Category: Uncategorized

By Peter Giampaoli, Climate Change Specialist, Land Tenure and Property Rights Division, USAID.

Clear, secure rights to manage and use forests are an important aspect of sustaining traditions and economic opportunities. Although this web site often discusses property rights in the context of developing countries, insecure title and undocumented land rights can undermine smallholder ownership in the United States as well. In the American South, some African American owners of rural land and forests face challenges stemming from imprecise boundaries and a lack of clarity regarding their property rights–both of which are legacies of how land and property rights were allocated to freed slaves following the Civil War.

In an ongoing case near Olney, Maryland, a kinship community is in a dispute with the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission over the whether a public road actually exists. Residents–descendants of freed slaves who settled in the area following the Civil war–argue that a public road previously existed but was removed from planning maps as the surrounding area was developed. A Commission official commented on the property deeds held by the residents, saying the descriptions of property boundaries are inadequate for determining “who actually is entitled to use a right-of-way.” He went on to note, “Ancient deeds make references to property descriptions in a lot of different ways. Sometimes it’s to a rock. Sometimes it’s to an apple tree.” An attorney representing one member of the community pointed out that if there is no recognized public road, then residents don’t have addresses, and “they can’t build on the land, they can’t get services, they can’t get emergency services, they can’t do anything with the property they’re paying taxes on.” He continued, “Obviously, the property is not worth much. … If you can’t build on it, it’s hard to sell it.”

In North and South Carolina, a pilot program by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Endowment for Forestry and Communities is helping sustain the African American legacy of forest ownership in those states by helping clarify smallholder titles over forest lands and providing training on how to productively manage forest lands for economic benefit. Many of these family holdings date back to the period following the Civil War. Often deeded to multiple families, these forest lands are now held in common by numerous inheritors without clear titles. Economic distress has driven some smallholders to sell their forest land, and individual descendants are able to force the sale of these lands–terminating family ownership.

In both the Maryland and North and South Carolina cases, owners face challenges exercising their property rights due, in part, to modern requirements regarding the precision and detail of property records. Such conflicts may be resolved by programs similar to the USDA’s, which attempts to achieve greater precision regarding ownership and property boundaries. The pilot program has enabled African American forest owners to retain ownership of their forest holdings and has been cited as a model for expansion across the South. The USDA program and similar efforts reflect the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security by helping smallholder owners clarify their rights and by providing extension and other services that allow them to use their land for economic benefit.

A guest post by Robert Oberndorf, Resource Law Specialist, Tenure and Global Climate Change Project

As the full impacts of Typhoon Haiyan become apparent, many commentators are linking this tragic event with concerns regarding the long-term impacts of global climate change. On the opening day of the UN Climate Change Conference in Warsaw, Poland, the Philippines’ lead negotiator, Yeb Sano, made an emotional speech on this topic. As the global community discusses how to improve the climate resilience of communities, important lessons related to tenure governance concerns should be considered. Many of these lessons can and should be applied in the Philippines as it recovers from the typhoon.

In addition to the staggering death toll from the typhoon, which is largely a result of the 16-foot storm surge that struck the most exposed areas in the storm’s path, it is reported that more than three million people in the Philippines have been left homeless. Many of these people lacked secure tenure before the storm and are now left in a position where they likely have no evidence to prove their land and property rights claims. This vulnerability is highlighted by growing allegations that some developers are claiming large tracts of previously occupied land in storm-affected areas and threatening to evict the current occupants. The lack of property records and the washing away of property boundaries must be recognized as critical post-disaster issues and addressed as communities shift their focus from immediate survival necessities to long-term rebuilding.

Issues that need to be addressed in the rebuilding process to ensure that the land tenure and property rights of vulnerable groups are not impacted negatively include:

