these policy measures contributed to combating hunger and poverty, to improving gender equality and environmental sustainability?

2.3. What have been the State policies and practices concerning indigenous land ownership and possession?

Policy and Legislative Framework

2.4. The national land policy, content and process: Has the government formulated a land policy and strategy to reform land tenure and natural resource management? If so, have environment, gender, HIV/AIDS issues, and their impact on social relations and agriculture, been taken into account in the design of the policy? Has due account been taken of indigenous peoples' land rights and land claims?

Was the design participatory? If not, are there calls for this within government or society or from outside agencies?

Is there or has there been any sort of structured process, such a formally constituted Commission of Enquiry, into land issues and how they are to be addressed?

Have different groups, in particular women, been consulted? Were they part of the formal consultation process (e.g. the Commission of Enquiry)? Are people (particularly in rural areas) aware of and informed about the content of the new policy? Is it broadly accepted across society? Have the views of minorities and marginal groups been requested? Are they reflected in the policy?

2.5. Land and development strategies: How does tenure policy link to other broad development policies and strategies, such as development policy, poverty reduction strategies, policies on gender equality, agricultural policy and land use planning at local and regional levels? Is there a mechanism to achieve these linkages? Are land issues reflected in the PRSP? Are there contradictions between land policies and other policies?

2.6. Land legislation: What is the content of current or planned legislation relating to land rights, land tenure, land and natural resource management, land markets and land institutions? Are they coherent with each other? More specifically:

* Land rights: What range of rights is covered by legislation on land tenure and natural resource management? What status is accorded to local/customary rights within the legal framework and how do these relate to statutory provisions? Is it possible to register joint ownership of land and natural resources, e.g. at community level? Do the poor have effective access to the information regarding legal procedures for the registration of rights and/or transactions? How are secondary rights protected under the new regulation? To what extent are land rights of indigenous peoples and minorities recognised and effectively protected?

* Laws and socio-political rights: Does legislation meet the expectations of different key actors as regards providing secure rights and access to land? Does the land policy and legislation guarantee the land rights of the poor (whether these are established formally or informally through transactions or relationships with other land users) and assist them to access fundamental rights of citizenship, and means of shelter and livelihood? Is there provision for joint spousal ownership of land and property or are the rights of wives restricted and subordinated to those of husbands or male relatives? Do government policies or actions undermine existing access to land of vulnerable groups? Does government protect vulnerable groups of being deprived of their access to land by third parties (male relatives, companies, landlords, etc.)? Does government give access to land to the landless?

* Are there sufficient incentives for investment in land improvements, including for tenants and sharecroppers? How do law and practice deal with the rights of typical disadvantaged groups - women, widows, migrants, herders, indigenous peoples, minorities? To what extent does legislation enable or restrict land transfers and transactions, in particular rental markets, as a means for people to access land, gain income and adjust their holdings of land assets?

* The application of the law: To what extent is this legislation and associated decrees easy to apply in practice? Is there a large gap between legal provisions and what actually happens? Why? Does government have the institutional capacity to implement the law? What is the role of the judiciary and the courts in resolving land disputes and settling land claims, and how do they respond to these in practice? Are farmers' organisations allowed to play a role in resolving land conflicts?

Institutional Framework and Land Administration Practices

2.7. Central government: Are responsibilities for carrying out land policy combined under one Ministry or distributed amongst various sectoral Ministries? Which different sectoral ministries play a role in dealing with land issues and delivery of land related services? How are these powers exercised in practice? Are there a number of different specialist agencies responsible for e.g. land administration, survey, land use planning, urban and rural or other categories of land? How do the different land agencies relate to one another? Are the approaches taken by different parts of government coherent, or do they operate in contradiction?

2.8. Land administration: How is the land tenure administrative system structured? What are the principal functions and activities undertaken and by which bodies: issue of title, management of land information, register of changes, adjudication, arbitration, and conflict resolution, etc.? How effective and efficient are such bodies in practice? Can they respond to the needs of different kinds of land rights holder, in terms of accessibility, cost, appropriateness, etc.? What are the major limitations and problems experienced with the delivery of land administration services?

