Download - Tiba PhD thesis
VILLAGE LAND RIGHTS FORMALIZATION AND EQUITY II
IMPLICATIONS IN TANZANIA
The Cases of Mbozi and Handeni Districts
Alphonce Yustin Tiba
PhD (Development Studies) ThesisUniversity of Dar es Salaam
January,201.5
VILLAGE LAIID RIGHTS FORMALIZATION AND EQUITY .:
IMPLICATIONS IN TANZANIA
The Cases of Mbozi and Handeni Districts
Alphonce Yustin Tiba
PhD (Development Studies) ThesisUniversity of Dar es Salaam
January,201.5
VTLLAGE LAIID RIGHTS FORMALTZATTON AND EQUITY ..IMPLICATIONS IN TANZANIA
The Cases of Mboziand Handeni Districts
By
Alphonce Yustin Tiba
A Thesis Submitted in Fulfilment of the Requirements for theDegree of Doctor of Philosophy @evelopment Studies) of the
Universitv of Dar es Salaam
University of Dar es SalaamJanuary,2015
CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certify that they have read and hereby recommen(l frlr acceptance by
the University of Dar es Salaam a thesis entitled: ViIIage Land Rigltls Formalization
and Equity Implications in Tanzania: The Cases of Mbozi and Handenl Districts in
fulfilment of the requiremertts for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the Univer-
sity of Dar es Salaam.
Prof. IBRAHIM FOKAS SHAO
(Supervisor)
o^,", !-:i-:! & - Ao'-{
(Supervisor)
, uru, -[ -?- :- Q- I - - 20/ {
1l
DECLARATION
AND
COPYRIGHT
I, Alphonce Yustin Tiba, declare that this thesis is my own original work and that it
has not been presented and will not be presented to any other University for a similar
or any other degree award.
Signature:
This thesis is copyright material protected under the Berne Convention, the.Copy-
right Act 1999 and other international and national enactnents, in that behalf, on in-
tellectual property. It may not be reproduced by any means, in full or in part, except
for short extracts in fair dealings, for research or private study, critical scholarly re-
view or discourse with an acknowledgement, without the written permission of the
School of Graduate Studies, on behalf of both the author and the University of Dar es
Salaam.
l l l
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost I wish to acknowledge and thank my supervisors Professor Ibra-
him Fokas Shao and Professor Bertha Omari Koda for their enduring support. Ibra-
him and Bertha, your expert advice, enthusiasm, encouragement and sustained com-
mitment to the ideas of my PhD are greatly appreciated. Bertha, your timing to join
our research group was impeccable and I am so fortunate you were a part of my PhD
journey.
I cannot forget Dr.Juma Rashid Kiduanga with whom I started the warm-up as he
managed to familiarise me with the culture of the University of Dar es Salaam. Actu-
ally, it was Dr. Kiduanga who introduced me to Prof. Ibrahim Shao, who wonderful-
ly asked for my proposal and later offered to supervise my project. Then Professor
Bertha Omari Koda came in as my second supervisor. Frankly speaking, Shao and
Koda were more of my parents throughout my stay at the University.
I am thankful to all academic and supporting staff in the Institute of Development
Studies (IDS) for their guidance and support. Special thanks must go to Prof Mongu-
la, Prof.Chambua, Dr.Msoka, Dr.Niboye and Dr.Magdalena Ngaiza and all staff in
the Institute for their support and encouragement. I thank my fellow PhD students,
particularly Mr.Muga, for familiarizing me with the PhD logistics and Dr. Nick
Mulungu whose guidance made my field work in Mbozi very smooth.
I also thank Professor Aldo Lupala of Ardhi University for his contribution to my
drafts. Special thanks should go to my research assistants namely Mr. Godwill Rich-
ard, Ms. Ivy Mwasepe, Mr. Dani Mwakapinga, Mr. Joseph Siwakwi, Mr.Adamu
iv
Ahmed, Ms.Upendo Upolo, Mr. Fadhili H.Lussonge and Mr.Abdallah M.Waziri for
supporting me in the field research process. Mr. Gwambene of IRA is thankful for
guidance on data cleaning in SPSS while Mr.Godwille Richard is highly thanked not
only for participating in data collection and entry but also for offering to accompany
me throughout my field work mission.
Thanks should also go to all respondents and leaders from all nine villages of Mbozi
and Handeni Districts; the senior land professionals from the Ministry of Lands,
Housing and Human Settlements Development (MLHHSD) and the Programme co-
ordinator of Property and Business Formalization programme (PBFP). In addition, I
thank the Organizatron for Social Science Research in Eastern and Southern Africa
(OSSREA) for sponsoring me to attend a Social Science Research Methodology
training and the United Nations Development Programme ([INDP) for partly financ-
ing this study.
Heartfelt thanks should go to my family: My beloved mother Mawe Ma Clezensia
Kokwakiira Alex Mushandura for bringing me up. My beloved wife Marlstella
Nyitho (Venosa), my son Alex Mujuni, my daughters Annet Kokwakiira; Irene Ka-
lungi and Alice Mukamala. My former employer, the National Environment Man-
agement Council (NEMC) is also thanked for regular permissions they gave me
without which the accomplishment of this task would have been difficult. Last but
not least, I thank the late Dr. I.J. Kapoli for editing this work and Dr.Murekaria for
translating abstract of this work in Kiswahili. I finally say that 'aspiration is greater
than resources' this work is a result of aspiration.
DEDICATION
I kindly dedicate this work to my mother, Mawe Ma Clezensia Kokwakiira Mushan-
dura and my brother, the late Mr.Theonest Rweyemamu.You were a man of the peo-
ple, and actually, it was you who transformed my life from where I was to where I
am today. You loved education and development. May God rest your Soul in eternal
olace.
VI
LIST OF ABBREYIATIONS
ACL Assistant Commissioner for Lands
AO Authorised officer
ARU Ardhi University
ATF Agriculture Task Force
AU African Union
CCRO Certificate of Customary Rights of Occupancy
CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Asainst Women
CL Commissioner for Lands
CRO Customary Rights Occupancy
CTWF Critical Third World Feminism
D by D Decentralization by Devolution
DAS District Administrative Secretarv
DED District Executive Director
DLO District Land Officer
EARC East African Roval Commission
FAO Food and Agriculture organtzation of the United nations
FGD Focus Group Discussion
FIG International Federation ofSurveyors
GIS Gebgraphic Information System
GPS Global Positioning System
GTZIGIZ German Technical Corporation
HDR Human Development Report
vlt
HRBA Human Rights Based Approach
IDS Institute of Development Studies
IFAD International Food and Agriculture Development
ILD Institute for Liberty and Democracy
ITR Individualization Titling and Registration
LAS Land Administration Svstems
LGA Local Government Authority
LGAF Land Governance Assessment Framework
LGI Land Governance Indicator
LHRC Legal and Human Rights Center
LPI Land Policy Initiative
MKURABITA Mpango wa Kurasimisha Mali na BiasharazaWanyongeTanzania
MLHHSD Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Settlement Development
NBS National Bureau of Statistics
NLP National Land Policv
NLUPC National Land Use Plannins Commission
NSGRP National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty
OCGS Office of Chief Government Statistician of Zanzlbar
OCHCR UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
OED Orgarization for Economic Development
PBFP Property and Business Formalization Programme
Prime Minister's Office Resional Administration and Local Govern-
PMO-RALG ment
vlll
PPA
PRSP
RAS
RC
SAGCOT
SD
SPILL
SPSS
TANU
TPHGO
UCLAS
UDSM
LTNDP
LINECA
UNECE
UNHCHR
URT
USA
VA
VC
VDTR
VEO
VLA
Participatory Poverty Assessments
Poverty Reduction Strategic Paper
Regional Administrative Secretaries
Regional Commissioner
Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor of Tanzania
Sustainable Development
Strategic Plan for the Implementation of the Land Laws
Statistical Packages for Social Scientists
Tanganyika African National Union
T anzania P astoralists, Hunters and Gatherers Organization
University College of Lands and Architectural Studies
University of Dar es Salaam
United Nations Development programme
United Economic Commission for Africa
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
United Republic of Tanzarria
United States of America
Village Assembly
Villase Council
Village Demarcation, Titling and Registration
Village Executive Offi cer
Villase Land Act
VLTI v'rage Land Tenure Institutions
WB World Bank
WEHAB Water, Energy, Health, Agriculture and Biodiversity
ABSTRACT
This study aimed at exploring and examining the extent of promoting equity in the
distribution of and access to land to the diversity of social groups in Handeni and
Mbozi Districts in Tanzania. The study applied the Critical Third World Feminist
Theory (CTWFT) as it is rich in issues of equity and equality in resources distribu-
tion. It used the exploratory and descriptive research design. Multistage systematic
random sampling method was used to select a sample of 9 villages (7 and 2 villages
from Mbozi and Handeni Districts respectively) from a population 159 villages.
Simple random sampling method was used to form a sample of 304 beneficiaries
(262 and 42 ftom Mbozi and Handeni Districts respectively). Data were collected by
using in-depth interviews, focus group discussions and archival reviews while analy-
sis was done by using non-parametric methods. Findings show that formalization did
not distribute land but rather it included the names of women in the certifrcates of
customary rights of occupancy. It was also found that formalization did not promote
equitable distribution of land to other social groups as the approach was based on
land rights claims as submitted by the beneficiaries.
This study concludes that formaHzatron which relies on land rights claims cannot ad-
dress the issues of land inequality and thus it is inequitable. It is recommended to the
policy makers to conduct land needs assessments in villages to determine actual land
needs at household and social groups' levels and thus set strategies for reducing ine-
qualities in land distribution and access. Further study is needed to investigate the
mechanism for redistribution of rural lands in some villases as landholdinss are in-
equitable.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
xll
1.5 Significance of the Study ........20
1.6 Scope and Limitations of the Study ..........21
1.6.1 Scope of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
1.6.2 Limitat ions of the Study.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
1.7 Thesis Outline .......22
CHAPTER TWO : LITERATURE REVIEW........... ............23
2.I Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
2.2 Def in i t ion of Terms.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
2.2. I Formal izat ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
2.2.2 Vi l lage Land Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28
2.2.3 Equity and its Categories ........33
2.2.4 Beneficiary ............40
2.2.5 Land Tenure and Administration Systems................ ....................40
2.3 Empirical Literature on Rural Land Formalization and Equity ......................44
2.3.1 Research and Literature Gap .....................53
2.4 Policies and Strategies Supporting Equity in Land Distribution ............... .....54
2.4.1 Policies Towards Equity .........55
2.4.2 Strategies Towards Equity ......59
2.4.3 Property and Business Formalization Programme (PBFP) ...........65
2.5 Theoret ical Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . - . . . . . . . . . .66
2.5.1 The Crit ical Third World Feminism Theory (CTWFT). ...............66
2.5.2 The Equity Theory in Relation to Land Rights....... ......................68
2.5.3 Institutional Theory with Respect to Land Rights ......70
2.6 The Conceptual Framework....... ...............73
CHAPTER THREE : RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .......80
xlll
3.1 An Overview.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80
3.2 Description of Study Areas .....80
3.2.1 Description of Mbozi District
3.2.2 Description of Handeni District ................86
3.3 Research Desien.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88
3.4 DataSources..............
3.5 Sampling Procedures ...............91
3.5.1 Selection of Study Districts.... ................... 91
3.5.2 Selection of Vil lase Cases ......92
3.5.3 Sampling of Respondents........... ...............94
3.5.4 Sampling for Participants for Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)...................95
3.6 Unit of Analvsis ......................96
3.7 Data Collection Methods and Too1s........ ....................97
3.7.1 Pr imary Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91
3.7.2 Secondary Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99
3.7.3 Ethical and Losistical Issues. .................. 100
3.8 Data Presentation and Ana1vsis............... .................. 103
3.8.1 Data Entry and C1eaning............. ............ 103
3.8.2 Data Ana1ysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
3.9 Data Qua1ity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
3.9 .1 Va1 id i ty . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
3.9.2 Reliabil ity ............108
CHAPTER FOUR : RESULTS AND DISCUSSION........... ................ 109
4.1 Introduct ion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109
4.2 Results and Discussions......... ................. 109
XlV
4.2.1 Object ive 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
4.2.2 Object ive 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
4.2.3 Object ive 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
4.2.4 Object ive 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
4.2.5 Summary of Performance in Promoting Equitable Distribution and Access to
Land in the Case Study: A Cross Case Analysis ............. ....I94
CHAPTER FIVE : CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS .....202
5.1 Introduct ion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .202
5.2 Summary of Key Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations.................202
5.2.1 Research Object ive 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .203
5.2.2 Research Object ive 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .205
5.2.3 Research Object ive 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .208
5.2.4 Research Object ive 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .209
5.3 General Conclusions.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2I1
5.4 Suggestions for Further Studies ..............212
REFERENCES.. . . . . . . . . . . . . .zrs
APPENDICES.. . . . . . . . . . . . " .233
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3-1: Mbozi Distr ict Population By Wards ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Table 3-2: Handeni Distr ict Population Distr ibution By Wards.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Table 3-3 Case Vil lage Sites in Mbozi Distr ict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .93
Table 3-4 Sample of Respondents from Case Studies of Mbozi and Handeni.........94
Table 3-5: Summary of Key In formants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99
Table 4-I: Land Size Distribution in the Study Areas ......... 1 10
Table 4-2: Results of the Farm Size Distr ibution Patterns.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Table 4-3 : Household Size Patterns of the Beneficiaries of Form alization.. . .. .. . .... 1 1 1
Table 4-4Land Size Owned by Persons * Household... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .112
Table 4-5: Symmetric Measures of Farm Size and Household Si2e.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Table 4-6: Sex of the Beneficiaries of Formalized Land Rights... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
Table 4-7: Relationship Between Land Size and Sex of beneficiaries .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
Table 4-8: Marital Status of the Beneficiaries of Formalization.... ........I20
Table 4-9:Marrtal Status* Sex of Beneficiaries .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .r. .121
Table 4-10: Co-Occupancy Patterns Among Beneficiaries... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122
Table 4-1 1: Mode of Ownership* Marital Status Cross tabulation .......123
Table 4-12:Land Size * Children Cross Tabulation ... . . . . . . . . .126
Table 4-I3: Participation in Land Size Determination per Case Study District Cross
Tabulat ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Table 4-14: Participation of Beneficiaries in the Formahzation Process................ 131
Table 4-15: Components of Mbozi Formahzation Model ...142
Table 4-16: Site Villages and Adjudication in Mbozi District .............. 145
xvl
Table 4-17: Members to Village Assembly in Iyula Village in Mbozi... .................162
Table 4-18: Sex and Means of Land Access...... .................. 163
Table 4-19: Extent of Satisfaction bv Sex and Institutions for VLTIs to Allocate
Land.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .167
Table 4-20: Main Institutions and Villagers in the Formalization Process.............. 170
Table 4-21: Consent on Villageiand Size Holding in Tan2ania............................ 175
Table 4-22: Summary of Performance Between Case Studies Based on Study
Object ives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .196
Table 4--23: Sex * District Cross Tabulation ......197
Table 4-24: Sex and District- Chi-Square Tests .................. 198
Table 4-25: Participation * Case Study District Cross tabulation ......... 200
I
XVII
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1: Districts with European union Funding for Formali2ation.................... l5
Figure 1-2 : Pilot Districts Funded by the world Bank for Formalization................ 16
Figure 2- l : Adam's Equi ty Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .69
Figure 2-2: Conceptual Framework for Assessing Equity Implication in the
Formalization of Rural land Rights....... .......73
Figure 3-1: Locations of Mbozi and Handeni Districts inTanzania ........ 81
Figure 3-2:Mbozi District before split to Form Momba District ............92
Figure 3-3: Mult iple Case Study Design.... . . . . . . . . . . g9
Figure 4-1 Household Size Patterns of the Beneficiaries... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . .112
Figure 4-2: Relationship Between Farm Size and Household Sizes Distribution ... 115
Figure 4-3: Sex of the Beneficiaries of Formalization.... .....1I7
Figure 4-4: Adjudicated and Titled Parcels in the Mbozi case Study ... 146
Figure 4-5: FormalizationCoverage in Handeni Case Study ................ 150
Figure 4-6: Index Map of Spot Adjudicated Parcels in Bongi vi l lage.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Figure 4-7: Means of Land Access in Both Study Areas.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ." ' . . .164
Figure 4-8: Challenges to Village Leaders on Village Land Administration.......... 165
Figure 4-9: Respondents' Perceptions on the Ability of VLTIs to Distribute Land 168
Figure 4-10: Results of Systematic Boundary Adjudication and Sex in Mbozi Case
Study ... . . t71
XVIII
LIST OF BOXES
BOX 2-1: Questions for Assessing Equity in Land Formali2ation.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Box 4-1: Reaction on the Meetings of Village Assemblies in Mbozi Case Study .. 134
Box 4-2: Expected Village Assembly Members in Bongi Village ........ 138
Box 4-3: Interview with a Handeni Key Informant on Approval of Land Si2e....... 140
BOX 4-4: Formalization Planned Activities in Handeni District .......... 151
Box 4-5: Effects of Customs and Tradit ions.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
Box 4-6: Effects of Customs and Tradition on gender ........ 158
Box 4-7 : Customs and Land Access in Handeni Case Study .. .. .. , .. .. ... ... 1 5 8
Box 4-8: Remarks of a Legal Officer on Formalization and Landlessness ............. 160
BOX 4-9: Available Land Access Approach for the Landless .............. 166
Box 4-10: Weakness of District land Office in Villase Land Administration......... 181
Box 4-11: Position of the MLHSD and Land Registers at the Village Leve1...,...... 184
Box 4-I2: Perception on the Control and Ownership of Land Resources ............... 186
Box 4-13: Roles of Managing Land Size in Formalization.... . . . . . . . . . . . .-. . 188
Box 4-14: Causes of Failure to Manase Land Size in Formali2ation.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
Box 4-15: Posit ion of the Government onthe Focus of Formalization.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
Box 4-i6: Remarks on Achieving Equitable Land Distr ibution.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
BOX 4-17: Handeni District Strategy to Deal with Pastoralists......... ... 191
Box 4- I 8: Concerns bf Pastoralists on Formalization in the Handeni Case Study. 191
XlX
LIST OF PLATES
Plate 4-2:Index Map Showing Adjudicated Farms in Sakamwela Vi11age............. 141
Plate 4-3: Office of Mbuyuni Village Land Registry Built by MKURABITA....... 148
PIate 4-4: FGD with Pastoralists at Bongi Village Land Registry........................... 156
Plate 4-5: Computerised CCRO Preparation in the Mbozi Case Study................... 178
xx
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix l: Multipurpose Questionnaires Used the Field Research ............. .........233
Appendix 2: Steps Used in the FormalizationProcess in Handeni District....,........241
Appendix 3: One of the Research Clearance Letter Issued to the Researcher .........242
Appendix 4: Handeni District Before Subdivided to Form Kilindi District ............243
Appendix 5: Data Matrix for Data Presentation and Analysis... ............244
Appendix 6: Equity Issues in the Village Land Administration ............245
Appendix 7: Pilot Villages in Handeni Case Study ..............246
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background Information
1.1.1 General Introduction
The land holding system in most developing countries is not purely an economic af-
fair. It is very much associated with people's culture and identity. That is partly why
land-related issues usually generate intense emotional reactions particularly in rural
areas. For rural residents of most developing countries, land is a primary means of
production used to generate a livelihood for households. It is also an important asset
that farmers uss to further accumulate wealth when possible and, equally important-
ly, what they transfer in the form of wealth to future generations (Deininger and
Binswanger,1999). Accordingly, the size of the land they own, the feeling of securi-
ty that they have on their holdings, and the process through which land disputes are
adjudicated all affect the households' income, incentive to work and invest, desire to
use their land in a sustainable manner, and even social and economic status in their
respective communities (Ghebru, 2010). As argued by Manji (1996), the agricultural
sector, and therefore land as an asset, will continue to be of importance because it
cannot be displaced by an expanding manufacturing sector of the economy. The non-
farm based sector is unlikely to outstrip agricultural based livelihoods and thus re-
duce the importance of land as property because the manufacturing sectors of devel-
oping economies are unable to absorb the current rural work-force(Manji,ibid).
Classical land formalization is a result of land reform approaches where private
property rights to land were formalized through surveying and titling upon demand;
high tech and high cost approach (Ghebru, ibid). There have been also the land redis-
tribution policies and projects such as the regular redistributions aiming at maintain-
ing an egalitarian land distribution as were in China, Ethiopia and Eritrea. There has
also been 'market-assisted' redistributions in countries with inequitable land distribu-
tions such asBrazil, Bolivia, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Malawi and The Philippines
(Ghebru, ibid). The same approach has been going on in Namibia since independ-
ence.
Land formalization through titling has mixed stories where some of them such as that
of Kenya and Madagascar failed as they did neither enhance tenure security and
promote investment nor land and credit markets (Place and Mogot-Adholla, 1998;
Jacoby and Minten 2007). Despite land redistribution reforms in Latin American
countries, South Africa, Zimbabwe land distribution has remained extremely skewed
after many years. Global successful land certifrcation include the one in Ethiopia
which used low-cost land registration and certifrcation; China which used the
household responsibility system and India with the computerized land registry sys-
tem used as a tax base(Ghebru, ibid).
