day 1, session 4: stimulating and meeting the demand for agricultural inputs in nigeria

INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE 1

Fertilizer subsidy and private fertilizer marketing in NigeriaHiroyuki Takeshima - Research Fellow (IFPRI) [email protected] Nkonya - Senior Research Fellow (IFPRI)

Sayon Deb – Senior Research Assistant (IFPRI)

NSSP National Conference 2012:“Informing Nigeria’s Agricultural

Transformation Agenda with policy analysis and research evidence”

Abuja, Nigeria – November 13-14, 2012

mailto:[email protected]

2

Introduction

Nigeria spends about 2% of government expenditure on agriculture

Between 2001-2005, Nigeria spent 43% of its Federal agricultural budget on fertilizer subsidy (Mogues et al 2008). States added subsidies

Despite the large public investment in fertilizer subsidy, Nigeria: • Average NPK application in Nigeria is 6 kg/ha

compared to 6.2kg/ha for SSA (excl Southern Africa)

• Is the second largest importer of rice in the world; largest importer of US red & white winter wheat;

• Value of imported food is growing at an 11% annually (Adesina 2011).

3

Research question

Did old fertilizer subsidy scheme crowd out the commercial fertilizer sector? • Patterns of fertilizer sourcing• Effect of subsidy on open market

fertilizer price• Size of crowding in/out • Policy implications

4

Fertilizer subsidy

Crowding out of private sector• 18-22% in Malawi (Ricker-Gilbert et al. 2011)• Smaller in Zambia (Xu et al. 2009)

Crowding in – potential (Dorward 2009)• Farmers’ awareness of fertilizer benefit• Increased fertilizer demand => larger economy

of scale

Other studies• Duflo et al. (2011) – subsidy could stimulate

fertilizer use in Kenya

5

Crowding in / out

Fertilizer subsidy crowding in / out T = G + C

• T = Total fertilizer consumption• G = Quantity purchased thru gov’t

subsidy• C = Quantity purchased thru commercial

suppliers

If > 0 → crowding inIf < 0 → crowding outIf = 0 → no effect

6

Why this study?

Government of Nigeria is implementing major fertilizer subsidy reforms• Hence it is important to set a benchmark

showing the impact of the current fertilizer subsidy program on private fertilizer market development

• These data will be used to assess the impact of the new fertilizer subsidy program on private sector fertilizer market development.

• Determine the crowding-in / out of commercial fertilizer marketing by the fertilizer subsidy program

7

Nigeria subsidy policy trend

Years PolicyEarly 1970s

Each State has separate fertilizer subsidy and distribution system

1976 Government creates FPDD to centralize fertilizer procurement. Actual subsidy 80%-85% and a fiscal cost over US$ 150 million.

1982-86 Under pressure from donors and fall in oil prices, fertilizer subsidy reduced from 85% to 28%. Cost of subsidy reaches US$ 240 million

1986-89 Nominal price fixed instead of inflation; subsidy rises to 80%.

1994 Economic reforms reinitiated, devaluation, and fertilizer subsidies reduced.

1997 Fertilizer subsidies removed and distribution liberalized.

1999-todate

Fertilizer subsidy re-introduced. FGN subsidy rate = 25%, each state gives additional subsidy

8

Fertilizer use trend in Nigeria & SSA regions

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 20080

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Nigeria East Africa Central AfricaWestern Africa SSA, excl SA

Ave

rage

NPK

/ha

Source: Presenters’ calculation based on FAOSTAT

9

Old fertilizer subsidy scheme

State

Federal

Farmer

Submit request

ADPOpen market

Fertilizer manufacturer

International market

Contract

Subsidized fertilizerNon-subsidized fertilizer

Source: Authors illustration based on literature and consultations with the local experts.

10

Empirical methods

Two household datasets• National survey on agricultural export

commodities (NASC) – pseudo-panel data

• Living Standard Measurement Survey – Integrated Survey on Agriculture (LSMS-ISA) – cross section data

Examine:1. Patterns of sourcing2. Effect of subsidy on fertilizer subsidy3. Size of crowding in / out

11

National survey on agricultural export commodities (NASC)

Collected by NBS, CBN, FMARD and FM of Commerce and Industry (FMC&I)

Export crop growers• Cashew, Cassava, Cocoa, Coffee, Cotton, Garlic,

Ginger, Groundnut, Gum Arabic, Kolanut, Oil Palm Rubber, Sesame seed, Sheanut, Sugar cane and Tea

• In 2010 LSMS Data, these farmers account for 15 % of producers in Nigeria 30 % of fertilizer use in Nigeria

Year of survey Sample size

2003 14,337

2006 16,307

2007 15,286

Source: NBS

12

Living Standard Measurement Survey – Integrated Survey on Agriculture (LSMS-ISA) Collected by the NBS, World Bank Sample – 5000 households nationwide Approximately 3000 farm households

with farm plots

13

Fertilizer purchase source

Commercial Public - subsidized

NSAEC data • Cooperative society*• Local market• Other source

• Ministry (Extension services)• Agro service center• Farm service center

LSMS data • Market (local / main)• Friend / neighbor• All the other

• Government• Political Leader• All free fertilizer (regardless of the source)

Source: Consultations with the local experts and literature

Definitions of commercial / public – subsidized sources


PATTERNS OF FERTILIZER SOURCING

15

Share (%) of farmers by sources of fertilizer

79.6

18.11.70.62003

69.7

25.0

2.13.22007

75.3

20.43.3

1.0LSMS

No

Com only

Sub only

Both

ÞOnly one type of source (usually)ÞSome indication of crowding-out

78.5

18.91.9

0.72006

Source: Authors

16

Why use only one source?

Potential reasons Small demand for fertilizer High transaction costs (information) Trust in particular source (quality)

=> Characterize the interaction between commercial and subsidized market

Þ Affect the nature of crowding-outÞ Determine our estimation approach


EFFECT OF SUBSIDY ON OPEN MARKET FERTILIZER PRICE

18

Fertilizer transportation costTable 6. Transportation costs from Lagos to major fertilizer destinationsa

Source: Informal communication with major fertilizer manufacturers in Nigeria.

Source: Generated by Renato Folledo using ESRI World Street Map (http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=3b93337983e9436f8db950e38a8629af)

Destination Zone Transportation costs

Naira / 30 ton

USD / ton

Kano NW380,000 82Sokoto NW

Katsina NWMaiduguri NE

450,000 98Yola NEJalingo NEAbuja NC 320,000 71Ilorin NC 220,000 49Ibadan SW 200,000 44Oshogbo SW 220,000 49Calabar SS 400,000 87Enugu SE 280,000 61Source: Major fertilizer manufacturers in Nigeria (Tak International)

19

Fertilizer prices – theoretical, actual (commercial / subsidized) - 2010

NW NC NE SW SS SE

689 666 706653

695 668585

520 520 553 585650

273325 312

527424

Theoretical (NPK and Urea) Open MarketSubsidized

(US Dollar / Ton)

Source: Authors’ calculations. Open market and subsidized prices are median of each region in LSMS data. No subsidized price was obtained for the South West region.

