Improving local land governance? Exploring the linkages between land governance reforms, institutional pluralism and tenure security in Burundi

Abstract

Reforms in land governance are assumed to significantly enhance the security of tenure in conflict-affected countries, through stimulating the resolution of land disputes, contributing to better control of property rights and reorganising the institutional framework for land management. Yet, this paper highlights the ambiguous outcomes of such reforms in situation of institutional multiplicity. Fieldwork in Ngozi province in northern Burundi points out how land-related reforms such as decentralising the administrative authority at the communal and hill levels and policy reforms in the formalisation of property rights have positive impacts in terms of dealing with specific land disputes and fostering local feelings of tenure security in the aftermath of the 2000 Arusha Peace Agreement. However, land governance reforms have also fuelled the proliferation of land governing institutions and fostered confusion among state and non-state authorities about which rules to apply and their roles in mitigating tensions over landownership and enforcing property rights. Actually, while introducing new laws, policies, institutions and practices, land governance reforms have produced mixed effects in securing local tenure for most community members and increased contestations against the authority of government representatives at the local level.

Defusing Land Disputes? The Politics of Land Certification and Dispute Resolution in Burundi

“…This ambiguity about who has the legitimate authority to deal with contested land claims remains a critical source of tension between different institutions in Burundi and may affect the sustainability of certification schemes. This likely applies to other conflict‐affected settings (Kobusingye et al., 2016; van Leeuwen et al., 2018; Tchatchoua‐Djomo, 2018).…”

“…In Burundi, land policy reform emerged as part of a broader set of post‐conflict policies, against a background of protracted ethno‐political violence and forced displacement, the widespread misappropriation of landholdings and the erosion of customary tenure arrangements (see, e.g., van Leeuwen, 2010; Tchatchoua‐Djomo, 2018; Tchatchoua‐Djomo et al., 2020). After the 2000 Arusha Peace Agreement, and on the insistence of the international community, the Burundian government identified land tenure reform as a key priority to preserve the fragile peace, to enable reconstruction and to enhance food security.…”

“… Overview of Diverse Land‐governing Institutions Involved in the Resolution of Land Disputes in Burundi Source : based on Tchatchoua‐Djomo (2018)…”

Understanding land-use change conflict: a systematic review of case studies

“…The mechanisms could be formally available but not operating in practice or allow for disputants to go 'forum shopping' between the various legislative bodies. In Burundi, for instance, the additional institutional arrangements on land governance that were established after the peace agreements of 2000, were found to fuel conflict because of the increased complexities and the failure of implementation mechanisms (Tchatchoua-Djomo, 2018).…”

Post- Burundi’s armed conflict and trust issues in land redistribution: Towards peacebuilding

“…Using 2015 as a marker for violent conflicts in Burundi, there is a noticeable trust disparity between the post-2015 and the pre-2015 outflow of refugees. For example, studies by Tchatchoua-Djomo andvan Dijk (2022) andRuiz &Vargas-Silva(2021) have shown that in post-2015 while the major host of refugees from Burundi remained in Tanzania with about 133,029 since the 30 th of June 2021), some countries like Uganda played host to 51 066 refugees from Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo hosted 43 158 and Rwanda 47 911. In terms of the trust, it implies that there is a greater possibility of different trust conceptions among refugees of Burundi origin scattered in different nations.…”