The formalization of customary land rights has come in the form of demarcation of
village boundaries and preparation of village land use plans; issuing of certificates of
village land (Tanzania) and then actual parcels adjudication, titling, and registration
of certificates of customary land rights. These have always used the low-cost land
registration and certification through the use of large scale implementation with the
strong participation of local communities. Formalization has come to address the
problem of insecurity in land ownerships. Sources and effects of tenure insecurity
include encroachment to unclear boundaries resulting into conflicts between private
individuals or individuals and organizations; state land acquisition or expropriation
and redistribution hence tenure insecurity of owners (Ghebru, ibid). Low cost of
land registration and certification reduces risks for expropriation and redistribution as
many land parcels are registered at once. Tenure security to owners strengthens land
rights (user, mortgage and transfer) which in turn support investment, access to credit
and land transfers (ibid).
Finally, economic growth is attained through efficiency in production and the securi-
ty of food among other benefits. Although these are effects of formalization but
when certification is implemented amid skewed land distribution situation it is as
well expected that even the intended benefits will be based on the inequitable distrib-
uted ofand access to land.
1.1.2 Political Economy of Land Tenure and Inequality in Tanzania
The heterogeneity of the present-day land tenure structure of Tanzania (Tanzania
Mainland) is a result of the political history of the country. Important events were the
l89lestablishment of the German administration over the then Tanganyika; Great
Britain administration of Tanzania after defeating Germany and the independence of
Tanzania under a government with a philosophy of "African Socialism"(James,
IgTl). The independence period had two important periods: pre-and post-Arusha
Declaration and the efforts to reform the social and economic situation.
l.l.2.l Pre-Independence Period
Before the coming of white people land tenure structure was under the control of lo-
cal chiefs as controllers of land on behalf of clans and tribal communities.
a) Germany Period
This period was full of large scale land alienation which took place in many areas in
Tanzania.It entailed the Germany's influence in East Africa were large tracts of land
were granted "for all times" to a Germany adventurer, Dr.Karl Peters by local chiefs
in consideration of gifts. It was during this period when the concept of proof of title
to be by production of authenticated documents without which a claimant of land had
a permissive right of occupation of the land. Equity was exercised as the adhoc-
Commission that adjudicated land was required to respect the occupation of Africans
on land by leaving to them sufficient land for their needs and future expansion-the
requisite amount being defined as at least four times the existing cultivated area
(James, ibid). The inequalities in rural land started at this time as the native popula-
tion was deprived of land necessary for their existence (ibid). By the end of the Ger-
many rule in Tanganyika about 1,300,000acres of land had been alienated taking the
most valuable land in the country.
b) British Period
This period saw the issuance of Tanganyika Order in Council, 1920 which provided
for the reception of English law whereby all rights in or in relation to any public
lands was vested in and became exercisable by the Govemor (ibid). The British ad-
ministration did not make substantial grants of public lands before 1923 as it restrict-
ed land alienation pending enactment of land legislation (ibid).
The British administration for forty-two years in Tanganyika insisted consideration
of native laws and customs while framing laws relating to land and natural resources
by insisting respect to rights and safeguarding both present and future interest of the
native population (James, ibid). There was an attempt to preserve native lands
whereby in 1928 a right of occupancy was redefined to include the title of a native or
of a native community lawfully using or occupying land in accordance with custom-
ary law- it aimed at safeguarding the title of the indigenous people of Tanzania to
their lands (ibid). There was the formalization of tribal life by introducing the policy
of indirect rule in local administration whereby local matters including administra-
tion ofjustice was left to local laws.
From 1945 to independence, the British attempted to move administration towards a
modem local government system but the bottlenecks were traditional chiefs, who
were reluctant to relinquish the formidable position they enjoyed. The indirect rule
system has an effect on the land tenure structure as it prevented changes from taking
place uniformly in the traditional sector of land tenure and land use (James, ibid). To
curb the shortcomings of the traditional husbandry which, to the "white " seemed un-
economic and environmentally destructive, the British administration tried to mod-
ernize rural East Africa through land individualization, titling and registration (ITR).
The East African Royal Commission (EARC) (1953-1955) recommended that agri-
cultural development would be improved through modernization of land tenure by
the process of ITR of land rights.
1.1.2,2 Independence Period
This period is from 1961 to date. It had been divided into four sub-periods as pre-
sented below:
a) Pre-Ar us hu Declaratio n I 9 6 I - I 9 67
The Tanganyika Government achieved independence with a commitment to build a
socialist society. Through the pamphlet "Ujamaa-the Basis of African Socialism" of
1962 the Govemment favoured the enlargement of the public section of land owner-
ship. In 1963, all freehold lands were converted into Government leases so that all
land was owned by the people as a whole. It was at this time when it was declared
that land belonged to society and not to individuals; one's right to land is dependent
on the use made of it and that land was not a commercial commodity-hence compen-
sation instead of price. A Customary Law Advisor prepared rules concerning land
under customary law where all lands under customary tenure were vested in the dis-
trict councils; every Tanzarian of the age of 18 years, the right to not less than 10
acres ofland.
Socialization of landholding focused on two approaches of improvement and trans-
formation to organize the people for agriculture development proposed by the World
Bank (WB) Mission in their report of 1961.The Government had prepared its first
Five Year Plan which borrowed much from the WB report. The Improvement ap-
proach aimed at the progressive improvement in the methods of crop and animal
husbandry by working on the peasant farmer on both the psychological and technical
planes to induce an increase in his productivity without any radical changes in tradi-
tional social and legal systems (James, ibid: 23). The emphasis was on increased
production on the small scale peasant farmer through such activities on the part of
the government as extension work, education, credit and subsid ization.
The Transformation approach involved transforming traditional agriculture; both
land use and tenure, by organizing the peasants in governmentally supervised reset-
tlement schemes. The purpose of establishing these schemes were to overcome the
conservative force of tradition by removing the farmers from traditional controls; to
allow the movement of scattered rural hamlets into compact villages; to concentrate
capital investment and technical manpower on groups of farmers living together ra-
ther than scattered over large areas of the territory and lastly to enable the govern-
ment to supply social services such as schools, dispensaries and water to community
farmers at minimum cost (ibid). It shifted communities to areas where there was a
lot of underutilized land or where population was less progressive (Sundet, 2006).
According to James (1971), the schemes failed because of the use of unnecessary
heavy capital investment that became unviable due to poor response from farmers.
They were unsustainable because of being initiated and managed by officials other
than the people themselves. These settlements approach had negligible impact on the
land tenure structure as the schemes were started over virgin land purchased by the
sovernment from settlers.
b) Arusha Declaration and Ujamaa Villagization Programme(1967-1975)
The Arusha Declaration which supplied the definition of socialism was followed by a
policy booklet on Socialism and Rural Developmenr providing guidance on rural life
and rural people. The paper provided three principles of equality which stated that
people should not exploit other individuals; self-reliance-development to be based on
people's efforts and lastly "Ujamaa"-development to be through ujamaa (family
hood) villages. Equality principle was strengthened by the legislation which enabled
the government to give land to the tiller and to arrest the growth of landlord and ten-
ant classes.
Arusha declaration re-emphasised that development had to be based on the people's
own efforts. In the second Five Year Plan (1969-1974) it was described that priority
would be on ujamaa villagers or potential villagers in the form of the distribution of
land and other social services. By 1973, villagization became compulsory and
through Operation Vtjlji, the whole rural population was supposed to have moved by
the end of 1976. The operation vijiji which was guided by the provisions of the Vil-
lages and Ujamaa Villages (Registration, Designation, and Administration) Act No.
2l of 1975 registered more than 7000 villages.
This policy aimed at providing incentives for voluntary settlements but as the process
became slow. In 1973, Mwalimu Julius Nyerere intervened by issuing an order
which stated that "to live in villages was an order" (Sundet, ibid).
Ujamaa schemes unlike the old village settlement schemes permitted ownership of
individual plots by the settlers. It also envisaged the pooling of existing owned land
for large scale socialist production. Under villagization programme land distribution
and allocation was directed to the head of a 'kaya'(a household or family unit) as he
or she was the one responsible with the upkeep of the entire household. This ap-
proach has been challenged because women lacked independent access to land alt-
hough there is no evidence if at that time there were no female who headed house-
holds. This happened since in many cases household or family unit in African culture
are usually headed by men. However, this trend has changed as many female are
heading their households because of either being divorced, not married, widow etc.
The application of this Act had a particularly serious impact on the matrilineal socie-
ties; instead of land being controlled by the maternal uncles and in some cases wom-
en, the land now came to be vested in men as household or family head. The concept
of ujamaa vijijini(rural sociolism) poses problems of property rights and was unfea-
sible in developed areas such as Kilimanjaro where established farms were individu-
ally owned and cultivated with coffee trees and other permanent crops (James, ibid).
c) The Agricultural Policy of 1983 and Village Land Titling
This period saw in 1982 the start of the programme of Village Demarcation, Titling
and Registration (VDTR) whereby Village Councils were granted rights of occupan-
cy as owners of village land while villagers were, in turn, supposed to be given leases
by the Village Councils. This was however done without first clearing the existing
"deemed rights of occupancy" or customary land rights of villagers hence, occur-
rence of double allocations of land rights and several land problems and disputes. By
mid 1991, it had become clear that only a small percentage of these village lands had
been surveyed, certified and registered.
t0
In 1983, the government came up with the agricultural policy which aimed at as-
sessing the state of agriculture sector in Tarr;ania. Initially, the Government formed
an Agriculture Task Force (ATF) which recommended an emphasis on development
of medium and large scale farms as previous strategies (resettlement scheme and
ujamaa villages) had focused on small scale farming (Sundet, 2006). The ATF
which became a powerful advocate of land formahzation emphasized facilitation of
medium and large scale farming sectors leaving behind the small scale farming sec-
tor, a sector where the majority of Tanzanians stay.
The Agricultural Policy of 1983, vested powers to the village councils to control vil-
lage land particularly disposition (a land which they do not own) whereby sale of
land was prohibited. The motive behind this administration was to identify land for
large scale agricultural development; however, it was difficult to get it because every
Village Council said that "no land is not village land" (Sundet, ibid). It was during
this period that demarcation, titling and registration of village land were seen as a
way of identifying free land for allocation to large scale commercial farmers. Titling
of a Village Land was an important means of protecting small holder farmers from
capitalist encroachers (ibid). By 1991 through this policy, large tracts of land in
many villages had been allocated to outsiders through collusion of the village author-
ities; hence it was deeply resented (ibid). Due to the implementation of this policy
land related disputes arose among and between villagers including movement of the
people from one place to another. The Government was concerned with this situation
of weak land governance resulting into President to appointment a Presidential
l l
Commission of Enquiry into Land Matters, which because of being Chaired by Pro-
fessor Issa Shivji then came to be named Shiv.li Commission.
d) Presidentisl Commission of Inquiry in Land Matters (Shiuji Commission)
Recognizing the problems of ruban and rural land administration emanating from law
and the fact that Tanzania needed new policies and laws to govern its lands, in 1991,
Ali Hassan Mwinyi, then Tanzanian President, appointed a Presidential Commission
of Inquiry into Land Matters (henceforth referred to as the Shivji Commission) to
look onto land matters in Tanzania Mainland. The Commission submitted its final
report to the Government in November 1992(Fairley, 2013). The Commission came
up with very detailed analysis and proposals on how to improve land administration
in the country. It recommended decentralization of village land administration by
vesting root title of most of the country's land in the respective village communities
and to remove control over temre administration from the executive into an autono-
mous Land Commission. These recommendations did not gain sufhcient govemment
support except for the village land whose administration was decentralized io the
Village assembly (persons of the age of majority and above residing in a village).
e) Implementation of the National Land Policy and Village Land Act(1995-to date)
The Government formulated this policy in 1995. In line with the land problems iden-
tified in the country, the National Land Policy (NLP) had several objectives of sus-
tainable land administration in the country. This policy had several fundamental
principles which came to be the objectives of the Village Land Act No.5, 1999. This
l 2
study focused on three principles which in essence were concerned with the issue of
equity. These are to:
a) facilitate an equitable distribution of and access to land by all citizens; (equi-
ry)
ensure that existing rights in and recognized long standing occupation or use
of land are clarified and secured by the law; (context equity)
regulate the amount of land that any one person or corporate body may occu-
py or use: and, (dislributive equity)
d) enable all citizens to participate in decision making on matters connected
with their occupation or use of land.- (participatory equity)
To enforce the fundamental principles of the NLP, in 1999 the Government enacted
two land laws namely; the Land Act No.4 (Cap.113) and the Village Land Act No.5
(Cap. 1 14) both of which commenced on the l st day of May, 200I. According to the
Land Act, 1999, all land in Tanzania is declared to be public land vested in the.Presi-
dent as trustee for and on behalf of all citizens of Tanzanra. Public land is divided
into three categories, namely, general land which refers to all land that is not village
or reserved land; village land which refers to land where customary tenure and
deemed rights apply; and reserved land such as forests, national parks, game reserves
and other lands reserved for public utilities (URT, 1999a). Access to land inTanza-
nia by non-citizens and foreign companies is severely restricted, in particular with
regard to customary or village land, in an effort to discourage acquisition of land for
speculative purposes. The NLP makes it clear that a dual system of tenure, which
b)
c)
13
recognises both customary and statutory rights of occupancy as equal in law, will be
established. Under these laws, The Commissioner for Lands is permitted to grant a
right of occupancy for a term of maximum of 99 years in the name of the President.
Unlike a freehold title, the granted right of occupancy has conditions such as a defi-
nite term for the occupation and use of the land; development conditions which can
be imposed on the occupancy right holder; an occupancy right holder has no right to
subdivide, transfer or mortgage that land without the consent of the Commissioner
for Lands; an occupancy right holder has to pay rent to the Government and that the
President may revoke the right of occupancy of the landholder (URT, 1999a).Section
18 of the Village Land Act gives equal status and effect to both customary and grant-
ed rights of occupancy, customary rights of occupancy generally have no term limit,
while granted rights of occupancy cannot exceed the term of 99 years (URT, 1999a).
This study is concerned with the implementation of the Village Land Act, No.5 of
1999 (VLA) in the areas where customary rights or deemed rights of occupancy are
used.
This study was concerned with the exploration and examination of the extent to
which formalization had achieved the fundamental principles of the NLP of ensuring
the promotion of equitable distribution of and access of land to all citizens and access
of land by women. The VLA provides the parameter for what appears to be a self-
contained system of villager land rights titling and registration at the village level
including decentralization of the roles of village land administration to the Village
Council (VC) and the Village Assembly (VA). This study collectively refers the VC
and VA as the Village Land Tenure Institutions (VLTIs) mandated with the functions
t4
of allocating land to villagers under its jurisdiction including issuance of Certificate
of Customary Rights of Occupancy (CCROs). The Government through support of
donor communities such as the World Bank and European Union has been imple-
menting the NLP and VLA through individualization, titling and registration( re-
ferred to as formalization) of rural land rights since 2001. According to Fairley
(2012,2013)the districts of Magu, Serengeti, Ngorongoro, Karatu, Monduli, Arume-
ru, Simanjiro, Korogwe, Mbozi, Rungwe, Ileie, Niombe, Kilombero, Mbinga and
Newala under the European Union (see Figure 1-1) while those of Bariadi, Maswa,
Kasulu, Urambo, Babati, Hai, Lushoto, Handeni Kilosa, Namtumbo, Tunduru,
Songea Rural, Liwale, Mbarali, and Sumbawanga Rural implemented formalization
under the funding of the World Bank(see Figure 1-2) below. It is a continuous pro-
CESS.
15
Pilot Dist*cts with F**dingEuropean Unisn
Figure 1-1: Districts with European Union Funding for Formalization
Source: Fair lev.2013
l 6
:'\,r.,r-'r.-*^-* : ' t }
- r . F F ) :r,.ti I
€
*gt
J
jt i
:Tundqrru0 ?5 150 3S0 ldlometers
Figure l-2 : Pilot Districts Funded by the world Bank for Formalization
Source: Fairlev" 2013
As pointed out earlier in this study, historical and empirical evidences concerning
land tenure system inTanzania Mainland suggest that the system has been character-
ised of full of or lack of adequate access to land, tenure insecurity, land and gender
inequality, weak governance, diminution of farm holdings, which in turn has been
among the major reasons for food insecurity and rural poverty (wB, 1995, LINDp,
II
I
t l
1997, URT,2000; URT, 2000). On recent, the land tenure system has continued to be
the causes of killings between competing social groups mainly the pastoralists and
peasants in the country.
In2004 the Government of the United Republic of Tarzania through the Ministry of
Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development (MLHHSD) initiated and co-
ordinated formalization using Mbozi District in Mbeya Region as the first pilot. Fol-
lowing the coming rnTanzania and adoption of Hemardo De Soto's idea of property
and business formalization, rn2006 the President's Office through the Property and
Business Formalization Programme (PBFP) known in its Kiswahili acronym MKU-
RABITA coordinated its first pilot in Handeni District, Tanga Region. Both institu-
tions collaborated with the respective district councils. Based on the objectives of the
NLP and the decentralization policy, the VLA vested all functions of village land
administration to the Village Councils (VC) and the Village Assemblies (VA) which
in this study they are referred to as the Village Land Tenure Institutions). The VLTIs
are established under the Local Government (District Authorities) Act no.7,1982.
These institutions are empowered and required to distribute and allocate land within
their areas of jurisdictions and issue certificate of customary rights of occupancy to
her villagers without discrimination.
Since when the concept of formalization was adopted by many countries, several
studies that have been conducted tried to explore the impacts of tenure reforms on
such issues like investment, access to credit and tradability of land in Africa (Feder et
al. 1988; Deininger and Feder 1998; Place and Migot-Adholla ibid; Jacoby and
Minten ibid; Sanga,2009; Nyatho, 2012, Mukandala,2009; Ghebru,2010) but there
18
are inadequate studies which have looked on the issue of fairness and justice in the
distribution and access of rural land to social groups in areas where formalization had
taken place. The recent study by Fairley (2012) in Tanzania looked on the effects of
formalization on the security of the village land but did not examine the equity as-
pects of land distribution and access of land to beneficiaries. Studies on empirical
assessment of the direct effects of such intervention on equitable distribution and ac-
cess are very scarce.
This study asks? To what extent has this initiative of formalizing rural property rights
to land achieved the fundamental principles of the NLP of promoting equitable dis-
tribution of land and its access to the diversity of social groups including women in
these villages? This study wanted to explore and examine the equity implication of
the formalizatron. The focus of this thesis is articulated towards a critical assessment
of the equity implication of rural land rights formalization process in relation to the
implementation of the land policy in Tanzania.
1.2 Statement of the Research Problem
Inequality in rural land distribution to rural communities has been raised as a serious
land issue in many Sub Saharan African countries and Tanzania is no exception,
Several debates that followed the formulation of the National Land Policy (1995),
Gender and Women Development Policy (2000) raised a question of social justice
and equity in distribution of land resources. To tackle this issue, Tarzania embarked
on the formalization of rural land rights with the objective of promoting equitable
distribution of and access to land by all citizens including land access by gender.
t9
Available literature informs that rural land formaLization in Tanzania has mixed re-
sults including differentiation in land ownership and non-democratic titling process.
Hitherto, there is inadequacy of information from the ground on the extent to which
formalization of rural land rights achieved the principle of NLP which came to be the
objective of VLA of promoting equitable distribution of and access to land to the di-
versity of rural citizens in Tanlania. This is the gap that this study intended to fill
from the case studies of Mbozi and Handeni Districts inTanzaria.
1.3 Overall Objective
This study aimed at exploring and determining the extent to which formalization of
rural land rights implemented in Tanzania has promoted equitable distribution of and
access to land by all citizens in Mbozi and Handeni Districts in Tanzania.
1.3.1 Specific Objectives
Specifically, the aims of this study were to:
(D To explore and examine the level of equity in distribution and access to land
among social groups at the district and village levels;
(ii) To investigate the extent of democratic participation by social groups in and the
mechanism used for land rights formalization at the village level;
(iii) To identifu factors that contributed to the success, problems and or failure of
the equitable land distribution of and access in the land formalization process at
the household and village level;
20
(iv) To identifi' actors and roles that they played towards land distribution at the
household and village levels;
1.4 Research Questions
(i) What is the level of equiq. in land distribution and access after the rural land
formalization at the village level?
(ii) To what extent was there participation mechanism across social groups in the
formalization of land rights at the village level?
(iii) What are the factors that facilitate and or constrain efforts towards equitable
land distribution and access to the formalization process at the village level?
(iv) What are the actors and roles that they played towards land distribution at the
villaee level?
1.5 Significance of the Study
This study is useful for Tanzania as it presents an evaluation of the implementation
of the NLP of 1995 in the context of facilitating an equitable distribution of and ac-
cess to land by all citizens through village land rights formalization.
Also the findings of this study inform the policy makers on the attitude and percep-
tions of the rural communities on the land allocation system, status of relationships
between land distribution and household sizes. Besides, this study will provide inval-
uable data and case study materials for educational and training program on devel-
opment studies particularly rural land administration and livelihood improvement. It
is expected to add new knowledge in the existing body of knowledge on how imple-
2 l
mentation of land policies are performing in the context of promoting equitable dis-
tribution of and access to rural land use rights to citizens in Tanzania and elsewhere.
In essence, this study stands as a benchmark for future land policy actions in rural
land administration particularly rural land rights titling and registration in Tanzania.
1.6 Scope and Limitations of the Study
1.6.1 Scope of the Study
This study was restricted to the village or rural land which is defined in Section 2.3
of this thesis. The study focused on evaluation of equity implication mainly distribu-
tive and procedural in relation to the formalization of rural land rights in both study
areas. It restricted itself to examination of the extent of the promotion of equitable
distribution of and access to land to the diversity of social groups including extent of
participation of landowners during the process.
l.6.2Limitations of the Studv
There was limited time with most interviewees because interviews were held in vil-
lage office premises that were not completely free from frequent intemrptions; The
study could not get views of the Village Assemblies (VAs) as one of the institutions
because of the fact from key informants that the VA were not always involved. Also
the researcher had to undertake corrective measures to develop a list of population
from where to get samples as there were no village land registers in each village as
expected.