• North => lower subsidized price, though slightly higher theoretical price• Open market price < Theoretical price => Subsidy depressed open market price

20

Lower subsidized price (higher subsidy) => lower open market priceCorrelation between open market and subsidized price at the LGA level

NSAEC data LSMS data2003 2006 2007 All LGA Sub-

SampleCorrelation coefficient .391*** .163* .565*** .014 .261**Sample size 135 114 83 70 68p-value (H0: correlation coefficient = 0)

.000 .083 .000 .907 .031

Source: Authors.

• Positive correlation at the LGA level between open market price and subsidized priceÞ Greater subsidy may be depressing open market fertilizer price as wellÞ Another indication of crowding out


SIZE OF CROWDING IN / OUT

22

Estimation challenge

Does not use fertilizer

Obtain fertilizer

from commercial source only

Obtain fertilizer

from subsidized source only

Obtain fertilizer

from both types of sources

1. Data restriction – we can only use 2 groups to estimate crowding-out effect

2. Subsidized fertilizer quantity – endogenous, censored at 0

Single-source users

Dual-source users

23

Estimation method

1. Bivariate probit - control for self-selection (ΠC, ΠG) = f (x) => Obtain λ

(inverse mills ratio)

2. Endogenous Tobit – crowding out among single-source users

Censored regression (Tobit)1: G* = f (xG, λ)

Censored regression (Tobit) 2: C* = f (xC, G*, λ)

3. OLS – difference in fertilizer use between single- and dual-source users

T* = f (xG, xC, δ)

δ: probability of being dual-source users – estimated from bivariate probit

Correlated Random Effects: Interact variables x with year dummies – to minimize bias

from pooled cross section data

24

Other variables in the models

Categories Variables

Farmer characteristics Age, gender, household size

Education Primary, secondary, post-secondary

Land tenure Size of land ownedLand tenure

Access to market, infrastructure

Distance (nearest town, all-weather road, market, ADP) at LGA level

Agro-ecological factors

Rainfall (mean, variation)4 Agro-ecological zones

Political factors 6 Geo-political zones

Use of modern inputs / credit*

Improved seedMotor plowPesticideCredit

25

Share of farmers using subsidized fertilizer

Share of farmers using subsidized fertilizer - by state

Share of farmers using subsidized fertilizer - by LGA

26

Household level analysis

Estimated crowding-out (mean of all sample) = 19 ~ 35%Adding 1 ton of subsidized fertilizer => increase total fertilizer use by only 650 ~ 810 kg=> reduces the demand for commercial fertilizer by 190 ~ 350 kg

Using both sources (commercial & subsidized), instead of one, => no increase in fertilizer use

27

Beneficiary characteristics as cause of crowding out

Farmers using more commercial fertilizer

Recipients of subsidy

Distance to nearest town

near near

Household size large large

Household head age older

Post-secondary education

yes

For farmers with large household size, residing closer to the town=> More subsidy was given to them although they were more likely to buy fertilizer at commercial price even in the absence of subsidy

Source: Authors’ estimation.

Key characteristics that are statistically significant in both datasets

28

Implications

Old fertilizer subsidy was more likely displacing commercial fertilizer market, than stimulating

Government’s goal, increasing fertilizer use in Nigeria under the ATA, can be achieved more efficiently through improved targeting to reduce leakages• Ex-ante assessment to identify demand• Targeting mechanisms – index-based targeting

Monitor the change in fertilizer use under ATA

29

Reference

Adesin A. 2011. Agricultural Transformation Agenda. Presentation made by the Honorable Minister of Agriculture to the Economic Management Team Abuja, September 9, 2011.

Banful A, E Nkonya & V Oboh. (2010). Constraints to fertilizer use in Nigeria: Insights from agricultural extension service. IFPRI Discussion Paper 01010.

Dorward A. (2009). Rethinking agricultural input subsidy programmes in a changing world. Paper presented for the Trade and Markets Division, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Duflo E, M Kremer & J Robinson. (2011). Nudging Farmers to Use Fertilizer: Theory and Experimental Evidence from Kenya. American Economic Review 101(6): 2350–2390.

FGN (Federal Government of Nigeria). 2011. The Transformation Agenda, 2011-2015. National Planning Commission, Abuja Nigeria.

Mogues T, M Morris, L Freinkman, A Adubi, E Simeon, C Nwoko, O Taiwo, C Nege, P Okonji & L Chete. (2008). Agricultural public spending in Nigeria. IFPRI Discussion Paper 00789.

Ricker-Gilbert J, TS Jayne & E Chirwa. (2011). Subsidies and Crowding Out: A Double-Hurdle Model of Fertilizer Demand in Malawi. Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 93(1): 26–42.

Takeshima H, E Nkonya & D Sayon. (2012). Impact of fertilizer subsidies on the commercial fertilizer sector in Nigeria: evidence from previous fertilizer subsidy schemes. IFPRI NSSP Policy Note 34.

Xu Z, WJ Burke, TS Jayne & J Govereh. (2009). Do Input Subsidy Programs “Crowd In” or “Crowd Out” Commercial Market Development? Modeling Fertilizer Use Decisions in a Two-Channel Marketing System. Agric. Econ. 40(1): 79–94.

INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

PBS PARTNERSHIP SUPPORT IN NIGERIAPaper Delivered by MPO Dore,PBS Nigeria Coordinator

NSSP National Conference 2012:“Informing Nigeria’s Agricultural

Transformation Agenda with policy analysis and research evidence”


INTRODUCTION: UNCED & CBD

Nigeria’s obligation arising from the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1992.

UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was one of the outcomes and Nigeria signed it in 1992 and ratified it in 1994.

The subject of possible effects of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) was just beginning to get recognition. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB) developed and Nigeria signed in 2001 and ratified in 2002.

OBJECTIVES OF CPB

--- contribute to ensuring an adequate level of protection in the field of the safe transfer, handling and use of living modified organisms resulting from modern biotechnology that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking also into account risks to human health, and specifically focusing on transboundary movements.

NATIONAL OBLIGATIONS

Nigeria is saddled with the task of developing its domestic legislation, regulations, sectoral guidelines, standard operating procedures and mechanisms to implement the provisions. These are by no means easy tasks given the lack of familiarity with the technology and dearth of legal expertise to draw up legislation on the subject.