• Inheritance: In instances where property owners have died, clear procedures need to be put into place to ensure the fair and transparent transfer of rights to the next of kin.
• Property rights clarification: Due to the destruction of residential property and lack of property documentation, there is an increased probability that claims to land could be contested or unclear. To allow for a more rapid resettlement and reconstruction process, a property claims process should be considered that leverages pre- and post-disaster satellite imagery and allows for the identification and vetting of property claims.
• Land property records: Individuals and households have likely lost their personal records of land property ownership, if they existed to begin with. It is likely that records held by local or regional governments could have been damaged or destroyed. In the future, disaster-resilient record keeping should be developed, and multiple back-ups should be properly stored for insurance purposes (both hard and soft copies).
• Climate resilient infrastructure built during reconstruction: If hard infrastructure, such as drainage culverts, sea walls, etc., are built to limit the physical impacts of future storms, they could potentially negatively impact existing land tenure and property rights claims. If that occurs, processes must be established to compensate individuals for the loss of existing rights.
• Effective land use planning: Some populations were located in areas that were inherently vulnerable to storm events. To lessen the costs to society of future natural disasters, there are certain steps the government can take, including establishing and enforcing effective land use controls, guaranteeing secure land tenure rights, and codifying strict building codes that combine climate resilience and locally appropriate methods and materials. Where changes in land use negatively impact existing land tenure and property rights claims, processes must be established to compensate individuals for the loss of existing rights.

According to Tim Fella, USAID’s Land Tenure and Conflict Adviser, “Land rights and land use planning are integral aspects to post-disaster planning and response. Not only does it help facilitate a more rapid and organized resettlement process; it can also contribute to increased resilience to future natural disasters.”

With strong political commitment, improved governance, and assistance from the international community, the communities of the Philippines that were negatively impacted by this event can and should be rebuilt in a more climate resilient manner. Lessons can be learned from other communities that were decimated by similar storms but were rebuilt in ways that lessened the impact of future disasters.

In 1900, the island city of Galveston, Texas, which was only 8.7 feet (~2.6 meters) above sea level at the time, was hit by sustained winds of over 140 miles per hour (225 kilometers per hour) and a storm surge of over 15 feet (4.5 meters). Much of the city was destroyed, and an estimated 6,000 to 12,000 people died (more than 20% of the city’s population). Though devastated, the city of Galveston rebuilt, raised the height of the entire city by 17 feet (almost six meters), and constructed a seawall that today spans ten miles (16 kilometers). The investments in climate resilience proved their worth just 15 years later when a similarly sized hurricane killed only 53 people and caused a fraction of the property damage sustained in the 1900 storm.

Today, USAID is integrating climate resilience into its infrastructure and land-use planning investments. The governments of the U.S., Spain and Costa Rica have led the Adaptation Partnership, a two-year global effort to share knowledge on mainstreaming climate change adaptation into development planning. This partnership spawned a community of practice on climate resilient infrastructure, as well as pilot activities in vulnerable locations. USAID investment and associated technical expertise will be crucial to help promote climate change planning in the urbanization processes underway across Africa and Asia.

History shows us that steps can be taken to properly rebuild the communities impacted by Typhoon Haiyan, but the people of the Philippines and the international community should insist that steps are taken to ensure that this process increases climate resiliency while minimizing negative impacts on property rights and compensating those whose rights are negatively affected.

Property ownership is one among a combination of assets that give women bargaining power within the household to address domestic violence, according to a study by Friedemann-Sanchez (2006). The study examined the effects of property ownership on women’s intra-household bargaining power in Colombia’s cut flower industry. Women had more relative power to address domestic violence when they had a combination of the following: 1) social capital (for example, the ability to move in with family), or 2) access to childcare that allowed them to work, which 3) gave them wage income to either purchase property or move out of their home and live on their own. Importantly, women who did not have a combination of these assets were not able to address domestic violence as effectively or at all. Friedemann-Sanchez’s work illustrates that property ownership is a necessary but not alone sufficient condition to increase a woman’s bargaining power and reduce the threat of violence within her household.

A 2011 report by Chowdhry illustrates how local political and economic factors and women’s inheritance rights may reduce violence against women and can change local marriage customs that often create opportunities for GBV. Marriage customs in India traditionally require a woman to marry outside of her home community and move to her husband’s family home. There is extensive research to show that a new daughter-in-law is subordinated in her new home by her mother-in-law, sister-in-law and husband. Chowdhry’s study of women’s land ownership in the state of Haryana illustrates how land scarcity and women’s land inheritance can change marriage traditions. In a number of cases, a husband chose to move in with his wife and farm her land after marriage. When a man moves in with his wife’s family, he must come to grips with becoming a ‘son-in-law’ in a way that most men in Haryana’s patriarchal society rarely do. In her own natal home, a wife is no longer a target of abuse by in-laws, and couples may have quite different relationship dynamics. In this particular political and economic context, Chowdhry’s work illustrates how women’s inheritance can change martial relationships. However, while many women who Chowdhry interviewed claimed that they suffer less physical violence when they live in their natal homes with their husbands, they still endure a husband’s verbal abuse. Outside of the marital relationship, a woman who has inherited a piece of land might find herself subject to threats and abuse from a number of male relatives as they seek to exert control over the land she owns.

