Securing Land Rights in Mozambique: Can the community land delimitation initiative in Mozambique be a cost-effective and inclusive alternative? - Hosaena Ghebru Presentation at MSU/IFPRI conference on “Agricultural Public Investments, Policies, and Markets for Mozambique’s Food Security and Economic Transformation”, Maputo, Mozambique, 20 November 2014 Portuguese version: http://www.slideshare.net/IFPRIDSG/hosaena-port

1. Securing Land Rights in Mozambique: Can the
community land delimitation initiative in Mozambique be a
cost-effective and inclusive alternative?
Hosaena Ghebru (Ph.D)
Presented at a Seminar “IFPRI-MSU Policy Workshop”
November 20, 2014
Maputo, Mozambique

2. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Introduction
• New land reforms high on the development agenda:
• (High Level) Commission on Legal
Empowerment of the Poor - LPI
• USAID, The World Bank, DFID (scaled
up financing of land reform projects)
• Land governance – integral component of
the G-8 alliance for food security
• MDGs: Rights based approaches

3. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
The three (neo-classical) justifications for
land rights formalization
• Tenure security
• Enhance investment
• Transferability
• Gains from trade
• Reallocate land to more efficient users
• Credit access
• Land as collateral
How important are each of these and are they always
achievable?

4. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Introduction: Mozambique
• In 2009, the MCC provided more than US$61 million
to fund a five-year project
• The Community Land Initiative (iTC) – established in
2006 by a group of six donors (DFID, Netherlands,
SIDA, Irish Aid, SDC, and DANIDA)
• GESTERRA (Capacity Building for Land Management
and Administration in Mozambique) program supported
bythe Netherlands and Swedish Embassy in Maputo
• Community-investor Partnerships supported by IFAD

5. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Mixed stories: failed reforms
• Land titling in Kenya and Madagascar
• Have not enhanced tenure security, promoted investment,
land and credit markets (e.g. Place and Migot-Adholla
1998, Jacoby and Minten 2006,2008)
• Sucessful reforms:
• Ethiopia: Low-cost land registration and certification
• China: Household responsibility system
• India: Computerized registry system, tax-base
• Recent innovative reforms:
• Community land delimitation initiative – Mozambique
• Customary land secretariat – Ghana

6. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
New land reform approaches: The continuum tenure approachLinksbetweenTenureSecurityandFoodSecurity:
EvidencefromEthiopia
6

7. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
New land reform approaches: The continuum tenure approachLinksbetweenTenureSecurityandFoodSecurity:
EvidencefromEthiopia
7

8. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
New land reform approaches: The continuum tenure approachLinksbetweenTenureSecurityandFoodSecurity:
EvidencefromEthiopia
8

9. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
New land reform approaches: The continuum tenure approachLinksbetweenTenureSecurityandFoodSecurity:
EvidencefromEthiopia
9

10. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Focus of the study and key research questions
1. Assess the factors explaining perceived tenure insecurity for
households and the implications of such tenure security on their
observed behavior in demanding for formalization of land rights in the
country.
• Distinction is made between source of risk of tenure insecurity as: :
• private or idiosyncratic tenure risks (such as ownership or inheritance
related disputes) ; and
• collective/systematic tenure risks (such as large-scale land acquisitions
by the private sector or expropriation by the government)
2. To investigate how the source/type of tenure risk households face in
protecting their land rights affects demand for formalization of
individual land rights (DUAT)

11. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Hypotheses and Data
1. Tenure insecurity is higher the higher the land scarcity is.
2. Households demand for improved land rights is higher in high potential
areas (high land values)
3. The higher private or idiosyncratic tenure risks (such as ownership or
inheritance related disputes) the higher demand for individual DUAT;
while
4. The higher collective/systematic tenure risks (such as large-scale land
acquisitions by the private sector or expropriation by the government) the
lower the demand for individual DUAT
Data used:
• TIA-2008 Household survey data: both household and parcel level dataset
• Geo-spatial data on agricultural potential, market access, land use and
population density

12. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Variables of interest
Tenure security proxy variable
• Possession of DUAT
• Possession of other land right documentations
• Knowledge of the land law
• Willingness-to-pay for DUAT
• Experience of land related dispute
• Perception of land related dispute – private
• Perception of land related dispute – Public

13. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Results: Descriptive analysis

14. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Results: Descriptive analysis

15. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Regression results: Determinants of perceived tenure insecurity

16. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Regression results: Determinants of demand for DUAT

17. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Regression results: Determinants of demand for DUAT

18. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Conclusion
• Households’ level of tenure insecurity and demand for improved land rights
is higher in areas with relatively higher land scarcity and agricultural
potential
• Results show that the type of perceived tenure insecurity (whether private or
collective tenure risks) households encounter dictates their demand and
willingness-to-pay for formalization of their individual land rights (DUAT).
• The study also revealed that a majority of households (regardless of the
gender of the head or the family structure of the household) have shown
significant demand for documentation to safeguard their rights over their
land.
• Willingness to pay for legal documentation of their rights (DUAT) on the type
of tenure insecurity farm households encounter, such as:
• Parcels with higher perceived tenure insecurity of private nature have higher
demand for individual DUAT; while
• Parcels with higher perceived tenure insecurity of collective nature have lower
demand for individual DUAT
• Such results implies the need to avoid a blanket solution approach to land
policy

19. INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Obrigado!
LinksbetweenTenureSecurityandFoodSecurity:
EvidencefromEthiopia
a
19
qualquer pergunta?