Côte d’Ivoire

Côte d’Ivoire’s land governance is closely connected to agriculture, migration and social relations. Cocoa and coffee expanded in the humid south, while food crops, cotton and livestock are important in the northern savanna. Families, migrants and investors often use land under arrangements negotiated with customary holders. These relationships can support production for generations, but disputes arise when parties disagree about whether a transfer conveyed ownership, a temporary use right or an obligation to share benefits.

The 1998 Rural Land Law, amended in 2004, 2013 and 2019, provides for recognition of customary rights and their formal documentation. A land certificate, a registered ownership title and a use contract serve different purposes. Nationality, gender, the history of a holding and its legal category affect the rights available. Protecting people who farm, inherit, graze or use a plot requires attention to those differences as well as to the number of documents issued.

Colonial and post-independence agricultural expansion drew Ivorian and foreign migrants to forest regions. Local hosts and newcomers made arrangements for clearing, cultivating and sharing land or crops. As land became scarcer and generations changed, parties sometimes interpreted the same arrangement differently. Political competition and violence from the late 1990s through the 2010–2011 post-election crisis intensified displacement and disputes, especially in western cocoa areas.

Citizenship and local identity have been politically sensitive. A person who moved from another region of Côte d’Ivoire is not in the same legal position as a non-Ivorian national, and neither category describes the full history of an individual family’s rights. Land administration should examine evidence and applicable law without assuming that a migrant is merely a temporary worker or that every locally born person has the same claim.

Law No. 98-750 of December 23, 1998, as amended, governs the rural land domain and establishes a process to record customary rights. The 2019 amendment identifies the rural land certificate as an administrative record of customary rights and restricts the transfer of uncertified customary land. The 2025 national rural land security strategy describes these changes and the effort to simplify procedures.

A certificate is distinct from a registered ownership title. According to the Rural Land Agency, AFOR, individuals, legal entities and identified groups claiming customary rights can request individual or collective certificates; non-Ivorians may also obtain one if they prove the claimed customary rights. AFOR states that rural ownership titles are generally reserved for the state, public bodies and Ivorian natural persons. The 2004 amendment preserved certain preexisting acquired ownership rights, so the position of an older holding should not be inferred from nationality alone. Land and Development Technical Committee study.

AFOR explains that a certificate holder generally has ten years to request registration, with a different starting date for certificates issued before the 2023 decree. This period concerns conversion of a certificate into a title; it should not be confused with an assumed universal deadline by which all customary users automatically lose their rights. AFOR guidance.

The process begins with a local inquiry into claimed customary rights and boundaries, followed by the administrative steps needed to issue a certificate. A collective certificate can identify a family or group rather than a single owner. Recording a claim and converting it to a title are separate administrative acts, and a lease or agrarian contract can protect a cultivator who is not seeking ownership. Cost, access to information and disagreement among relatives or neighbors can slow each stage.

Customary land management differs among communities. A family or lineage may regard land as a shared inheritance while individual members cultivate particular fields. A village leader, family head or other representative can negotiate access, but the agreement may also affect women, younger relatives and people already working the plot. Collective certificates can record a group’s claim, yet the rights and decision-making arrangements within the group still need to be understood.

Some landholders grant access to migrants through a relationship often described as tutorat, involving land use and continuing social obligations. Terms vary and may change over generations. A payment or gift may be understood by one party as part of a sale and by another as recognition of a continuing relationship. Written, locally understood agreements can help, provided they record the parties’ actual understanding rather than imposing a standard form that overlooks earlier rights.

Many cocoa growers cultivate land they do not own. Arrangements include leases, crop sharing and planter-partager, under which a landholder and a farmer agree on creating and managing a plantation and sharing specified benefits. The terms vary: some agreements divide harvests, while others address a division of the plantation or land. A single formula cannot be assumed for every contract.

AFOR’s contract guidance describes models for landholders and non-owner operators, including a planter-partager contract with harvest sharing. A useful agreement identifies the parties, boundaries, duration, investment and maintenance obligations, shares of output, inheritance or transfer, and what happens at expiry. It should be understandable to both parties and include a fair way to resolve disputes. The 2024 study of planter-partager examines the diversity and social context of such arrangements.

Perennial crops make the duration of a right particularly important. A cocoa tree takes years to establish and produces over multiple seasons. If a farmer does not know whether an agreement continues after the death of a landholder, an heir’s claim or replanting, the incentive and ability to invest can be weakened. An agreement should specify who owns or may harvest existing and replacement trees, who pays for inputs and what happens to improvements when the arrangement ends.

Women can request a rural land certificate when they establish customary rights; the land law does not distinguish between women and men for that purpose, according to AFOR. The OECD’s review describes the 2019 reforms to inheritance and marriage law. The applicable marital regime and family circumstances remain important to an individual case.