Background

PBS works with stakeholders to develop and implement science-based, functional biosafety systems that ultimately: Expand producer choice, inspire consumer confidence, facilitate trade, and promote agricultural R&D.

Its remit includes national, regional and global activities. It serves by providing comprehensive expertise for technical, legal, communications and outreach as well as policy/strategy development.

WHERE WE WORK

Countries & Economic Groupings

East Africa: Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda; Common Market for East and Southern Africa (COMESA)

West Africa: Nigeria, Ghana, ECOWAS

Southern Africa: Malawi, Mozambique

SE Asia: Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, APEC

Nigeria presence

Initiated in 2003; 2nd phase (2008 – 2013)

Primarily funded by USAID; IFPRI-managed

Comprehensive expertise: technical, legal, communications, policy/strategy development

Technical assistance component supported by independent IFPRI policy research team

SERVICES

Services offered : Capacity building for national biosafety officials (familiarization tours, retreats), Development of operational biotechnology and biosafety policies, development of Biosafety laws, implementing regulations and guidelines.

Provision of technical expertise for Confined Field Trials (CFTs) and multi-location trials (MLTs), commercial release guidelines, functional coordination among agencies, strategic outreach and communications, Issues Management, Capacity building for decision makers and Coalition building for policy support.

ANALYSIS OF NIGERIA BIOSAFETY SITUATION

Nigeria has two functional bodies responsible for biotechnology and environmental safety in the use of biotechnology. These are the National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA) of the Federal Ministry of Science and Technology and Federal Ministry of Environment.

The latter is the focal point for the Convention on Biological Diversity and biosafety and led Nigeria’s negotiations for the CPB.

Existence of guidelines

Nigeria has as yet no laws governing modern agricultural biotechnology and biosafety. The Federal Ministry of Environment, which has responsibility for biosafety regulation issued national biosafety guidelines, which became operational in 2001. The guidelines contain provisions for field-testing of GM crops, following review by the National Biosafety Committee.

Passed Bill

At the moment the National Assembly has passed the Biosafety Bill and is awaiting presidential assent. The bill calls for the establishment of a National Biosafety Management Agency. The Biosafety Bill was presented to the Ministry of Environment by the current Nigeria Biosafety Committee in 2006.

PBS ENGAGEMENT

PBS has a long-standing relationship in Nigeria and spans almost a decade. This is discernible into two phases. The first phase of activities commenced in the period 2003-2008. Activities have now entered their second phase which span 2008-2013.

Phase I

2005 PBS sub-agreement with International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA) under the National Agricultural Biotechnology Program (NABP). --NABP focused on development of Nigeria’s national biosafety system and the strengthening of national capacities for its implementation.

-establish an enabling policy environment for the safe use of biotechnology and

strengthen national capacities to implement biosafety guidelines leading to the approval of field test applications

Achievements 2005-2007

Review and further development of the draft biosafety policy and law;

Technical training in key skill areas of biosafety review and regulatory oversight and provision of equipment for the biosafety office to be better able to function.

retreat organized in 2005 in collaboration with the Federal Ministry of Environment and an NGO which saw the emergence of a draft biosafety bill and regulatory system.

Achievements

Several training events provided to regulators (IBC members, NBC members) on CFT review and management. These events took place in 2006 (in Ghana, participants from Nigeria).

Hands-on national workshop in 2007, focusing on promising technologies for cowpea, maize and cassava supported through the IITA sub-agreement.

These activities have significantly strengthened the available skills and capacity for field trial review and management.

2007-8

Regulatory dossier development for an insect-resistant cowpea CFT application became the focus in the period 2007-08, with support from USAID/Nigeria and in collaboration with African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF).

Phase II

PBS efforts focused on increasing the productivity of selected commodities (cowpea) and the number of value-added products (cassava events, sorghum), build a more commercial and competitive orientation among farmers and small entrepreneurs, and improve the policy environment.

Phase II

Expansion of services both in scope and content. Direct collaboration with stakeholders and provided technical support for the first ever Confined Field Trial , support for passage of bill passage, supporting an outreach through OFAB (NABDA) which ensures that the potentials of biotechnology are brought to the grassroots, developing Biosafety guidelines and preparing for regulations required for implementing laws.

Current Programs

Programs drawn up to deal with the identified areas needing technical expertise in preparation of Nigeria for the coming into law.

The development of regulations for implementing the law to be developed include guidelines and manuals on:

Taskforce to draft regulations A crucial aspect and determinant in

ensuring further progress in the attainment of a lasting and workable Biosafety regime in Nigeria.

Risk assessment and Risk Management• System for monitoring and enforcement:

e.g., LMO inspections, equipment purchase, development of protocols and guidelines

• Need for joint planning and coordination of activities

• Procedures for the regulation of laboratory research and confined field trials

Regulations & Guidelines

Procedures for the commercial release of GMOs into the environment

Procedure for the import, export and transit of GMOs

Advanced field trial guidelines and SOPs Guidelines for general releases Advanced field trial guidelines, regulations

for the enforcement of the Biosafety Act

Legal Analysis

To ensure an efficient Nigerian biosafety regulatory system that reduces redundancy while meeting all international and national legal obligations. A Biosafety Act is one part of a broader national regulatory system for biotechnology. In addition to the Biosafety Act, there are other existing Nigerian laws that may impact biosafety and/or regulate GMOs or their products.

Other legislations

Other relevant legislations-- food safety legislation, seed laws and phytosanitary laws may impact plant materials (including GMO plants) and general environmental legislation may apply to the release of a GMO into the environment.

International obligations, such as consensus documents from Codex Alimentarius, may impact national biosafety regulation.

PBS legal expert & in-country lawyers are working to provide a roadmap of options to reconcile those legal obligations.

Process Management

Upon passage of the National Biosafety Bill into Law, technical and organizational management advisory services will be required to ensure that the newly established NBMA has adequate capacity to function and execute its mandated duties.

Management tools

One tool to accomplish this is Process Management Training, which can be useful in articulating the “who, what, when, where and why” of a given process and among various regulatory / legal functions in a clear and methodical stepwise process. Process management, currently applied in several PBS partner countries, will help implement a coordinated framework that is transparent, predictable and efficient.

PIPELINE PRODUCTS

Biocassava+-Pro-vitamin A Cowpea—insect resistance Sorghum-lysine, Zn

THE NEAR FUTURE Demand driven ????

CONCLUSION

PBS has helped reduce uncertainty surrounding biotechnology and biosafety and increase technical knowledge and confidence on biosafety systems in Nigeria.