22
1.7 Thesis Outline
This thesis is organized into five chapters namely; Chapter One is on introduction in
which background information to the research, research problem; objectives and the
significance of this research are presented. Chapter Two presents a literature re-
view and theoretical and conceptual frameworks related to formalization of land
rights Chapter Three presenfs methodology used to conduct the study. Chapter
Four presents results and discussion from the field research in both study areas
while Chapter Five presents conclusions, recommendations on formali zation and.
equitable distribution of and access to land in rural areas in Tanzaua.
23
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Overview
This chapter presents review of literature related to this study. It starts by presenting
definitions of key terms used in this study, empirical literature on rural land formali-
zation and the policies and strategies supporting equity in land resources distribution
are presented. Finally theoretical and conceptual frameworks which have guided and
studied in this study are explained.
2.2Definition of Terms
2,2.lFormalization
The term formalization is used in this study to refer to the act of identifying bounda-
ries of rural land, the owner of that land or farm, preparation of a land title and regis-
tration of the same through a designated land registry. In some countries, it is re-
fened to also as certification or individualization titling and registration (ITR) etc.
Formalization is used to describe the process of increased state engagement in t..-,
oflegal regulation and registration ofland rights (Ikdahl. et a|.2005). It is, ironical-
ly, * unclear concept but has its origin from 'formal' which comes from the Latin
word formalis, which means 'precise/explicit/clear' (Ikdahl, et al,. ibid). Hence, to
formalise would mean to make something clearer and more explicit (ibid). Other
scholars such as Mr. Israel Simbal argues that the term formalization is not good be-
cause these rights are formal to the relevant communities and clans thus it is better toa
I Interview with Mr. Israel Simba a retired Lecturer in Laws related to real propertyand land administration at Ardhi Universitv inTanzania.
24
call the exercise certification as it issues a certificate. Actually some countries such
as Ethiopia refer to this process as certification although it goes beyond certification
as it also includes boundaries identification. etc.
In current literature on land rights in Africa, the term 'formal 'is usually and implicit-
ly associated with official and written documents. According to this understanding,
to 'formalise' would be to make it offrcial. In another sense, something is formal to
one who recognises it but informal to those who do not. In Tanzania, the term is
sometimes replaced by the word Certification which refers to issuance of certificate
to the land. But also, it has been used to refer to individuali zation titling or certifica-
tion and registration of the certificate or ownership of the land rights.
A formal tenure system is normally created by the state through a law. The under-
standing of the term formalisation leads to an overall focus on the state both in terms
of state law and policy. In the area of land use and access to natural resources, states
attempt to simplify and standardise local tenure systems and rules regarding transfer
of rights, trying to make them 'legible'.
Formalisation is thus often seen as a shift from 'informal' to 'formal' norms. from
oral to written, from extra-legal to legal or from unofficial to offrcial. The classifica-
tion of institutions as formal or informal, traditional or modern is questionable but in
essence it depends on the circumstances under which the classification is made. Alt-
hough it is recognized that the terms 'formal/informal' and 'formalisation' are prob-
lematic, they are used for practical purposes to explain or describe the situation of an
25
increased state engagement in terms of legal regulation and registration of land
rights. In a country like Tartzaria with more than 120 ethnic groups which are not
regulated by the state, then, formalization would mean to document what the formal
government does not know and hence simplifu provision of public services. To un-
derstand the way rural land distribution is affected by formalisation, we will have to
pay attention to the complex interplay between formal and informal norms and prac-
tices of village land administration. Formalization is also referred to as the processes
of identifying interests, adjudicating them and registering them (Meinzen-Dick and
Mwangi, 2007).In Tanzania, the term is also referred to as certification or individu-
ahzation of land rights, individualizationtitling and registration (ITR) etc. The output
of formalization is the issuance of a document referred to in this study as the Certifi-
cate of Customary Rights of Occupancy (CCRO). Formalization of land rights uses a
mechanism known as boundary adjudication which can be systematic and sporadic.
a) Adjudication
This term is used in this study to refer to the mode of delineating land boundaries for
the purpose of individualization, titling and registration (ITR) during the formaliza-
tion process. Adjudication, titling and registration can be done systematically or spo-
radically. Adjudication can either be systematic and sporadic. Likewise titling and
registration can also be systematic and sporadic.
Systematic adjudication and Registration is a survey that takes place according to
an organised plan so that rights to land are determined simultaneously within a pre-
26
defined area. It is usually supply driven. When done systematically it means that al
the district or a village levels, all parcels or farms are surveyed at one time.
At the village level systematic adjudication is done whereby all farms or plots can be
surveyed at one time whereby owners of land, land size, crops found and other prop-
erties on the farm can be documented. The advantages of systematic survey are the
abilities to: strategically plan 'and
coordinate survey activities including public
awareness, adjudication and registration teams; strengthening the appropriate local
agencies; lowering individual survey costs through economies of scale; administering
contiol; and more easily providing increased tenure security.
Systematic surveying is regarded as a more efficient method for building a coordi-
nated cadastre in areas not previously surveyed because survey and mapping results
are simultaneously acquired in a logical step-wise process. Disadvantages include
dependence on long term government commitment and public support, and the large
investment costs financed by implementing agencies with limited immediate recu-
peration opportunities. Systematic registration has the advantage that it will provide
more comprehensive land information within a given time frame. It will also give
more people improved rights more quickly, thus supporting the general development
impact of increased security of ownership and reduced transaction costs.
Sporadic adj udicatio n and re gistration
Sporadic adjudication is a parcel by parcel approach, usually triggered by some spe-
ciltc event, like the sale of the property or registering the ownership as is the case
with one who buys land in a village. This is one where when a land owner(s) want(s)
his or her or their farm to be surveyed, he/she lthey can request the land adjudicator to
27
do the boundary adjudication. Through this, details of the land rights claimers will
then be recorded and then a title or customary right of occupancy will be processed
and registered. Depending on the jurisdiction sporadic adjudication will then involve
demonstrating that the title is basically sound before it is accepted and entered into
the registration system (LINECE, 1996).
Sporadic methods are piecemeal, taking place as-needed for ownership or boundary
determination. This may result from an owner's request as opposed to being pre-
scribed by authorities, i.e. they are typically demand driven. Sporadic surveying or
adjudication is a piecemeal approach which may lead to discrepancies when isolated
surveys are brought into the cadastre resulting into the existence of large gaps of in-
formation about parcels which are left unregistered. There is potential for the sporad-
ic survey approach to favour larger land holders and elites who can afford the system
and therefore secure their property against small and more informal ownership of
poorer citizens.
According to FAO (lggg),sporadic registration is usually based on a specific action
or actions of the owner of the property to trigger, bringing it into the registration sys-
tem. The most common action used to trigger sporadic registration is the sale of the
property or mortgage processing. This was, for instance, used as the main trigger for
compulsory registration in defined registration areas in England and Wales after
1925. Sporadic systems enable selective registration, reduce overall costs, require
only a short term commitment, and allow survey costs to be directly imposed onto
land holder(FAo,ibid).
i
28
Sporadic registration has the advantage that it may be less expensive in the short
term than systematic registration and that it tends to target most economically active
property first. It has the disadvantage that it will take much longer to achieve com-
plete coverage of all titles within the jurisdiction. If the intention is to register all (or
even most) parcels, then sporadic registration cannot be cheaper, and will likely be
more expensive because of lack'of economies of scale (e.g., neighbours all having to
survey their parcels separately.
According to FAO (ibid), the process of adjudication should simply reveal what
rights already exist, by whom they are held and what restrictions or limitations there
are on them. In practice, of course, the mere fact of a final and definitive recording of
these rights is a significant change in those jurisdictions where previously there had
been uncertainty. The process of adjudication may be sporadic or systematic, as with
resistration.
2.2.2 Y illage Land Rights
The term village as used in this study refers to the basic administrative and political
structure at the local level with an elected village council and a village assembly
which consists of all adults (individual who have reached the age of majority, that is
eighteen years and above who are of sound mind) living in a village(URT,1975).
It is also referred to as a conglomeration of households (Rwejuna, 2006). A village
can also be defined as the major non-familiar unit of peasant society, whose origin is
suggested to be an extension of the family, with non-family members introduced ei-
ther by way of marriage(and thus absorbed into the family) or to perform a specified
29
task(ibid). A Village in this study refers to a settlement which has been registered
under the provisions of the Local Government (District Authorities) Act No.7 , 7982
as a village and which has been surveyed and issued with a Certificate of Village
Land (CVL) in the village council and the Village assembly as village institutions are
delegated power to administer the land within its jurisdiction. Village Land is one of
the three categories of public land; others are the General Land and Reserve land
(URT, I999a). "Village land" means the land declared to be village land under and in
accordance with section 7 of the VLA and includes any transfer or- land transferred
to a village; "Operation Vijiji" means and includes the settlement and resettlement of
people in villages commenced or carried out during and at any time between the first
day of January, 1970 and thirty first day of December,1977 for or in connection with
the purpose of implementing the policy of villagization, and includes the resettlement
of people within the same village, from one part of the village land to another part of
that village land or from one part of land claimed by any such person as land which
he held by virtue of customary law to another part of the same land and the expropri-
ation of it in connection with Operation Vijiji (URT,1999).
Village land rights refer to rights to the use and occupation of land by individuals,
organrzattons, clans, within the jurisdiction of a village. Land rights are defined by
the land tenure system which is made up of rules, authorities, institutions and rights.
Land rights have components or'web of interests'which are categorized as: the use
rights, such as the right to access a resource (for example, to walk or pass across a
field or farm of someone) and to withdraw from a resource (to pick some wild plants
such medicinal plants) (Meinzen-Dick and Mwangi, 2001).
30
Other categories include the exploitation of a resource for economic benefit or the
control, or decision-making rights, such as the rights to management (plant a crop),
right of exclusion (prevent others from accessing or entering the land, plot, farm or
field), and alienation (rent out, sell, or give away the rights to others, mortgage etc)
(Meinzen-Dick and Mwangi, ibid). According to Ghebru (2010) there are three prin-
cipal rights linked to the spatial dimension of land; namely; use rights; control rights;
and transfer rights. Use rights refer to the right to use land for growing crops, pas-
sage, grazing animals, and the utilization of natural and forest products. Control
rights refer to the rights to make decisions about how the land should be used and
how benefits should be allocated. Holders of land rights can transfer their rights in
the form of sale or mortgage land, convey land to others, transmit the land through
inheritance and reallocate use and control rishts.
Land tenure rights include the freedom to: occupy, use, develop or enjoy one's land;
bequeath land to heirs or sell land; lease or grant land or use rights over that land to
others with reasonable guarantees of being able to recover the land; restrict others'
access to that land; and use natural resources located on that land(Knight,2010).A
number of individuals can hold different tenure claims and rights to the same land
whereby these claims may be formal, informal, customary or religious, and can in-
clude leasehold, freehold, use rights and private ownership (Ifuight, ibid). The
strength of one's land claims may hinge on national legal definitions of property
rights, local social conventions and multiple other factors (Ifuight, ibid).
According to FAO (2002) and Meizen-Dick and Mwangi, (2007) classification of the
web of land interests is based on the functions of each interest as follows:
31
Overriding interests such as when a sovereign power (e.g., a state or a
community) has the power to allocate or reallocate;
overlapping interests where several parties are allocated different rights
to the same parcel of land, for example one party may have tilling rights
and another may have a right of way;
(iii) complementary interesls when different parties share the same interest in
the same parcel of land, as between bee-keepers and farmers with or-
(iv)
chards to be pollinated; and
When different parties contest the same interests in the same parcel.
These different categories of interests mentioned above (i-iv) have, in other cases,
been designated as primary, secondary and tertiary/transitory. For many rural com-
munities these interests are derived from social relationships and memberships,
which in turn will define the content of the risht or claim and then underwrite the
exercise ofthat right.
Land rights at a village level can be of three types, namely, clan, family and self-
acquired land. According to Manji (1996) self-acquired land may be defined as prop-
erty which has been obtained through the efforts of an individual or a family. Such
property is usually acquired by clearing virgin lands or buying land which is already
cleared. 'Family land'.is one which in the past had been owned by individuals of the
same family lineage. 'Family land' may now be defined as small plots or homesteads
retained by individual families within villages and farmed by them. 'Clan land' is
land vested in the clan under traditional systems of land tenure (ibid). These property
rights to land can be either formal or informal. Formal rights are those which are rec-
(i)
(ii)
i z
ognized by the state and secured by legal means. Informal land rights such as clan
and family are not protected by formal laws or the modern governments. In Tanza-
nia, for example, there are many tribes each of which has customs and traditional
norms and laws which are not monitored closelv bv the Government. In some cases a
right can be dehned somewhere in between the formal and informal rights. The right
may not be against the law but it is not recognized by the law either, for indigenous
areas this is common (FAO, 2002) hence formally known as customary land. Cus-
tomary rights bounded by customary law are often practiced within indigenous areas
and are governed by traditional procedures and rules (Kalabamu, 2000).
Statutory rights are formally recognized rights which are often defined within market
capitalism. Statutory land tenure means that an ownership guaranties certain rights
such as the right for owner to sell his/her property and to transfer the property on the
market (Kalabamu, ibid). In some cases customary law has over time been written
down into formal rights which are regulated under common law (Dale and Mcl.augh-
l in, 1999).
The public land in Tanzania Mainland is categorised into three types of land, namely,
the general, reserve and village land. The last category is administered by the Village
Council and the Village Assembly. Land tenure right rnTanzanra is called a right of
occupancy which refers to title to the use and occupation of land (URT, 1999a). It is
a relationship between the people and the land within any jurisdiction. It is concerned
with the mode in which rights to land are held, and which are, therefore, grounded in
statutory law, common law or customary law and traditions.
a aJ J
2.2.3 Equity and its Categories
Equity is a close synonym of justice and fairness, so it usually relates to more quali-
tative matters. Equality refers to the condition of being equal, and it tends to relate to
things that can be expressed in numbers such as area of a farm, income etc. For ex-
ample, one might say that land equality is a result of equity in the society, or that in-
equality in land ownership is a great inequity in land distribution. In this thesis, ineq-
uity has been used interchangeably with inequality to refer to a lack of equality in
opportunity or treatment during land formalization. Inequality is used to refer to dis-
parities in land size ownership between and among individuals and for that matter
household.
In the distribution of land as a resource, gender equity entails consideration of men
and women in the registration of land rights so as to have secure tenure for both; on
youth and adults to ensure that inheritance rights are defined for the future genera-
tions while in the case of pastoralists and peasants to consider the size of land parcel
that each group deserve to have to sustainable development.
Equity is related with land governance as it processes of decision making and im-
plementation of decisions. The term good governance can be viewed in several con-
texts such as corporate, institutional, national, and local governance. The standards of
transparency, equityo accountability, subsidiarity, and also participation are especial-
ly important to sustainable Land Administration Systems (LAS).
Smith (2008) argues that when land rights are formalized, what matters is not land or
a building but the associated equity, which he defined as something in a legal record
or title - which provides security to the holder of the legal record or title for free use,
34
mortgages, easements and other covenants. In practice, when an individual wants a
loan from a bank he or she presents the title deed to a bank and thereby allow the eq-
uity associated with the underlying asset to be set free for purposes of investment in
other things. In this way, the records and representations constituting the formal
property system bring a new domain of quasi-abstract reality into existence, whose
growth is intimately associated with those advances in human welfare which are as-
sociated with economic development (Smith, ibid).
Many scholars have tried to discuss equity. According to Sharon (2000) equity is
about fairness and derives from a concept ofsocialjustice. It represents a beliefthat
there are some things which people should have, that there are basic needs that
should be fulfilled, that burdens and rewards should not be spread too divergently
across the community, and that policy should be associated with impartiality, fairness
and justice towards these ends (ibid).
Equity implies that people's needs, rather than social privileges, should guide the dis-
tribution of opportunities for well-being. Equity requires reducing unfair disparities
as well as meeting acceptable standards for everyone. Equity implications assessed in
this study are distributive equity, procedural/participatory equity and contextual equi-
ty. Theses aspects of fairness and justice are associated with the procedure used to
distribute land rights during the formalizatton process in the study areas of Mbozi
and Handeni Districts inTanzania. Procedure and participatory equity which consid-
er context in which the resource is located can determine the way distribution and
access can be equitable. Contemporary thinking on equity owes much to the work of
US philosopher John Rawls, who argued that just outcomes are those that people
35
would agree to under a "veil of ignorancs"-1[41 is, if they did not know what statusthey would occupy in society (LrNDP, 20lr). John Rawls,sidea ofjustice advocated
basic liberties and procedural fairness by permitting inequalities in cases when theycould reasonably be expected to be to the advantage ofeveryone (and ifby reducing
them they would make everyone worse offl.
Evaluation of equity implication where land rights formalization or titling program
has taken place is important because it is about human development. Human devel-
opment is the expansion of people's freedoms to live long, healthy and creative lives;
to advance other goals they have reason to value; and to engage actively in shaping
development equitably and sustainably on a shared pranet.Equity is about distribu-
tive justice; therefore, where the process of land titring becomes inequitable, it be-comes unjust across groups or generations. Inequalities are especially unjust when
they systematically disadvantage specific groups of peopre, whether because of gen_
der, occupation, race or birthplace, or when the gap is so great that acute poverty ishigh(ibid) or likely to be high.
Equity can be distributive,
procedural or participatory
below:
a) Distributive Equity
According to Mc-Dermott et at.(2011),distributive equity is concemed with out-
comes in the allocation among stakeholders of costs, risks and benefits resulting from
environmental policy or resource management decisions and hence represents pri-
procedural or participatory and contextual. In practice,
equity facilitates distributive equity. They are discussed
36
marily (but not exclusively) the economic dimension of equity. In this respect then
equitable distribution of benefits (which in this case is land resources, grazing areas
etc) to the beneficiaries can be justified on the basis of one of several different prin-
ciples: equality, social welfare, merit and need. The distributive equity can be within
the same generation or between the current and the future generation hence, intra-
generational and intergeneratioiral equity. These categories are discussed in detail
below:
(i) Intergenerational Equity
Intergenerational equity in economic, psychological and sociological contexts is the
concept or idea of fairness or justice in relationships between children, youth, adults
and seniors, particularly in terms of treatment and interactions (Foot and Venne,
2005). It refers to relationship that a particular family has on resources. Intergenera-
tional equity is the central ethical principle behind sustainable development (Sharon,
2000). The 1987 UN Brundtsland Commission defined sustainable development in
equity terms as: "development that meets the needs of the present without compro-
mising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."Intergenerational
equity refers to how fairly benefits such as land rights are distributed across existing
population of interests (Arko-Adjei,2011). It is more about distribution of resources
such as land.
Distributional equity.ensures that the needs of minorities and vulnerable groups in
the society are provided for. In this case, the focus is on how rights are apportioned
such that they are used effectively and efficiently at present, without compromising
their use by future generations, hence incorporating sustainability.
) t
Sustainability is concerned with one type of equity- across people bom in different
times- as distinct from the distribution of outcomes, opportunities or capabilities at
present.
Intergenerational equity means that we inherit the Earth from previous generations
and have an obligation to pass it on in reasonable condition to future generations.
The idea behind not reducing the ability of future generations to meet their needs is
that, although future generations might gain from economic progress, those gains
might be more than offset by environmental deterioration which will occur as a result
of population growth, overgrazing or misuse of rangelands, etc.
(ir) Intra-Generational Eqaity
This is about fair treatment across communities (household, gender, occupational
groups, age, etc) and nations within one generation. Intra-generational equity is as-
sociated with the principle of sustainable development because in many cases inequi-
ties in the distribution of land resources have triggered the degradation of the,envi-
ronment. As a result of inequities in the distribution of land resources, people be-
come poor hence they become environmentally unsound in their activities. As argued
by Sharon (2000), poverty deprives people of the choice about whether or not to be
environmentally sound in their activities.
Intra-generational equity is concerned with the way resources are distributed within
the current generation. It is about equity between people of the same generation such
as male and female; boys and girls; youth and adult; married couples; peasants and
pastoralists (Sharon, ibid). It includes considerations of distribution of resources such
38
as land and justice between nations or individuals or social groups within a commu-
nity such as a clan, community, a village etc. Other considerations include what is
fair for people within any one nation, a village, district or any geographic al area.
Thus, the distribution of benefits such as land use and access right can be termed eq-
uitable in terms of intra-generation if it is inclusive whereby all social groups in a
community or a village have been considered. Therefore, if a certain social group is
denied ownership or access right or has inadequate land resource, then there is likeli-
hood for one group or individual to trespass into the land of another individual or
group or a reserved area. Examples of indicators of intra-generational inequities in
Tanzania include escalating land related disputes, trespass to protected areas such as
wetlands, game reserves, forests reserves or common land resources in a village such
as grazing and burial sites.
The high levels of wealth are perhaps even more damaging to the environment (both
rural and urban) as they are accompanied by high levels of resources consumption
such as land grabbing, which lead to landlessness to segment of communitigs and
thus poverty for those who rely on land do so for livelihoods. Many environmental
problems-such as global warming and chemical contamination are the result of af-
fluence rather than poverty (Sharon, 2000). These occurrences are witnessed in Tan-
zaniain the form of trespassing on reserved lands such as the national parks, forests
and game reserves, wetland areas and even to land owned legally by individuals and
organizations.
