Category: Uncategorized

This week marks the 10-year anniversary of the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KP), an international certification process that regulates trade in rough diamonds in an effort to prevent conflict diamonds from entering the market and fueling rebel movement.

The U.S. Government continues to be an active member of the KP, and over the course of the 2013 Intercessional Meeting, symbolically held in Kimberley, South Africa, USAID was able to further the development agenda within the KP. Building on the recent adoption of the Washington Declaration, which formally incorporates development goals into the KP and specifically addresses the artisanal mining sector, USAID developed a diagnostic tool for Member states to measure progress in the implementation of the Washington Declaration. During a one-day workshop attended by over 50 representatives, the draft version of the diagnostic tool was presented, reviewed and commented on, which will result in a revised version ready for testing later this year.

Throughout the week, USAID also collaborated closely with The Central African Republic and Cote d’Ivoire, partners to the Property Rights and Artisanal Diamond Development (PRADD) program. With the provision of short-term technical assistance from USAID and its implementing partner Tetra Tech International Development, Cote d’Ivoire has made significant progress in recent months towards re-establishing KP compliant processes in country, as recognized by the Working Group on Monitoring, in an effort to have the ban on the diamond trade lifted. The Central African Republic, which recently underwent an unsanctioned transfer of power and was subsequently temporarily suspended from the KP, faces significant challenges as the new government tries to establish itself without the benefit of an industry that made up approximately 60% of exports. With assistance from USAID, the EU and other partners, a plan has been developed which would ensure a partial lifting of the suspension, should basic targets be met over the remainder of the year.

Recent stories from Burma and Ethiopia illustrate the contentious issues surrounding the large-scale acquisition of land for agricultural production. In Ethiopia, the government may be re-assessing its policy of granting large tracts of land to investors, reducing the size of initial allocations and increasing the scrutiny of investors’ capacity to achieve their proposed plans and fulfill contractual obligations. The Minister of Agriculture, Tefera Derbew, has indicated that once investors demonstrate the capacity to productively manage 5,000 hectares, then the government can reasonably consider the allocation of additional land. While the government favors investment to boost Ethiopia’s commercial agriculture production, it wants to ensure that the land granted to investors is put to productive use.

There are important lessons from Ethiopia for Burma, which is rapidly emerging from two decades of political and economic isolation and increasingly the focus of foreign investment in numerous sectors, including agriculture. The rapid increase in the allocation of land to investors reflects the government’s intent to restore agricultural productivity. The policy of allocating large tracts of land to agricultural investors has raised fears of large-scale displacement of smallholder farmers, exacerbating an existing problem of landlessness in Burma. Nor is it clear whether investors will be able to make full use of allocated land, either due to lack of sufficient resources or the failure to consult and collaborate with affected communities. Displacement and other grievances can generate conflict and thus, inhibit the ability of investors to fully use the allocated land and realize its productive potential.

Basing incremental allocation upon conditions such as engagement with and benefits for surrounding communities and evaluating investors’ demonstrated use of initial allocations according to contractual obligations before allowing additional holdings could help ensure that the large-scale allocation of land to investors benefits host country stakeholders.

For more information, see USAID’s recently published profile on Burma.

A recent paper from the Global Canopy Programme, “Land tenure and fast-tracking REDD+: time to reframe the debate?” rightly points out that legally defensible and enforceable land rights are an essential condition for effective, equitable implementation of REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation plus augmentation of carbon stocks). The authors assert that clear land tenure and usage rights determine who should be compensated for reducing deforestation or held accountable for continuing it. This will require reform of laws and policies surrounding land tenure “to ensure that REDD+ projects will both reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation, and positively impact the livelihoods of forest communities by maximising the flow of REDD+ benefits to these groups.”

However, the authors note that legal reform is a lengthy process with uncertain outcomes. Over the time that such reforms unfold, forests remain under pressure, subject to widespread clearance and unsustainable use. Even where forest and land governance laws are reformed and harmonized, the authors contend that poor implementation, weak enforcement, and unsustainable practices can thwart achievement of desired REDD+ objectives.

Citing examples from published literature and brief case studies from Nepal and Papua New Guinea, the authors argue that legal reform of land and forest tenure will not successfully advance REDD+ objectives if the de facto power of communities remains weak, enforcement is poor, and the influence of powerful political and economic stakeholders who benefit from unsustainable forest practices remains unchecked.

The authors propose immediate interim measures that can help foster successful REDD+ efforts; their description of these measures implies that the proposed steps differ from and fall outside the typical reform of legal land tenure systems. They propose: mapping laws and policies across sectors to ensure policy consistency and to identify perverse incentives, legal loopholes, and conflicting priorities; the use of moratoria and the revision of concessions; and the engagement of community forestry user group networks with governments to expand recognition and protection of de facto community land rights.

