Presentation on theme: "Land Administration and Management in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia"— Presentation transcript:
1Land Administration and Management in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia Meskerem Brhane, David Mason, Olga Kaganova, Geoff Payne and Chinzorig BatbilegAnnual World Bank Land and Poverty ConferenceMarch 2015
2Purpose and Context of Report UB’s population and built area have greatly expanded during a period of economic growthCity has been exploring ways of improving financial management, creditworthinessParallel work examining urban service delivery and municipal expendituresHow can urban land be used as a resource for the infrastructure investments and enhancing quality of life?
3Overview of Presentation UB’s population and built area have greatly expanded during a period of economic growthThis has negatively impacted the quality of life for many urban residentsDespite all of the investment and expansion of the built area, land administration and management have not kept paceThe city has likely foregone substantial revenues because of thisOverview of recommendations for UB
4Background: Mongolia in Transition Transition to democracy and market economyAll land was state ownedUse of land for private purposes is now allowedLand ownership by Mongolian CitizensLand possession by private and state entitiesLand use by foreign entitiesLand management and administration practices, and related legislation are totally new
5“Survey” of Urban Land Issues Land Administration Issues:TenureLand ownership for all Mongolians (good for low income housing)Land Use and PlanningUncoordinated & poorly planned land use and developmentCadaster and RegistryPoor land administration capacity, procedures and systemsLand disputes, challenges to land & property titlesTaxation and Value CaptureActive and profitable land and property market (known to all but the cityLand Management:Poor records of publicly owned landLoss of public land from “carvings”Lack of land for public useThe land privatization policy enabled secure and affordable land available at a scale and speed consistent with demand, but on the other hand UB cannot provide the population with basic social and engineering infrastructurelow-density growth of ger areas makes the costs of public infrastructure, such as roads, high, while heating and sewerage to these areas would require public capital and ongoing operating expenses at a level so prohibitive that they often cannot be provided at all. For example, a 2009 World Bank study estimating infrastructure costs found that water connections would cost between US$4,500 and US$11,500 per household with heating connections between US$2,000 and US$8,000 per household (World Bank 2010). A more recent World Bank survey estimates that 52.3 percent of ger households earn US$3,243 (MNT 6 million) or less per year (World Bank 2014a), suggesting the connection costs for these two services alone are far out of the ability of many ger households to pay.
6Existing Policies Encourage Low Density Entitlement of large free plots with little taxation result in low density residential areasZoning that separates residential use from commercial use and discourages mixed land uses result in:People having to travel long distances to meet their daily needs of jobs, education, food etc.Increases burden on roads and contributes to traffic congestionMaster Plan promotes expansion of city without regard to the cost of per capita infrastructure provision
7New growth is mostly low-density expansion Between 2000 and 2013:87% of all new expansion has occurred in the form of low density development201369 percent of the entire built up area of UB is low density ger area development. Since 2000, 87 percent of land developed as been this type of built up are
8Ulaanbaatar has low density by international standards Low average density compared to other East Asian cities of similar sizeAmong 869 EAP cities with a population over 100K, UB ranks 748 in terms of density of BUILT UP AREASAverageSource: ‘East Asia’s Changing Urban Landscape’, World Bank 2014
9Infrastructure has not kept up with the city’s expansion PAVED ROADS This slide shows the total number of paved roads as a share of urban area in UB compared to other cities in the region, including cities of a similar population such asUB has the lowest density of paved roads out of the whole sample size. Cities like Danang, Singapore and Hong Kong, of comparable built-up urban areas, surpass UB’s road density by 3, 4 and 7 times.
10And there are more cars using limited road space VEHICLES TO KM PAVED ROADS RATIO UB’s vehicles to km paved roads ratio is comparatively high, particularly when ‘motorbike cities’ are excluded.
11Which increases average commute times BeijingBangkokManilaShanghaiUlaanbaatarJakartaCebuWuhanSingaporeSeoulHong KongHo Chi MinhWhile UB has the fourth smallest built-up urban area, it has one of the longest average commute times in the sample of its peer citiesHa NoiDa Nang
13Proximity to Amenities and Location Drives Land Prices
14Dimensions of Residential Land Markets City’s built area is dominated by khashaas and low density growthLimited penetration of formal credit (less than 10 percent)Plots have limited value for collateralAvoid price reportingLittle information about prices, volumes, submarkets
15Control of Public Land Lack of strategic land management Lack of strategy and coordination results in shortages of land for public use“Carve outs,” lack of protected land for new streets in city centre or schools in ger areasExcessive land holdings:- About 2,500 individuals hold close to 6,000 m2 each for household use- Do budgetary organizations need 5.9 hectares each and NGOs hectares each?Forgone revenues from land allocations => non-transparent land allocation – direct allocations
16What is public land used for? Inventory of the public land was carried out, but it still does not provide crucial informationInventorying of public land was carried out, but it still does not provide decision makers with simple yet critical information such as the current balance of land possessed by government entities and its allocation for various uses, or the amount of buildable land still vacant within built areas.