39
b) Procedural/Purticipatory Equity
Procedural Equity (PE) can be specified to mean an1'thing from guaranteeing basic
rights equally to taking affirmative action to amplify the voices of groups such as
women, the landless and ethnic minorities which are frequently marginalized with
respect to natural resources, (Mc-Dermott et.al,2011). PE is about fairness in the po-
litical processes that allocate land resources and resolve disputes. It involves repre-
sentation, recognition/inclusion, voice and participation in decision-making. Accord-
ing to Shao (2008), empowered participation or involvement means not only the
physical presence of the individual, but also active, effective and conscious participa-
tion. In the context of village or rural land formalization process, all dimensions of
equity come together in the normative principle of participatory parity, which insists
on fairness, inclusiorVrepresentation and democratic decision-making at all levels
from the design of formalization process (awareness, approval of claims, adjudica-
tion mechanism, titling and registration) to completion.
c) Contextual Equity
Contextual equity links together the other two dimensions (distributive and proce-
dural equities) by taking into account the pre-existing conditions under which people
engage in procedures and benefit distributions - and which limit or enable their ca-
pacity to do both. It entails access, capabilities and power. Access refers to the
'ability to derive benefrts from things such as land', whereby this ability depends on
a 'web of powers' exercised through social relations and institutions such as tradi-
tion, markets, property, and informal, illicit and coercive claims to resources such as
land rights (Ribot and Peluso, 2003). Capabilities are capacities necessary for indi-
40
viduals and households to fully function in their chosen lives, which in other words,
constitutes freedom and the wherewithal to exercise land rights and choices in pursu-
ing their lives they find appropriate. In order for a villager to exercise any on-farm
livelihood activity such as farming or livestock keeping they require adequate land
for farming and grazing purposes including recognition as members of the village (as
a community). Also education, information, sufficient economic resources and secu-
rity are a prerequisite (Ribot and Peluso, ibid). Power enables actors such as the Vil-
lage leaders and their Councils and the villagers who are customary land rights hold-
ers or beneficiaries (villagers including women and other nrlnerable groups) to gain
control and maintain access to land resources. Unequal power (re)produces inequity
in its other dimensions.
2.2.4Beneficiary
Benefrciary in this study refers to an individual or institutions whose land rights
(clan, family or self-acquired) were adjudicated, individualized,titled and registered
at the District Land Registry during the formalizatron programme in Mbozi and
Handeni Districts. Beneficiaries are also referred to as respondents in this study.
2,2.5Land Tenure and Administration Svstems
a) Land Tenure
Land tenure is the relationship, whether legally or customarily defined, among peo-
ple, as individuals or groups, with respect to land (FAO, 2002).lt develops due to so-
cial, political and economic structures that have existed within a country.
4 l
Therefore, it is important to understand each country's specific history as well as cul-
ture to be able to understand the land tenure structure that has developed within the
country studied and why. Land tenure is categorized into the following sub areas
(FAO, ibid):
Private or individual land refers to land which is tied up to an individual or a party
with exclusive right to that specific land. Communal land is one in which each
member of a society or a village has the right to use like a path, farming, grazing etc.
Open access means free access to resources to all, for example forests and marines,
grazing and medicinal picking and State in which the rights to this tenure category
are assigned to an authority in the public sector as is the case of Tanzania National
Parks Authority (TANAPA) for all national parks and game reserves in Tanzania
Mainland. InTanzania the state land is referred to as the reserve land. All these cate-
gories of land can be found in a village. Manji (1996) talks about clan and family and
self acquired land as one under private or individual land. In many rural areas, com-
munal land, open access are sometimes owned by individuals, groups such as cian or
family.
b) Land Tenure Systems
Land tenure system refers to the rules, authorities, institutions, rights and norms that
govern access to and control over land and related resources. They define the rules
and rights that govern the appropriation, cultivation and use of natural resources on a
given space or piece of land; they govern who can use what resources, for how long
and under what conditions. They can be formal or informal whereby the former is
42
recognized by the state while the latter is not recognized by the state; statutory or
customary whereby the former is a result of the statute while the latter are rights that
result from customs and traditions of the local community or traditional institutions;
legally recognized or not legally recognized are rights which are either codified or
not codified by any law although they exist-for example nyarubanja rights still exist
in Bukoba although legally they are not recognised; permanent or temporary are
those rights which are periodic such as a permit to graze in someone's farm after
harvest. The right of private ownership or of common property are like those of
freehold tenure while common property rights is like those where owners do not de-
fine their individual rights such as customary tenure (IFAD, 2008).
Land tenure systems need to take sufficient account of the land access and tenure is-
sues otherwise they can result into problem. Therefore, the types of crops that are to
be grown on a piece of land- be they for subsistence or commercial purposes- are in-
fluenced by the decisions of land access and tenure security. The decision of land
access also influences the extent to which farmers and other land users are prepared
to invest in improvements in production, sustainable management, and adoption of
new technologies and promising innovations. Tenure systems in many developing
countries have been influenced by former colonial land policies that overlaid estab-
lished patterns of land distribution and access (ibid).
c) Land Administration Systems (LAS)
Land Administration is defined as the processes of recording and disseminating in-
formation about ownership, value, and use of land when implementing land man-
43
agement policies G|NECE, 1996). Land administration is the management of sys-
tems of land rights which include the following subjects:
(i) Procedures by which land rights are allocated or recognized;
(ii) The definition and delimitation of boundaries between parcels;
(iii) The recording of information about land rights, rights holders, and parcels;
(iv) Procedures governing trdnsactions in land, including sales, mortgages, leases
and dispositions;
(v) The resolutions of uncertainty or adjudication of disputes concerning land
rights and boundaries;
(vi) Institutions and processes for the planning, controlling and monitoring of land
use; and
(vii) Land valuation and taxation procedures.
To be able to perform these subjects, land administration systems can either be in the
form of a centralised, decentralised or integrated system. Centralised systems use a
centralised bureaucracy to carry out land administration tasks, thereby relying on a
single, closed (top-down) approach. Decentralized system uses a decentralized bu-
reaucracy to carry out land administration tasks with offices at the district or local
level depending on the government system in place. In Tanzania, for example, ad-
ministration of village land has been decentralizedto the village levels whereby reg-
istration of village land rights is done at the district land registry level.
Integrated system is one whereby some functions are centralized while others are de-
centralized as is the case with the administration of general land in Tanzaniawhereby
certain land size allocation needs approval of the Commissioner for Lands.
44
But Fairley (2012) argues that land administration systems can be top-down or bot-
tom-up and concurrently centralized or decentralized.
2.3 Empirical Literature on Rural Land Formalization and Equity
The literature review strategy included expert chain of citations ('snowball') ap-
proach which was followed by a keyword-based computerised search of the litera-
ture. Several studies with keywords of rural land formalization, equity and equitable
land distribution, land access and distribution; gender and land access; vulnerable
groups and land formahzatron were reviewed. This part presents findings of the prior
works on rural land rights formahzation with a focus on equity from global to local
level. Equity in a particular programme or project can be in the form of distribution
of outcomes and in the procedures employed in the project or programme.
There are formalization programmes that considered the relationship between citizen
and land ownership during the allocation of land resources. Cambodia has been cited
by Catalla (2001) as one of countries with a fairly equitable land ownership system
following the enactment of a Sub-decree No. 25 and Instruction No. 3 of 1989. In
this country, land was redistributed to private households based on the number of
family members (household size) and land availability in the area. Local authorities,
with full participation from village residents, identif,red the number of members in
each family and the available land in the area, then subdivided the land accordingly
(ibid).
A study by Jayne.et al,(2003) in the Eastern and Southern African Region, found that
the smallholder farming sector was typically characterized by small but relatively
45
"uni-modal" and equitably distributed land holdings situated within a "bi-modal" dis-
tribution of land between large-scale and small-scale farming sectors. Jayne. et
al.(ibid) admit of that empirical data show that in Africa there have been inadequate
studies within the small farm sectors and that land-related research has mainly fo-
cused on the effects of land property rights and tenure. The study further found that
in many African countries the distribution of farm sizes has signs of disparities in
access to land within the smallholder sectors. This included the difficulties of nurtur-
ing other avenues to rural income growth for households lacking access to sufficient
land to ensure a decent livelihood (ibid). Inequities in assets distribution is seen as a
challenge. In countries with a "bad" distribution of assets; however, economic
growth was skewed toward wealthier households, causing the gap between rich and
poor to widen (Jayne; et a1,2003). This necessitates evaluation of the formalization
of land rights in Tanzania so as to determine the patterns of distribution of land as
assets.
On farm or land size, Jayne. et al., (2003) argue that the discussion of feasible and
sustainable rural growth strategies must be grounded within the context of prev'ailing
farm size distribution patterns and trends. However, available evidence indicates that
most of Africa is facing increasing rural population densities and person-to-landratr-
os (ibid). This finding is supplemented by Gugerty and Timmer (1999) study who
found that initial "gogd" distribution of assets, both agricultural and non-agricultural
growth, benef,rtted the poorest households slightly more in percentage terms. It was
also found that formahzatron in many cases had been associated with the decentrali-
zation of land administration powers through introduction of village councils as deci-
sion making bodies.
46
Knight (2010) in his study on countries that have made and implemented land law
mentions Tanzania in the list of best practices but does not discuss the extent to
which these land laws and in particular the VLA have achieved their objectives of
promoting equitable distribution of and access of land to her citizens. But, Pedersen
(2010) in his working paper on the Challenges of Implementation of the Tanzama
Land Law Reform raised two important issues to address, namely, whether equity in
access to land administration services is ensured and whether the rishts of vulnerable
groups are sufficiently protected.
The role of local land tenure institutions has also been found as sources of land ten-
ure problems. A study by Quan (1997) found that the introduction of formal catego-
ries of tenure and systems of land administration (such as land boards, village coun-
cil) in parallel to existing systems of customary land management has frequently re-
sulted in uncertainty and confusion regarding rural land rights. This was supported
by Lastarria (2006) who found that titling programmes in many cases ignore cultural
norms and practices around land rights resulting into a situation where certain groups
(such as women, children, pastoralists and other ethnic minorities) are disenfran-
chised.
Approach to formalization programme has also been discussed as resulting into land
related problems. Acgording to Hall (1998), experience with land rights formahza-
tion in Africa has shown that efforts to redistribute rural land to the "disadvantaged"
or to the "rural landless", have tended to reinforce existing land rights resulting into
new dimensions of inequalities within beneficiary communities. This is further sup-
ported by Amanor and Moyo (2008) in their study in Zimbabwe where they found
47
that inequitable access to land prevented the rural poor from acquiring plots of land
that were economically viable. In uncertainty situation where existing rural land
rights are unclear or weak as is always the case in many rural settings in Africa, the
use of sporadic or on - demand approach for first - time registration of rights will
often carry a significant risk of land grabbing by well - connected and powerful
el i tes (Deininger. et a|.,2010).
Findings by Deining er. et al., 8010) in Ethiopia and Rwanda show that the mecha-
nism of formalization adopted low-cost, community-based approaches to land regis-
tration. These approaches involve women in key administrative and decision-making
positions at all stages of the process of demarcating and adjudicating land parcels.
Land parcel occupation and boundaries are agreed upon in public, with the consent
of all parties, including those occupying neighboring parcels. Besides being of low
cost, Deininger et al; (2008) argue that the land adjudication used a participatory
mechanisms which was viable and led to equitable outcomes that allow clear produc-
tivity, gains over time.
In his analysis on considering customs and tradition in policy implementation, Sha-
ron (2000) argues that many policies that emphasize reliability on customs and tradi-
tions in their implementation, take a 'one size-fit all approach' without looking into
local conditions of the country (for example, village, ward, district or region) and
hence this can result into inequities in land resources distribution. This is in line with
Shao's (2008) findings that measures to improve environmental problems through
the introduction of private land titling in communities where land is used as a com-
48
mon resource can result into serious disputes as was the case in Handeni District in
Tanzama. The implementation of these policies may impact more on some sectors of
the community than others. This can happen through imposing additional costs re-
sulting from less accessible land resources or reduce ability to compete locally, re-
gion wise or internationally because of the reduced capabilities.
A study by Block and Foltz (1999) in Sahelian countries found skewed distribution
of land and that there had been little attention devoted to quantifying land distribu-
tion patterns within Africa's small-scale farming sector. This happens amid a wide-
spread acceptance that "pro-poor" agricultural growth is strongly associated with eq-
uitable asset distribution (ibid). The model of structural transformation has demon-
strated that in countries where 70-80% of the rural population derive the bulk of
their income from agriculture; poverty reduction typically depends on agricultural
productivity growth (ibid). This is associated with the observation made by Jayne
et.al; (op cit) that discussion of feasible and sustainable rural growth strategies
should be grounded within the context of prevailing farm size distribution patterns
and trends. This is what this study has tried to look into in the context of Mbozi and
Handeni Districts to see if institutions resnonsible for land allocation considered rela-
tionships that existed between farm sizes ura tfr.i, household size, occupation etc.
Literature on land rights distribution inTanzania shows the existence of inequities. A
study by Mchomvu et al; (2002) quoted studies by Awiti (1973) and Putterman
(1986) on distribution of land in Ismani (Iringa) and Arusha, Morogoro, Mbeya,
Iringa and Ruvuma regions reaffirming the existence of inequality in the distribution
of landholding. Manji (1996) points out the Tanzanian programme of villagization
49
under which farming was to be carried out collectively by all members of a village as
the one that altered the concept of family land resulting into land inequalities. Means
of access such as own acquisition (buying), inheritance of clan or family land deter-
mine equality of land ownership. Manji (ibid) argues that, in case of women, those
who acquired their own land were treated by other villagers with more respect than
those who are landless or those who expected to get through inheritance. Though
these studies were conducted a long time ago, they show how the issues of inequities
in land is old and thus where formalization has taken place assessment is vital to see
whether those inequities have been addressed on not.
In examining factors that affect equity in the distribution of and access to land a
study by Catalla (2001) on land registration found land registration in some cases
exacerbate disputes and enabled land grabbing because some elite groups sought to
assert claims over land which was not theirs under customary law because of the
knowledge of impending registration. The inequities in land distribution were due to
lack of access to education, land information and contact; cost of registration as users
find that the land that they thought was theirs has been registered by someone else.
The most vulnerable to losing land use rights are smallholders.
Moteover, registration tends to penalize holders of secondary land rights, such as
women and herders, as these rights often do not appear in the land register and are
thus expropriated (Cotulla. et al; ibid). This is supported by Lastarria-Cornhiel
(2006) who laments individualization and privatization of ownership (formalization)
do transfer land rights from household members to individual men as they are able to
claim all rights to land and that formalization has been full of inequity in the status of
50
land distribution. Under many of the titling programs there is one dynamic of indi-
vidualization that those persons with indirect and secondary rights to land (such as
women, ethnic minorities, and nomadic pastoralists) may lose them (rights), particu-
larly when land is formally privatrzed under titling and registration programs.
Empirical studies further show that some of the user rights which are normally lost
during formalization include access and use rights for cultivation and grazing that
women and minority groups may have to land under customary rules. These, accord-
ing to a study by Tuladhar (2004) occur especially during the adjudication phase in
which existing land rights are recognized. and recorded according to the land law.
This has been the case during registration of land rights in many developing coun-
tries as less or more security of tenure and conflicts over land are created (ibid). Be-
sides, such tools as formal land use plans can result into denial of use rights such as
grazing rights of pastoralists as was the case between Chamakweza and Pingo Vil-
lages in Bagamoyo District, Tanzama (researcher's own eiperience formerly as a
Bagamoyo District Land Officer and Registrar of Customary Rights of Occuppncy)
hence affecting the livelihood of the pastoralists.
In Kenya, a long history on the impacts of formalization as presented by Okoth-
Ogendo (1985) show that a formahzation program impoverished the rural society
whereby for example.in Kajiado area it compromised the viability of the range for
pastoralists, resulting into many Maasai selling off their land and moving into trad-
ing centres such as Nairobi in pursuit of petty trade and menial jobs (Odhiambo,
2006). This is supported by Platteau (1995) who found that in Africa land registra-
tion has increased uncertainty and conflict over land rights especially for groups such
51
as pastoralists which customarily had no formal access to natural resources. Other
studies with negative findings on formalization include that by Shao, 2008 and Od-
gaard,2006 who found that weak local land governance in terms of policies and
democratic principles in rural areas had resulted into conflicts mainly between pas-
toralists and peasants. The educational, economic and political dlites were generally
able to benefit disproportionately from land titling. Recent massive formalization is
that of Ethiopia where Deininger. et.al; (2008) regard it as the largest land admin-
istration program carried out over the last decade and possibly in the World as it is-
sued 20 million certihcates to farmers. Unfortunately the study does not narrate any-
thing about equity in this programme.
In line with situation, Tsikata (2001) and Kagwanja (2008) recommended an exami-
nation of the adverse effects of individuahzed titling programs in Africa on marginal-
ized segments of society, including women, children, migrants; pastoralists, hunters
and gatherers, and communal land users particularly questions of social justice and
equity in the distribution of land resources. Other studies by (Koda, 2000, Cotulla et
aL,2004; Claussen, et al., 2003;) on the implementation of new land policies and leg-
islations recommended examination of the effects of these new policies and legisla-
tions in Sub Saharan Africa so as to inform the governments on the consequences of
their efforts through qualitative gendered concerns. Their recommendations included
the follow-up suveys in Tanzania so as to come up with the assessment of the im-
pacts of formahzation on different social groups. This is an evidence of the existence
of inadequate information on the extent to which equity issues have been handled by
formalization pro ce s s.
52
Study by Ghibru (2010) on the land certification in Ethiopia also proved that many
literature on land reforms have explored its impacts on investment, access to credit;
productivity and tradability of land in Africa (for example in Tanzania by such re-
searchers like Mukandala,2009; Sanga, 2009 and Nyatho, 2012) but studies on em-
pirical examination of the status of such intervention on land distribution among so-
cial groups at the rural settlement levels were very scarce. This was also raised by
Fairley (2012) in her recent research in Mbozi, Kisarawe, Bariadi and Handeni dis-
tricts in Tanzaniawhen she recommended a further research on women land rights,
agriculture improvement in the form of optimal farm size for the most efficient pro-
duction of food crops which she regarded as an ongoing debate in this field.
Empirical studies show funher that procedures for land access and administration
have some injustices as some social groups such as pastoralists are marginalized and
their land use rights disregarded (Shivji, 1999; Mwaikusa, 1999; ole Kosyando,
2007; Fairley, 2012;2013). Fairley (2013) recommended a funher assessment to de-
termine how hybrid approaches of formalization could help sustain the livelihoods of
residents in Tanzania and this recommendation is what this study had tried to do. In-
dicators of inequity in distribution and access to land in Tanzania is manifested from
the growing volume of land related conflicts mainly between pastoralists and peas-
ants; trespass on protected areas and objection to land use planning pro-
cess(Shao,ibid).
A recent study by Ali. et al ;(2011) on the assessment of gender and land access in
land regularrzatron and titling (LRT) in Rwanda found that gender equity was highly
53
earmarked as 660A of women have secure tenure either independently or jointly with
their husband. Besides, they found that approximately 93% of public land in Rwanda
was owned either singly or jointly by women. Also, the program improved land ac-
cess for legally married women (about 76 percent of married couples) and prompted
better recordation of inheritance rights without gender bias((Ali et al., ibid). This
study did not assess the relationship between land size and household size to deter-
mine the likelihood for departure from poverty by these households.
Giving women - particularly female-headed households - greater influence over land
assets allows them greater control over household incomes, and welfare. Tenure se-
curity also enhances women's power in agricultural production and in social relation-
ships in the wider community (ibid). However, Ngaiza (2002) in her study on gender
and poverty inTanzania insisted on transformation which should concentrate efforts
more on both rather than thinking of women alone. Patriarchal powerlessness should
not be ignored as it can endanger societal and women's well-being (Ngaiza, ibid).
This study by Ngaiza was conducted during the early stages of the implementation of
the village land act but is vital as it considers the balance between male and female
with strong consideration of male.
2.3.1 Research and l.,iterature Gap
The Research and Literature Gap is that majority of the studies presented above,
though conducted in different periods since the implementation of the NLP and the
VLA, did not focus on the equity implications of the formalization process. Many of
these studies tried to examine effects of formalization to credit access and investment
54
in the form of mortgage. Others such as that by Fairley (2013) were concerned with
the security of the village land as a whole during the upholding of customary tenure.
Besides, these studies have not adequately collected quantitative and qualitative data
at the household level and neither have they assessed relationships between for ex-
ample, farm size formalized and household sizes, farm size and gender; number of
children and household farm size and equity in participation.
These prior studies have inadequate information on the extent to which rural land
rights formalization has achieved the objective of the NLP in promoting equitable
distribution of and access to land by all citizens in Handeni and Mbozi Districts. As
argued by Sekkandi (n.d) how the burning problem of land is handled is important
for present and future generations.
2.4 Policies and Strategies Supporting Equity in Land Distribution
There have been global and national concerns that emphasize on equity in dealing
with land tenure rights. Equitable distribution of and access to land is believed to be
good in facilitating civil order, peace and economic growth; redressing the history of
racial, ethnic, social and gendered inequity in ownership and access to land (kdahl
et a1,.2005). History shows that, early land registration system that started before in-
dependence in Tanganyika such as freehold tenure, concentrated lands in the hands
of more efhcient farmers, but it led to landlessness and poverty for large segments of
the population. Upon attaining independence, Tanzania (then Tanganyika) believed
that equity concerns were more important than the efficiency considerations (collat-
eral, productivity) because by then, the tenure system could create a small landed
class. This resulted into the conversion of freehold titles into leaseholds under the
55
Freehold Titles (Conversion) and Government Lease Act (Cap.523) of 1963 which
were later on converted into Rights of Occupancy under the Government Leaseholds
(Conversion of Right of Occupancy) Act No.44 of 1969 (URT,l995).