While these are all important steps, they are an integral part of the longer-term process of reforming tenure governance to develop clear, enforceable land and forest rights for communities. The international Voluntary Guidelines for the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security adopted in 2012, outlines these and other principles and practices.

On May 28, the UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS) marked the one-year anniversary of the endorsement of Voluntary Guidelines (VGs) for the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security with a meeting that aimed to keep alive the spirit of understanding, cooperation and partnership that existed during the negotiations of the Voluntary Guidelines. USAID Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Middle East Bureau, Elisabeth Kvitashvili, represented USAID at the event and encouraged CFS members and participants to recommit themselves to implement elements of the VGs that are most appropriate to their country context.

Ms. Kvitashvili congratulated the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) for becoming a focal point for implementation of the VGs – a process that is also supported by many countries and organizations through multilateral and bilateral program assistance. The U.S. Government (USG), through USAID and MCC, has 53 active land governance programs in 32 countries, representing a commitment of over $800 million. Ms. Kvitashvili also mentioned new opportunities to support and accelerate implementation of the VGs, noting that the recent Grow Africa Investment Forum featured a breakout session on land governance.

Ms. Kvitashvili also noted that, with participation from many civil society organizations, the private sector, multilateral institutions and more than 95 member states, the process by which the VGs were adopted was unprecedented in its transparency. The United States was happy to participate in development of the VGs, which according to Dr. Gregory Myers, USAID Division Chief, Land Tenure and Property Rights, “are one of the most important tools developed by stakeholders to strengthen land governance systems. The USG remains committed to supporting implementation.”

The full transcript of Ms. Kvitashvili’s remarks can be found here.

In Benin, food insecurity is evidenced in the height and weight deficiencies in 40% of children under age 5, the limited availability of farmland, and the lack of diverse produce options in markets. At the same time, where farming is possible, some families who move elsewhere leave fields in their home village unused in order to show their ownership. The Government of Benin introduced the rural landholding plan (Plan Foncier Rural or PFR) as a pilot project in 1993 to address these problems as well as their root cause: the lack of secure land tenure caused by Benin’s dual system of customary and statutory land rights.

In Benin, customary land rights have largely been inherited through male lineage and recognized by ceremonial acts rather than written documentation. Without formal proof such as titles or parcel maps, families have had to establish their ownership through keeping fields fallow, installing physical barriers (such as rocks, fences or trees), and prohibiting their tenants—who possess subordinate rights—from making improvements, planting trees, or using fertilizer. However, these strategies have not protected owners against speculators or state confiscation.

To strengthen the rights of rural landholders, the United States Government’s Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) and several European donors have funded the expansion of the PFR into nearly 400 villages, which will create their own plans for implementation. With support of MCC’s Benin Access to Land Project, the PFR will survey and map fields, recognize and document customary rights, record a list of landholders’ names, and archive land sale contracts and agreements of tenancy or subordinate use.

MCC’s Knowledge and Innovation Network (KIN) Journal reports that there is evidence that land proprietors are willing to lease their now-fallow lands. A series of impact evaluations have found an increase in: the use of written contracts, tree planting, engagement in village land management, and women’s farming. They also found that there may be some resistance to register documents either because of high fees or a desire to hide the transaction from official oversight.

Where landholdings are documented, Benin law grants owners the right to use land as collateral for a loan. USAID research has found that when land governance systems effectively protect rights in this way, people make a variety of forward-looking investments because they are more confident that they will capture returns on their efforts.

A number of recent articles highlight the importance of strengthening property rights for Indigenous Populations (IP). In Botswana, the government’s attempts to relocate indigenous San (or Basarwa) populations continue to spark heated debate as well as lawsuits. In Nicaragua, indigenous communities are demanding action to halt illegal logging and encroachment by settlers. In Brazil, frustrated indigenous populations have stormed congress and occupied cattle ranches and dam sites.

As we noted in a previous commentary, indigenous populations’ rights to land and natural resources are often contested by dominant society groups. In many countries, rising population pressure and the expansion of agriculture and infrastructure can create competing demands for indigenous territories and the valuable resources often contained in indigenous territories.

Policy makers seeking to improve the livelihoods IP and reduce land-related conflict should consider the this research paper: Tenure and Indigenous Peoples: The Importance of Self-Determination, Territory, and Rights to Land and Other Natural Resources, which contains recommendations for strengthening land and resource rights of IP.

A recent article published by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) highlights the challenge of promoting forest management in areas that lack secure property rights, and the growing recognition that community forests need to be protected by the inhabitants themselves. Until inhabitants are secure in their right to the land and able to benefit from it, individuals will continue their rush to extract resources as quickly as possible for maximum personal benefit. With an estimated 80% of Sub-Saharan Africa lacking secure tenure, we may well witness the tragedy of the commons on a massive scale.

Developing country governments have shown an increased interest in preserving their forests since the emergence of the REDD+ mechanism. Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) is an international mechanism to increase forest-based carbon sequestration by providing developing countries with financial incentives to protect and better manage their forest carbon stocks. A continued challenge has been the question of how to ensure that local communities that occupy these forests, yet lack formal tenure, can benefit from REDD+.

