The Limits of State-Led Land Reform: An Introduction

Sikor, Thomas; Müller, Daniel

doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.08.010

Cited by 118 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Such an approach is suggested by the RAI principles. However, a centralist or 'state-led' land reform does not only have important limitations in achieving its targets (Sikor and Müller 2009) but -as we argue in our second concern -it also inevitably strengthens the state administration at the expense of local communities and individuals. While this is not negative per se, our examples have shown how involved state representatives can leverage their position in a formalization procedure to lead reforms astray.…”

Section: Centralist Approaches To Formalization Of Existing Tenure Rimentioning

confidence: 87%

“…The example of Tanzania, whose Village Land Act of 2001 provides customary rights -be they registered or not -the same legal status as statutory rights under the Land Act 2001, is an attempt in that direction. However, the implementation of such types of land reforms faces its own challenges (Sikor and Müller 2009;for Tanzania see Pedersen 2010. First, there is often a lack of commitment on different state levels to fully implement respective laws and allocate the necessary means to the local level (Knight 2010: 258).…”

Section: Approaches That Recognize Pluralism and Their Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Land Grabbing, Investment Principles and Plural Legal Orders of Land Use

Locher¹,

Steimann²,

Upreti³

2012

The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, foreign direct investment in land, also termed 'land grabbing', has increased significantly in developing countries. In response to growing concerns about its detrimental impacts, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World Bank and other multilateral organizations have come forward with two proposals, namely the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (FAO 2012, FAO guidelines), to protect people's rights, and the Principles for Responsible Agricultural Investment that Respects Rights, Livelihoods and Resources (FAO et al. 2010, RAI principles), to make such investments more responsible. One of their central tenets is that investors and host governments respect local people's existing property rights over land by formalising them in a transparent and participatory manner. The article challenges the two proposals -and thus much of the recent land grab debate -from a legal pluralism perspective, by showing that they do not adequately consider the existence of plural legal orders over land and the dynamics of power and everyday practices inherent in property relations. Referring to empirical evidence from Tanzania, Nepal, and Kyrgyzstan, we raise three fundamental concerns about the formalization of property rights. First, we demonstrate that the recognition of customary rights is a very complex and delicate endeavour, which risks neglecting existing property claims and rights. Neither of the proposals addresses this in a satisfactory way. Second, we understand that formalization by state intervention is sometimes necessary, but in those circumstances we cannot recommend the centralist approach of formalizing property rights, as proposed in the RAI principles. In many contexts, this approach has resulted in adverse effects for local communities rather than strengthening their rights. Third, a more rights-based vision as brought forward by the FAO guidelines still bears the risk of reinforcing unequal local power structures. Yet, this vision leaves it to local communities to decide whether their land should become a marketable good to outsiders or not. However, the introduction of such a property regime requires fundamental changes in governance. This cannot be addressed adequately within the framework of guidelines alone. Instead, more long-term strategies for the protection of customary rights are required. Thus, from an analytical perspective, a moratorium on 'land grabs' would be most appropriate. From a more pragmatic perspective though, we acknowledge the FAO guidelines and -to a much lesser extent -the RAI principles as more immediate efforts to reduce negative effects of 'land grabs'. However, investors and host governments should not mistake these guidelines as guarantors of ostensibly harmless land acquisitions. Finally, this article concludes that employing a legal pluralism perspective is very helpful in gaining a more holistic understanding of potential effects and proposed me...

show abstract

Section: Centralist Approaches To Formalization Of Existing Tenure Rimentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Approaches That Recognize Pluralism and Their Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Land Grabbing, Investment Principles and Plural Legal Orders of Land Use

Locher¹,

Steimann²,

Upreti³

2012

The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This perspective argues that property rights are embedded in social relationships shaped by asymmetric power, thus efforts to secure tenure may favor those social groups with a relative bargaining advantage and likely threaten more vulnerable groups [39]. In this view, formalization of tenure rights, in contexts of uneven power relationships and market asymmetries, would lead to increased conflict, which is associated with frontier occupation where more powerful groups, with greater political influence, might take advantage of the process [40]. Furthermore, achieving secure tenure is difficult since property rights are continuously contested over time.…”

Section: Land Appropriation Property Rights and Frontier Expansionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tenure Security and Land Appropriation under Changing Environmental Governance in Lowland Bolivia and Pará

Pacheco

Benatti

2015

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Appropriation of public lands associated with agricultural frontier expansion is a longstanding occurrence in the Amazon that has resulted in a highly skewed land-tenure structure in spite of recent state efforts to recognize tenure rights of indigenous people and smallholders living in or nearby forests. Growing concerns to reduce environmental impacts from agricultural development have motivated state governments to place greater attention on sustainable land management and forest conservation. This paper assesses the political and institutional conditions shaping tenure security and land appropriation in lowland Bolivia and the State of Pará in Brazil, and their links with environmental governance. The two cases show that clarifying and securing tenure rights is considered as the cornerstone for improving environmental governance. Thus, much attention has been given to the recognition of indigenous people and smallholder rights and to legalization of large-scale estates in agricultural frontiers, which have in turn influenced emerging conservation and environmental governance approaches. While policy frameworks share similar goals in the two cases, contrasting implementation approaches have been adopted: more agrarian in lowland Bolivia and more conservationist in the State of Pará.

show abstract

“…Redistributive land reform was a core component of socialist policies across Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa in the 20th century. Other types of land reform initiatives that followed in the last decades range from land registration and titling, tenancy reform, consolidation of landholdings, to restitution of land rights to historical owners (Sikor and Müller 2009). An assumption that has dominated the latest set of initiatives is that secure land tenurethat is "the terms and conditions on which natural resources are held and used" (Bruce 1986 in Scoones 1995) -will positively affect agricultural and economic growth (Deininger et al 2009) thereby reducing poverty.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualising context in institutional reforms of land and natural resource management: the case of Vietnam

Clément

Amézaga

2013

Int J Commons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research and policy debates over natural resource management in developing countries have largely focused on identifying the set of institutions that best supports resource sustainability and poverty alleviation. We argue that beyond finding the right institutional fit for a social-ecological system, it is equally important to understand how context affects the design and outcomes of institutional reforms. We propose a refined conceptualisation of context, based on a revision of the Institutional Analysis and Development framework. We defend a systematic analysis of context, distinguishing between contextual factors affecting the fitness to local socio-ecological conditions and contextual factors that mobilise power such as political-economic interests and prevailing discourses. We illustrate our argument with empirical research on land-tenure reforms that have been implemented since the 1980s in northern Vietnam. The proposed analytical framework and conceptualisation of context allows a more pervasive understanding of contextual factors, enabling the incorporation of the forms of power that give meaning and legitimacy to institutional change.

show abstract

The Limits of State-Led Land Reform: An Introduction

Cited by 118 publications

References 36 publications

Land Grabbing, Investment Principles and Plural Legal Orders of Land Use

Land Grabbing, Investment Principles and Plural Legal Orders of Land Use

Tenure Security and Land Appropriation under Changing Environmental Governance in Lowland Bolivia and Pará

Conceptualising context in institutional reforms of land and natural resource management: the case of Vietnam

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About