At the African Continent level, there is a Land Policy Initiative (LPI) of the United
Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) which seeks to make the African Union
commitment to ensuring equitable access to land and related resources among all
land users (particularly the landless and vulnerable groups such as the youth, the dis-
placed persons and women), a reality (Polack, 2012). Many of the policies and strat-
egies relevant to the issue of equity were formulated in the 1990s. Many of these
strategies and policies which are to be discussed below focused on equity as a princi-
ple necessary for growth and poverty reduction.
2.4.1 Policies Towards Equity
(, Gender and Women Development Policy of 2000
This policy came as a result of the review of the Women in Development Policy of
1992. This policy emphasises and requires sectors responsible with survey, and ti-
tling of land to rural communities to ensure that women get this service so as to en-
sure they have land to use and secure agricultural loans for their development; and to
ensure that peasants get enough land. It provides for women empowennent by giving
more opportunities to women in all spheres including politics, leadership positions,
management and economic development. This policy is anchored on the belief that
women are inferior and that they should be mainstreamed in development process.
56
However, Ngaiza (2002) challenges this by arguing that also there are men who need
support in the form of empowerment. Through objectives of this policy, there has
been mandatory requirement for gender mainstreaming in the decision making bod-
ies such as the village councils. It requires inclusion of women in the village councils
as members. This study verif,red the inclusion and participation of women in the land
tenure institutions in the study aieas as will be shown later.
(ii) Decentralization Policy of 1972
This policy came into force in 1972 and gained strong momentum in the 1980s. Also
known as decentrahzation by devolution (D by D), it emphasizes the need for the
transfer of roles and responsibility of various activities such as village land admin-
istration from central to the local sovernment authorities. Decentralization can also
be in four forms of devolution, delegation, de-concentration and divestment
(Rwechungura, 2011). Three types of decentralization are political, administrative
and fiscal (UNDP, 2000). In line with the requirement of this policy, Tanzania Gov-
ernment, through the Village Land Act, decentralized the administration of tlie vil-
lage land to the local government authorities mainly the village councils. This was
administrative decentrahzatton; it presents the decentrahzation of the roles of village
land administration to the grassroots structures referred to in this thesis as the village
land tenure institutions (VLTIs). The village councils are empowered to administer
village lands but the powers are subject to limitations embedded in the laws and pro-
cedures (URT. 1995).
57
According to Rwechungura (ibid), administrative decentralization enables the gov-
ernment to improve service delivery through:
a) De-concentration by transfer of authority and responsibility from one level of
the central government to another while maintaining the same hierarchical
level of accountability from the local units to the central government minis-
try, department or agency which has been decentralized;
b) Delegation by redistribution of authority and responsibility to local units of
government or agencies that are not always necessarily branches or local of-
fices of the delegating authority. While some accountability transfer to the
sub national level units to which power is being delegated takes place, the
bulk of accountability remains vertical to the delegating central unit.
It needs to be noted that historically, functions of rural land administration in Tanza-
nia were in the hands of chiefs until 1963 when these functions were rendered obso-
lete. Delegation of functions started from the re-establishment of the local govern-
ment system through the enactment of the Local Government (District Authorities)
Act No.7 of 1982. The grassroots structure in the rural local government systems of
Tanzania is the village which is administered by two institutions referred to in this
study as the VLTIs. The Villages and Ujamaa Villages Act of 1975 established the
VLTIs (village assembly and village council) and are recognized as grass root level
political and administrative organs. Thus, the questions we raised in the context of
this policy in relation to our study are about whether during formalization, these in-
stitutions played their roles as required or not? Were these institutions able to dis-
58
charge their duties to enhance equity in the distribution of and access to land as pro-
vided for in the policy?
(iit) National Land Policy, 1995
This policy had one of its fundamental principles of ensuring the promotion of equi-
table distribution of and access to land by all citizens; to ensure that existing rights in
land, especially customary rights of small holders (i.e. peasants and herdsmen who
are the majority of the population in the country), are recognized, clarified, and se-
cured in law. It also stated that ceilings on land ownership would be set and later
would be translated into statutory ceilings to prevent or avoid the phenomenon of
land grabbing (URT, 1995). These objectives focused on equity and this study was
concemed with how the implementation of the National Land Policy through indi-
vidualization, titling and registration(ITR) also known as certification or formaliza-
tion, achieved these in Mbozi and Handeni Districts inTanzania. In line with the ob-
jectives of the NLP, the Land Use Planning Act No.6, 2007 under Section 4 presents
commitments to equity in her objectives as to:
a) facilitate efficient and orderly management of land use;
b) empower landholders and users to make better and more productive use of
their land;
c) promote sustainable land use practices; and
d) ensure security and equity in access to land resources.
This study raised questions emanating from the objective of this policy:
(i) How was land ceilings controlled or not during formalization process?
59
(ii) How were landholders and users empowered to make better and more pro-
ductive use of their land?
(iii)How was equity ensured in the access to land resources?
2,4.2 Strategies Towards Equity
0 Tanzania Poverty Reduction.Strategy Paper (PRSP) of 2000
This strategic paper reports that poverty was largely a rural phenomenon and that the
poor are concentrated on subsistence agriculture (URT, 2000). It also revealed that
poverty incidence for households whose heads worked in own farms was 57 percent.
Bearing in mind the evidence that economic growth is a powerful means of reducing
income poverty, this strategy has had the objective of promoting accelerated and eq-
uitable growth. It reports gender inequality, weak governance and insecure land ten-
ure as among other factors challenging the poor. In the logical framework of the
PRSP there was action for distributing land suitable for inigation in favour of the
poor and promotion of effective participation of all stakeholders. In line to the PRSP
this study asked the following questions:
a) How did formalizatron handle gender inequality?
b) Was there land distribution for any use like irrigation to the poor?
(ir) National Strategyfor Growth and Reduction of Poverty NSGRP of 2005
This strategy has mentioned the issue of equity particularly in paragraph 4.2.7 of
NSGRP where equity is discussed as follows:
The basic tenet is that growth is necessary but not sfficient for poverty reduction. Tothat ffict, equity issues need to be taken on board as well. Tanzania needs fast butequitable growth, focusing on reducing inequalities, increasing employment and en-
hancing livelihood opportunities for the poor. Equitable growth will entail improving
60
access to and use ofproductive assets by the poor, addressing geographic disparitiesand ensuring equal and universal access to public services (URT, 2005).
This study asked the following questions:
a) Was formalization process capable of trying to reduce inequalities and ineq-
uities in land access?
b) Was the process capable. of improving the access to land as a physical asset
for the poor?
(iii) Human Rights Based Approach (HRBA)
This is concerned with the rights of human being in all development processes. It is
apparent that current international and national laws and policies addressing 'formal-
rzatron' or 'secure land rights' are clearly related to the human rights. The applica-
tion of a HRBA has a direct bearing on international and national land reform poli-
cies, facilitating gender equality through the elimination of direct and indirect dis-
crimination. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has integrated
human rights in recent reformulations of international development policies (Ikdahl,
et a|.2005). The Johannesburg Declaration of 2002, which followed up the UN Sec-
retary General's initiative on Water, Energy, Health, Agriculture and Biodiversity
(WEHAB), is also adopting this approach. These initiatives have been further fol-
lowed up by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human fughts (OCHCR)
in the 'Draft Guidelines on a Human Rights Approach to Poverty Reduction'
(OHCHR, 2002).
61
Independent and effective land rights for women have been identified by researchers
and policy makers as vitally important for family welfare, food security, gender
equality, empowernent, economic efficiency and poverty alleviation (Agarwal,
2003). Also unequal ownership and control of land is a critical factor which creates
and maintains differences between women and men in relation to economic well-
being, social status and empowbrment (Ikdahl. et al., ibid). Besides ownership be-
tween men and women, is also vital to understand the size of land each group owns,
the mode of ownership which is used including the occupation of those who own
land within a particular village. It is also of importance to have description infor-
mation on how local land govemance institutions are functioning in the process of
distributing land resource at the village level.
(iv) Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF)
The LGAF which had a total of 80 dimensions was formulated by the World Bank to
be used to assess local land governance in a country. The framework was developed
based on the experience drawn from various countries and that it can be used io ur-
sess any country using objective information (Deininger et al.20I2). This study
adopted a Land Governance Indicator number three (LGI.3) which looks on equitlt
and non-discrimination in the decision making process. LGI.3 requires that policies
are formulated through a legitimate decision-making process that draws on inputs
from all concerned; legal framework must be non-discriminatory and institutions
should ensure that property rights to land are equally accessible to all.
It emphasizes assessment to see if:
62
a) A comprehensive policy exists or can be inferred by the existing legislation.
Land policy decisions that afTect sections of the community are based on con-
sultation with those affected, and their feedback on the resulting policy is
sought and incorporated in the resulting policy;
b) Land policies incorporate equity objectives that are regularly and meaningful-
ly monitored, and their impact on equity issues is compared to that of other
policy instruments;
c) Cost of implementation of land policy is estimated, expected benefits are
identified and compared to cost, and there are sufficient budget, resources,
and institutional capacity tbr irnplementation;
d) Land institutions report on land policy implementation in a regular, meaning-
ful, and comprehensive way, with reports being publicly accessible.
This study strictly dwelt on (ii) by examining the extent to which these equity objec-
tives were achieved during the formalizationprocess in Handeni and Mbozi Districts
rnTanzania. According to Deininger (2003) there is evidence that increased cpntrol
over land and other assets by women could have 'a strong and immediate effect on
the welfare of the next generation and on the level and pace at which human and
physical capital are accumulated'. This framework was useful in this study as it stood
as a tool for examining equity implication in the formalization in property rights to
land in Tanzania.
63
(v) Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women (CEDAI'Y)
This convention is ratified inTanzania sphere (Ikdahl, et a1.2005). The CEDAW and
the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Rights of
Women in Africa (hereafter referred to as 'the African Protocol on the Rights of
Women' apply in both the public and the private sphere) and are embedded within a
principle of non-discrimination against Women ( ibid). CEDAW cuts across market,
state and family land transactions and places a duty on nation's states and interna-
tional development agencies to respect protect and fulfil the right to resources that
are necessary for livelihoods, such as food, water, housing, health and education. It
sets standards that apply to land reform regardless oflegal or tenure form (ibid).
State law and state institutions are not the sole regulatory forces (Moore, 1978). Lo-
cal communities basing on their clans' norms, have the capacity to generate and en-
force their own internal norms in response to changing legal, social and economic
conditions. In practice, the state norms such as land regulations, established land al-
location committees are not concomitants with the traditional norms applicable to
community settings. Many studies which were gender based have raised concerns on
the discriminatory tendencies towards women. The question emanating from the re-
quirement of this convention and which this study has tried to ask and seek an an-
swer for about the extent to which discrimination was eliminated durins formahza-
tion process in Mbozi and Handeni Districts.
As supported by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
(2010) the primary innovations concerning statutory recognition of customary land
64
rights established by the National Land Policy and the accompanying Village Land
Act (VLA) in Tanzania include:
a) Customarily-held land rights being equal in weight and validity to formally-
granted land rights;
b) Processes for titling, granting and registration of family and communal land
within village are established, with village councils given the power and au-
thority to administer and manage village lands according to customary rules;
c) Women gained equal rights to hold, access and derive benefits from land; im-
portantly, the act sets out that the burden of protecting and enforcing wom-
en's, widows and orphans'land rights falls on the village council
d) Communal areas and pastoralists' land claims are formally recognized and
protected;
e) New village-level land registries were created to formally register customary
land rights.
These concerns raised questions which this study used in examining the extent to
which fotmalization process in Mbozi and Handeni Districts achieved these com-
mitments. Qualitative and quantitative data collected from the study areas helped to
answer these questions' Box 2-1 presents some important questions which one can
ask when analysing equity implications in the land rights formalization.
65
BOX 2-1: Questions for Assessing Equity in Land Formalization
(i) What is the share of land held de jure and de facto by women under different
forms-individual, joint and in common?
(ii) What share of parcels and of the total area is formally registered?
(iii)Are the institutional responsibilities clear?
(iv)Are the rights of indigenous people or herders appropriately protected?
(v) What is the inequality of the ownership or operational distribution of land?
(vi)How much does each individual hold and how can it be redistributed to the
landless?
Source: Adopted from Deininger, 2003
2.4.3 P r operty an d Business Formalization Pro gramme (PBFP)
PBFP is popularly known in its Kiswahili acronym as MKURABITA which stands
for"Mpango wa Kurasimisha Biashara na Mali za Wanyonge Tanzanic". MKU-
RABITA which was supported by the UN Commission on the Legal Empowerment
of the Poor, its goals and objectives were based upon the work and theories of the
Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto which were to promote a land privatization
agenda, so as to "unlock" the "dead capital" that kept the poor "trapped in the grubby
basement of the pre-capitalist world" (De Soto, 2000).
There is a relationship between PBFP and the NLP as the former was implementing
the fundamental principles of the NLP and her subsequent Village Land Act (VLA)
of 1999.
The fundamental principles of the NLP which PBFP was implementing include en-
suring that the existing rights and longstanding occupation and use of land are clari-
fied and secured by law through titling (formalization). Other principles include en-
66
suring access to land women; control of land ceiling and citizen participation in land
affairs. Generally, PBFP/MKURABITA operations were guided by the land policy
although the objective of the programme was also to assess the proposed land for-
malization procedure for the purpose of easing the process, what is also known as re-
engineering.
2.5 Theoretical Framework
The theories adopted in this study are those which we found relevant to a holistic so-
cial science research that try to examine equity dimensions in the areas where for-
malization of rural land rights has taken place. This study is guided by the Critical
Third World Feminism Theory (CTWFT) which in essence borrows much from such
theories like equity; institution and property rights. Each of these theories is reviewed
for the purpose of deploying an insight for the way analysis of equity implications
for the formalization of village land rights rnTanzania.
2.5.1 The Critical Third World Feminism Theory (CTWFT)
This theory borrowed many inputs from both liberal and socialist feminism (Koda,
2000). The CTWFT sees men as allies of women historically. Thus, emancipation
becomes highly needed (personal communication with Prof. Shao on 2011212013).
This theory recognizes the contribution of women and men to both the perpetuation
of patriarchy and the development process including differences among and between
women in terms of race, class, religion and ethnicity.
The feminists in the Third World deal with issues of rights to education, rights to be
protected by the law, rights to participate in power sharing and transformation of
67
structures of power in the domestic and public domains (Ngaiza,2002;Koda,2000).
They are also concerned with'empowerment" as apanacea to the land ownership
inequities among individuals from the household to village levels. The struggles for
land use ownership and gender equity are related to power and processes of empow-
erment (Rwechungura,20ll). Since land represents an important cultural resource or
a productive factor and capital asset, then it is indisputable that those who control
land rights have a certain amount of power over those who do not in rural areas. In
practice, incidence of discrimination occurs against the less powerful social group
hence the recognition of equal rights for women and men is fundamental to any pro-
cess which attempts to rectify imbalances that result from a privileging group over
another (ibid).
In the land rights registration process, there is also institutional complexity which
largely determines land use rights distribution and allocation particularly women's
rights to land. This is expected to be in the form of inclusion of names of a wife or a
husband in case of registering a matrimonial property. As argued by Rwechqngura
(ibid), the institutional complexity in relation to land rights arises from the three
main general mechanisms by which an individual, a household obtains land or say an
individual can obtain land: tltrough inheritance, purchase, state intervention. These
three mechanisms are influenced and regulated by patriarchal ideology, socio-
cultural institutions, the market economy and the state, and while any one set of insti-
tutions may appear dominant within a certain context, it is the dynamics between in-
stitutions and shifting power relations within society that ultimately determine tenure
relations (ibid).
68
This theory (CTWFT) was supportive in this study as it helped in raising concerns
which helped in finding answers to the following questions:
(D How did the actors in the formalization process consider male and female in
(ii)
allocating land?
Did the formalization process adhere to the requirement of the law on equity
between male and femalb?
What was the relationship between male and female in terms of ownership
rights and protection of married couples?
Was marital status considered during the determination of co-occupancy
type?
(iii)
(iv)
2.5.2The Equity Theory in Relation to Land Rights
This theory emphasises on faimess, justice and rights in the distribution of resources
including procedure used in the process. It does not differ much from the CTWFT.
Various scholars and thinkers such as a George Caspar Homans (1910-89), a United
States Sociologist argued that inequity is felt among (societies or communities.y as
uncomfortable even when it is in an individual's favour. Inequity tends to generate
behaviour aiming at restoring equity, such as altering inputs or outcomes or cogni-
tively distorting them, leaving the field, attempting to distort the other person's per-
ceptions of inputs or .outcomes, or changing the person used as a point of comparison
(Colman, 2006). A good example of the indicator of inequity is the claims by villag-
ers in Kapunga Rice Farm in Mbarali district Tanzanra who have forced the govern-
ment to subdivide the farm and allocate part of it to them as already they have little
land to cultivate. This theory is more on economic equity as was the case with Karl
69
Marx who ignored the aspects of gender in his analysis as he was concerned with the
production factors. Havinal (2009) points out Adam's Equity theory as illustrated in
Figure 2-l).
Figure 2-1: Adam's Equity Theory
Source: Adopted from Havinal, 2009.
This theory states that people are motivated to maintain fair relationship between
their perfonnance and reward in comparison to others. Under this theory, equity re-
fers to individual's subjective judgements about fairness of the reward he or she gets.
Under this theory equity is defined as the ratio between the individuals job inputs
(such as effort, skill, experience, education and skill) compared to the rewards others
are receiving for similar job inputs. Though this theory is related to labour it is evi-
dent that distribution ofland that considers the household land needs is based on eq-
uitable occupation and household size.
C*atinuati+u atthe sam+ lesei *f
CIutpu€Iquitabiefu++.-acds
tr{+c* thaaEquitabieRrr+ards
70
In the rural areas, if communities or villagers feel that they are inequitably treated in
the allocation of land for their use, they may be dissatisfied (trespass into protected
areas, others land etc), reduce the quantity and quality of work or leave the sector of
agriculture. Prolonged feelings of inequity may result into strong reactions as has
been the case with land conflicts where people trespass in others farms or in protect-
ed areas such as forests reserves, national parks, wetlands etc. This theory is relevant
as it brings light to the need for actors and institutions responsible for resources dis-
tribution to consider needs of the households and individuals when approving land
claims for registration. Thus, the data about the size of the household, occupation,
number of children and marital status could help in the distribution of the land re-
sources.
This theory is relevant to this study as it raised the following questions that this study
worked on:
(i) Was land distribution patterns considered in the size of the household?
(ii) Are land distribution patterns related to the occupation of users?
(iii) How equitable was participatiorVprocedure during the formali zatronprocess?
2.5.3 Institutional Theory with Respect to Land Rights
Institutions are the constraints that human beings impose on human interaction. They
consist of formal rules (constitutions, statute law, regulations) and informal con-
straints (conventions, norns, and self enforced codes of conduct) and their enforce-
ment characteristics. This theory raises the existence of two views of institutions,
namely, the top down and bottom up view. The top down view is an institution which
is determined by the laws written by the government through statute.
7 l
These are formal rules which are easier to see and are in this matter the land policies
and land laws (Pia Aberg, 2005). InTanzania, for example, these include the village
councils, the village assemblies, and the district land allocation committee. The vil-
lage and its administration structure were first coined in 1975 under the villagization
programme and had been adopted by the Village Land Act of 1999.
The bottom up view shows institutions as emerging spontaneously from the social
norms, customs, and traditions, beliefs and values of individuals within a community
or clan. These are informal rules widely used within villages since the villages them-
selves own all land within the village (Pia Aberg, 2005). These are like traditional
institutions found in Ghana and the former African chieftaincies which were abol-
ished in Tanzaria.
In the bottom up view, there is an expression of reluctance to make drastic changes
to institutions whose rationale they cannot fully comprehend, showing respect for the
historical evolution that has somehow yielded today's institutions. Thus, the absence
of traditional concerns in the current formal village land administration system in
Tanzania can, in the long run, jeopardize local land governance. Institutions are
governance structures based on rules, norms, values and systems of cultural meaning
(Rwechungura,20Il) so as to administer and manage land resources. Formal and
informal institutions, together with their enforcement characteristics, determine
transactional costs and induce cooperative behaviour (Pia Aberg, 2005). Besides, it
needs to be noted that in sociology, institutions are social structures which are sanc-
tioned by the norns and values of the society (ibid). Therefore, institutional theory is
72
vital as it helps in the examination of the nature and genesis of institutions, including
effects and their implications. This theory articulates the building blocks of institu-
tions by emphasizing the importance of the institutions in sustaining cooperation,
reducing uncertainty and determining the transaction costs (Rwechungura, ibid).
This theory is relevant to this study because of the questions which it raised and an-
swered under this theory in relation to rural land rights formalization in Tanzania and
equity dimension included:
(i) Which institutions participated in the formalization process and how effective
were they?
(ii) What are the driving forqes for or behind formalization which can result into
equitable rural land rights distribution inTarrania?