Formal equality does not remove barriers in family allocation, inheritance, financing or village decision-making. Women may cultivate food crops on land controlled by a husband or relative and may lose access after separation or death. Practices differ, including between patrilineal and matrilineal communities; neither guarantees equal decision-making. Documentation should identify women’s separate and shared rights and give them a meaningful opportunity to participate.

The World Bank’s PAMOFOR results report certificates issued to women and describe efforts to support women’s rights. Percentages depend on the program, date and whether individual or collective documents are counted; they should not be treated as a national measure of all women’s land ownership.

AFOR implements rural land certification and supports village land-management committees, surveying and contract formalization. The 2025 ordinance establishing the rural land information system, SIFOR, is part of a wider modernization effort. Village boundaries, individual parcel boundaries, certificates, registered titles and land-use contracts are separate outputs.

The government reported in June 2026 that PRESFOR had surveyed and demarcated more than 2.35 million hectares. An October 2026 midterm report stated that one million hectares had been certified under the program. These figures describe different stages at different dates; mapped land is not automatically a delivered certificate or ownership title.

In August 2026, the agriculture ministry reported 68,026 certificates and 86,447 agrarian contracts issued or signed across its stated program results. Those counts are documents, not necessarily unique people or complete national coverage. A reliable system also needs public information, correction procedures and safeguards for personal data.

Demarcation can expose a disagreement that was previously managed informally. Before a boundary is fixed, neighboring families and users should be able to inspect the proposed line and raise objections. Digitizing a certificate may make it easier to retrieve, but accuracy still depends on the local inquiry, identification of all rights holders and a functioning route to correction.

Disputes can involve inheritance, boundaries, the meaning of a sale, the renewal of a plantation contract or competing claims after displacement. Village committees and administrative authorities may help establish evidence and mediate, while courts can be necessary for other questions. A process is more credible when all parties, including women, tenants and absent heirs, receive notice and can present evidence without intimidation.

Violence during the 2010–2011 crisis displaced people from farms and homes, and return could bring older and newer claims into contact. The priority is to understand the particular history of a site and protect people from violence, not to assign a claim by ethnicity or origin. Land documentation can help prevent disputes, but issuing a document before an unresolved claim is heard may harden the disagreement.

Insecurity in the central Sahel has also driven people across the northern border. UNHCR’s January–June 2026 factsheet reports refugees and asylum seekers in Côte d’Ivoire, many from Burkina Faso. Shelter and livelihood arrangements should consider both displaced people and host communities and avoid conflating refugee protection with ownership of rural land.

Pastoralists and farmers share land and water in the northern savanna. Herd movement can connect seasonal pastures and markets, while crops and perennial plantations occupy land that may previously have been used for passage. Damage to crops, blocked routes or disputes over water can create tension. Both Ivorian and cross-border livestock keepers use the region, and their circumstances are not identical.

Law No. 2016-413 regulates transhumance and livestock movement, with responsibilities for public authorities and livestock keepers. IOM’s Bounkani monitoring documented alerts about herd movements between September and December 2025. Routes, resting areas, water points and crop-damage procedures need local negotiation and enforcement; a map alone does not ensure safe access.

Urban growth around Abidjan and other cities changes the value and use of land formerly managed by rural communities. Customary transactions and subdivision can precede formal planning and registration, creating uncertainty for buyers, original holders and occupants. A household may own a building while its land documentation remains incomplete. Tenants and informal residents also face risks when a neighborhood is redeveloped.

The Ministry of Urban Planning lists the 2020 Urban Planning and Urban Land Code and its 2024 amendment. The 2024 law amended provisions on subdivision, publication and definitive concessions. A rural certificate, a village attestation and an urban definitive concession are not interchangeable documents.

Planning should address drainage, access to services, the rights of existing users and the cost of regularization. Transparent subdivision approvals and opportunities to contest overlapping claims can reduce multiple sales and displacement.

Rivers, lagoons, groundwater and seasonal water sources support drinking water, crops, livestock and fisheries. Access can be shared among communities or linked to a particular use of land. Pollution from settlements, agriculture and mining can undermine livelihoods even when a household retains access to its plot. Irrigation and drainage works may affect users beyond the immediate project area.

Water management should identify upstream and downstream users, pastoral access points and people who fish or collect water. In coastal and lagoon areas, development and conservation can alter landing places and fishing access. Consultation with women and small-scale users helps reveal interests that may not appear in a land certificate.

Cocoa expansion and other land uses have contributed to the loss and fragmentation of forest. Protected areas, classified forests, rural land and agroforestry systems are governed by different rules. The European Forest Institute’s legal analysis explains how the 2019 Forest Code addresses land, planted trees and environmental services. A right to cultivate a plot should not automatically be assumed to settle ownership of every tree or the legality of cultivation in a protected area.