2.9. The roles of local government and traditional rulers: Has government administration been decentralised and to what level? Is local government involved in land management? Are

2.10. their roles clearly defined? Does it have adequate financial and human resources? How are customary rights managed? What is the role of customary rulers, traditional authorities and institutions? Are they reliable, impartial and non-discriminatory? Are they likely to respect the interest of the majority? What incentives do they have to manage land in the interests of the local population and to respect their rights? Are there checks and balances (e.g. through peer pressure, social accountability or formal legislation) on the actions of customary or traditional authorities?

2.11. Financial aspects of reform: Do land policy and tenure reform feature in the government's budgetary planning and what are the expected financial implications of carrying through the proposed measures and interventions relating to land? Have different options been assessed/costed?

3. Opportunities for changes in land policy

In order to identify possible donor interventions it is necessary to assess the entry points beforehand and identify any ongoing processes where specific opportunities can be seized.

3.1. Ongoing reform processes: Is there currently any government project or process related to land policy, legal, institutional or tenure reform? If so, who is responsible for it and what is the focus? What stage has the process reached? Have clear objectives been defined?

3.2. Stakeholder participation: Are there processes of policy debate currently underway aimed at changing the way in which land tenure or other aspects of land policy are handled? What are the main issues emerging in the debate and what is being proposed to address them, in particular by government? Who is leading the process and what broader constituencies are involved? What role are national stakeholders (state bodies, NGOs, farmers' and women's organisations, researchers, private sector, ethnic minorities and tribal and indigenous people) and international actors (donors, World Bank, UNDP, IFAD, FAO, private sector) playing in this process?

3.3. Emerging pressures: What pressures are emerging from different social and economic groups regarding changes to land distribution, land tenure and administrative provisions? Do civil society organisations focus on land issues? Particularly, do farmers/herders' organisations have their own views on land issues and policy? What are the main positions and perspectives and which groups are leading this process? Do indigenous peoples' organisations have policy proposals for land restitution, titling, demarcation?

3.4. Political factors: How does the process of reforming land policy and legislation fit within the broader political context and associated timetable (electoral cycles, political tensions and conflicts, re-formulation of other major related strategies, etc.)? Does government promote or suppress debate and possibilities for change? Is the political climate favourable for achieving changes to land policy and interventions? Are land issues considered to be too sensitive politically and too loosely bound up with risks of conflict to accommodate change? Is the processed geared to strengthen access to and control over land to the most vulnerable groups?

3.5. Government commitment: How far is the government committed to achieving significant changes in land policy, access, tenure and administration, and in favour of which social and political groups? Which political pressures are driving changes or, alternatively, hampering implementation of agreed measures?

3.6. Donor support: What donor programmes or support measures are currently underway in the field of land tenure and administration? On which issues and aspects and in what regions? Is land policy and land administration a focus for other donors?

3.7. On which topics do field projects/NGOs work in the field of land tenure, land access and land resource management? Are there innovative frameworks or methodologies that are tried and tested in practice which could feed back into policy debate? Is there any assessment of such work? Is there a mechanism for donor coordination? Is it government-led? How effective is it? Are other stakeholders involved?

3.8. Available research: Has there been recent research carried out on land issues in the country? Is there a means to track changes in important social, economic, political and environmental variables relating to land? Is there any research on or analysis of the impacts of land reforms and policy change? Is there documented research on land claims made by/with indigenous peoples' organisations? Are there (national/international) researchers/consultants capable of providing relevant insights and expertise?

4. Adequacy, affordability and sustainability of land interventions

4.1. Analysing the economic sustainability of the policy implies looking at the cost and benefits of implementing the reform or other interventions which policy intends. In putting in place or reforming land administration - on which successful reforms to land tenure, distribution or resource management all partially depend, the greatest chances of success lie in the establishment of a reliable system which is cheap and easily accessible to users. The information provided must be easy to update and remain reliable over time.

