# I. Introduction & Motivation

Property rights play a central role in the framing of investment incentives, the allocation of resources, and economic development more broadly (North and Thomas 1973; Besley 1995; Acemoglu, Johnson, and Robinson 2001). However, policies and institutions across Sub-Saharan Africa on land (Deininger 2003) and other key assets are constraining investment and productivity, while population growth and environmental degradation place greater pressures on productive resources. A lack of effective property rights can lead to a number of undesirable economic outcomes (Galiani and Schargrodsky 2011): fear of expropriation can lead to under-investment; a lack of transferability can impede the efficient functioning of markets (for land in particular); an environment of uncertain property claims can impede the collateralization of land and other assets; and insecure property rights can adversely affect women’s labor and reproductive decisions, as well as their decisionmaking within the household, with the potential for knock-on investment and welfare effects.

Securing property rights over productive assets is of particular importance. Assets can serve as a store of wealth and buffer against shocks, can shape the set of productive economic opportunities available to women and men, and help determine the relative bargaining and decision-making power of individuals within the household (World Bank 2011).

There are three sets of productive resources that matter most for households and individuals in SubSaharan Africa: land, livestock, and savings and bank accounts<sup>1</sup> (FAO 2011a):

- _Land_ : Land is the central productive asset held by rural and urban poor (A. V. Banerjee and Duflo 2007), and a key fixed asset for agriculture and entrepreneurship. In rural areas, household asset portfolios tend to be heavily weighted toward land and livestock (Aryeetey and Udry 2000). In an economic sense, land is unique as an asset as a store of wealth and for collateral in that it is both immobile and virtually indestructible (Binswanger and Rosenzweig 1986). Land also holds an important socio-cultural meaning, provides social standing, and serves as a source of income from rental or sale. Despite land’s importance, land rights are perhaps among the most poorly defined “among rival and excludable assets, in particular in developing countries” (Galiani and Schargrodsky 2011).

- _Livestock_ : Livestock and animal products have a number of attractive features for poor households, including: their reproductive potential, mobile nature, store of value, and ability to be bought and sold in whole or from derived animal products (FAO 2009). Livestock also serve as an important complementary input for agricultural production, contributing both draught power and soil organic matter (Sheahan and Barrett 2014). Pica-Ciamarra et al. (2011) examined evidence from household surveys in 12 countries and found that most rural households hold some livestock, and livestock ownership for the bottom 40% of rural households (in terms of expenditure), is even higher, at 68%. In Tanzania, for example, analysis from a nationally-representative dataset reveals that 61% of rural households derive some income from livestock activities and that, among these households, revenue from livestock makes up 22% of their total income (Covarrubias, Nsiima, and Zezza 2012).

- _Savings and bank accounts_ : Savings can help poor households grow assets and smooth consumption. Formal savings in particular confer a number of advantages over informal savings. Storing one’s savings at home poses risks such as theft or appropriation by a family member and heightens the risk of temptation to spend (A. V. Banerjee and Duflo 2007).

> 1 There a number of other types of non-productive assets that are not included in this review (e.g., jewelry). We restrict our focus to those assets that can serve as a safe store of wealth and offer a non-negligible return. In addition, gender differences in human capital are not considered in this review.

3