Finally, Joshi (2013) explores the relationship between tenure security, urban service delivery, and GBV. In many slums around the world, individuals defecate in public toilets or in open spaces and are subject to verbal and physical abuse in the process. Joshi examined household (private) sanitation projects in urban slums in Kenya and Bangladesh. She argues that even if improved tenure security increases the likelihood of public or household investment in sanitation, private access to sanitation does not reduce GBV or the underlying gender inequality upon which it is based. Moving sanitation into the home does not reduce women’s exposure to verbal abuse and physical assault, because those abuses are not limited to her walks to the toilet. In fact, private sanitation provision may allow men to control their wives’ movement and interactions, keeping her in the private sphere (the home), but making her no safer. Thus while it may appear that tenure security and urban service delivery reduce violence, GBV may persist out of sight in the home and in society at large. Reducing women’s exposure to violence is not equivalent to reducing GBV itself. Reducing GBV also requires changes in men’s attitudes and behavior toward women.

I hope that this commentary spurs a conversation among policy makers and development practitioners who integrate LTPR into their work to consider 1) how LTPR can act as an analytical lens to study gender relations; and 2) the extent to which LTPR programming can facilitate structural change and address the patriarchal norms that govern many women’s lives around the world.

By Dr. Matt Sommerville, Chief of Party, Tenure and Global Climate Change Project.

At the recently concluded 2013 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference in Warsaw, Poland, negotiators agreed to a landmark set of decisions. After seven years of negotiations, United Nations (UN) member states reached a consensus on a framework to reward countries for REDD+ actions (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation).

The agreement reached in Warsaw defines a broad structure for establishing emission reference levels to measure future emission reductions against. It reaffirms the role of social and environmental safeguards in the process and notes that financing can be provided for “readiness” activities that prepare countries to participate in REDD+, as well as for emission reductions. There is still work to be done to address key issues related to securing natural resource rights and improving tenure governance, particularly regarding how benefits will flow to local stakeholders and operationalization of safeguards. Emerging lessons from USAID forest carbon projects, as well as technical support provided by USAID to the international community, are helping to build social and environmental soundness into both the policy and practice of REDD+.

At the Warsaw meeting, countries agreed to establish a national entity or “focal point” within REDD+ countries to act as a liaison to coordinate information sharing and financial support for the implementation of REDD+ activities. In some countries, this institutional arrangement is likely to facilitate the coordination of diverse activities and allow funds to flow directly to implementing agencies and project proponents. However, this structure also presents risks associated with the potential centralization of REDD+ financing at the national level.

It is important to ensure that the new REDD+ “focal points” effectively consider the role of local stakeholders. A crucial first meeting between financing institutions and the new focal points will occur in November 2014 in Lima, Peru, followed by additional meetings in June 2014. While the new REDD+ mechanism invites continued input and representation from multiple groups – including UN institutions, international and regional organizations, the private sector, and indigenous peoples – these first meetings will establish how the voices of various stakeholders are recognized.

UNFCCC negotiators also reconfirmed the importance of safeguards in the emerging REDD+ mechanism. Performance payments will be based on achieving these safeguards, several of which reinforce strong natural resource rights and tenure governance, such as:

• Transparent and effective national forest governance structures;
• Respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members of local communities; and
• Full and effective participation of all relevant stakeholders, especially indigenous peoples and local communities.

While REDD+ countries will be required to report on how these and other safeguards are implemented, this reporting will only happen after REDD+ activities have begun and only on an infrequent basis (in coordination with the often slow timeframe of UNFCCC national communications). This may limit the ability of financers to properly understand baseline social and environmental conditions. As usual in these negotiations, the details have yet to be clarified and will be subject to individual countries’ interpretations.

