Presentation on theme: "Building knowledge to improve evaluation of Land Administration Projects (LAPs) A toolkit based on experiences in Latin America F. Edouard (FAO); Sofia."— Presentation transcript:
Building knowledge to improve evaluation of Land Administration Projects (LAPs) A toolkit based on experiences in Latin America F. Edouard (FAO); Sofia Espinosa, E. Pantoja (WB)
Presentation outline 1. What triggered this publication/toolkit? 2. Main issues regarding M&E systems for LAP and lessons learnt from Central America 3. A common framework to address LAPs evaluation in Latin America 4. Content of the publication, and to how to use it 5. Questions
What is the publication about and who is it for? The publication aims to help practitioners working on monitoring LAPs and also, those involved in the design of these projects
What triggered this publication? In LAC, and especially in Central America, we face the same issues with respect to LAP evaluation. To facilitate comparisons, LAPs should be evaluated using the same standards in every country.
Why is this toolkit relevant ? (1) LAPs have a wide range of objectives, which are quite difficult to evaluate: Secured tenure and its effects on poverty alleviation Effectiveness of land administration institutions information systems on land tenure and land use getting the municipalities more involved in Land Planning and Land Taxation In some LAPs, recognition of land rights of indigenous peoples ….etc.
Why is this toolkit relevant ? (2) Need to consider economic and financial aspects when it comes to huge investments and loans for poor countries Important to take into consideration the new frameworks on Governance, as Voluntary Guideline on Tenure (VGGT) and Land Governance Assessment Framework (LEGAF).
Who is involved in the publication? This publication is a collective effort carried out by several local and international consultants who have been participating in LAPs evaluation Some are also part of the national teams involved in the implementation of theses projects in Central America
Main opportunities and issues relating to M&E systems for LAP in LAC Country LAP nameIntervention Areas FinancingStart El Salvador Proyecto de Administración de Tierras. (Fase Piloto; Fase I) 14 departmentsWB1993 Guatemala Proyecto de Administración de Tierras (PAT) Fase I y II 8 Departments municipalities. WB, IDB1997 Honduras Proyecto de Administración de Tierras de Honduras (PATH) Fase I y II 10 Departments municipalities. WB, Nordic Development Fund 2004 Nicaragua Proyecto de Ordenamiento de la Propiedad (PRODEP) Fase I y II 4 Departments (38 municipios) 2 Autonomus regions WB, Millennium Challenge Corporation, Nordic Development Fund 2005
Main opportunities and issues relating to M&E systems for LAP in LAC Similar stories in LAC Countries: land and market reforms, Change in the institution in charge on Land Administration Services, decentralization, indigenous land right claims, increase in the number of Protected Areas…etc. LAPs are designed as multiphase projects, which last more than 10 years. This enables us to have long term M&E systems, needed to assess outcomes and impacts, and crucial for adjusting the design of the next phases Relatively easy to communicate and exchange experiences among national teams in the LAC countries.
Main opportunities and issues regarding M&E systems for LAP in LAC Developing consistent M&E systems has been challenging …., because the information we need is held by many different institutions The results chain, which explains the logic of cause and effect of the LAPs interventions in different areas is not clear enough from the beginning of the project. Internal controls in Land Administration Institutions are weak, so, it is difficult to obtain reliable information for M&E systems
Main opportunities and issues regarding M&E systems for LAP in LAC Impact evaluations: lack of information on tenure available makes difficult to select household samples, including the control groups. Few disaggregated data regarding women or indigenous people. Economic and financial analysis is generally based on the increase in property value, but it has been difficult to calculate the additional benefits gained from the information systems on land tenure.
Country Level Institutional Sphere Subnational and territorial entities Households who benefit from secured tenure Common framework to evaluate LAPs Levels of expected impacts
MAIN EXPECTED IMPACTS LAP OUTCOMESLAP INPUTS Changes and awareness of property rights and responsibilities Concerted process for Legal and Policy framework reforms Legal framework assessment Technical support for new proposals Supporting participation & communication programs Country Level
MAIN EXPECTED IMPACTSLAP OUTCOMESLAP INPUTS Increased access to reliable information Reduction on time and cost regarding land transactions Increase in efficiency Reliable and functional information systems Financial sustainability Transparency and accountability Technical assistance Strengthening capacities Development of information systems Linking Land information systems LC/R Institutional sphere
MAIN EXPECTED IMPACTS LAP OUTCOMESLAP INPUTS Local property taxes collection Decentralization of LA services T erritorial organization / planning Infrastructure & investment Local cadastre units Update of the database of taxable properties Capacity for standard property valuation Delimiting macro-area Collecting and updating LC Strengthening capacities of local cadastre units Geographical Information and linkages Subnational and territorial entities : Municipalities
Households who benefit from secured tenure MAIN EXPECTED IMPACTSLAP OUTCOMESLAP INPUTS Access to financial and public services Increase the value of assets Improve perception on tenure security Rural and Urban lands with unsecured tenure are regularized Land Conflicts between neighbors are addressed Social communication campaigns Tenure regularization Conflict resolution
Contents of the Toolkit 3 sections, according to the different areas of impacts: Institutional, Territorial Entities, Households with improved tenure security. Each section includes a chapter on Literature review, experiences in Central America and the rational around the result frameworks. 2 sections are crosscutting issues: general background on LAPs in LAC Economical and Financial analysis.
