Measuring the cost-effectiveness of land administration by Tony Burns Managing Director Land Equity International

Rationale ‘…despite the significant resources being invested by the donor community for modernizing land administration infrastructure, there is little systematic discussion of the key elements of such a system and of what constitutes effectiveness within particular socioeconomic, cultural and temporal contexts.’ Lavadenz et al 2002

Country Case Studies AfricaAsia Europe and Central Asia (EAC) Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) Ghana Mozambique Namibia South Africa Uganda Indonesia Karnataka (in India) Philippines Thailand Armenia Kyrgyzstan Latvia Moldova Bolivia El Salvador Perú Trinidad & Tobago

Contextual AlternativesPossible ObstaclesGeneric Objectives Post-conflict transition (demobilisation, settlement of refugees, limited government credibility and authority, etc) Colonial legacy/poverty (limited resources, lack of funds, limited government credibility, authority and relevance, confusion between formal and customary, etc) Transition economies (limited experience with property, limited relevance of existing bureaucracy, overstaffing, etc) Evolving market economy (unequal wealth distribution, limited safeguards, limited government credibility and authority, etc) Other (including a mixture of the above) Lack of political will Legal overlap and ambiguity Conflicting/overlapping institutional mandates Operational constraints (poor land records, poor integration of registry/cadastre, limited access, etc) Corruption/low civil servant salaries Limited funding Limited safeguards for vulnerable groups Other obstacles Clearly defined and enforceable land rights Accessible, efficient dispute resolution Efficient and secure processes to transfer rights Confidence of users, particularly the public, and their participation in the land administration system Regulation of land use in the public interest Management of public lands and the commons Equitable taxation of property Equitable access to land information Poverty Alleviation

Contextual AlternativesPossible ObstaclesGeneric Objectives Post-conflict transition (demobilisation, settlement of refugees, limited government credibility and authority, etc) Colonial legacy/poverty (limited resources, lack of funds, limited government credibility, authority and relevance, confusion between formal and customary, etc) Transition economies (limited experience with property, limited relevance of existing bureaucracy, overstaffing, etc) Evolving market economy (unequal wealth distribution, limited safeguards, limited government credibility and authority, etc) Other (including a mixture of the above) Lack of political will Legal overlap and ambiguity Conflicting/overlapping institutional mandates Operational constraints (poor land records, poor integration of registry/cadastre, limited access, etc) Corruption/low civil servant salaries Limited funding Limited safeguards for vulnerable groups Other obstacles Clearly defined and enforceable land rights Accessible, efficient dispute resolution Efficient and secure processes to transfer rights Confidence of users, particularly the public, and their participation in the land administration system Regulation of land use in the public interest Management of public lands and the commons Equitable taxation of property Equitable access to land information Poverty Alleviation

Contextual AlternativesPossible ObstaclesGeneric Objectives Post-conflict transition (demobilisation, settlement of refugees, limited government credibility and authority, etc) Colonial legacy/poverty (limited resources, lack of funds, limited government credibility, authority and relevance, confusion between formal and customary, etc) Transition economies (limited experience with property, limited relevance of existing bureaucracy, overstaffing, etc) Evolving market economy (unequal wealth distribution, limited safeguards, limited government credibility and authority, etc) Other (including a mixture of the above) Lack of political will Legal overlap and ambiguity Conflicting/overlapping institutional mandates Operational constraints (poor land records, poor integration of registry/cadastre, limited access, etc) Corruption/low civil servant salaries Limited funding Limited safeguards for vulnerable groups Other obstacles Clearly defined and enforceable land rights Accessible, efficient dispute resolution Efficient and secure processes to transfer rights Confidence of users, particularly the public, and their participation in the land administration system Regulation of land use in the public interest Management of public lands and the commons Equitable taxation of property Equitable access to land information Poverty Alleviation

Policy/Legal Framework for Land Administration Types of rights recognised formally Types of rights recognised informally % of country and population with formal rights Characteristics of population without formal rights Level of disputes over land Time taken to resolve land disputes Safeguards for vulnerable groups Qualitative Indicators for Customary Tenure Legal recognition of customary rights Clarity in identity of customary authority Clarity in boundaries of customary authority Clarity in customary rights Quantitative Indicators for Formal Land Administration System Security Clarity and simplicity Timeliness Fairness Accessibility Cost Sustainability Indicator Framework

3. Formal Land Administration

Summary of Indicators 1.policy/legal perspective: percentage of country covered by formal rights recognition; level of disputes over land; time taken to resolve land disputes; 2.customer perspective: number of days; and cost as a percentage of property value; 3.community acceptance/market activity perspective: number of registered transactions as a percentage of registered transactions; 4.internal efficiency perspective: number of registration staff days per registered parcel, annual running costs per registered parcel; 5.sustainability perspective: ratio of revenue to expenditure.

Summary of Indicators

Systematic Registration Costs

Cost and Time Estimates in Ethiopia MethodologyCost (US$)Survey time/speed (hours:minutes) /parcel/ha/parcel/ha Hand-held GPS :1900:34 Rope only :1500:28 Rope and hand-held GPS :1700:30 Tape and Compass :3402:53 Tape and Compass and hand-held GPS :3603:00 Total Stations :2300:44 IKONAS satellite imagery :1700:31 Source: Alemu 2006

Methodology Lessons Detailed concept note a useful tool Tried to collect too much data Some data quality issues Some ambiguity in indicator definition Fewer indicators the better –however there is still a need for contextual data Indicators constrained to formal system Indicators should focus on policy rather than outcomes Temporal nature of indicators