Save for the qualities of the said theories, the CTWFT is the main theory used in this
study. Others have been used marginally because of the additional contributions that
they add. CTWFT deals with equity issues such as distributive and procedur-
allparticipatory and it goes further by unpacking the patriarchal system which is em-
bedded in all culture and traditions inherent in Tanzania as Sub Saharan Africa coun-
try. Besides, CTWFT also looks into the genesis of the existing situation, why it is
like that and what can be done to mitigate the situation. Institutional theory was used
in this study to clarify issues of fun.t-ions in the procedure/participation process of
land rights at the geographical or area of jurisdiction which has a role of administer-
ing the village land.
t )
2.6 The Conceptual Framework
Figure 2-2 presents the conceptual framework which guided this study.
i
Equirahle rural grow'thand poverq- reduction
Figure 2-22 Conceptual Framework for Assessing Equify
Formalization of Rural land Rights
Source: Own Construct, 2009.
lmplication in the
Ileuseheld siz*)iumber ofindividuais,geuder. childrea
ContextEquit5
-Lor:ai teiiefs-Claus. rustorrs.- trrditions.
Pr*ceduraUparticip atoryEquiq.
-tnc:.USr1-tn*ss-abiiitr to aiiocatc ian'l
i r * i r r + i ^ - .- l t lJLI LUtrv!s-
Distributi*n Equiry
-int*genrrational
equitr'-intra-generational
equi4.'
Equitable f*nr:alizaticn ofrural land use rights
74
The conceptual framework demonstrates how adoption of fairness and justice in the
formahzatron process can make land distribution and access equitable and in turn can
result into equitable growth and reduction of rural poverty. As defined by Miles and
Huberman (1994), a conceptual framework is a visual or written product that "ex-
plains, either graphically or in a narrative form, the main things to be studied-the
key factors, concepts, or variables-and the presumed relationships among them".
The conceptual framework is presented and used as an appropriate way of articulat-
ing and conceptualizing the significance of equity that enhances equitable rural land
rights distribution for growth. It was developed using input from various literature,
theories and strategies for enhancing equitable rural land distribution and access. As
the objective of the study was to evaluate the extent of equity in the formalization
process then data related to these variables were collected through interviews, docu-
mentary reviews.al. The variables were:
(y' Institutions
Institutions relevant to this study were the village councils and village assemblies
which have been collectively referred to as the Village Land Tenure Institutions.
Analysis of local beliefs, customs, traditions and the recognition of existing rights
and longstanding occupation and use of land depend on the strength of these institu-
tions. The institutions roles are related with the coordination of the participation in
the land distribution as earlier discussed under heading 2.2.3 (b) of this thesis.
75
(ir) Fsrm or Land Size
A farm is a very important phenomenon which calls for the attention of all members
of the family or household in the African mode of production (Rwejuna, 2006). In
rural areas there is an evolving rural reality which focuses on the linkage between
land issues and poverty. Similarly, in Eastern and Southern Africa, cultivated land
per capita has halved over the last generation and, in a number of countries, the aver-
age cultivated area today amounts to less than 0.3 hectares per capita (Jayne et al.
2003). There is evidence that a more equal distribution of land leads subsequently to
faster growth, and rapid growth increases the likelihood that a redistributive land re-
form will help reduce rural and even urban poverty (ibid). Previous reforms in land
sector such as that in China, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, contributed to the
largest and fastest rate of rural poverty reduction in modern times. In parts of Latin
America, Southern and Eastem Africa, and Asia the extremely skewed land
distribution continues to hamper broad based growth and has led to civil unrest, natu-
ral resources degradation and even violent conflicts (ibid).In Tanzania, these have
been happening in several areas such as Ihefu wetlands and the recent killings that
occurred in Manyara Region etc.
(ll1) Household size
According to Rwejuna (2006), a household is a residential group consisting of people
normally related by descent or by marriage, who live in one place, a house or a group
of houses, a "kraal" or "compound" - and share in catering arrangements and the
preparation of food. Also, a household can refer to a person or group of persons who
occupy the same dwelling.
76
Therefore, a household size refers to the number of individuals having legal rights
and responsibilities living together in one single dwelling structure or a house.
These households consist of individuals whose livelihoods depend on diverse income
sources. Extremely poor and food insecure rural households, resources under com-
mon property regimes (crops, livelihood, natural products and forest resources) con-
tinue to make a decisive contribution to their incomes and diverse livelihood strate-
gies. In rural societies, the landless or near landless and those with insecure tenure
rights typically constitute the poorest and most marginalized and vulnerable groups
(IFAD, 2008). It was relevant for this study to examine relationship between the pat-
terns of farm/land size owned and size of the household which depend on that farm.
According to Deininger (2003), there is a link between distribution of assets and
growth; because the former facilitates channels for land access for rural households
and entrepreneurs and economic and social development. Therefore, consideration of
household size (HS), gender (G), occupations of social groups (oc), land or farm
size (FS), village land use plan(LUP) and their interrelationships in the formalization
process can result into equitable procedure and participation which, when used to
guide formalization, then will have equitable outcomes to all citizens at the village
level.
(iv) Gender
In the context of this study gender include social differences; age, sex, ethnicity, reli-
gion, occupation etc. The gender addressed in this study is limited to the relationship
between men and women in the protection of their land rishts and access.
77
Both men and women play essential roles in agriculture, but almost everywhere,
women face more severe constraints in accessing productive resources, markets and
services and have fewer opportunities to participate in decision making. This "gender
gap" hinders their productivity, imposes high social and economic costs on develop-
ing countries, slows down development and diminishes the capacity to achieve glob-
al food security. Disparities on land access are one of the major causes for social ine-
qualities in rural areas. Gender differentiated rights to land have implications on rural
food security and nutrition as well as on the wellbeing of rural families and individu-
als.
One of the National Land Policy (1995) principles which became one of the objec-
tives of the VLA was to ensure women land access. According to Manji (1996) the
Tanzania Customary law (Declaration) Order 1963 codifred the rules of intestate
inheritance in patrilineal groups whereby rights of widows and daughters to clan,
family and self-acquired land were safeguarded.In many cases, gender issues are not
considered adequately, thus, the issues of considering gender relations is highly em-
phasized by the government as it ensures equitable ownership by all groups.
(v) Occupution
This refers to the type of daily activity done at the village or rural level. There are
those who are peasants, employed staff, pastoralists etc. As pointed out, even the
2005 Strategic Plan for Implementation of the Land Laws (SPILL)(revised in 2013)
insisted that allocation of land has to consider the occupation of the household or in-
dividual in question. Formalization approach which approves landholdings patterns
of an individual, household head at a village level as claimed to be occupied and
78
used need also to consider the occupation of the various claimants. Thus, for formali-
zationapproach to have equitable outcome consideration of occupational types is a
prerequisite.
(vil Equity
This entails notion of fairness and justice which is supposed to be exercised by the
actors and institutions involved in the formalization process' This will happen in the
form of distribution of land resources, participation or procedural equity whereby all
beneficiaries get an opportunity to air their views, concerns and perceptions in the
process whose outcome is mainly land resource distribution. It is under this approach
that even the contextual issues are considered in the form of beliefs, culture, etc' Be-
sides, it needs to be noted that recognition, or the cultural dimension ofjustice is also
an important dimension of equitY'
The associated form of injustice can be understood as misrecognition' a relegation to
low or invisible social status, which modern identity and multicultural movements
strive to overcome. Misrecognition is tied to economic inequality and institutional
subordination, e.g., when indigenous people (e.g. Maasai as pastoralists) are not ac-
cepted as "full memberfs] of the moral and political community" formed by the dom-
inant status group. Unrecognition and distributive inequity interfere with genuine
participation in political processes. In Handeni District, for example, the Maasai
were discriminated because of the use of customs hence they were denied rights of
use and occupation although for a number of years' they had settled and used the
land in the area (Ole Kosyando,2007)'
79
(vit) Lund Use Planning
This is important as it defines land resources utilization within a village. A village
with no legitimate land use plan can find itself in land related disputes. When village
land use plan is in place, it means that all relevant land uses are clarified so that all
social groups within the village can access land according to the approved land uses.
The Land Use Planning Act, 2007 requires that for every village, a land use plan
must be prepared in a participatory manner so as to allow all social groups to partici-
pate and determine the use of their land. It requires participation by all land users and
owners so as to come up with the acceptable land use plan by land users. As argued
by Enermark et al. (2014), it is the firfor-purpose approach that can come up with
equitable land use plan.
Through the use of interviews with beneficiaries and actors in the formalization pro-
cess; documentary review especially the certificates of customary rights of occupan-
cy; the land registers at the villages and district levels the study gathered data associ-
ated with the variables of things which this study worked on.
80
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 An Overview
This chapter presents the methodology and procedure used in conducting this study.
It is divided into the following sections: Description of the study areas; research de-
sign; sources of data; sampling procedure; target population and units of analysis;
data collection methods and tools; data presentation and analysis; and quality of data.
3.2 Description of Study Areas
This study was conducted in Mbozi and Handeni districts which are in Mbeya and
Tanga Regions respectively. These districts were purposefully selected for this study
because they were the first districts to be used to implement the NLP and the VLA in
2004 for Mbozi and 2006 for Handeni Districts. Besides, these pilots were coordinat-
ed by two separate Government institutions, namely, the Ministry of Lands, Housing
and Human Settlements Development (MLHHSD) for Mbozi and Property and
Business Formalization Programme (PBFP) for Handeni District. The locations of
these districts in the context of Tanzania are shown in Figure 3.1.
3.2.1 Description of Mbozi District
(i) Location
This is one of the districts which form Mbeya Region2. It is located on the Southern
highlands of Tanzani4 between latitude 80 0' 0" and 90 12' 0" south of the Equator
and longitudes 320 7' 30" and 330 2' 0)) East of Greenwich Meridian (URT, 1997;
,,D
t Other districts are Chunya, Ileje, Mbalali, Mbeya, Rungwe, Kyela and Momba
81
Sanga, 2009). To the South it is bordered by Ileje District, to the East by Mbeya Dis- . .
trict at the mark of Songwe River, to the North it extends to Lake Rukwa where it is
bordered by Chunya District, whereas to the West it shares boarders with Rukwa Re-
gion and the Republic of Zambia (URT, 1997).
Fieldsite Districts in Tanzani*
: ' '-g KaskatritPffiba% frsrarpemga
€ i i. - l J
rE{aztn'ungula:
EltunsuPk€s SaFant
: )1 l - j
t _ ' 1" f :
LuYUma
Figure 3-1: Locations of Mbozi and Handeni Districts rnTanzanra
Source: Adapted from Fairle y,2012,2013 with Author's Amendments
Before 2010, the district had a total areas of 9,679 squa"re kms which is about
967,900 Ha generally classified as arable land (766,640 Ha); Forest Reserves (93,738
Ha); Settlements and Other uses (78,322Ha) and Water Bodies (29200 Ha).
82
In 2010, the government divided Mbozi District into two Districts of Mbozi and
Momba each with an area of 3,404km2 and 6,275 km2 respectively. This study co-
vers the old Mbozi District before the 2010 split/division. The location and wards of
Mbozi District are shown in Figure 3.2.
Figure 3-22 Mbozi District before split to Form Momba District
Source: Sanga,2009.
(ii) Administrative Framework
Mbozi District (before the split to form Momba District) was officially created as
separate administrative unit in 1964 after the split of the then Mbeya District
(Knight, 1969). Mbozi District has central and local governments. The central gov-
ernment is the District Commissioner's office where there is a District Commissioner
and the District Administrative Secretary (DAS). The local government at the dis-
trict level is headed by a Chairperson (elected Councillor) who is assisted by the Dis-
trict Executive Director (DED). DED is the accounting and executive officer of the
Mbozi DistrictJ \ ,
J/ i
f'-r{J '
_ * +tt (rtanbr !: - ] i' t .^- i
F r k E .
tlrqree
83
Local Govemment Authority and is assisted by heads of departments. The DED is
the Chairperson to the District Land Allocation Committee (established under the
Land Act No.4 1999), to administer and provide guidance on all matters related to
general and village land administration especially for allocation of land above twenty
hectares. The District is subdivided into 6 divisions, 26 wards and 175 villages. At
the village level, there are two leaders, namely, Village Chairperson and Village Ex-
ecutive Officer (VEO) and two institutions, namely, the Village Council (VC) and
the Village Assembly (VA) which in this study are referred to as village land tenure
institutions (VLTI). The VLTIs manage the village land within their areas ofjurisdic-
tion. They are mandated to receive application for customary rights of occupancy and
approve it for a land whose size does not exceed twenty hectares (URT, 2005).
(iii) Population and Ethnic composition
According to the Tarnania Population and Housing Census of 20l2,the old Mbozi
District(including Momba District and Tunduma Township) had a total population of
740,719 with 354,328 (male) and 386391 (female) and a sex ratib of
9I(NBS&OCGS,2013). Average household size was 4.36 persons. The population
pattern is largely influenced by land fertility and climatic conditions.
Table 3-l shows the population distribution of the current Mbozi District excluding
population data for the new Momba District and Tunduma Township. It sex and
household sizes at the wards levels with the household size standing at 4.3 persons.
84
Table 3-1: Mbozi District Population By Wards
1 lhanda
2 Bara
3 Nanyala
4 Nambinzo
5 ltaka
6 lsansa
7 Ruanda
8 lyu la
9 Nyi rnbi l i
10 Mlangal i
11 Myovizi
12 lgamba
13 Halungu
14 Msia
15 Mlorvo
16 lpunga
17 lsandula
18 Vwarqa
Total
21,35520,1068,914
25,9512r,8324?",8918,604
30,7U23,90319,53915,73834,&22?7,\5127,36138,0169,367
t4,54956,256
Ward PoPulation Male Female Household size
10,s$8 1L,267 4.1
9,591 10,515 4.5
4,149 4,765 3,9
12,610 13,341 4-7
t0,2ffi 10,768 4.5
2A,4& 72,427 4.4
4,L36 4,468 4'1
14,7{6 16,018 4-2
11,{85 12,418 4'3
9,459 L0,080 4'5
7,591 8,!47 4.3
16,569 18,253 4'3
13,023 14,128 4'3
13,319 14,042 4.3
L7,978 20,038 4
4,401 4,966 4
6,352 7,597 4.2
26,372 29,884 4.7-
213,217 233,L22ffi,1t9
Source: NBS and OCGS 2013.
The District is composed of three ethnic groups, the largest of which is the Wanyiha,
who occupy the central Mbozi Plateau proper (Knight, 1969).Wanyiha gropp ac-
counts for 50% of the total population and is the dominant ethnic group in the high-
land areas, which cover lgamba, Iyula and vwawa divisions (uRT, 1997)'
To the west are located the l4/anamwanga, one of those numerous tribes cut in half
by inter-territorial boundaries in the 1890s (US, 1965). Wanamwanga (these days
called wanyamwanga) which account for 30o/o of the total population are the main
ethnic group in the lowlands areas, which include Kamsamba, Msangano and Nda-
lambo divisions (URT, lggT). Other ethnic groups ate Wawanda, WanyalEusa'
Wandali, lV/alambya, l4/amalila and Wasafwa. Wasukuma and Wamasai groups who
85
are mainly pastoralists have immigrated into the district. Wawanda are closely relat-
ed to the Wanyiha and also the Wafipa of Sumbawanga District in Rukwa Region
(Knight, 1969).
(iv) S ocio- Eco nomic Activities
Social Activities include primary and secondary schools whereby each village has a
primary school. Also each ward has a secondary schools owned by the government
while others are privately owned. Water availability can serve about 3 1% of the pop-
ulation of the district (URT, 1997). There are health facilities such as hospitals,
health centres and dispensaries mainly provided by the government and the private
sector especially religious organizations. The district has two hospitals, three health
centres and 38 dispensaries (ibid).
Economic activities are in agriculture and livestock sectors which contribute signifi-
cantly to the economy of the population by providing income, employment and en-
suring secure food supply. Agriculture sector (mainly coffee and maize) employs
about 90Yo of the active working population (URT, 1997). Coffee is the major cash
crop grown in an intercropping nature with banana. Livestock keeping is not a tradi-
tional activity although it has of recent become a business. A small number of popu-
lations in townships are engaged in commercial and industrial sectors mainly in
maize mills, brick making, carpentry and tailoring (URT, ibid). Other economic ac*
tivities include fishing, small scale industrial activities, small scale mining- gold,
lime, marble and salt which are produced in small quantities (ibi{.
86
3.2.2 Description of Handeni District
(i) Location
This is one of the Districts that form Tanga Region. Handeni District (see Appendix
4)is located on the North Eastern side of Tanzania with coordinates -5"26'0" South of
Equator and 38'01'0" East in DMS (Degrees Minutes Seconds) or -5.5 and 38 (in
decimal degrees). Its UTM position is CP89 and its Joint Operation Graphics refer-
ence is SB37-06.To the West it is bordered by Kilindi District which was established
in 2002 when the government subdivided Handeni District. To the north it is bor-
dered by the Korogwe District, to the east by the Pangani District, and to the south
by Bagamoyo District which is in the Pwani Region. It has an area of 6,rl2km2.
(ii) Administrativ e Frumewor k
The district is headed by the District Commissioner for the central government while
for the local government there is Full Council which governs the Council through
three Standing Committees responsible for finance and administration; economic af-
fairs, works, environment and health. District Council is headed by the District
Council Chairperson supported by the District Executive Director (DED) who acts as
a chief executive officer. There are nine departments where one of these is responsi-
ble for lands, natural resources and environment. The district is sub-divided into
Tdivisions, 2Owards and 112 villages (URT, 2008). Each village is further subdivided
into vitongoji (hamlets) resulting into 704 hamlets (ibid).A village is administered by
a village executive officer (VEO) who is a public officer employed by the District
Council.
87
(iii) Population and Ethnic composition
According to the 2012 Population and Housing Census (PHC), Handeni District had
a population of 276,646, with 137,2|8(male) and 139,428(female). The household
size stands at 5 people while the sex ratio is 98. The population growth in the Dis-
trict has been increasing at the rate of 3. 1 percent per annum because of the influx of
people from Arusha and Kilimairjaro Regions (ibid).
Table 3-2 below presents the population distribution per wards in Handeni District
Table 3-2: Handeni District Population Distribution By Wards
: *:t **$-laaj
l
, Tstal, I $egera
2 l{d.ohva3 Maziagara
. + K*=ssiai:, I K:+=-*aga
. 6 Kralugrrru: -
J EAIIg A?TT
, 8 K*"ankoaje
, 9 Kircc&agaiu }rlrGeri,l
I I Mi*iea, 1l Kiva
: 13 Kabr:ku
, 14 Kwaa.EtukE
i i: Ii:+=.liaie€e
. lS Mgambo, t? K*ab*a6e ,, 18 lv{kata
19 Kabr*u ndam
: l0 Krtangrre
EsrAL TfLLLE Fr,kl-ALE uouss*cl} srSE
3?S,$+€?i .1J51 a 1 t ?
f :.g:+r r,35 t
1 i ,3479=**g
t n ( 7 1
10,-li816 lOf t
l;,:**9,971
::,:::
: I , ; :3{ i i q
t t , : r ;:s.:$:5 r -6 tY1 < i { tt * t r J J L
7 ia i
13?:1811,50511.553
{ - t 6 J
:.g:++=19?\ 1 t j {
4,8,13:"3135.1 t68" 135o- jyJ
+,ggj>.vJs:-:g+3_18Ss.1::?,850
1i,i;:f ? 9 ?
+.*:
139=4?8i 1=9401l_761
s - u l li 5€?
+=15*\ J 1 J
4.:5Si ? i R
l_J t.rg,o):s.9?3
6 ?Rq
:=+r:3,139: , :=€
8.{111*"3:?7,7643.845
J T
5.3{ 4
4.S
5.0
i . l{ " }J . .L
i ?
i t
3.2
+.9+.*4-]{ K
i .+
'1.)
+.6
Source: NBS&OCGS" 2013.
88
Ethnic composition in Handeni District includes Wazigua and Nguu ethnic groups.
There are also wasukuma and wamasai groups which had moved there with their
heads of cattles. They are pastoralists.
(iv) Socio-Economic Activities
Economic active population engage in agriculture which employ 74 percent of the
labour force. Other economic activities include livestock keeping, professional and
elementary jobs. In 2006, there were 57,627 Ha of land set aside for maize produc-
tions while about 12,048 Ha were set for cassava. This information is relevant to this
study as it presents the significance of equitable distribution and access of the land
resources so as to enable these social groups to benefit from the use ofland in an eq-
uitable manner.
3.3 Research Design
This study was guided by the pragmatist paradigm, a recent development in social
science field whose focus is on the problem and the finding of practical solutions. It
is pluralist in nature and allows the inclusion of any paradigm, assumption and meth-
od and is eminently suitable to mixed method research (Roux and Barry, 2009; Cre-
swell2009). The research design entails decisions regarding what, where, when, how
much, by what means concerning an inquiry or a research study (Kothari, 2004). The
study adopted an exploratory and descriptive research design. The exploratory and
descriptive research design was found to be appropriate because some facts about
land rights formalization were known but more information was needed by the re-
searcher to come up with a viable theoretical framework. Also Sekaran (2003) had
89
the same view on the relevance of explorative study. This methodology supports the ..
investigation of issues concerning the context, social processes of evaluation and
subjective meanings attributed to these processes by the beneficiaries of the formali-
zatron and other stakeholders. It accommodates the use of multiple sources of evi-
dence which, in turn, allows for the corroboration of evidence from at least three
sources.
The research design adopted in this study is summarised in Figure 3-3. It is apparent
that after the field research in each study area reports for each were prepared fol-
lowed by the cross case conclusion.
Define and Desien Prepare. Collect and Anahze
F - - + i II
Analyze and Conclude
L... . . . . . . . . . , . -- . . . . . . - . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . -)II
Draw CrossCase
conclusion\\'-ritin o' ' _ - _ ' _ _ D
Handeni CaseReport
FieldRe se arch inHandeni
ProblemStatement
\\tritiugN{bozi Case
Report
Figure 3-3: Multiple Case Study Design
Source: Adapted from in Yin (2009) in Gray, 2004 and amended by researcher to fit
the study.