At present, as safeguard information systems and operational guidance are developed, there is a need to continue monitoring the developing structures. Looking ahead, there is also a need to document how strengthening natural resource rights and tenure governance leads to sustainable, equitable, efficient and effective REDD+ programs. USAID is playing an important role with other donors and civil society to evaluate and document these emerging experiences.

USAID is pleased to announce a first-of-its-kind partnership between the Governments of Ethiopia, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Federal Republic of Germany to improve rural land governance. Building on existing programs and the seven land country partnerships announced at this year’s G8 Open for Growth Summit, this new partnership will support greater transparency in rural land governance, promote responsible agricultural investment, and improve Ethiopia’s legal framework and practices related to rural land administration and land use.

The partnership will foster further collaboration between Ethiopia and its development partners to strengthen rural land governance and realize the Voluntary Guidelines for the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security. This partnership will also support the Government of Ethiopia to implement its Rural Land Administration and Use Plan and to achieve its existing commitments under the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, a partnership among G8 members, African nations, and the private sector to lift 50 million people out of poverty through coordinated policy reforms and responsible agricultural investment. In addition, it will help Ethiopia’s development partners to amplify the impact of their development support by coordinating efforts, sharing knowledge, and leveraging limited resources.

One of the programs involved in this new partnership is USAID’s recently launched Land Administration to Nurture Development (LAND) project. The LAND project works to strengthen the capacity of federal and regional land administration agencies, to improve the legal frameworks for rural land administration and land use, and to expand the documentation of rural land use rights, including in pastoral areas.

“The United States applauds the Government of Ethiopia for its commitment to strengthen rural land governance and welcomes this opportunity to collaborate more closely with our partners. This partnership provides a model for greater coordination that will improve the effectiveness of our investments in securing land tenure and property rights. We hope to see more of these partnerships developed in the future,” said Dr. Gregory Myers, USAID Division Chief, Land Tenure and Property Rights.

Over the past year, USAID has led a global effort in the land and resource governance sector to improve donor coordination and support the Voluntary Guidelines for the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security(Voluntary Guidelines). Working with the Global Donor Working Group on Land, a newly formed group of bi-lateral and multi-lateral donors and development agencies, USAID led a data collection and visualization project that gathered information on land and resource governance programs from around the globe. The result of this effort – a database of over 400 programs in more than 100 countries – will be launched publicly at the Global Donor Platform Annual General Assembly in January 2014.

USAID is making information on each of its projects publicly available now. Visit the new interactive map that displays where USAID is working and what USAID is working on with respect to land tenure and property rights. This includes USAID projects that focus exclusively on strengthening land tenure and property rights, as well as projects with a broader focus on other issues in which land tenure and property rights activities are included. This map also includes information on land and resource governance programs funded by the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), with whom USAID often works in a whole-of-government approach to strengthening land tenure and property rights.

In addition, the map incorporates information on how each USAID and MCC project supports the Voluntary Guidelines. According to Dr. Gregory Myers, USAID Division Chief, Land Tenure and Property Rights, “successful realization of the Voluntary Guidelines will require coordinated action by development agencies, civil society organizations and governments around the world. When the Global Donor Land Governance Program Database is publicly launched in January, it will provide stakeholders with a platform for information sharing and coordination in support of the Voluntary Guidelines, with profound consequences for millions of people. We are releasing our own program information now as a demonstration of the U.S. Government’s commitments to greater transparency and the Voluntary Guidelines.”

All too often our development efforts are hampered by a lack of coordination and knowledge sharing among relevant partners striving toward common goals. Better communication and coordination among donors and development agencies can help us avoid unnecessary duplication, share lessons learned, and amplify the impact of our work.

Launch the interactive map of USAID and MCC land tenure and property rights programs.

USAID welcomes The Coca-Cola Company’s recently announced commitments to ensure that its sugar suppliers protect the land rights of local communities. Coca-Cola – the world’s largest purchaser of sugar – agreed to revise its corporate Supplier Guiding Principles to incorporate principles that recognize and safeguard local communities’ and indigenous peoples’ rights to land and natural resources. Coca-Cola also agreed to publicly advocate that food and beverage companies, traders, and governments endorse and implement the Voluntary Guidelines for the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security.