Ghana’s complex land administration framework includes a statutory system of land rights alongside traditional approaches that are legally recognized, but which fail to define boundaries between customary groups. These largely undocumented rights in traditional areas do not ensure clear land tenure security or the sharing of forest benefits, which has contributed to the country having one of the highest deforestation rates in the world, according to the Rainforest Alliance. In contrast, CIFOR’s article notes an interesting case in Cameroon, in which traditional leaders have extensive control over their forest resources, and have implemented their own patrols to keep illegal loggers out and promote conservation from within. It is expected, but yet to be proven conclusively that greater ownership rights and benefit sharing within customary communities can lead to improved forest management.

The land tenure and property rights portal features additional research on climate change, property rights, & resource governance.

Also, see USAID’s Forest Carbon Rights Guidebook: A Tool for Framing Legal Rights to Carbon Benefits Generated through Redd+ Programming.

According to a new research report from the Enough Project, there is a brief open window for peace to take root in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The DRC conflict, which has lasted for over two decades, has left more than 6 million people dead, displaced countless others within DRC and throughout the region, and has led to trans-boundary regional conflict. The report recommends that the keys to forming a credible peace process include: 1) incentives for DRC and its neighbors to cooperate on economic, security, and refugee issues; 2) institutional reforms that allow for democratic transformation; and 3) repercussions for those who have committed mass atrocities.

The report’s authors point out that governments in the region sponsored armed groups to extract or control natural resources such as land, minerals, and smuggling routes. It recommends that land conflicts must be resolved as part of the national democratic reform process; “Armed groups are taking over large tracts of land in eastern Congo, displacing more than 2 million people. Congolese military commanders and militia leaders have set up cattle ranches and other businesses on these properties. Some of them occupy the land as squatters, and others obtained titles to land from successive national governments… A land commission should be set up, investigations should be conducted on land titling, the national land law should be reviewed, and land-reform proposals should be discussed in a national dialogue.”

The Dodd-Frank Act passed by the U.S. Congress in 2010 included a provision that requires U.S. companies to examine their product supply chain for the presence of conflict minerals. As a result, says the report, “Armed groups’ profits from these minerals are now significantly lower than their pre-2010 levels, which was the high point for smuggling.” The Inter Press Service News Agency reports that there are new opportunities for the United States government to address mounting conflicts in the DRC. The U.S. House of Representatives will soon consider a bipartisan bill to support a peace deal in DRC, including the creation of a special envoy from the president to the DRC and the surrounding Great Lakes region. In addition, policy makers can also draw on the Voluntary Guidelines for the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security as a tool.

The Land Tenure and Property Rights portal features research on land tenure in DRC as well as research on land tenure and vulnerable populations, including populations that have been displaced by war or civil conflict.

Karol Boudreaux has recently penned this article, Addressing Land Rights Can Make Social Change Possible for the Guardian. USAID is delighted to see an important foundation taking a public and carefully articulated stand on this vital development subject. Ms. Boudreaux correctly notes “The challenge is to expand people’s opportunity to improve their lives by securing their property rights.” This is indeed one of the most fundamental objectives in addressing challenges related to property rights.

“While the right itself is important, what you can do with the right is perhaps more so,” says Dr. Gregory Myers, USAID Division Chief, Land Tenure and Property Rights. “Rights allow you to make more decisions about what you want to do with your assets. Strong rights allow you to take risks, be more entrepreneurial, or withdraw when risks are determined to be too high.” While these rights generate economic and social gains across all segments of society, stronger property rights greatly benefit one vulnerable group in particular: women. Stronger property rights allows women to control assets upon divorce or death of a spouse, exclude men and brothers who might take land from them, and leverage assets for access to investment to increase productivity. As Ms. Boudreaux’s article points out, USAID and its partner Landesa are piloting an innovating model for improving women’s access to customary justice, particularly related to women’s land rights in Kenya.

For a more robust discussion on women and property rights, see this paper from USAID.

The New York Times reported that Greece’s land administration system is a major impediment to economic growth. After a history of occupations, wars, and shifting population centers, less than 7 percent of the country has been properly mapped, while most land transaction records are handwritten and lack clear boundaries or zoning. Property ownership is often unclear, especially in rural areas, and that has led to competing claims for property and a backlog of court cases.

According to the article, “As Greece tries to claw its way out of an economic crisis of historic proportions, one that has left 60 percent of young people without jobs, many experts cite the lack of a proper land registry as one of the biggest impediments to progress. It scares off foreign investors; makes it hard for the state to privatize its assets, as it has promised to do in exchange for bailout money; and makes it virtually impossible to collect property taxes.”

USAID recognizes that clear, secure, and negotiable rights to land and resources are an essential foundation for trade and a key component of a growth-friendly enabling environment.