The collaboration between PBS and Nigerian entities has been fruitful and rewarding for all concerned

A robust biosafety administrative regime will emerge arising from PBS engagement in Nigeria

Identifying Key Land Governance Policy Issues in Nigeria*

By:

Peter Olufemi AdeniyiChairman, PTCLR

' Paper Presented at the National Conference of Nigeria strategy Support Programme (NSSP); Under the Auspices International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Rockview Hotel Royale, Wuse 2, Abuja, Nigeria; 13 – 14 November 2012

Title Page

Outline of Presentation

59

Importance of Land

What is Land Governance

Governance and Policy Making Emergence of Land Governance Assessment Framework

(LGAF) — Purpose, Content and Implementation Arrangement — LGAF Study in Nigeria — Summary of its Substantive Results — Some of the Policy Recommendations

Why PTCLR— The Objectives, Goal and Expected Benefits of PTCLR — Key Features of the PTCLR Activities — Challenges

Importance of Land

60

In the book of Genesis 2:7, it was stated that man was created from the dust of the land and will return to the land at the end of his life. It was also indicated that while alive, man will keep on working, “tilling the land” for his or her survival (Gen. 3:23).

Still in the Holy book (Deuteronomy 12: 9 – 10; 25: 8 and 25:21) it was noted that land is our home, our means of survival and our place of rest, safety and enjoyment of good life. It is therefore not an overstatement to say that without land there would be no human existence since land provides humans with items like food, fuel, clothing, shelter, and medication which are very essential for survival.

Land is the source of all material wealth. From it we get everything that we use or value, whether it be food, clothing, fuel, shelter, metal, or precious stones. We live on the land and from the land, and to the land our bodies or our ashes are committed when we die. The availability of land is the key to human existence, and its distribution and use are of vital importance. Land records, therefore, are of great concern to all governments. The framing of land policy, and its execution, may in large measure depend on the effectiveness of ‘land registration’, as we can conveniently call the making and keeping of these records. (Rowton Simpson, 1978, Page 3)

Land Governance and Elements of Good Land Governance

61

What is Land Governance? — Land Governance is about the policies, processes and institutions by which land, property and natural

resources are managed. This includes decisions on access to land; land rights; land use; and land development. Land Governance is about determining and implementing sustainable land policies (Ememark, 2009)

Elements of Good Land Governance— Land administration systems are efficient, effective and competent; — Land policies that embody value judgments and are endorsed by elected politicians after consultation

with interested and affected parties; — Land information is freely available subject to the protection of privacy; — Land laws and regulations are freely available, well-drafted in a participatory transparent manner,

responsive and consistent and able to be enforced by the government and citizens; — Land administration agencies are independently audited and publish their accounts and performance

indicators; — Land administration services are provided for all without discrimination e.g. on the basis of gender,

ethnicity, religion, age, or political affiliation; — Sustainable land development is encouraged; — Land services should be provided close to the user; — Land registration and legal systems should provide security of tenure for those with legitimate interest

in a parcel of land;— Land administration officials behave with integrity and give independent advice based upon their best

professional judgment. (FAO, 2007)

62

Understanding Issues

(Scoping Studies)

Evaluating Options

Evaluating Policy Consequences

(Monitoring and Evaluation)

Selecting Policy Implementing Policy

Piloting and Testing

Basic Steps in Governance and Public Policy Making and Implementation

Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF)

63

Why LGAF? — Need for a robust and comprehensive methodology to assess the various

components of Land Governance — The need for a framework that provides governments with objective assessment

tool that can be used to identify areas where improvements are required

What is LGAF?It is a diagnostic instrument, developed by the World Bank in collaboration with IFPRI and other partners, for rapid national evaluation of various aspects of land governance. Its methodology is based on 21 indicators. The indicators are further broken down to 80 dimensions which are then grouped into the following five thematic areas: — Legal and Institutional Framework — Land Use Planning, Management and Taxation— Management of Public Land— Public Provision of Land Information— Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management — Plus additional 16 dimensions on Large Scale Land Acquisition

Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF) (Cont’d)

64

Its Methodology is Strategic and Novel— Strategic because of the use of in-country experts thereby ensuring

credibility and buy-in of the process and outcomes— Novel not only because of the development of comprehensive

indicators but also because its implementation is based on participatory approach involving: Use of Expert Investigators to collect background information

on a number of the dimensions Composition of Expert Panel Workshops for consensus

assessment of a number of dimensions Conduct of Technical Validation of the Consensus Assessment

Report Conduct of Policy Dialogue where key policy recommendations

and monitoring indictors are developed.

Implementation of LGAF in Nigeria

65

Period of Study: February to November 2011

Four Expert Investigators were appointed to provide background information on 59 out of the 96 dimensions

Nine Expert Panel Workshops were conducted for the consensus assessment of a number of dimensions between April 27 and May 13, 2011

Conduct of Technical Validation Workshop involving 30 multi-stakeholders Nigerian participants and 13 participants from International Organisation

Policy Dialogue meeting involving 28 Nigerians and 9 participants from International Organisations

LGI Dimension Description

Ranking by Expert Panel Members (EPM) EPM

Consensus Ranking

1 2 3 4 5

1 i Land tenure rights recognition (rural) B D D B A1 ii Land tenure rights recognition (urban) A D B B A1 iii Rural group rights recognition C D D B C1 iv Urban group rights recognition in informal areas D C B C C1 v Opportunities for tenure individualization B C D C C

2 i Surveying/mapping and registration of rights to communal land A D D B D

2 ii Registration of individually held properties in rural areas C D D C D

2 iii Registration of individually held properties in urban areas A D C B D

2 v A condominium regime provides for appropriate management of common property D C D C C

2 vi Compensation due to land use changes C C D D C

3 i Use of non-documentary forms of evidence for recognition of property claims B D D B C

3 ii Formal recognition of long-term, unchallenged possession C D C C D

3 vi Efficient and transparent process to formalize possession C B B D C 66

Summary of LGAF Findings

Individual and Consensus Ranking by the Expert Panel Members on Land Tenure

Summary of LGAF Findings (Cont’d)

Individual and Consensus Ranking by the Expert Panel Members on Urban Land Use Planning and Development



Consensus Ranking1 2 3 4 5

3 v Formalization of urban residential housing is feasible and affordable B D B C C C

4 i Restrictions regarding urban land use, ownership and transferability are justified B D B B B B

7 i In urban areas, land use plans and changes in these plans are based on public input C C D D B C

7 iii Public capture of benefits arising from changes in permitted land use C B C C D C7 iv Speed of land use change C C D D D

8 i Process for planned urban development in the largest city in the country D D C D C D

8 ii Process for planned urban development in the four largest cities in the country, excluding the largest city D D D D C D

8 iii Ability of urban planning to cope with urban growth D C D C C C8 iv Residential plot size adherence in urban areas C C D C C C

9 i Applications for building permits for residential dwellings are affordable and processed in a non-discretionary manner C C B B D C