Contents of the Toolkit Also recommendations to use data from different sources and to influence the design of other surveys (field form used for the cadastral survey, agricultural censuses, poverty surveys,…etc.) Each section includes Guidance Notes and some tools such as questionnaires, data base structure, Score cards, which will facilitate the implementation of different kinds of evaluation The content of the section is designed to help national teams to prepare TOR, when it comes to external studies. Guidance Notes include recommendations to disaggregate data according sex and ethnic origin of the beneficiaries.
Some tools included Results chain Logical or result Framework Participatory tools for assessing local governance
KEY OUTCOMES DIRECT EFFECTS IMPACTS INDIRECT IMPACTS Women and youth have increased their ownership over land property titles Women and youth with negotiation power to take part in policy decisions making Land property titles are recognized as collateral Conflict resolution system operating Women and men have a higher incomes from diversified sources Competitive and efficient land market Housing infrastructure is improved Natural Resources Management is improved Women and youth increase their control over land Greater access to public goods and services People’s perception of land tenure security and its benefits is improved Higher investments in land and its infrastructure Greater access to financial services Property value increases Less conflicts regarding property boundaries and illegal occupation The proportion of titled land has increased IATs are strengthened Conflict resolution mechanisms are improved Access to land property information has improved in quantitative and qualitative terms Reduced time and expenses dedicated to land titling Higher percentage of conflicts resolved LAPs RESULTs CHAIN AT HOUSEHOLD LEVEL
INDICATOR CATASTRE LAND REGISTRY REGISTER SUB- INDICATOS METODOLOGYINSTRUMENTSVARIABLES FORM OF MEASUREMENT BASIC ASSUMPTIONS EFECTS (CLOSE IMPACTS) Lower service and transaction cost for users XXX Transaction costs Compilation of economic and financial information of each institution Spreadsheets of transactional Cost. Breakdown of Cost -level accounts. Separation for delegation in organizational departments, etc. Transaction costs Economic Analysis of transactions or public services. Public institutions implement formal programs regularization and legalization of real property, have rates for services, and receive state budget or funding of other stakeholders in the stability of land tenure Transaction volume Compilation of operational information of each institution Spreadsheets Sepation of normal transaction and improved process Number of required transactions Comparative Analysis With and Without Assessment Program or Project Transactional allowance Compilation of economic and financial information of each institution Spreadsheets Separation of funding sources (donation, loan) and duration External Economic Contribution ( State, donor, other) Result and logical Frameworks
Tracking tools for participatory assessment on local governance Ex: Secured tenure on indigenous territories IndicadorCalificaciónParámetros para calificación Titulo Colectivo de Propiedad 0. Territorio definido como tierras nacionales. 1.Definición del modelo de titulación colectiva y del polígono propuesto, mediante consulta previa, libre e informada, previa política gubernamental de apoyo. 2.Polígono definido, validado (control de calidad), incluyendo el consentimiento de las comunidades colindantes e informando a las autoridades municipales 3.Titulo colectivo entregado y registrado en el IP Figura Jurídica/ personalidad jurídica del consejo territorial 0. Sin ninguna figura ni esquema definido 1.Elaboración y concertación de estatutos del consejo territorial mediante consulta previa, libre e informada con delegados de comunidades y organización global 2.Constancia de solicitud a SEIP de figura asociativa 3.El consejo territorial tiene personalidad jurídica Derechos formales sobre el territorio 0. Solo el acceso 1.Uso: Derechos de aprovechamiento del territorio limitado al autoconsumo 2.Manejo: El derecho de regulación de los patrones de uso, de transformación y comercialización de los recursosTitulo colectivo entregado y registrado en el IP 3.Exclusión: El derecho de decidir quién puede o no tener acceso a los recursos naturales (concesiones, terceros…etc.) 4.Alienación: El derecho de vender, rentar u otorgar concesión para el aprovechamiento de los recursos naturales
Local Governance Assessment Base Line End of Project