Farmers living or working in and around classified forests can face difficult transitions as conservation rules are enforced. Restoration needs to consider tenure, livelihoods and the specific legal status of the area. Agroforestry can combine trees and crops where permitted, but benefit sharing and long-term access matter if farmers are expected to invest in trees.

Forest restoration can also affect fuelwood collection, shade, water and household food production. The rights of people who planted or maintained trees may differ from those of the person entitled to allocate land. Clear agreements about harvesting, maintenance and revenue can make replanting more attractive and reduce disputes at the end of a lease.

Côte d’Ivoire submitted its third nationally determined contribution in October 2025. Climate action includes adaptation and the management of forests and land; a national commitment is not a count of projects completed. Drought, changing rainfall and flood risks affect agricultural livelihoods and urban settlements.

Carbon and restoration projects should identify land and tree rights, the duration of restrictions, payment and benefit sharing, and the process for resolving disputes. Tenants who plant or maintain trees can have interests different from the holder of a land certificate. Agreements should address those interests directly rather than assuming that one signature represents every user.

European market rules affect cocoa supply chains and the information buyers request from producers. The European Commission states that the EU Deforestation Regulation is in force, with application scheduled for December 30, 2026, for large and medium operators and June 30, 2027, for most micro and small operators, subject to stated exceptions. These are EU operator obligations and dates, not a claim that every Ivorian farmer must hold a land title.

Traceability and geolocation can help identify where cocoa is produced, but a mapped farm is not necessarily a legally recognized ownership claim. Smallholders and tenant farmers need accessible information and support so that compliance costs do not fall disproportionately on people with the least secure rights.

Gold and diamonds create income for industrial operators and artisanal miners, while extraction can affect farms, water and settlements. The 2014 Mining Code addresses permits, artisanal activity, relations with surface occupants, community development and environmental obligations. A mining authorization and a rural land right are distinct.

The research on surface and subsurface rights describes how customary landholders and miners negotiate access. Effective formalization requires attention to both systems, compensation where applicable, safe working conditions and restoration. A license alone does not resolve a dispute over the farm or water source above a deposit.

Artisanal diamond mining may occur on land also used for crops or managed by a customary family. Negotiations often concern access, the duration of excavation and how a site will be rehabilitated. The state’s role in granting mineral rights does not eliminate the practical need to reach surface users and assess damage to fields, trees and water. Small-scale miners also need an accessible route to comply with applicable permits and safety requirements.

Investment in plantations, infrastructure, housing and mining can create employment but also change access to land. Investors should identify the relevant legal domain, the holder’s authority to contract, existing farms and shared resources, and the interests of workers and tenants. A contract with one family member or a village leader may not cover every person whose rights are affected.

Clear boundaries, duration, payments, employment terms, environmental obligations and dispute procedures are essential. Where land is acquired for a public project, notice, valuation and compensation must be assessed under the relevant procedure. The quality of consultation and the distribution of benefits are as important as the existence of a signed document.

Land policy sits at the intersection of state administration, customary authority, citizenship and global commodity markets. Formal recognition can protect a claim, but the process can also privilege people who control information, documents or local representation. Women, migrants, tenants and young family members may face different barriers even within the same village.

Effective reform combines certification with transparent procedures, accessible contracts, fair dispute resolution and public information. It should distinguish ownership from use, and recognize the people whose livelihoods depend on land and trees before decisions alter their access.

Law and administration

• AFOR, rural land legislation; AFOR, frequently asked questions; AFOR, agrarian contracts.
• National Rural Land Security Strategy, 2025; 2024 amendment to the Urban Planning and Urban Land Code.
• Law No. 2016-413 on transhumance; Mining Code, 2014.

Land rights and livelihoods

• World Bank, PAMOFOR results; Government, PRESFOR midterm review.
• OECD, women’s economic empowerment and land; Land and Development Technical Committee, planter-partager.
• IOM, Bounkani transhumance monitoring; UNHCR, Côte d’Ivoire factsheet.

Forests, climate and markets

• European Forest Institute, agroforestry legal framework; Côte d’Ivoire’s third nationally determined contribution.
• European Commission, deforestation regulation; Research on artisanal mining and property rights.

October 2026: Updated rural and urban legislation, certification and contract procedures, women’s rights, land-program results, forests, cocoa markets, pastoralism and mining. Program figures are identified by date and administrative stage.

High confidence: The distinctions among rural certificates, titles and contracts are supported by AFOR guidance and the cited legal framework. Moderate confidence: Customary arrangements, administrative practice and the distribution of benefits vary by community and project. Program statistics describe reported outputs and should not be treated as counts of all rights holders nationwide.