9 ii Time required to obtain a building permit for a residential dwelling D C A C C67


Individual and Consensus Ranking by the Expert Panel Members on Rural Land Use and Land Policy


Ranking by Expert Panel

Members (EPM) EPMConsensus

Ranking1 2 3 4

4 ii Restrictions regarding rural land use, ownership and transferability are justified B C B B B

6 i Clear land policy is developed in a participatory manner B D B C C

6 ii Meaningful incorporation and monitoring of equity goals C D C C C

6 iii Policy for implementation is costed, matched with benefits and adequately resourced C D C D D

6 iv Regular and public reports indicating progress in policy implementation D D C D D

7 i In rural areas, land use plans and changes in these plans are based on public input D D C C D

8 v Use plans for specific rural land classes (forests, pastures, etc) are in line with use D D D D D 6

8


Individual and Consensus Ranking by the Expert Panel Members on Management of Public Land

69


Ranking by Expert Panel Members

(EPM) EPMConsensus

Ranking1 2 3 4 5

12 iPublic land ownership is justified and implemented at the appropriate level of government

B B C C C C

12 ii Complete recording of publicly held land C A B C A C12 iii Assignment of management responsibility for

public land C A C C D C

12 iv Resources available to comply with responsibilities D C D C D D

12 v Inventory of public land is accessible to the public B C C C C C

12 vi Key information on land concessions is accessible to the public C B B B B B


Individual and Consensus Ranking by the Expert Panel Members on Management of Public Land (Cont’d)

70


Ranking by Expert Panel Members

(EPM) EPMConsensus

Ranking1 2 3 4 5

13 i Transfer of expropriated land to private interests A C D B C C13 ii Speed of use of expropriated land C B C C C C14 i Compensation for expropriation of registered

property C B C B C C14 ii Compensation for expropriation of all rights A A C C C C14 iii Promptness of compensation D D D D D D14 iv Independent and accessible avenues for appeal

against expropriation B A C D D D

14 v Timely decisions regarding complaints about expropriation C A D C D C

15 i Openness of public land transactions D D D C C D15 ii Collection of payments for public leases A C A C C C15 iii Modalities of lease or sale of public land B B D B B B


Individual and Consensus Ranking by the Expert Panel Members on Large-Scale Land Acquisition

71

LSLA Dimension Description


Consensus Ranking

1 2 3 4

LSLA-1 Most forest land is mapped and rights are registered C D C C D

LSLA-2 Land acquisition generates few conflicts and these are addressed expeditiously and transparently D D D D D

LSLA-3 Land use restrictions on rural land parcels can generally be identified C C D D D

LSLA-4 Public institutions involved in land acquisition operate in a clear and consistent manner D B C C D

LSLA-5 Incentives for investors are clear, transparent and consistent C B D C C

LSLA-6Benefit sharing mechanisms for investments in agriculture (food crops, biofuels, forestry, game farm/conservation) are regularly used and transparently applied

C C C D C

LSLA-7 There are direct and transparent negotiations between right holders and investors D C C C C

LSLA-8 Sufficient information is required from investors to assess the desirability of projects on public/communal land. C C C C C


Individual and Consensus Ranking by the Expert Panel Members on Large-Scale Land Acquisition (Cont’d)

LSLA Dimension Description


Consensus Ranking

1 2 3 4

LSLA-9For cases of land acquisition on public/community land, investors provide the required information and this information is publicly available

C C C C C

LSLA-10Contractual provisions regarding acquisition of land from communities or the public are required by law to explicitly mention the way in which benefits and risks will be shared.

D C D D D

LSLA-11 The procedure to obtain approval for a project where it is required is reasonably short D D B C B

LSLA-12 Social requirements for large scale investments in agriculture are clearly defined and implemented D C D D D

LSLA-13 Environmental requirements for large scale investments in agriculture are clearly defined and implemented D C D D D

LSLA-14

For transfers of public/community lands, public institutions have procedures in place to identify and select economically, environmentally, and socially beneficial investments and implement these effectively.

C C C D C

LSLA-15 Compliance with safeguards related to investment in agriculture is checked C C D D D

LSLA-16 There are avenues to lodge complaints if agricultural investors do not comply with requirements D D D D D

72

LGAF Validated Findings

73

Summary of the Validated Consensus Ranking of the LGAF Dimensions

5.21

15.38

7.41

14.58

6.25

42.85

15.38

12.5

5.88

18.52

42.71

37.5

14.29

23.08

62.5

52.94

44.44

37.5

56.25

28.57

46.16

25

41.18

29.63

14.29

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

All the Dimensions - 96

Large Scale Land Acquisition (16Dimensions)

Dispute Resolution and ConflictManagement (7 Dimensions)

Public Provision of LandInformation (13 Dimensions)

Public Land Management (16Dimensions)

Land Use Planning, Managementand Taxation (17 Dimensions)

Legal and Institutional Framew ork(27 Dimensions)

Th

em

ati

c A

reas

% Score

A

B

C

D

The order of weakness based on the percentage of dimensions scoring C and D are:— Land Use Planning, Management and Taxation with 94.12%;— Large Scale Land Acquisition, 93.76%; — Management of Public Land, 87.5%;— The Legal and Institutional Framework, 74.07%;— Public Provision of Land Information, 69.24%; and — Dispute resolution and Conflict Management, 42.86%

LGAF Validated Findings (Cont’d)

74

Areas of great weakness —Enforcement of rights;—Mechanisms for recognition of rights;—Institutional overlap;—Equity and non-discrimination issues;—Transparency of land use planning;—Efficiency of land use planning;—Transparency of valuation;—Tax collection;—Difficulty of identifying public land;—Speed of use of expropriated land;—Transparency in land expropriation procedures;—Promptness of Compensation;—Independent and accessible avenues for appeal against expropriation;—Openness of public land transactions—Mapping of registry records;

— Reliability of records;— Cost of registering a property transfer;— Financial sustainability of the registry;— Capital investment;

— Speed of conflict resolution in the formal system; and

— Long-standing conflicts (unresolved cases older than 5 year)

Major Policy Recommendations and Monitoring Indicators

75

POLICY ISSUE ACTION PLANS MONITORING INDICATORS1. LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK More than 30 years after

its passage, none of the key pieces of regulation envisaged in the Land Use Act (LUA) (Sections 3 and 46) has been passed. This has seriously undermined good land governance and effective land use planning in the country.

A high degree of vertical and horizontal overlap among land institutions creates confusion, high levels of transaction costs, and undermines good governance in the sector.

To enable the National Council of States to pass needed regulations and to monitor land system performance on a regular basis, a National Land Commission as a technical body with representation from key actors needs to be established. Pending the establishment of the National Land Commission, the Presidential Technical Committee on Land Reform (PTCLR) should carry out the tasks below.