* What are the additional costs and benefits that the reform will generate? To what extent they can be sustained in the current macro-economic framework? How do they compare to the costs of not undertaking a reform?

* To what extent are constraints such as market failures in input/output marketing or the lack of infrastructure considered when assessing the productivity of land? In this light, have the constraints that may be imposed by land tenure or other land problems, and therefore the economic returns from the proposed reforms, been realistically assessed? Are the sequencing and timeframes for reform appropriate?

* Is the government monitoring and evaluating the impact of the reform based on an agreed set of indicators and regular data collection? Is there a base for comparison (baseline data)? Do the results of M&E feed back into the assessment of economic impact?

4.2. Financial sustainability deals with the cost of land reforms and the land administration system and the capacity for government and users to cover the recurrent and investment costs incurred.

* Is the system proposed adequate to the needs of the users? Is there a demand for the "product"?

* What approach has the government adopted to cost recovery for land services? Is it implemented effectively? Are the resources collected properly accounted for and do they result in decreasing budgetary allocations? Is it affordable for the poor?

* In programmes of land access or redistribution, is finance available for land acquisition or to provide compensation to land owners facing expropriation or compulsory purchase? How is land acquired for redistribution: by the state, by intermediary bodies or directly by beneficiaries? To what extent can costs be recovered? Are land acquisition credit or rental payments affordable? Is donor financial aid or other forms of concessionary finance available?

* How is government dealing with taxation of land? If it is not in force, are there plans to introduce it? Is such a tax (or will it be) pro-poor (i.e. will it penalise highly concentrated land ownership and/or inefficient utilisation of land by large landowners)? If a land tax is in force, what is the extent of tax evasion?

* Is government addressing problems of corruption and rent seeking in land administration and land reform programmes, and any mismanagement of associated funds and revenues? When culprits are identified are they brought to justice? Are land agencies subject to regular independent audits of their accounts?

4.3. Institutional sustainability. A sound land policy requires appropriate institutions to i) enable and monitor its implementation, ii) provide security to land users, allocate and deliver land rights, and provide services required to facilitate and record transactions, iii) regulate land use, and iv) act as a honest broker in the case of conflicts. The implementation of land policy must often rely on local institutions and reinforce their role to ensure beneficiaries' participation in the management of land rights.

* Has government reviewed the role and function of land related institutions (land use department, land registration and titling office, local government, parastatals) as well as community-based, private sector and civil society organisations? How well does the reform refocus government activities on its core functions?

* What progress is government making in implementing agreed institutional reforms? What about training/upgrading for staff? Does the Ministry have a staffing plan matching human resources with tasks and activities?

* Do local administrations have adequate capacity? If, not what remedial action is being taken by government? Is a posting in a local administration attractive to civil servants, to both men and women? Is there a deliberate policy to encourage the posting of staff to provinces and districts?

* Do monitoring agencies and judiciary bodies dealing with resolution of land conflicts have adequate capacity and independence? Are staff members well acquainted with the land rights of the poor and human rights law?

* Is the technology (e.g. for land information and cadastral systems and for land survey) appropriate for the existing/planned capacity? Is it too costly or ambitious for what can realistically be achieved, or do limitations in available technology create bottlenecks in realising policy objectives?

4.4. Social impact. Given the importance of land as a productive asset, land reform can have massive impact on social relations both at community level (by modifying relations amongst land users, between land owners and workers or tenants, and between traditional rulers, national/local administrations and individuals) and at household level (by modifying relations between men and women or between generations).

* To what extent does the reform process help to bridge the gap between legacy, legitimacy and practices and to provide effective support and legal protection for the rights of farmers and herders? Does it provide for a gradual transition from traditional tenure to private ownership? How will the provision of the law secure the rights of the poor?

