_Gender and land rights:_ As in other parts of South Asia, women may appear to enjoy certain land rights in law, but they rarely translate into effective control over land in practice, owing to embedded, gender-biased social norms and customs. It is suggested that women's access to and effective control over land may be enhanced through joint land titling. This measure is rather limited in scope, since ideally what need to be promoted are women's independent land rights. But while the principle of joint titling is readily accepted at the level of the Government of India, it has yet to be realized in practice in Orissa. In focus group discussions, village women assert that their bargaining power vis a vis their husbands and in-laws would be enhanced considerably by joint title over land. The common objection that this may make it more difficult for women to escape from abusive marriages was for them a second order consideration.

_Organization of land administration:_ Land administration in Orissa is carried out by two, parallel government agencies: the Department of Revenue and Excise, responsible for policy formulation and revenue collection; and the Board of Revenue, responsible for the implementation of land policy and judicial matters. Land revenue has declined as a share of state revenue from over 30 percent to less than 2 percent over the last forty years. As a result, land administration is perceived as a burden on the state, rather than a service which, if made more efficient, could potentially contribute to raising agricultural productivity. Stamp duties and other fees payable upon the registration of land sales, on the other hand, account for up to 6 percent of state revenue. There is little or no coordination between the maintenance of land records, which is the responsibility of revenue inspectors and tehsildars; and land registration, which is the responsibility of sub-registrars. Measures to coordinate these two services and enhance their efficiency through computerization, while at the same time reducing transaction costs to individuals in the land market, could go a long way towards stimulating the land market. Whether or not this would enhance access to land for the rural poor, however, depends on the degree of transparency with which land administration is conducted in practice. Access to information and public awareness of rights seem to be critical factors. A recent initiative of the Revenue Department, Government of Orissa, to disseminate a local-language 'how to' manual on matters of land transfers and access to land records, is a most welcome contribution in this area.

_Land survey and settlement operations:_ Survey and settlement operations evolved historically as a way to establish a record of rights in land, on which to base the assessment of land revenue. Periodic, revisional surveys, conducted every 25-30 years or so, serve as the major means to update land records. Since the process of mutation following an individual land sale-purchase transaction is burdensome, protracted and (for many) prohibitively expensive, many land holders prefer to wait until the next revisional survey to obtain title to their land. In practice, the survey and settlement process provides widespread opportunities for rent-seeking on the part of the govermnent officers involved, and it is not uncommon for poorer and less powerful landholders to 'lose' at least a proportion of their land in the official record. Land-grabbing by more powerful individuals, facilitated by exerting leverage over settlement officers, appears to be commonplace during survey and settlement operations. While the contested amounts of land are usually small, the net effect is systematically to discriminate against the rural poor and the socially excluded.

Four types of land transaction are considered in the main analysis. Land may be purchased, inherited, rented (leased) or, in the case of commons and public land, encroached upon. Each of these types of transaction, and the state's responses through land law and administration, has particular implications for the ability of the rural poor to improve their access to land.

_Land sale-purchase transactions:_ These are estimated to account for around 80 percent of land transactions at village level, although the share of total agricultural land changing hands is typically as low as 5-7 percent per year. Land markets are thin for various reasons. In large part, there are few willing sellers of land, as the price of land does not reflect its full social value. Most sales are therefore distress sales by smaller farmers, and most purchases by larger farmers. High transaction costs in land markets are also a significant obstacle to land iv