Conduct and carefully evaluate pilot studies in relevant areas to provide evidence to inform the drafting of key regulations for land registration and survey/mapping in two states within one year.

Carry out a study to identify horizontal and vertical overlaps in the land system and recommend solutions.

Establishment of the Commission

Evaluation of results of the pilots available

Regulations drafted Provision of information and

institutional arrangements to monitor outcomes.

Study conducted and recommendations disseminated & discussed.

- % increase of land registration, leases and land transfers, C of Os

- reduced boundary conflicts

- reduction in transaction costs and time

- reduction of vertical and horizontal overlaps

Major Policy Recommendations and Monitoring Indicators (Cont’d)

76

POLICY ISSUE ACTION PLANS MONITORING INDICATORS2. LAND USE PLANNING, MANAGEMENT AND TAXATION While land use plans are

necessary to guide development in urban and rural areas, they are mostly unavailable leading to haphazard growth.

Absence of property tax administration, assessment and collection hinders decentralization and effective provision of local services.

Prepare strategic land use development plans with adequate implementation and enforcement regulations; sensitize the public on their existence, importance and use of the same.

Review planning standards, plot size, land use class, and adoption of model plans for public use.

Develop, disseminate, and help implement transparent systems for property tax administration, assessment, and collection for use by local governments at different sizes.

Initial establishment of land use development plans.

Mechanism to monitor compliance with plans in place and results monitored/publicised.

Property tax guidelines available, explained to and understood by citizens, professionals (e.g. estate surveyors and valuers), and local governments.

Increase in property tax assessments and actual collection.

Number of states that have land use plans, land administration machinery and property tax rolls.


POLICY ISSUE ACTION PLANS MONITORING INDICATORS3. PUBLIC LAND MANAGEMENT Lack of information on the

location and extent of public land makes it impossible to properly manage and protect this critical asset.

A large number of acquisitions occurs without prompt and adequate compensation, thus leaving those losing land worse off, with no mechanism for independent appeal even though the land is often not utilized for a public purpose.

Divestiture of public land is less transparent and therefore does not generate revenues for the public sector.

Undertake a comprehensive inventory of land owned by all tiers of government.

Harmonize various legislations into a clear single simple process for acquisition of land by all government agencies to ensure due process for land acquisition by requiring publicity, adequate and prompt compensation in line with global best practice and ensure availability of independent avenues for appeal. Put in place sanctions for misbehaviour.

Ensure publicity of the detailed agreement, including schedules of applicable charges.

Inventory has been established and mechanisms to maintain it currently exist.

Legislation to regulate expropriation has been enacted and is effectively applied.

Share of allocations of government (public) land and transactions that are advertised.

77


POLICY ISSUE ACTION PLANS MONITORING INDICATORS4. PUBLIC PROVISION OF LAND INFORMATION The low level of

registered parcels (less than 3% of the country covered) and the incomplete spatial reference of registry information fosters conflict, corruption, undermines investment, land market functioning, and housing finance.

Lack of processes for automatic updating undermines the value of the land registry as a tool for private sector development.

Establish software tools to manage textual and spatial data jointly and to link existing ones.

Building on the pilot study results, develop procedures for systematic expansion of registered areas.

Study and recommend processes and requirements to streamline and control different registration services and based on this, establish a registry service charter (including sanctions and avenue for appeal) that is publicly available and binding on both user and officials.

Design and implement awareness campaign as well as training programs for officials.

Make transparency issues more comprehensive by publishing list of all allottees upon or at allocation.

Ensure implementation of global best practice on access to public land information.

Share of registry records with textual and spatial information integrated.

Share of the land under private use that is registered and mapped.

Implementation of service charter leads to higher levels of customer satisfaction.

78


POLICY ISSUE ACTION PLANS MONITORING INDICATORS5. DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND CONFLICT MANAGEMENT Lack of awareness of

the rights and avenues to enforce them reduces the ability to access and properly utilize land especially for vulnerable groups.

High level of pending conflicts undermines investment and efficiency of land use.

Disseminate existing laws and sensitize different groups about their rights under the law and ways to enforce them.

Link spatial and textual data (see above) to reduce boundary disputes.

Mainstream traditional institutions and the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) into the justice system to reduce backlogs and improve access to justice, especially for vulnerable groups.

Increase the ability of formal institutions to speedily resolve dispute by building capacity and rationalizing assignment of responsibilities.

Knowledge of relevant legal provisions and avenues for enforcement in the population and specific groups (e.g. women).

Reduction of backlog of conflicts.

Number of new conflicts reaching the formal system decreases.

79


POLICY ISSUE ACTION PLANS MONITORING INDICATORS6. LARGE SCALE LAND ACQUISITION Lack of clear and efficient procedures

for large scale investment in land reduce Nigeria’s ability to attract technically qualified investors.

Realized investments often are technically, environmentally, and socially unsustainable.

The need for government to expropriate land before it can be transferred to investors opens space for discretionary behaviour and, due to procedural weaknesses (see up), often undermines the livelihood of local people.

Lack of local involvement, non-transparent contracts, and lack of monitoring undermine the scope for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) potential to provide benefits to locals and contribute to development.

Review and streamline regulations for land-related foreign investment. Create a one-stop shop/intervention and conduct publicity campaigns among potential investors.

Adaptation of existing EIA and SIA mechanisms to the needs of land-related investment, mandatory publication of these documents, and increased efforts at enforcement. Review of other relevant procedures in light of international standards and best practice.

Ensure those affected by large scale land acquisition have the choice of receiving compensation in kind and provide options for direct negotiation between investors and local communities.

Ensure arrangements for large scale land transfer are negotiated and agreed upon by local land users, that mechanisms for benefit sharing and arbitration are specified, and that contract terms are publicly available to facilitate monitoring.

Establishment of the one stop intervention for large scale land acquisition.

Number of viable investment proposals increases.

Number of failed projects due to technical, environmental, or social problems and conflict decreases.

Living standards in areas affected by FDI improve.

80

Why a PTCLR?