90
3.4 Data Sources
This study used primary and secondary data whose sources were interviews and dis-
cussions for primary data and documentary reviews for secondar y data.
Primary Data came from in-depth interviews with key informants from village to the
National levels as follows: in each village interview was conducted to 2 key inform-
ants therefore in 9 villages 18 key informants were interviewed; at the district level
we interviewed 4 key informants, hence, the researcher interviewed 8 key informants
in two districts. At the National level interviews were conducted to 3 officials
(Commissioner for Lands, Assistant Commissioner for Rural Lands and an Assistant
Commissioner Legal Services) from the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Set-
tlements development. Interviews were also conducted with 2 officials at the Proper-
ty and Business Formalization Programme (PBFP) also as MKURABITA. Five focus
group discussions were conducted with pastoralists in two villages in Handeni Dis-
trict; other discussions were conducted with representatives of Village Councils in all
village cases. At the District level, the research captured responses from the District
Commissioners of both districts; Mbozi and Handeni Districts Councils' officials,
namely, the District Land Officers (who are registrars of Certificates of Customary
rights of occupancy); land surveyors, GIS Pioneers (those who are using hand held
global positioning system(GPS) to take boundaries of farms in villages. The sources
of secondary data y,rere the Certificates of Customary Rights of Occupancy
(CCROs), village and district land registers and the formalization progress reports,
and the systematic and sporadic adjudication reports.
The major areas for investigations included: biological information; information on
the farm size registered as owned under formalizatron; occupation; means of land
9 l
access; marital status; household size; perception on the ability of village councils to
administer and allocate village land and the participation process in the formalization
process.
3.5 Sampling Procedures
3.5.1 Selection of Study Districts
Purposeful sampling was used to select two districts from the list of all districts
where formahzation process had started inTanzania. By 2009 when this study start-
ed, about nine districts were at different stages of formalization process and plans
were underway for various districts. Of these, only Mbozi and Handeni Districts
were purposefully selected as appropriate districts where it could be possible to learn
from example because of being rich in information about the implementation of the
VLA under the close supervision of the MLHHSD. Handeni Case was the first pilot
to be coordinated by the Property and Business Formalization Programme (PBFP)
popularly in its Kiswahili acronym Mpango wa Kurasimisha Mali na Biashara za
Wanyonge Tanzania MKURABITA). These two pilots districts being coordinated
by two separate govemment institutions, namely; the MLHHSD in collaboration with
Mbozi District Council for Mbozi District in2004) and by MKURABITA in collabo-
ration with Handeni District Council for Handeni District in 2006) they were rich in
information about approaches and consequences especially in the context of equity
fiustice and faimess), participation and access by gender in the formahzatron process.
Therefore, this study found these case studies as appropriate in evaluating how they
fared in the formalization process particularly in the context of promoting equitable
distribution of/ and access to villase land.
92
The formalization programme in Handeni Case study was in line with the proposal
made by the Peruvian economist Hernando De Soto and his Institute for Liberty and
Democracy (ILD).The formalization strategy in Tanzania was in line with PRSp of
2000 which had borrowed much of concerns about rural poverty from the World
Bank PPA of 1995 and the tINDp ppA of 19973,
Therefore, this study found these case studies as appropriate in evaluating how they
fared in the formalization process particularly in the context of promoting equitable
distribution of/ and access to village land.
3.5.2 Selection of Village Cases
The study used the systematic simple random sampling to select villages to form a
sample. This technique was adopted because each village had equal chance to be se-
lected to form a sample. In Mbozi District, the researcher was provided with a Dis-
trict Land Register from which a list of 152 villages was retrieved to get village pop-
ulation. The researcher found that 5 percent was an appropriate sample; therefore by
systematic sampling technique eight villages were selected to form village srimple.
Every 19th village in the list was selected to from the sample. Since every village
had equal chance to form a sample, therefore, the researcher randomly selected Msia
village (5tn in the list) as the first village, then selected every 19th village until when
the sample was complete. Table 3-3 below shows sample villages from Mbozi Dis-
' The World Bank and the United Nations Development Programme conducted par-ticipatory Poverty Assessment in 1995 and 1997 respectively.
able ase vil Sites in Mbozi DistrictCVL Date of
ResistrationVillageName
Area(Ha) Ward Number ofCCROs
5N{BZ 28104/2004 Msia 2729 Msia 200(103)24|NIBZ 28/0U2005 Ikana 45t9 Ndalambo 91(23)43IMBZ 02/05t2005 Namchinsa 6881 Kapele 2s(2r)62IMBZ 0210512005 Ivendwe t t620 Kapele 64(4r)SIIN[BZ 28t07t2005 lvula 4123 Iyula 183IOOINIBZ 28t07t200s Sakamwela 3282 Ihanda 207(r91\II9/M.B.Z 18/08/2005 Nkangamo 7355 Nkansamo e6(86)
866(507)
93
3-3 C
Source: Compilation from Fieldwork 2012.
Note: Villages of Ikana, Namchinga and Iyendwe are now in Momba District.
In Handeni District, the researcher used simple random sampling to select two vil-
lages from a list of seven villages ( Bongi, Kwamkono, Kweisasu, Mbuyuni, Mzeri,
Nkale and Sindeni(see Appendix 7). The researcher intuitively saw a sample of 30
percent of 7 villages resulting into a sample interval of 3 villages. By dividing popu-
lation to a sample, the researcher got an interval of 3. Thus, from the alphabetical list
of seven villages, the researcher randomly selected Bongi village as the first sample
and then by counted three intervals the second village to form a sample was Mbuyuni
village. Thus, by use of l-in-3 systematic sampling we selected Bongi and Mbuyuni
as samples in Handeni District.
94
3.5.3 Sampling of Respondents
Table 3-4 below presents the sample of the respondents from each sample village
resulting into 33.7o/o of the population.
Table 3-4 Sample of Respondents from Case Studies of Mbozi and Handeni
Simple random sampling was used to select respondents. Sampling frames for this
study were the list of formalized lands as extracted from the registers of the Certifi-
cates of Customary Rights of Occupancy.
Based on the extent of precision that this study wanted to achieve, a sample of 30
respondents was considered as reasonable sample size for data collection and statisti-
cal analysis usually used in social science study. For each Case studies the sampling
procedures are described in paragraph i and ii below:
(i) Sampling of Respondents in Mbozi Case Study
According to the implementation report which was provided by Mbozi District
Council (MDC) up to 2012, there were 17670 Certificates of Customary Rights of
Case Study District Villagecase site
Population ofrespondents
Sample(N) t
Mbozi (N:262) Ikana a az ) 7 30.4Iyendwe 4 l 13 31.7Iyula 183 75 40.9Msia 200 44 16.8Namchinka 21 8 22Nkansamo 86 J ) 40.7Sakamwela 191 80 4t.9
Handeni CN:42) Bonsi 92 t9 20.7Mbuyuni 64 ^ a
Z J 3s.9TOTAL STUDY AREAS 901 304 a 1 n
) ) . 1
Source: Survey Data, 2012
95
Occupancy (CCROs) issued to beneficiaries in 152 villages. The 7 sampled villages
had a total of 745 CCROs. Therefore, by simple random sampling 262 respondents
were selected to form a sample which was equivalentto 35o/o.
According to Matata. et al., (2001), having a sample ranging from 80 to 120 re-
spondents is adequate for a social-economic study in sub-Saharan African house-
holds. Thus, we took 35 percent of 745 from Mbozi Case Study which gave us 262
respondents (Table 3.4 above). Where a sampled respondent was absent, the next re-
spondent in the list from the sample was taken as a reserve.
(i, Sampling of Respondents in Handeni Case study
The researcher used l-in-3 systematic random sampling to get respondents from the
already sampled villages of Bongi and Mbuyuni Villages each with 92 and 64
CCROs respectively. Since we wanted a representation of at least 30 respondents,
this means that 30 percent of 92 tn Bongi village gave us 28 while for Mbuyuni Vil-
lage it gave 19 respondents. Every 4th respondent was selected as a reserve. The re-
searcher interviewed 19 respondents in Bongi Village.
3.5.4 Sampling for Participants for Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)
Sampling of participants for FGDs was based on their roles and nature of their social
status in the formalization process from the village and district levels. At the Village
level participants were members of the Village Councils (ranging from 5 tol5)who
were actors in the formalization process. In the Handeni Case, as cases of land rights
conflicts between pastoralists and peasants had been reported during the formaliza-
96
tion process (Ole Kosyando, 2007; PBFP, 2007),the researcher purposively orga-
nized a discussion with 5 representatives of the pastoralists.
At both District levels, there were discussions with a group of five offrcials repre-
senting sectors pertinent to the formalization process (land use planner, land survey-
or, cartographer, land officer and adjudication offrcer) to present their views on equi-
ty aspects in formalization process. In Mbozi District there were three women in the
FGDs (Assistant land officer and 2 adjudication officer) while in Handeni District
there was one woman who works as Assistant Land Officer.
3.6 Unit of Analysis
A unit of analysis is the one from which information is obtained (Kajembe, 1994).
Beneficiary of formalization were assigned as main unit of analysis based on the
main reason that implications of equity in the formalized land rights could be easily
captured and differentiated at this level. As Gray (2004) argues, orgarization might
be the main unit of analysis. Thus, beneficiaries to which land rights claimed were
approved and issued with the CCROs are regarded in this study as units of analysis.
The researcher chose beneficiaries because they were the citizens and thus appropri-
ate in capturing first hand information on village land rights formalization which in
essence, involves evaluating the extent of the promotion of equitable distribution of
and access to land during the formalizationprocess.
97
3.7 Data Collection Methods and Tools
Two types of data; namely, primary and secondary which were qualitative and quan-
titative were collected in this study as presented under sections 3.7 .I and 3.7 .2 be-
low. In terms of data collection, the case study method required the use of multiple
sources of evidence which included structured, semi structured or opens ended inter-
views, focus group discussions, field observations and document analysis. Mixed
methods of data collection were used because of the types of respondents and their
environmental settings, for example, beneficiaries being in rural environment it was
appropriate to use structured questionnaires which the researchers administered.
3.7.1 Primary Data
The researcher used structured, semi-structured open ended interviews and focus
group discussions to collect data. The types of questions used were closed ended
with coded answers which simplihed data collection. There was a discussion for each
case followed by a cross case conclusion so as to establish patterns and variations
emerging from individual cases and their implications to theory and policies issues
and as a basis for working out recommendations and conclusions. The study used
multipurpose questionnaires with questions as shown in Appendix 1.
The researcher administered the questionnaire to the beneficiaries of formalization in
their homestead and the Village Council Office or where the respondent was found.
It needs to be noted that some villages are quite big(with more than four hamlets
scattered) to the extent that the researchers had to travel as far as 2 km from some
village headquarters to arrive to the respondents' homestead. The researcher and his
98
assistants were led by Village Chairpersons and Village Executive Offrcers (VEO),
who identified the selected respondents and then called one after the other until the
sample was complete. Therefore, the questionnaire enabled collection of data on
household characteristics, land size, perception on the formalization process and how
they played a role in the distribution of and access to land. When the researcher was
unable to find the beneficiary physically, research assistants assisted by providing
mobile phone for the missing respondents (these were those who were not rural resi-
dents) as many of them were known to the research assistants. However, when this
strategy failed, the researcher replaced the missing respondent with the next person
from the sample list. By administering questionnaire at the office the researcher
thought also that, that was a means of verifying some of the information that we had
obtained from different other sources. At times, different sources give different kinds
of information about the same aspect (Shao, 1995).
On the other hand, the researcher used checklist while conducting the FGDs so as to
get complementary data from those provided in the beneficiaries' questionnaire ad-
ministration. In each village we organized one discussion with the members of the
Village Councils (statutorily, it is gender sensitive) to provide information on their
perception regarding the roles they played in the formalization process in the context
of promoting equitable distribution of and access to land in their villages.The FGDs
were held at the villase offices.
Moreover, the researcher held informal discussions with key informants to validate
the data provided by the respondents. Key informants in this study were at three lev-
99
els from the village to the Nation. In summary they are presented in Table 3-5 be-
low.
The researcher was able to observe some of the formaltzation processes such as
boundaries adjudication, preparation of farm plans and certificates of customary
rights of occupancy, delivery process of CCROs to beneficiaries and the way adjudi-
cated parcels are approved at the village level. We took photos.
3.7.2 Secondary Data
Secondary data were. collected to gain insights on global, regional, national and local
status on state of rural land distribution and access situation including implementa-
tion of land policies on the promotion of equitable distribution of lands, factors af-
fecting equitable distribution and the roles played by government institutions in han-
dling the issue of skewed distribution of land.
able 3-5: Summarv o nlbrmantsS/N Level Kev Informants
Village Village Chairpersons, Village Executive Officers,Members of the Villase Councils.
2. Districts District Commissioners; District Executive Direc-
tors, District Land Officer or Registrar of Customary
Rights of Occupancy, Land Surveyors, Cartogra-phers, Land Use planners in Handeni and Mbozi
District Councils.
3. National Commissioner for Lands, Assistant Commissioner
for Rural Lands in the Ministry of Lands, Housing
and Human Settlements Development(MLHHSD);
Director of Property and Business Formalizatron at
Property and Business Formalizatron Programme or
MKURABITA.
Source: Own Construct, 2012
100
Secondary data accessed from documentations provided theoretical and secondary
data from the village and districts land registries; prior research reports, project re-
ports; journals and libraries searches from the Africana Section of the Central Li-
brary of the University of Dar es Salaam (UDSM), Documentation Centre of the In-
stitute of Development Studies (IDS) at UDSM; National Bureau of Statistics, Ardhi
University and also from various Internet sources. We also examined policies, legis-
lations and regulations, government archives, newspapers; Regional and District So-
cial Economic Profile for Mbeya and Tanga Regions and the Mbozi and Handeni,
reports on formalization implementation for both Handeni and Mbozi District Coun-
cils Offices. Also, we got implementation reports from MKURABITA, participation
reports from Tanzania Pastoralists, Hunters and Gatherers Organization (TAPHGO)
and the Legal and Human Rights Centre (LHRC).
3.7.3 Ethical and Logistical Issues
Ethically, a research cannot be conducted without a clearance from the authprity;
therefore, the Vice Chancellor of the University of Dar es Salaam issued Research
Clearance Letters which were addressed to resions where the researcher conducted
the study, Appendix 3 shows one of the letters.
In turn, the respective RASs also wrote research clearance letters which the re-
searcher submitted to the District Administrative Secretaries (DAS) of Mbozi and
Handeni Districts. Also, each DAS, after being briefed on the wards and villages
where the research team aimed to visit, prepared research clearance letters introduc-
ing the researchers to the District Executive Directors (DEDs), the Division Officers
101
(DO), the Wards Executive Officers(WEO) and the Village Executive Offic-
ers(VEO) of the sample villages. In turn, the VEO and the Village Chairpersons as-
sisted in identifying the sampled respondents, what is also known as snowballing.
Logistical issues included collaboration with the District Land Officials to identify
and engage research assistants. The researcher was fortunate in selecting research
assistants because at the Mbozi District Land Office there were a team of about sev-
en Form 4 and 6 leavers who had been working there as CCROs processors or as
Fairley (2012) called them GIS Pioneers. The researcher with the assistance of the
District Land Officer who had just been appointed District Commissioner selected
five assistants (2 female and 3 male) then they were trained on the purpose of the
study and the kind of data that the researcher wanted to collect. The researcher con-
ducted field research for three months in Mbozi District where initial two weeks
were spent by organrzing field study logistics, field site information and site selec-
tions.
In the Handeni case study, likewise, the researcher used the same approach #hereby
two Bachelor of Science students in Land Management and Valuation from Ardhi
University who at the time had gone to Handeni District for practical training were
selected. In Handeni case study we spent one month. Like their colleagues in Mbozi
case study, these assistants were trained on the objectives of the study and on how to
administer questionnaires and interview.
In both case study districts, a pair of research assistants was assigned a village. The
researcher used his vehicle to dispatch research assistants whereby after introducing
r02
them to the Village Leaders they continued with the mission. In many cases, the re-
searcher remained in the village for three hours to ensure that the exercise was
smoothly going on, and then he moved to another village. Also, by working closely
with the Village Leaders the exercise became easy enough to get the intended re-
spondents as they knew their homes and hamlets.
Finally, in-depth interviews were held with key informants at the Ministry of Lands,
Housing and Human Settlements development (MLHHSD) and the Programme Im-
plementation Unit of MKURABITA in Dar es Salaam on how they coordinated the
formalizrtion programme including their policy concerns on the promotion of equi-
table distribution of and access of land to rural citizens in Tanzania.
The study required data on the farm size owned; sex/gender; household size; mode of
owning the land; marital status of the beneficiary; education level; number of chil-
dren; means of land acquisition; participation and perception on village institution to
allocate land. We allowed respondents to respond to questions spontaneously and
freely in Kinyamwanga and, Kinyiha, Kizigua and research assistants, majority'beitrg
Nyia and Nyamwanga, except one, helped where necessary to interpret.
The structured interviews were carried out with the help of research assistants (6 in
Mbozi and 3 in Handeni case studies) who the researcher had earlier engaged in in-
duction training on the objectives of the study and the types of data that we needed.
It needs to be noted as once said by Koda (2000) that empirical data provided by re-
spondents are useful in linking theory to experience and policy issues, hence, the re-
spondents' direct experience of everyday life becomes a primary source of
knowleds.e.
103
3.8 Data Presentation and Analysis
3.8.1 Data Entry and Cleaning
All questions from the questionnaires were entered into a datamatrix which was de-
veloped by use of the IBM-Srarrsfical Packages for Social Scientists (SPSS.20) soft-
ware in a variable view (see data view of the matrix in Appendix 5). Data collected
through the fieldwork using structured interviews were in a coded form then were
cleaned and entered into a data matrix was done. Categorical data analysis was
adopted because background characteristics and the observed outcomes were meas-
ured categorically. After entering the data in the data matrix they were sequentially
checked to determine if they were corresponding to the data in the questionnaires.
Data from FGDs and key informants interviews were transcribed, sorted, and la-
belled in order to make decisions about meanings as it stands or in the context of in-
terviews, relevance and importance.
3.8.2 Data Analysis
Both qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed with the support of the SPSS.
The analysis involved univariate, bivariate and multivariate analysis that included
cross-tabulations. Non-parametric methods were used to test the strength of depend-
ent and independent variables. The Non-parametric test was used in this study (socio-
logical research) because the statistical tests are distributional- free, hence they are
more easily to understand than parametric tests.
One of the non-parametric tests which were used is Chi-Square test(x2) of independ-
ence and Goodness of Fit. The chi-square test was used to determine if there were
t04
significant differences between the two groups of respondents mainly male and fe-
male; mode of ownership and marital status; household size and land size owned.
Ituses the formuluP :>Q-E)2 / E where O stands for Observed frequencies, E
stands for Expected frequencies.
E can be calculated from a formula:
E : (R*C)/ N where R stands for row's total of the respective cell; C
stands for the column's total of the respective cell; while N stands for the total num-
ber of observations.
* va\ue range from 0 to infinity and where x2 is zero it means the observed and ex-
pected frequencies completely coincide. The greater the discrepancy between the O
and E frequencies, the greater shall be the value of *.
Cross-tabulations of study variables were run to summarise data on beneficiaries and
their household characteristics, relationships between variables of interests to gener-
ate descriptive statistics. Analysis was done depending on the specific objectivps of
the study as presented below:
(i) Data Analysis to Determine Equitable Distribution of Land
The researcher analyzed data to determine if formalization process had distributed
land in an equitable manner by conducting assessment of the following:
The researcher assessed intra-generational equity by examining relationships be-
tween male and female (sex), farm size and occupational (peasants and pastoralists);
household size and land size owned. Also. the researcher examined if there were
105
consideration of marital status during the determination of mode of ownership (co-
occupancy).
The researcher also examined intergenerational equity through testing the relation-
ship between children in the household and size of farms; the researcher also exam-
ined the relationship between household size and farm size; and the existence of and
enforcement of the land use planning.
The researcher used the contingency analysls also known as cro^ss tabulation tech-
nique in the IBM-Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS.20) to make these
analyses. According to Babbie (2011), this technique is applied to variables of any
level of measurement such as nominal. scale or ordinal.
Depending on.the 2- way design of the table, the researcher was able to make the in-
tended analysis of relationship. For a table with a design of 2x2, we used significance
value Qthi value) to determine relationships. Where the 2-way table format was of
3x3, the contingent coefficient was used to determine the degree of relationship. For
variables with attributes resulting into unequal format such a 3x5 or otherwise, the
test of Cramer's Zwas used in the analysis. For example, for assessing the relation-
ship between mode of ownership (4 attributes) and marital status (4 attributes), the
researcher used the goodness of the fit Chi Square Test (X2) and, the Cramer's V sta-
tistic.