As we have argued previously, responsible private investment is necessary to enhance food security, promote economic growth and lift millions of people out of poverty. Coca-Cola’s commitments – including the commitment to cut off any suppliers that do not adhere to its revised Supplier Guiding Principles – provide an innovative model for private sector actors to ensure that their investments are responsible and their suppliers recognize the property rights of local individuals and communities. Additionally, Coca-Cola’s commitment to support implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines and increase its participation in the UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS) advances what the private sector is doing to engage on land governance issues that could help amplify the impact of the Voluntary Guidelines.

“We welcome Coca-Cola’s commitments to recognize the property rights of local communities and promote transparency along its supply chain. Coca-Cola and other responsible private sector actors have the ability to affect positive change by leveraging their market power to compel their suppliers to work in consultation with local communities and adhere to guidelines that protect rights and promote responsible investment. We support Coca-Cola’s commitments and hope other companies follow suit. We also acknowledge the work of Oxfam in developing this important agreement,” said Dr. Gregory Myers, USAID Division Chief, Land Tenure and Property Rights. Dr. Myers added, “We also encourage greater private sector participation in CFS. We would welcome additional roundtable discussions between the private sector, civil society and governments on responsible agricultural investment.”

Coca-Cola’s announcement followed the release of Sugar rush: Land rights and the supply chains of the biggest food and beverage companies, a report by Oxfam International that claims that land acquired for sugar production has often displaced local communities and led to land-related conflicts. Coca-Cola’s recent announcement included commitments to conduct third-party social, environmental and human rights assessments, which will include impacts related to land and land conflicts, in its top 16 cane sugar sourcing countries, beginning in Brazil, Colombia, Guatemala, India, Philippines, Thailand and South Africa.

According to Ed Potter, Coca-Cola’s director of global workplace rights, “our company does not typically purchase ingredients directly from farms, nor are we owners of sugar farms or plantations, but as a major buyer of several agricultural ingredients, we acknowledge our responsibility to take action and use our influence to help protect the land rights of local communities.”

See the full list of Coca-Cola’s commitments here.

A guest post by Dr. Paul Munro-Faure, Deputy Director, Climate, Energy and Tenure Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)

Following the endorsement of the Voluntary Guidelines for the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (commonly referred to as the Voluntary Guidelines) in 2012, FAO initiated a four-year programme for making improved governance of tenure a reality. One of the main aspects of the program is awareness raising. To that end, we have made the Voluntary Guidelines available in six official languages on FAO’s website and distributed over 15,000 printed copies to people in about 140 countries. FAO has also helped to convene ten regional awareness raising workshops over the past twelve months. We have recently begun convening sub-regional meetings, starting with a meeting in Abu Dhabi for the Gulf States and Yemen. Country level workshops will begin in the next couple of months and resources are already available to start these in more than twelve countries.

Another aspect of this programme is capacity development – preparing additional tools and aids to support implementation of the Guidelines. We are close to finalizing the initial five Governance of Tenure Technical Guides prepared by FAO and partners, which address core areas in the Voluntary Guidelines. An additional eight guides and their dissemination are under discussion with donors and stakeholders.

We have also made progress in developing e-learning programmes to disseminate and build capacity for supporting implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines. Open-source land administration software is also being made available and supported with increased functionality to requesting countries.

At the country level, we are responding systematically to requests for support in implementing the Guidelines, with discussions already underway for six countries. We are also in discussion with key stakeholders regarding partnerships targeting support for implementation of the Guidelines. We are engaged in detailed discussions on a partnership with the African Union’s Land Policy Initiative, the World Bank on mainstreaming of the Voluntary Guidelines in the Bank’s land-related portfolio, and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) on strengthening partnerships at the country level.

The regional workshops this past year have both re-validated and reinforced the recognition of the vital importance of the Voluntary Guidelines, showing that political momentum is developing and that governments are becoming more ready to engage. They have emphasized the importance of capacity development at the country level and the critical role for FAO in country level awareness raising and dialogue. A great deal has been achieved at the global and regional levels through enormous media coverage. We are, however, in the first stages of a long process. Awareness, capacities, momentum and support are all critically needed at levels where work is to be done – on the ground – principally at the national levels and with all stakeholder groups.

