Review of Literature on Women’s Land Rights: Gaps and Findings Amanda Richardson Resource Equity

Background  Two questions:  The impact of external and intra-communal threats on women’s land tenure security  The effectiveness of interventions that respond to these threats

Secure Land Rights Framework  Legitimate: Legally and socially recognized  Resilient: Able to withstand changes in their families and their communities  Durable: Long-term  Enforceable  Independent: Exercising does not require consultation or approval beyond what is asked of men

Criteria and Databases  Rigorous research on five requirements for tenure security – cultural/legal legitimacy, resilience, durability, exercisability, and enforceability.  Studies were included if :  They were published after 2000  they identified a threat(s) to women’s land rights, including not meeting one or more of the four criteria above for secure land tenure and/or  They rigorously evaluated an intervention to lessen or eliminate one of these threats.  Excluded qualitative or quantitative studies that focus on evidence of impact of improving land tenure security for women.  Databases included: Google Scholar, JStor, University of Washington Faculty e-Journals, FAOLex, LandWise, and the Land Tenure and Property Rights Portal.  Search terms included: Land rights, Land tenure, Women, Security, Threat*, Gender, Divorce, Inherit*, Polygamy, Dispute, Conflict, Customary, Commun*

Overall Findings  Lack of peer-reviewed research, especially of interventions  More small, qualitative studies than quantitative studies  Lack of large-scale studies  Lack of longitudinal studies of interventions  Threats better studied than interventions

Legal and Cultural Legitimacy  Legal and customary rules and practice that keep women from having/exercising land rights  Most studied threat: women’s lack of legal documentation to land. Customary and statutory problem.  Interventions in Africa, Asia, and Latin America: joint titling of spouses (legally married or not) and individual titling of women  Studies look at various interventions (joint, single, legal reform, custom reform)  Some studies look at effects. Few compare types of interventions.

Titling Studies  Women accumulating wealth depends on legal marital and inheritance regimes in addition to basic property rights (Ecuador, Ghana, India)  Joint vs. single titles. Higher yields for both. Joint titles improve women’s bargaining power with no efficiency losses (Vietnam)  Land tenure regularization pilot in Rwanda improved  land access for legally married women  recording of inheritance rights without gender bias  for female-headed HH, had a large impact on investment and maintenance of soil conservation measures  Reduce cost to increase joint and female ownership (fee waivers, special rates or subsidies in formalization) (Nepal)  Gender neutral approach to agricultural investments not enough  Zambia: investors must adopt  explicit gender policies  communal registration of customary land tenure  affirmative action to protect women’s rights to land and natural resources  joint registration of land under joint occupation by married people (Zambia)

Resilience and durability  Legal or customary norms may prevent categories of women from keeping their rights to land or may not protect women when communities change  Primary threat: women losing rights to land if their status changes (e.g. marriage, divorce)  Interventions focus on making women less vulnerable to changes  Focus on improving legislation or on informing/educating women about legislation  Legal reforms studied in Ethiopia, India, and Ghana  Social change communication understudied: focus on widows in two identified studies

Legal Reform/Awareness- Raising  In Ethiopia, awareness about land registration process = changed perceptions toward equal division of land and livestock upon divorce, particularly for wives in male-headed households.  In India, HSAA increased daughters’ likelihood to inherit land. Increased over time with pattern of dissemination and learning  Strengthening engagement with civil society in the implementation of government programs resulted in more widows claiming services, including land rights. (India, Nepal, Sri Lanka)

Exercisability and Enforceability  Women may not have the ability to exercise or enforce their rights  Threats studied include  Women not participating in natural resource governance (Africa and Asia). Three large-scale studies.  Women are unable to exercise or enforce their rights.  Largest category. Gaps in knowledge and access to dispute resolution, government offices, finance, etc.  Women are unable to assert their rights in large-scale land deals  Less literature. Large information gap here.

Groups/Networks  Economic self-help groups for women effects on women’s economic, social, and political empowerment (not psychological). No evidence of adverse effects (e.g. domestic violence).  Forest user groups in Kenya, Uganda, Bolivia and Mexico  With more women perform less well in forest resource enhancing behavior. Recommends mixed groups. (Kenya, Uganda, Bolivia, and Mexico)  Female-dominated = more property rights to trees/bushes and more fuelwood but less timber. Participate, sanction, exclude less.  Gender-balanced groups = participate more in forestry decision-making and are more likely to have exclusive use of forests. Female-dominated groups participate less, sanction less, and exclude less.

Education/Legal Aid  Uganda: male and female paralegals  targeted sensitization messages support community education efforts on women’s property rights  two levels: 1) formal, structured trainings on the law and women’s property rights; and 2) ongoing assistance on handling property rights disputes/cases and delivering sensitization messages  strengthening relationships with local leaders and institutions critical  Uganda: Social capital significantly influences information exchange among rural households  Gender disparities: female heads of households disadvantaged in their access to information.  Recommends support for group-based approaches in technology dissemination. Gender heterogeneous groups.  Formal extension activity in the village stimulates information exchange, particularly among women that head households.

Next Steps  Other databases?  Other resources you access?  Other interventions or threats?

Thank you!