81

The Land Use Act (1978) has had noble intentions... — Offer all Nigerians access to land— Facilitate the acquisition of land by governments for projects of public interest— Combat land speculation

… but poor results:— Information about who owns land anywhere in the country is largely unavailable as only about 3% of

the land parcels in Nigeria has been demarcated and registered — Land speculation is thriving and prices are prohibitive — Land registration is cumbersome, time consuming and expensive (Nigeria is no. 180 out of 183

countries assessed)— Increased informal land development everywhere — State revenue levels, from ground-rent, are very low

Increasing concerns about the failure of LUA by both public and private organizations, CSO, NGOs, business and professional organization, academia, etc

As social and economic pressure increase, there is an urgent need to put more land into productive use through improved land governance anchored on evidence-based land policies

As a response to this, the PTCLR was established in April 2009 by the Federal Government The LGAF result further justifies the constitution of PTCLR and it further assists in

redesigning of programme activities and seeking support for their implementation

Example of Informal Development Around Lagos

82

PTCLR’s Terms of Reference

83

To collaborate and provide technical assistance to States and Local Governments to undertake land cadastral nationwide;

To determine individuals’ “possessory” rights using best practices and most appropriate technology to determine the process of identification of locations and registration of title holdings;

To ensure that land cadastral boundaries and title holdings are demarcated in such a way that community, hamlet, village, village area, town, etc, will be recognizable;

To encourage and assist States and Local Governments to establish an arbitration mechanism for land ownership conflict resolution;

PTCLR’s Terms of Reference (Cont’d)

84

To make recommendations for the establishment of a National Depository for Land Title Holdings and Records in all States of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory;

To make recommendations for the establishment of a mechanism for land valuation in both urban and rural areas in all parts of the Federation; and

To make any other recommendations that will ensure effective, simplified, sustained and successful land administration in Nigeria.

Goals of the Reform

85

To empower Nigerians from all walks of life to have easy access to incontestable certificate of occupancy.

To bring about sustainable socio-economic growth and development anchored on secure land tenure system and effective land titling.

To promote wealth creation and economic empowerment of Nigerians by optimizing the use of land as an economic commodity.

What the Reform is All About

86

Collaborating with State and Local Governments to provide technical assistance and enhance their capacity for modern land administration.

Undertaking a train-the-trainer programme for Field Officers and other technical personnel required for effective nationwide cadastral survey.

Putting in place a time defined process of clarification of Land boundaries or adjudication of land for the purposes of registration.

Identifying and removing the bottlenecks that are embedded in the current land titling and registration procedures and processes within the existing land delivery process.

What the Reform is All About (Cont’d)

87

Scaling up the quality and adequacy of institutional capacities required to administer and promote land transactions.

Mainstreaming best practices in the documentation of land transactions, land titling and registration processes and procedures.

Installing a nationwide land information infrastructure that is required for the efficient networking of databases of cadastral and land title records.

Undertaking a comprehensive survey involving the mapping of the country on a scale large enough to show land holdings of individuals or group of individuals or corporate bodies.

Direct Benefit of the Reform

88

Guaranteed land tenure security and possessory rights for all land owners and occupiers.

Economic empowerment of individuals through the use of their certificates of occupancy as credit collateral to promote their economic ventures.

Improved efficiency of land administration especially for revenue generation for Local, State and Federal Governments.

Reduction in the cost of land transactions, and by extension, reduction in the cost of housing.

Reduction or elimination of fraud and other risks in land transactions due to transparent processes and procedures.

Effective and early resolution of land disputes. Direct and easy access to reliable, complete and up-to-date land

information. National economic growth and development resulting from optimal

use of land in various economic engagements.

Key Features of the Reform

89

Intensive and extensive awareness building

Conduct of Strategic Stakeholders’ Meetings

Densification of geodetic stations across the country through the installation of Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS)o CORS have been installed in Ondo, Katsina and Imo

States while that of Kano State is about to be installed

The CORS being Installed in Ondo State

90

The CORS being Installed in Katsina State

91

Key Features of the Reform (Cont’d)

92

Conduct of scoping studies to provide necessary background information for the development of regulations and a toolkit for systematic land titling and registration Perception Study Studies on Land Administration Service Delivery in Nigeria Socio-economic base line Study Strategic studies into Valuation Mechanisms

Design and development of a toolkit for systematic land titling and registration, involving: (i) a streamlined systematic registration work flow, (ii) a detailed manual that provides sufficient information to enable field staff to implement the procedure, including copies of all the field forms, and (iii) the training material necessary to train State, LGA, village and field staff in the implementation of the procedures.

Development of registration software package (e.g FAO Open Source SOLA Software)

Conduct of pilot systematic land titling and registration in Ondo and Kano States

Land Registration in Nigeria

93

The process of registering property is cumbersome, time-consuming and unaffordable to majority of Nigerians. Nigeria ranks 180 out of 183 countries on the issue of registering property.


94

Land titling and registration can be sporadic or systematic. The sporadic system is usually part of a user-pays government initiative that allows individual landholders to gain titles or more secure tenure at their own initiative and cost. The systematic titling on the other hand is equally part of a large government initiative to deliver secure land titles or tenure to a wide cross section of the population at little or no cost to the landholders.

The sporadic system is the system being used in Nigeria and this is responsible for the abysmal low level of registered parcel in Nigeria. Today, most land titling projects adopt a systematic approach as exemplified by the well-known Thailand Land Titling Project. The same approach is being adopted across Africa in such countries as Ghana, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Tanzania, etc.


95

The advantages of the systematic land titling registration include:

Low initial cost for landholders; Government can effectively manage land since it knows

who owns what and where it is; A vital end product is a complete map of all land in a

jurisdiction or country to support land management and sustainable development;

A systematic approach is much more equitable than a sporadic approach, especially when the base map is used for land taxation, to identify encroachments, or other planning or environmental controls;

Titling is completed relatively quickly (15 – 20) years is possible for most countries.

Designed Field Party Structure for the Systematic Registration

96

State Coordinator

Field Party Leader

(PL)

Deputy Field Party Leader

(DPL)

Sensitisation Officers

(3)

Office Assistance

(3)

GIS Officer (1)

Field Team (3)

Field Team (3)

Field Team (3)

Field Team (3)

Field Team (3)

Field Team (3)

Field Team (3)

Village Officials

(2)

State/LGA Official

Employed Staff

Village Officials


97

Each of the four field parties will be structured as follows: Field Party Leader (FPL, either a land surveyor or an estate

surveyor) who is responsible for the management of the overall activities of the party including: liaison with the community, leading the sensitisation activity in the villages, oversight of the dispute resolution process, preparation of reports to the state coordinator.

Deputy Field Party Leader (an estate surveyor if the PL is a land surveyor or a land surveyor if the PL is an estate surveyor) who assists the PL in managing the work.

Sensitisation Officers (3 staff) – responsible for planning and coordinating the village sensitisation program with the field teams, implementing the village sensitisation program, facilitating dispute resolution, assisting with the public display, helping distribute registration information.


98

Office Assistants (3 staff) – responsible for checking the data gathered by the field teams, entering the data into the computer, producing reports, producing material for public display, helping resolve disputes, preparing registration material.

GIS Officer (1 staff) – responsible for entering the spatial information in the GIS, preparing large scale plots for the field teams, preparing the maps for public display, preparing and spatial data for registration.

