1. Trust Fund "Supporting Transparent Land Governance in Ukraine"
Land Governance Monitoring: structure, functions, and development stages
Klaus Deininger, World Bank
Trust Fund "Supporting Transparent Land Governance in Ukraine"

2. Monitoring of Land Governance in Ukraine: Thank Personal Contributions
Government of Ukraine:
Maksym Martynyuk, Minagro
Denis Bashlyk, Geocadastre
Monitoring Working Group
WB Project Team:
Denys Nizalov
Kateryna Ivinska
Vitaliy Dankevich

3. 1. Governance of Land Resources: key problems
Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF): 45 countries
Asymmetric Information on: land rights, land use, land availability and government decision making
Consequences:
Moral Hazard in government decision making and performance of government services
Low investment attractiveness
Low access to capital
Conflicts
Fragmentation of markets
Eviction
Monopolistic power
Low productivity growth
Land grabbing
Undervalued land and poverty trap

4. 1. Monitoring of Land Governance
A system for collecting, processing and publishing data on the state of land governance at regionally disaggregated level based on administrative data.
Goals:
Support evidence based policy making – higher quality of policy making
Keep track of progress with reforms – stimulate economic growth
Reduce information asymmetry – more efficient use of land resources
Identify the gaps in normative base and practice – higher quality of land governance
Stimulate applied research and generate new knowledge - more efficient use of land resources
Support public awareness and develop trust to land reform – social stability
Other tools: open data; business analytics; law on access to information

5. 1. Monitoring: global experience
Croatia (2015) – piloting
Georgia (2014) – limited piloting
EU – selected business analytics, legal taxonomy
India (2014) – piloting & use as a basis for national program
Moldova (2015) – selected business analytics
Peru (2015) – scope assessment
Philippines (2015) - piloting
Rwanda (2014) – piloting & initial implementation
Ukraine ( ) – concept development, piloting, normative base, public use
Vietnam (2015) – law, limited piloting

6. 2. Case of Ukraine: overview
Wave 1:
Wave 2:
Wave 3:
Implementation:
Development of concept
Proof of concept
Development of normative base
Data collected and published
Implementation:
Piloting
Update methodology
Automated process
Data collected and published
Public use
Implementation:
Regular automated reporting
Applications:
Policy making
Business decision making
Land governance at local and national levels
Public awareness and use

7. 2. Case of Ukraine: Sources of Admin. Data
StateGeoCadastre
(SE Center for State Land Cadastre)
State Fiscal Service
Ministry of Justice
(State Registry of Rights)
State Court Administration
State Statistics
State Water Agency
Automated Monitoring System

8. 2. Case of Ukraine: overview
6 functional areas of land governance + Land Reform (country specific)
Wave 1: 140 indicators -> Wave 2: 65 indicators
Universe of 490 rayons and 182 cities
Compliant with FAO VGGT (Transparency and accountability. Part 7, pa 26.2)
Products:
Open data: Wave 1 ( ); Wave 2 ( ), Wave 3 (expected, quarterly)
Yearbooks: Wave 1 ( ); Wave 2 ( ), Wave 3 (expected, annually)
Public awareness: blogs, news letters, presentations…
Analytical products: index of land governance, benchmarking of local performance…

9. 2. Case of Ukraine: Advantages of Admin. Data
Low cost of data collection – Information is collected and stored as a part of regular operations;
Promptness – administrative data requires minimum processing, allows construction and publication of monitoring indicators on a regular base with very short delay after the reporting period;
Regular update of information – the data source entities are keeping their data sets up to date, updates are possible to automate;
Accuracy of information – the data source entities are in charge for having their records accurate and they employ different quality control and back up practices; they are interested to address any known gaps in data.
Feedback and quality improvement

10. 3. Implementation: Key LG Monitoring Indicators
Land Reform monitoring (country specific)
Coverage: The share of communal, private, and state land registered and mapped (all land use types)
The number and prices of registered transactions of different types (sales, mortgages, rental, etc.)
Receipts of land and real estate tax revenue
Cases of expropriation and privatization
The number of land-related conflicts
Equity: Share of land and real estate registered and mapped in women’s, men’s name and in joint ownership
Base Characteristics (total area, population, etc.)

11. 4. Example: Benchmarking (Bilotserkivskyi rayon)
Note: 100 percentile is top

12. Benefits I: Local resource management
Actions to improve land governance need to start at local level
Improve resource basis by better use of state land
Identify scope for better use/planning of public infrastructure (irrigation)
Monitoring information essential to harness these opportunities
Link land use & legal information (satellite imagery & cadastral maps)
Inventory & level of use of public assets & infrastructure
Identify opportunities for private investment
Can provide basis for local investment plans
Template to be developed
Potential for donor support

13. Benefits II: Results-based support to land sector
Bank moving towards results-based approaches
Accelerating private investment in Agriculture as one example
Land – related results areas impossible without data
Key results areas:
Register at least 12 mn. ha of state land & establish boundaries of admin. units
Transfer state land to communal ownership & auction use/ownership rights for at least 80,000 ha via transparent electronic auction
Improve scope for protection of rights & market functioning via interoperability of registries, price recording, and clear regulations governing private sector provision & access to land information

14. 5. Implications and Challenges
Monitoring provides evidence regarding the actual state of land governance in Ukraine at national and local levels. It helps to prevent political speculation regarding land 1 2
Provides for accountability of local and central government authorities involved with land
Improves investment attractiveness of agriculture and rural areas by better transparency of land governance 3
Highlights heterogeneity of land resources and state land governance within the country – land policies and land reform need to accommodate these differences 4 5
Provides input to international rankings of Ukraine