* Will the land policy reform effectively rule out forced evictions? Is the land policy reform sufficient to effectively protect the land rights of vulnerable groups from threats by third parties? If not, what complementary measures are needed? Will the land policy reform stop land grabbing and illegal appropriation of natural resources? Are complementary measures needed? What benchmarks have been set for land redistribution? What kinds of policies have been implemented for land redistribution? To what extent does the reform process help to overcome landlessness?

* How does the land policy take into account the specific needs of women? Are women allowed to own land and acquire title? Are they consulted on the content and involved in the implementation of the reform? Are informally determined secondary rights, on which many women and poor households depend, protected or not? Are indicators and data collection disaggregated by gender?

* Does the reform respect the rights of ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples? Does the reform adequately cater for the needs of landless people and the poor?

4.5. Environmental sustainability. Land reforms are powerful tools to improve natural resource management and reduce soil fertility decline. However, for land reforms to contribute meaningfully to improving natural resource management, objectives relating to environmental sustainability must be built into the reform programme from the start and trade offs such as those between agricultural productivity and land management must be openly addressed.

* What measures have been taken to ensure that land reform will lead to a more sustainable use of natural resources? Has a Strategic Environmental Assessment been carried out? Have recommendations been put into practice?

* Do land use regulations treat land productivity from an environmental point of view, (incorporating questions of soil fertility) as well as from an economic perspective?

* How does the government address illegal exploitation of natural resources on common land (e.g. forestry, fisheries)? Is existing legislation adequate and enforced?

* Have regional issues, such as the shared management of common resources between neighbouring countries, been discussed/addressed?

5. Defining a response strategy and a set of interventions

The range of donor intervention is very broad. The choice should consider government priorities, main development challenges, issues raised by civil society, other interventions planned or already under way, donor capacity and strategic policy directions. Capacity building in civil society organisations and public institutions should be an integral part of all donor programmes.

>REFERENCE TO A GRAPHIC>

5.1. Possible interventions include:

* Research and analysis: to improve knowledge and understanding of land policy, land rights and ownership, and maximise impact on the poor.

* Policy formulation: participatory processes for policy formulation, public debate with stakeholders, provision of expertise, exchange of experiences and best practices (local/national/international), facilitation. Pilot testing of innovative approaches. Supporting the capacity of marginal groups to participate and voice their interests. Support for government role as mediator among conflicting interests between stakeholders. Support for the engagement of farmers' organisations and other civil society groups in the public debate.

* Legislation: Support for the development of new tenure legislation and revision of codes, to recognise and regulate new types of rights or forms of transfer. Gender sensitive revision of inheritance law. Balancing short term legal reforms to address urgent problems, with longer term legislative development. Support to the judicial system to resolve land disputes. Capacity building in the judiciary and support for legal assistance for marginalised groups.

* Land administration: Improvements to the efficiency of land administration systems, specifically:

o Registration and titling: Establishment of systems for land registration and titling of existing rights, cadastral services, land surveying, capacity building in local communities to support identification and management (including registration) of customary rights.

o Formalising and securing land transactions, regulation of land markets: Establishment of simple and fair procedures for land transactions and their formal registration; mechanisms for regulation of land markets (giving priority to farmers, allowing local bodies to define rules about land sales outside the community, etc.); maintenance of land information systems; regular land valuation exercises.

* Land Management:

o Land redistribution and resettlement: Land purchase and redistribution, by government, directly by beneficiaries or by land trust funds or other intermediary bodies; funds for compensation of landowners facing expropriation; provision of rural infrastructure, support to services and productive support in newly settled areas.

o Restitution: Restitution of land rights alienated from the original owners or users; support for judicial and negotiation processes. Restitution of lands to indigenous peoples according to their ancestral rights.

o Privatisation: Privatisation of collective or state property (land condominiums, etc.), infrastructural development.

o Resolution of land disputes and land adjudication: in land registration programmes or following land reforms, restitution or privatisation processes.

o Institutional development: Establishment of new institutions and structures with responsibility for land acquisition, administration and conflict resolution.