The regional workshops have prompted increasing numbers of requests for national and sub-regional workshops and that is where FAO and its partners will really make the difference. At the national levels, we can provide information on the messages of the Voluntary Guidelines and help provide space for discussion about how they can change peoples’ lives for the better.

Three quotations from those participating in the regional awareness raising workshops reflect the tenor of this groundswell of support and interest:

• “The Guidelines showcase a people-centred approach to tenure, putting a human face on the issue”
• “The Guidelines are ideas we can work towards”
• “The value of the guidelines is not only in their content but also in what they can induce”

Read more information on the Voluntary Guidelines from FAO and from USAID.

By Dr. Gregory Myers, USAID Division Chief, Land Tenure and Property Rights

USAID recently sponsored Devex’s Land Matters campaign in order to raise awareness about the importance of property rights. Throughout this campaign I stress that secure land tenure and property rights (LTPR) is the gateway to economic growth, food security, sustainable natural resources management, and other development goals.

I participated in the final event of the month-long campaign, a filmed discussion on the future of land rights, facilitated by Karol Boudreaux, Director of Investments, Omidyar Network. We were joined by Dr. Steven Lawry, Global Lead, Land Tenure & Property Rights, DAI and Tiernan Mennen, Director, South America, Chemonics. Between us, we have spent decades working on strengthening land rights. However, as we all agreed, this is the first time there has been a consensus among United Nations organizations, the World Bank, technical experts, civil society organizations, and many bilateral donors that secure LTPR is fundamental to development goals.

Currently, the U.S. Government invests more in LTPR programs than any other bilateral donor—with 44 projects in 36 countries. However, this work represents only a small fraction of the U.S. foreign aid budget, which is less than 1% of the overall U.S. budget. Consequently, we make strategic investments where small amounts of money can lead to measurable impacts and programs that can be replicated by host governments and donor partners. The investments we make in strengthening ownership rights create choices, which can lead to economic empowerment for families and communities.

One good example of our work is in Ethiopia where USAID helped 600,000 families plot their land and secure documents that prove their rights to it. Through this project, some women who leased out land found out that the area of their plot was actually twice as large as they earlier thought. They raised land rents and our analysis showed that overall, household incomes increased dramatically—by 10 to potentially 40% in the area. This led to changes in household decision making, including increased investment in children’s education.

Focusing on women’s property rights has proven to be an effective way to change lives through relatively small amounts of money. A change as simple and easy as including a line for a woman’s name on a title or deed to a house creates rights for her that lead to entirely different household economic choices. When women have access to land and secure rights, they increase their income and make investments in food and their children’s futures. Focusing on women increases USAID’s impact in a country for no additional cost.

When we multiply these efforts across Ethiopia, Africa, and the entire spectrum of countries worldwide that have weak property rights systems, we will see a tremendous impact on incomes, economic growth, and food security. Of course, the trick is finding an appropriate model for each country.

An appropriate model is both realistic and fair. USAID recognizes that private sector investments in agriculture can scale up food production, but can also create a power imbalance. Therefore, we work with governments to ensure that they recognize the land and resource rights of communities as part of or before large scale investments are made. We also help communities build their capacity to negotiate and benefit from outside investments. Then when these two sides come together, both can profit.

We have reached an historic moment where international donors are coordinating to strengthen land rights for people in developing countries. Last month, the Global Donor Working Group on Land – an organization of donors and development agencies working to strengthen land governance – held its first official meeting in Rome. I am happy to note that USAID is a founding member of this new body. One of the first tasks of the Working Group was to create a database of all donor-funded land governance programs. This donor database – which USAID played a lead role in developing – will be launched publicly in January, 2014.

It is exciting to see a consensus emerging among the global donor community that secure land tenure and property rights are the gateway to achieving international development goals, and that by working together we can insure better use of public resources and the application of data-driven best practices. In ten to twenty years I expect we’ll see new forms of governance systems around property rights emerge that are much more democratic, and equitable (particularly for women) and promote better economic returns. Vesting rights in people empowers them to make decisions about their assets, and thus their future.

If you are interested in the future of land rights, I encourage you to watch the video of the discussion. I will continue this dialogue–answering your questions–through Twitter on Thursday, November 14, 2:00 – 3:00 PM (EST) during an Ask-the-expert session hosted by @USAID. You may submit questions now by tweeting #AskUSAID.