Presentation on theme: "ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL MUNICIPAL CADASTRES. FIT FOR PURPOSE APPROACH FOR IMPROVING LOCAL LEVEL LAND ADMINISTRATION SERVICES IN PERU World Bank Land."— Presentation transcript:
ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL MUNICIPAL CADASTRES. FIT FOR PURPOSE APPROACH FOR IMPROVING LOCAL LEVEL LAND ADMINISTRATION SERVICES IN PERU World Bank Land and Poverty Conference Washington D.C. March 2015 Victor Endo firstname.lastname@example.org Luis Triveno Luis.Triveno@proexpansion.com
Content 1) The cadastres maze in Peru 2) LGAF results: cadastres and land governance 3) Field work results and typology of municipalities 4) Fit for purpose approach for building and integrating municipal cadastres 5) Policy implications
Some facts on context 2004 – 2013: GDP growth 6.4% per year 2004 – 2013: GDP growth construction sector 11.4% 2014: Lima the 2 nd highest city growth in the region However: housing deficit also grows Successful housing programs, but only reached by middle classes Informal housing predominates – urban sprawl The need for cadastral information is undisputable.
The cadastres maze IDEP Urban cadastres SNCP Rural cadastres Property Registry graphic database Resource cadastres MiINAGRI SUNARP 1,838 municipalities 25 regional governments Peruvian SDI National System for Integration Of Cadastres and Registries Mining Forests Environment Protection Archeological sites
LGAF findings (1) Weak linkages between cadastre – property registry More than 50% of titles lack maps overlapping rights, conflict, obstacles for strategic investments Decentralization lower land administration service quality Difficulties to define and enforce land use restrictions Policy formulation and harmonization limited due to lack of territorial information Authorities cannot enforce regulations compliance Weak information systems impede urban and rural planning
LGAF findings (2) Limitations to efficiency and transparency of property tax collection Limited land valuation Official cadastral data formats too complex for most munis SIAF-GL: large demand for technical assistance, but high heterogeneity between municipalities Weak state-owned land management Inventory of national lands below 30% coverage (even worst when function transferred to weak Regional Governments) Poor cadastral data reduces Property Registry reliability Limited cadastral data – overlapping rights and conflict Registry information is not updated due to high transaction costs and lack of “registration culture”
Field work (under RAS for Ministry of Housing) Assessment of municipal cadastres August and October 2014 Surveys and interviews Quantitative (budget, equipment, facilities) and qualitative data (vision, previous experience, plans) 40 municipalities 139 officials Data base and Cadastral Capacity Index on Local Governments (ICGLMT)
Tipology of municipalities Incipient Inadequate facilities No equipment Inadequate human resources No previous cadastral surveys No vision neither plans to develop cadastre Limited No equipment, neither qualified staff No software Very weak links with tax collection office Some experiencie in cadastral surveys Recognize importance of cadastre Attempts to update data Conformist Better equipment No software Weak links with tax collection office Previous experience in cadastral survey Recognize importance of cadastre Do not seek to improve catastral management Progressive Equipment and qualified staff Ongoing software implementationn mid-high links with tax collection Recognize importance of cadastre Ongoing initiatives to improve cadastral management Consolidable Available equipment, software and qualified staff Operational links with tax collection office Has a vision and implemented actions to improve cadastre Need certificacion of progress IC: 0 to 0.5 IC: 0.6 to 1.0 IC: 1.1 to 1.5 IC: 1.6 to 2 IC: 2.1 and higher
Clasification of sample municipalities acording to typology Incipiente Carmen de la Legua Iguaín M. Provincial de Azángaro Santa Anita Mesones Muro Palpa Lamas San Ramón Limitado La Arena Chiclayo Castilla José Leonardo Ortiz Piura Pátapo Chancay Rímac Wanchaq Catacaos El Porvenir Huanchaco General Sánchez Cerro M. Provincial de Abancay Conformista M. Provincial de Morropon Ancón Madre de Dios Independencia M. Provincial de Puno Villa María del Triunfo Ate Villa el Salvador M. Provincial de Ayacucho Puente Piedra San Juan de Miraflores Progresista San Juan de Lurigancho Alto de la Alianza Consolidable M. Provincial de Cusco
What to do? Policy considerations Decentralization of cadastres cannot be reversed Legal framework establishes munis have “exclusive competences” Political context demand decentralization Municipalities are very heterogeneous Capacities (human resources / infraestructure / income) Needs (basic services, increase tax collection, planning growth, etc.) Potential for property tax revenue collection However cadastres need to be standardized But One single standard for multiple realities does not work
Proposed strategy to promote cadastre modernization 11 A strategy to acknowledge heterogeneity Differentiated standards according to types Differentiated products: technical assistance, training, manuals, certification A central authority capable of: Systematically assess and monitor municipalities capacities and progress in cadastre management Provide technical assistance – build capacities in collaborative scheme with municipalities Manage the aggregated national data base of urban cadastres and link to the SNCP. Coordinate with potential stakeholders: MEF (incentive program for local governments governance improvement), Ministry of Housing (Housing programs and urban planning), Ministry of Health, etc.
12 Importance of national coverage and data integrity: All rights All uses Simple systems Sustainable systems Flexibility to diversity of users Incremental improvement : cover today´s basic needs but capacity to improve over time when conditions (legal, financial) are in place Fit for purpose approach for municipal cadastres (and other Land admin. services)
Guiding principles to promote urban cadastres development 1.Decentralization context 2.Heterogeneity: differentiated products, 4 – 5 standards, scalable over time 4.Progressive strengthening of municipal capacities municipales 5.Some functions centralized (economies of scale) : aerofotography, restitution, etc. 6.Central authority strong but light, alliances with y alianza con entidades del sector público y privado 3.Need for integrating dispersed cadastres
La integración de información es más que una cuestión técnica Integración Técnica Social Cuestiones culturales Desarrollo de capacidades Antecedentes históricos y sociales de los grupos de interés Legal D erechos, restricciones, responsabilidades Propiedad de la data Acceso y privacidad Licenciamiento Institucional Modelos de colaboración Modelos de financiamiento Relaciones entre unidades de gestión de información Políticas Temas normativos Prioridades (desarrollo sostenible) y objetivos de política Pricing Basado en Mohammadi, H., A. Rajabifard, A. Binns e I. Williamson 2006