* Taxation: Designing, testing and setting up a land-based tax system.

* Land use and planning: Providing support to develop and disseminate appropriate land use plans as a basis for a sustainable use of land and water.

* Environmental impact: Impact assessment of reform processes and projects; development and application of environmental and land use regulations.

* Monitoring and evaluation: Development of M&E systems, expertise for the identification of indicators on policy relevance and impact. Support for civil society engagement in participatory monitoring of land policy reforms.

5.2. An appropriate strategy will combine the above activities in a logical sequence and an adequate timeframe. It would set out realistic outcome/impact objectives. It would propose systematic testing of reform options in pilot projects.

* Coordination and collaboration. As most land reform programmes will contain one or more of the above activities, the execution of which falls substantially within governments' responsibilities, land reform programmes are ideal candidates for Sector Programme-type approaches and provide good opportunities for budgetary support.

* Integration with broader development planning: Analytical work on the place of land in poverty reduction strategies and programmes, and horizontal and vertical integration with sectoral policies and programmes: e.g. for agricultural development, including production and marketing, investment promotion; housing and urban development; service delivery; natural resource management and utilisation; decentralisation; regional and local economic development; programmes for good governance, gender equality and access to justice.

6. Monitoring and evaluation

Indicators are a powerful tool to measure the extent to which the new policy is meeting agreed objectives. They are by nature very case specific. The list provided below is not exhaustive and is intended only to serve as a guide to define a specific set of indicators relevant in the national context. "Outcome indicators" which provide information on how the policy is performing should be preferred to "input indicators" which detail inputs such as finances and human resources.

6.1. Indicators of tenure security

* Trends in land ownership, access and utilisation by both men and women. Size of plots. Equity of land distribution (Gini coefficient). Number of landless and related trends.

* Share of land (number of parcels and total area) registered individually and communally.

* Cost of registration (time and money) to land owners/communities and duration of registration process.

* Level of protection of rights of indigenous peoples, pastoralists, minorities.

* Number and extent of land conflicts, localisation. Number of new conflicts over the year. Prevalence of forced evictions, land grabbing and illegal appropriation of land.

* Existence and effectiveness of conflict/dispute resolution mechanisms. Existence of appeal mechanisms.

6.2. Trends in land market

* Development of a land market: number and volume of transactions.

* Relative price of land for different categories. Comparison with agricultural profits. Differences between rural and urban land.

* Evidence of land fragmentation, average size of plots.

* Availability of information on land prices.

* Equity of inheritance laws/regulations in particular to women.

* Level of informal land transactions.

* Restrictions to land sales both administrative and on price.

* Cost (time and money) of a land transaction.

* Existence of mortgage financing for the purchase of land. Interest rates.

6.3. Environmental impact and Natural resources management

* Trends in land degradation/desertification. Ha of degraded land. Agricultural productivity in marginal lands.

* Size of protected areas. Extent of encroachment. Protected areas under sustainable community management.

6.4. Regulatory framework

* Tax rates on land. Collection and use of taxes. Collection efficiency (share of taxes actually collected). Information on the use of taxes.

* Existence and timely availability of cadastral/registry information/maps.

* Cost of cadastral service to user and as a percentage of the actual cost of the service.

* Number and duration of court cases.

7. Appendices

Selected bibliography

DFID, November 2002, Better livelihoods for poor people: the role of Land Policy, Consultation draft of a DFID issues paper.

FAO, 2002, Land tenure and rural development. FAO Land Tenure Studies No 3.

GTZ, 1998, Land Tenure in Development Cooperation: Guiding Principles, CD-ROM (also available on line)

GTZ, Sustainable Land Management, Guidelines for Impact Monitoring.

MAE, 1998, La dimension foncière du développement rural en Afrique de l'Ouest.

World Bank, 2003, Land Policy for Growth and Poverty Reduction.

Tool box

Terms of reference, Useful links, online sources.