Field Teams (7 teams each comprised of a field officer, adjudicator and field assistant – a total of 21 staff) – responsible for the demarcation and charting of property boundaries, the gathering of information on rights, the completion of the field forms with the necessary signatures and supporting information, chasing land holders not present in the field, the correction of incomplete or incorrect information on the field forms, settling disputes, assisting with the office processing and other tasks.


99

The deployment of the procedures involves the following three (3) stages:

(i) First Stage (Front Office) which entails: Village or ward sensitization

Field survey to identify the boundaries of land parcels.

Taking inventory of the possessory rights of individuals or family groups or corporate bodies over the parcels of land, which must be carried out in the presence of all adjacent owners of such parcels of land in the community.

Field adjudication for minor disputes


100

(ii) Second Stage (Middle Office) which entails: Entering, analyzing and processing of the cadastral and attribute

data collected in the field.

Quality control of the data so collected.

The timely process of adjudication of land disputes which could not be resolved in the field by the local adjudicator. This will be done at the Local community level.

Where the claims are not contested or the contestation had been resolved, the rights of individual to the parcels being presented for validation are then confirmed.

The confirmation will be done through the issuance of a receipt that entitles the owner of the parcel of land to apply for a title or certificate of occupancy from the appropriate authority.


101

(iii)Third Stage (Backroom Office) which entails: The presentation of the receipt from the middle office

represents application for the issuance and registration of the title documents or certificates of occupancy by the appropriate authority.

Development of computerized land registries at Local and State Government levels.

Provision of computerized backup facilities in a National Depository at the Federal level.

Promotion of the development of the National Cadastral data infrastructure.

Importance and Relevance of Land Reform (Cont’d)

102

Land Reform will strengthen the capacity of State Governors and Local Government Chairmen to administer land in their States and Local Governments.

Land Reform will protect all land owners and occupiers from illegal encroachment.

Land Reform will enhance the security of all Statutory and Customary Certificates of Occupancy.

Land Reform will make land more viable for economic activities and this will lead to economic empowerment and wealth creation.

Challenges

103

Attitudinal Change and lack of capacity to appreciate and manage change

Poor perception of the fundamental importance of land

Very weak capacity in Land Administration Development of a comprehensive evidence-based

National Land Policy Resource Mobilization for the nationwide conduct

of Systematic Land Titling and Registration Sustenance of Stakeholders’ Interest Establishment of a National Land Reform

Commission

Th

e P

resi

den

tial

Tech

nic

al

Com

mit

tee o

n

Lan

d R

efo

rm

Conclusion

104

Thank you!

Challenges and Opportunities for Land Governance in Nigeria:

- Insights from Case Studies in Ondo and Kano states

NSSP National Conference 2012:

“Informing Nigeria’s Agricultural Transformation Agenda with Policy Analysis and Research Evidence”


Hosaena G Hagos, IFPRI


Background: About This Research

• Very little is known about customary or statutory legal provisions regarding women’s rights, the types of ownership or use and management rights women hold;

• There is lack of clarity on mandates of institutions (formal and customary) available to enforce land rights in case of violation and the transaction costs associated with doing so.

• IFPRI was asked by the PTCLR to do qualitative assessment of the land governance system in Ondo and Kano

• This report is based on case studies and exploratory visits to the pilot intervention sites identified by the PTCLR (in Ondo and Kano states)

•


Motivation: Why Land Governance Reform?

The demand for secure property rights to land • Need for investment to increase agricultural productivity &

sustainability • Increasing urbanization, escalating land prices, • ‘Scramble’ for land in wake of bio-fuel boom (speculation)

Supply-side factors • New land legislation in much of Africa in 90s• Advances in IT and remote sensing reduces cost

But why has so little happened on the ground?• Technical or institutional obstacles• Limited benefits compared to cost


The Rationale for Land Right Formalization

• Theory predicts that formalized land rights enhance tenure security of households

Economic benefits of formalization of land rights:• Enhance land investment

• Conservation structures, technology adoption• Transferability

• Gains from trade• Reallocate land to more efficient users

• Credit access• Land as collateral


Proposed Approach


Rational for the Demand Assessment Study

Objectives of the survey

Assess the general public’s knowledge and perception of land

regulations Understand the expectations with respect to benefits offormal and

informal property rights (e.g. land disputes, access to mortgage,

protection of women rights, etc.) Quantify the willingness-to-pay for a certificate of occupancy

Inform the second phase assessment (design of the baseline survey)

and help refine registration process and sensitization strategy


Preliminary Findings: case studies

• The study shows that the costs of land registration are around 10 percent of the land value

• Household reported the disbursement of compensation as a major problem rather than the lack of land registration per se.

• The local governments play a rather limited, if not completely nonexistent role, in providing land governance services


Preliminary Findings: Cont.

• The law, both statutory and customary recognizes the right of women to own and use land for productive uses.

• However, there is a regional variation in the rights of female to land ownership (acquisition)• Kano: In the event of the death of the husband, the wife has the right to

inherit ¼ the husbands property.• Ondo: A woman according to custom has no right of inheritance from

her husband,

• Direct purchase, gift through inheritance and government allocation are the dominant modes of land acquisition for women

• Though joint ownership of land and properties with spouses is constitutionally allowed, it is rarely practiced.

• Majority of respondents opposed this form of land ownership (reason: potential cause for conflict in polygamous family)


Preliminary Findings: Cont.

• The willingness-to-pay for Certificate of Occupancy (C of O) varies in both states

• Generally, there is a higher willingness (backed with ability) to pay in the urban area, among male respondents, migrants and households with earlier experience of land dispute

• Unaffordability was stated as the major reason for not having (obtaining) certificate of Occupancy

• Land-related disputes are more common in urban areas than rural. • Though a myriad of them exist in both states (Kano and Ondo

State), inheritance dispute , border dispute and dispute caused by land expropriation are dominant cause of land related disputes in the two states.

• Majority of the households have reported to have poor access to formal dispute resolution mechanisms - mainly relying on traditional (informal) mechanisms


Conclusions

• Sporadic land registration is more expensive and less pro-poor (risk of elite capture)

• A need for a context-specific land governance intervention as sources of risk of tenure insecurity and customary practices vary from place to place

• In addition to lack of clarity in recognition of land rights, poor organizational structure of institutions, overlapping institutional mandates, and lack of public awareness of the formal and traditional rules (laws) are factor for poor land governance in Nigeria


THANK YOU!

day 1, session 4: stimulating and meeting the demand for agricultural inputs in nigeria

Documents

separate fertilizer

fertilizer subsidy re

fertilizer subsidies

fertilizer demand

fertilizer procurement

free fertilizer

fertilizer subsidyprogram

fertilizer subsidy3