17Land Management and Administration Practices The databases at PRD are at best incomplete and at worst inaccurateThe databases at the Cadastral Division of the Property Relations Department (PRD) that contain information on municipal land parcels are at best incomplete and at worst inaccurate. It is also unclear if records are updated in a timely manner when land holdings change. There are delays in land registration and cases of encroachment on public land. For example, a sample cadaster map (figure 3.1) for the National Drama Theatre does not identify the parcel that has been carved out for a commercial tower currently under construction behind the theatre. The land parcels of 710 city and city-owned entities are partially included in these databases, and these organizations have possession rights over the land they occupy.
19The Master Plan could extend existing problems Aims to disperse rather than concentrate population (satellite cities)Does not dedicate adequate space for mix land usesCosts for full implementation far exceeds available resourcesExisting tax and fee structures for land preclude value captureSatellite cities will add more congestion, commute times, infrastructure costsUN Recommends 40 percent of land should be available for mixed usesUB Budget: 400 billion MNT, expected cost of plan 34 trillion
21Key ConclusionsUB is undergoing a historic transformation toward market-driven urban development, but the process has its internal imbalances:Market forces already value land according to its location and infrastructure amenitiesFree access to land for residents, budgetary institutions, NGOs, and other land users led to low-density urban expansion and overall overconsumption of land by various land holdersThe Master Plan exposes UB to risks of non-sustainable spatial
22Key Conclusions, cont’d 2. UB has the street system that is dramatically insufficient for its needs“Better” streets rather than “more” streets3. Significant foregone public revenue from potential land value capture:Land and property holders have been paying very low property tax and land fee, if at all (for example, owners of apartment not paying property tax at all)Land for commercial activities was allocated free-of-charge or at low administrative pricesThe forgone revenue issue can be addressed for going forward, as outlined in recommendations
23Key Conclusions, cont’d 4. However, the current efforts face three key sets of constrains:Existing national laws and regulations that limit UB’s power to establish taxes and feesStill conflicting perceptions about land as a designated public entitlement for residential useFlaws in the land management and administration system, such as (i) lack of strategic direction, (ii) insufficient transparency, and (iii) missing critical elements of land administration infrastructure
24Key Recommendations, Short Term 1. Begin developing an explicit land management policy and strategy for publicly owned land, by a special and temporary Task ForceMembers from different departments, district level governmentsDevelop long-term comprehensive land management strategy and practicesReview existing practices and procedures to reduce fragmentation in land administration and managementComplete inventory of public landsDetermine which vacant public lands to retain for future public use, which to release to the private sector; which to retain for future determination
25Key Recommendations, Short Term 2. Some priority actions to pursue, cont’dEnhance city’s budget revenues by capturing land value of newly allocated land through using auctions as the main instrument of allocating good-quality vacant land to the private sectorIntroduce new procedures for good-quality auctions of land and other ways of land allocationCreate and use a separate budgetary fund to collect revenues from privatization of land rights (e.g. land privatization, allocation of possession rights) for capital investment purposes
26A framework for sorting out municipal land All municipal landLand for current and future public usesLand that can be allocated for private usesLand that can be allocated for private usesSites in less valuable locationsSites in valuable locations“Golden reserve” for future auctionsFor auctions onlyCan be allocated via other mechanisms (e.g. lottery)
27Key Recommendations, Short Term 3. Start engaging the population, businesses, and the civil society in open and evidence-based discussion of land-related challenges that UB faces and choices and changes ahead
28Key Recommendations, Longer Term 4. Conduct “audits” on land held by individuals with large land parcels / holdings, budgetary organizations, and NGOs, in order to identify excess land and re-possess it to the city for further release on the market or charge market price for it
29Key Recommendations, Longer Term, cont’d 5. Explore further land value capture via two internationally tested instruments:A. Market-based property / land taxExample: A modest market-value based tax on non-residential buildings can generate 16% of UB’s 2012 budget; a similarly modest, market-value based property tax on apartments can generate 18% of the UB’s 2012 budgetB. Land Development FeeA one-time charge paid by everybody before they may start construction, with revenues spent on infrastructure; used in Europe, the US, and former Soviet countries
30Key Recommendations, Longer Term 6. Regulatory and administrative reform related to land:Streamline procedures for obtaining and transferring land and property and construction permits (in partnership with GASR and ALAGaC)Improve interdepartmental coordination and sharing of information and databases (PRD and Tax Office)Review and revise existing land regulations to support density and diversity of land uses, access to transit
31Key Recommendations, Longer Term 7. Pursue legal reform at the national level forImproving the investment climate by reforming the current land tenure lawsEventually reconsidering the current practice of allocating low-cost urban land for residential use in current form,It is not compatible with more sustainable, environmentally and economically feasible urban environment that provides modern quality of life