106
(iD Data Analysis to Determine Factors Affecting Equitable Access to Land in the
Formalization Process
The researcher used qualitative data which we had collected in which questions re-
lated to what was perceived as factors hindering equity in the land distribution, were
answered. There were responses from varied Sources of data with views' concerns
and perceptions on the factors related to these issues. The use of qualitative data re-
lies on the types and source of data to be collected, participants involved and the pro-
cedures used in the interpretation ofdata'
The researcher used qualitative content analysis which assists in establishing values
and attitudes of respondents hence generating themes and tendencies (Kajembe and
Luoga, 1996). By this method the researcher knew different opinions of respondents
on issues such as gender and land access; the degree of equity, faimess' justice and
wlnerability handling in the formalization; capacity of village land institutions in
handling land access and participation of community members in village land man-
agement. The researcher ran analysis with the use of data from the matrix we hhd de-
veloped in (IBM-SPSS 20 software) to analyze and rank factors as collected during
the data collection phase. The researcher was able to get the factors which were
raised by the respondents, key informants and in the focus group discussions'
(iii) Data Analys.is to Investigate the Extent of Participation in the Formulization
Process
The researcher used qualitative content analysis to determine the extent of participa-
tory equity in the formalization process' The researcher used data from the matrix to
t07
analyze the perceptions; views of the respondents (304) on how they participated in
the formalization to facilitate equitable distribution of and access to land. The re-
searcher also coded the concerns, perceptions and views collected from consultations
with key informants and focus group discussions on their participation during the
formalization process with focus on equitable distribution of land and access to land.
The qualitative content analysis was instrumental in this analysis.
(iv) Cross Case Analysis Between Handeni and Mbozi Districts
The researcher ran a non-parqmetric tests and Chi-square to determine the perfor-
mance of the two districts in terms of promoting equitable distribution of and access
to land during the formalization of rural land rights. This approach was used by
Shwatz (2011) in assessing performance of attendance between different Business
stores. This was useful in informing statistically if there were differences between the
two organizations in terms of promoting equitable distribution of and access to land
to the villagers. The researcher also related legal and policy requirements on equity
and the empirical information as collected from the fieldwork.
3.9Data Quatity
Data quality entails data validity and reliability. Validity and reliability are closely
related terms. Maxwell (1996) defines validity as the correctness or credibility of a
description, explanation, interpretation, account or conclusion.
108
3.9.1Validity
It refers to the extent to which the concept one wishes to measure is actually being
measured by a particular scale or index; that is, the extent to which an account accu-
rately represents the social phenomena to which it refers. To ensure validity of meas-
ures, the data were gathered from various categories of respondents to ensure ade-
quate representation of diversitybf the social groups.
Collected data were cross-checked and triangulated by asking same questions to dif-
ferent respondents. Also there were debriefing sessions with research assistants so as
to share impressions of the interviews and observations.
3.9.2 Reliability
It refers to the consistency with which repeated measures produces the same results
across time and across observers. To ensure this, the study used questionnaires, in-
terviews and observations. The researcher also established a case study protocol and
developed a case study database in which all study steps, sources of data and infor-
mation including documents reviewed, names of persons and institutions interviewed
and dates were kept. Triangulation is typically a strategy (test) for improving the va-
lidity and reliability or evaluation of findings (Golafshani,2003). To ensure internal
reliability the researchers ensured intemal consistency by asking similar questions on
the same factor to different people.
109
CHAPTER FOUR : RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents results and discussion of the data which were collected during
the field work. The results which are presented in this chapter are in line with the ob-
jectives of this study. In this chapter the researcher has combined results and discus-
sion because it is fruitful to discuss the results as they are presented rather than put-
ting them into separate chapters or sections. At the end of the chapter in section
4.2.5, a cross case analysis summary of the performance of the case study in the con-
text of promoting equitable distribution of and access to land is, albeit, briefly pre-
sented.
4.2 Results and Discussions
4.2.1 Objective I
To explore and examine the level of equitable distribution of and access to land
among social groups at the household and village levels
Results of the analysis of the relationships or differences between land size disiribu-
tion and household size ofthe respondents; gender ofrespondents and the land they
own; and the mode of ownership and marital status are presented below. Distributive
equity and procedurallparticipatory equity were the basis of assessing equity in this
study. Results are presgnted below:
(i) Assessing Relationship Between Owned Formalized Farm Size and the Sizes of
the Households of Owners
Results of Farm Size Distribution
110
In the rural setting, the size of land owned bv a household matters most as house- ..
holds in these areas depend on land as the main sources of livelihood. On farm activ-
ities are greater than nonfarm activities in many rural settings.
Results in Table 4.1 show the farm size distribution patterns in both study areas. It
further shows that in Mbozi District, 197 beneficiaries (75.2%) owned land with are-
as ranging between 0.25 acres to 10 acres. In Handeni District, results show that a
majority of all beneficiaries, that is, 18 respondents (3%) owned land with area
ranging between 20-50 acres.
Source : F ield D ata. 20 12
Results from Table 4.2 show the land ownership distribution patterns in the two case
studies. It shows minimum. maximum. mean of land sizes owned by beneficiaries.
Table 4-2: Results of the Farm Size Distribution Patterns
District Q{) Min Max Mean Std. Devia-tion
Mbozi(N:262) 0.25 300.00 14.3937 28.95217
Handeni(N:42) 3.r3 102.40 35.2869 27.54497Source: Field Data. 2012.
Table 4-1: Land Size Distribution in the Studv Areas
Mbozi District(N=262) Handeni District N=42
Area in Acres Frequency % Frequency %0.25 - 10 t97 75.2 6 14.4
11 - 20 18 6.9 6 t4.42t - 30 0 0 a
J 7.23 l - 50 .0 27 10.3 l8 43.251 - 300 20 7.6 9 2r.6
111
Results in the Table 4-2 further show that in Mbozi District beneficiaries own small-
est land size 0.25 acres when compared with Handeni District where the smallest
land had size of 3.13 acres. This result implies that owners in the Handeni Case
Study have bigger land than those in Mbozi Case Study. The deviations from the
means (standard deviations) were 28.95 and 27 .5 acres for Mbozi and Handeni Case
Studies respectively which means that the mean size of land owned by individuals in
both study areas are far away from the mean. Furthermore, in Mbozi Case, there is
acquisition of bigger land than in Handeni case. This means that those owners in
Mbozi District have bigger land than in Handeni District. In Handeni results show
that the average (mean) rural farm size is 35.3 acres while the standard deviation is
27.5 acres.
Household size
Data in Table 4-3 presents the
land ri shts formalization.
of the households of the beneficiaries of ruralS1ZES
Table 4-3: Household Size Patterns of the Beneficiaries of Formalization
Number of person perhousehold
Mbozi (N:252) Handeni (N=42)
Frequency % Frequency %1-3 t7 6.84-5 50 19 .8 8 19.06-9 95 J t . t t4 a a a
J J . J
10-15 83 32.9 I7 40.5More than 15 2.8 a
J 7.1Total 252 100.0 42 100.0
Source: Survey Data, 2012
Results in Table 4-3 show that 228 beneficiarie s 90.5Yo had persons ranging between
t12
4 to 15 persons in Mbozi while in the Handeni Case the number under this category
was 39 beneficiaries 92.9Yo. This result is graphically presented in Figure 4-1 be-
cause of the fact that graphs and photos speak easier than numbers. This result is use-
ful in this study as it was later used to analyze the relationship between owned farm
size and the household size of owners.
r Mbozi
r HandeniN,'
45o ^ -b0 J )+ . t<E L J
glso {
-5. q ' r 5 r5b" 1s" .^dl''
^ $ '
\tto*'
Household size
Figure 4-1 Household Size Patterns of the Beneficiaries
Source: Survey Data, 2012.
Results in Table 4.4 show relationships between land and household sizes
4-4Land, Size 0w Householdable 4-4Ltn YZe ned Persons ouHousehold size
TotalFarm srze Frequencies 1-3 4-5 6-9 1 0 - 1 5 > 1 5
l-50 Count 1 6 trn 106 87 7 zoo
Expected Count 15.3 52.1 97.€ 89.8 9.0 264.0% within Household size 94.1o/o 86.2% 97.2% 87.0% 70.0% 89.8%
51-300 Count 1 8 3 1 3 3 28Expected Count 1 . 7 A O 11 .1 10.2 1 . 0 28.0
% within Household size 5.9% 13.8o/o 2.8% 13.0% 30.0% 10.2%Count 1 a 58 10€ 100 1 0 294
Source: Field data, 2012
In terms of observed and expected frequencies results show that in each category of
farm size (0-50 acres) under the column of household size (1-3), 16 is the observed
113
frequency while 15.3 is the expected frequency. This result means that there was no
relationship between farm size distribution and the number of persons in the house-
hold. Results fuither show that about 273 beneficiaries of formalization which is
89.8% own land between 0 to 50 acres. During the field work in Iyendwe and Ikana
Villages it was learnt that some individuals who got land through buying or alloca-
tion owned land with sizes above 50 acres. It is also presented that all households
from the smallest to the largest are under owners with land of sizes of up to 50 acres.
Results in Table 4.5 show the Cramer's V statistic value of 0.238 or 0.24 Q4%)
while contingency cofficient indicates 0.23I.
Table 4-5: Svmmetric M fF Size nd Hou hold Size
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.
b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis
c. Based on normal approximation.
Source: Field Data, 2012
The rule requires that, if the 2-ways table design is of 2x3 or 2x6, thenthe Cramer's
V can be used to make analysis. The statistical values of 0.238 and0.231 are both
greater than 0.05 (p >0.05) implying that there is no significant association between
the sizes of farms that beneficiaries own in relation to the sizes of their households.
m casures or rarm a se
Value Asymp. Std. Error"Approx. ToApprox.
sis.Nominal by Nominal Phi
Cramer's V
Contingency Coefficient
nterval by Interval Pearson's R
f,rdinal by Ordinal Spearman Correlation
\ of Valid Cases
.238
.238
.231
.'1 39
. 1 1 1
304
.07e
.067
2.447
1.949
.004
.004
.004
.015 '
.052'
n4
Generally, the relationships presented by these results are not strong because from
the score of 0 to 1 which is the bend of measurement of strength, there is 24Yo which
is a strong relationship. This result implies that in all study areas the sizes of farms or
land owned by the beneficiary are smaller than the number of people or individuals
within those households. As proposed in the NLP principles which are the objectives
of the VLA it was expected that formalization process would have addressed this in-
equalities in ownerships. This implies that the formalization process did not consider
the issue of land inequality which in turn has effect on the social polarization. Social
polarization which can be analysed through inequality of land holdings is detrimental
to the likelihood of extreme policy deviations as property rights to land become inse-
cure hence affecting growth.
The quantitative results presented in Table 4.4 and Table 4.5 above are comple-
mented by the results from interviews and focus group discussions with key inform-
ants and some respondents that formalization concentrated on the land claims as
submitted by the rights holders. There was no consideration and assessment o{ land
needs at the individual and household levels hence the earlier observed inequalities
in land ownerships remained intact. This implies further that the intentions of nation-
al policies and strategies to promote equity in land distribution and access were not
achieved.
Figure 4.2 is the graphical presentation of the relationship of the size of land rights
owned by individuals against the size of their households.
l l 5
Far6.r1"* diskibufion and hourehokl rires
l l s .&dr i<
I t . rl+-sDe.sI ro-rsEmorcthan tSluE
H
t]
ro
fr
z
0-5it 5l-380
Larrd size orrmed by personr
Figure 4-2: Relationship Between Farm Size and Household Sizes Distribution
Source: Field work, 2012
From Figure 4-2 it is apparent that the majority of beneficiaries of formalization
have farms or land size ranging from 0 to 50 acres and that only a few individuals
own land ranging between the sizes of 51 to 300 acres. From the results presented
above, our assumption that there was no consideration of household size during the
formalization process in both case studies is accepted. Consideration of household
size was important as it could provide the Government with the land size need for
distribution to the household members.
These results imply further that the certification process was inequitable in terms of
intra-generational equity as there was no consideration of the required land by
households. This is in agreement with the admission made during the interview with
one key informant at the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Devel-
II6
opment (MLHHSD) who said the MLHHSD had not discussed with the Ministry of
Agriculture on the issue of appropriate farm size needed for sustainable livelihood
strategy at the household level. The Government had proposed, in the National Land
Policy and Village Land Act that the Ministers responsible for Lands and Agriculture
would have to sit together and determine a farm size appropriate for moderate house-
hold size. It can be also concluded that the strength of relationship is a result of the
means of land access which is mainly inheritance. Fairley (2013) saw this as a result
of the control of land access by village authorities but in practice these authorities do
not control but rather certify land deals between buyers and sellers. The occurrences
of the strength of Village Assemblies is observed in cases where commonly used
lands such as the pasture or grazing land are alienated to investors or forcefully oc-
cupied and used by groups such as pastoralists(Loliondo, Kiteto cases are examples).
(ii) Relationship Between Sex and Farm Size
Data in Table 4.6 presents the relationship between sex of beneficiaries and the
owned and formalized,land, parcels. In the case Handeni District, results (Tabie a.6)
show that 39 respondents (93%) were men. This result means that the majority of the
land right holders in many rural areas are men.
Table 4-6: Sex of the Beneficiaries of Formalized Land Rights
Sex of land rights hold-ersFemaleMaleTotal
MboziN:252) Handeni(42)Frequency(F) % F %
J I
215252
14.7 385.3 39
7 .192.9
100.0Source : F ield D ata. 20 12
100.0 42
r I l
This assessment was based on two variables of sex of beneficiaries and farm size dis- .'
tribution patterns. The study looked at the issues of sex equality and equity in land
access by women as proposed in the NLP and the VLA and then during implementa-
tion through formalization of rural land rights.
In a sample of 252 respondents drawn from seven villages in Mbozi District there-
fore,2I5 beneficiaries who arc 85.3Yo of the sample were men while women benefi-
ciaries were 37 respondents who ne 14.7o/o.
Figure 4.3 presents a graphical situation whereby 37 women (14.I%) in Mbozi Dis-
trict had registered land in their names while in Handeni District, results show that
only 3 women (7.I%) had registered land.
c)bo
q)c,|rq)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0Female Male
Sexr Mbozi r Handeni
Figure 4-3: Sex of the Beneficiaries of Formalization
Source: Field Data, 2012
118
This discrepancy is evidence that the formalization process did not deal with land
access by gender as required in the National Land Policy and the Gender and Women
Development Policy, 2000.
Results from focus group discussion with Village leaders in Bongi village showed
that formalization process registered land rights according to the claims submitted to
the village leaders and in the approving authorities (the village assemblies).Results
from interviews with the key informants on the formalization process in the Handeni
Case study showed that formalization process in this case was gender sensitive as it
ensured that names of spouses were included in the registers.
The researcher used the variables of sex and farm sizes to determine their relation-
ships which are presented in Table 4.7 where the observed and expected frequencies
were used to assess relationship between sex and farm sizes owned.
Table 4-7: Relationship Between Land Size and Sex of beneficiaries
Sex
TotalFemale Male
Land size ownedby persons
l-50 f,bserved Count ?c 227 266
xpected Count ? 6 C 228.1 264.0% within Land size owned bylersons
14.7o/o 85.3% 100.0%
51-300 f,bserved Count I 27 28xpected Count 4 . 1 25.9 3 1 . 0
']/o within Land size owned bv)ersons
3.7o/o 96.3o/o 100.0%
Iotal )bserved Count 4C 254 294
Source: F ield data. 20 12
T19
It needs to be noted that in the sample of 304 beneficiaries, there were 10 institutions
(registered trustees, non goveilrment organizations) which acquired and formalized
their lands in the villases in Mbozi District.
Within the farms with sizes below 50 acres, there were 227(85.3%) male while fe-
male stood at 39(14.7%). Results further show that there were 27(96.3%) male who
own land between 51 to 300 acres. In the farm sizes between 51-300 acres, results
show that if there were no differences or say equality, then at least 4 female would
have been expected to own land with sizes ranging from 51 to 300 acres. Results of
the assessment of the strength of relationships between farm size and sex as deter-
mined by the use of the goodness of ffi Person Chi Square xz (2, 304) was 6.922.It
gave contingency cofficient (p:0.149) which implies no significant association or
correlations between farm size and sex.
The formalization process as concentrated on land rights claims, means that male
benefitted more than female during the certification process. This result implies the
formalization did not reduce gender inequalities in terms of land access.
As pointed out earlier, the formalization process, as set by the government, had a
mission of reducing inequality including land access by gender (sex) but the results
prove otherwise as the access were mainly through inheritance and direct acquisition.
The popular means of land access in the villages visited in both Handeni and Mbozi
Districts was through inheritance, hence, as pointed out by Ikdah et al.(2005), even
where formal laws are strong and aim to promote equality, they become ineffective
before strong'customs and traditions. This is possible in countries like Tanzania
where customs and traditions lack checks and balances on their operations.
120
(iii) Relationship Between Co-occupancy and Marital Status
This assessment was based on the results of two variables of co-occupancy and mari-
tal status. Data in Table 4.8 present the marital status of the beneficiaries of formali-
zation in the study areas where226(89.7%) and 38(90.5%) from Mbozi and Handeni
Districts respectively were married.
Table 4-8: Marital Status of the Beneficiaries of Formalization
In this analysis, the 10 beneficiaries (institutions in Mbozi District) were excluded as
they do not apply. This result was helpful during the examination of relationships
between marital status and co-occupancy patterns. This was intra-generational equity
assessment.
Marital status/District Mbozi Handeni
Frequency % Frequency %
Single 5 t .9 o 0Widowed t6 6.3 J 7.1
Divorced 4 r .6 1 2.4Married 226 89.7 38 90.5
Separated I 0.5 0 0Iotal 252 100.0 42 100.0Source: Survey Data, 2012
t2 l
Data in Table 4.9 present contingency table or cross tabulation of marital status and
sex of the beneficiaries of formalization. Results show that 24l(gL 3o%) men were
married and 23(8.7'%) women who were married had their land rights titled and reg-
istered. As the issue of protecting of women is highly emphasized in the law then this
result will be used to determine if the rights of married women were protected during
the process of titling and registration of land rights or not.
Table 4-9: Marital Status* Sex of Beneficiaries
Marital StatusSex Total
Women MenSingle Count I 4 5
% within Marital status 20.0% 80.0% 100.0%Widowed Count l 5 A
a t9% within Marital status 789% 2t . t% 100.0%
Divorced Count 0 5 5% within Marital status .0% 100.0% 100.0%
Maried Count 241 264% within Marital status 8.7% 91.3% 100.0%
Separated Count I 0% within Marital status 100,0% .0% 100.0%Count 40 ' r<A 294
Source: Survey Data, 2012
Mode of Ownership or Co-ownership
This refers to how beneficiaries registered the land rights during the formalization
process. This is vital because law requires consideration of marital status during the
registration of land rights. The Village Land Act emphasizes that joint tenancy is
possible only for married couples and not otherwise. It also emphasizes that tenancy
in common must also show shares.
r22
Results from Table 4.10 show that in Mbozi District, individual beneficiaries (natu-
ral persons) registered their land rights in three modes of ownership.
able 4-10: C 'atterns Amons BeneliciariesCase studv district Occunancv tvne N o,/
,/o
Mbozi N:262) Joint Ownershin 72 28.6Tenancy in Common I 0.4Sinsle Ownershio 179 71.3Corporate 10 3.8
Handeni CN:42) Joint Ownership 33 78.6Sinsle Ownership 9 2t .4
Source: Survey Data, 2012
In I79 benefrciaries out of 252 (7I%) from Mbezi District formalized their land
rights as joint owners. The study excluded the 10 institutions from this analysis so as
to remain with 252 natural persons. Only one individual which is 0.4o/o of all re-
spondents in the sample own land as a tenant in common (with equal shares) while
72 respondents (28.60/o) registered their land rights as joint owners. For the case of
Handeni, results show that joint ownership added up to 33(78.6%) of all beneficiaries
while about 9(2IA%) claimed and had their land rights titled and registered as qingle
owners. In the Handeni case the compliance to the law was high as the process was
closely administered and coordinated by officials from the Programme Implementa-
tion Unit of the PBFP or MKURABITA.
Results in Table 4.11 show that implementers of the formalization programme did
not consider marital statuses of beneficiaries during the individualization, titling and
registration of land rights.
r23
Table 4-11: Mode of Ownership* Marital Status Cross tabulation
Marital status
TotalFrequencies s W D M S NA
Mode of
Ownership
io int
Count 0 4 1 oo 1 U 105
Expected Count 1 . 7 6.6 1 . 7 91.2 ? 3.5 105.0
% within Marital sta-
tus)o/a
2 1 . 1o/o
20.0%37.5%100.0
o/o.jYo 34.5o/o
fenancy ir
lommon
Sount n 0 n 1 t l 0 1
Expected Count . ( 1 .9 n .0 1 . 0
% within Marital sta-
tus.001 .0% .0% .4% .0% .0% 3%
Single
3ount '15 4 164 0 0 18€
Expected Count 3 .1 1 1 . 8 3 . 1 163 . : . b o.z 188 .C
% within Marital sta-
tus
100. (o/t
78.9o/o
80.0%62.1o/( .0% 0% 61.8%
Institutions Sount c n n L 0 1 0 1C
lxoected Count .€ .2 8 .1 .0 1 0 . c
']/o within Marital sta-
:US001 jo/t jo/a .001 0%
'100.0
o/o3.3%
Iotal 3ount 1 € 5 264 1 1 0 304
Source: Field Data, 2012.
Key: S:Single; W:Window; D:Divorced; M:Married; S:Separated
Results in this table further show that in both case studies, there were 264 manied
beneficiaries (Mbozi:226; Handeni:38) but out of these 164 beneficiaries (62.1%)
formalized their land rights as single owners. This implies that the land rights of oth-
er spouses were not clarified and registered, hence insecure. This insecurity of ten-
ure, as argued by Enermark, et al. (2014) keeps the poor and the disadvantaged
trapped in poverty as they may not be able to use their land as collateral or even in
informal mortgages.
124
Results show that 99 respondents (37.5o/o) who were malried registered their land
rights jointly as required under the law, These varying results could be attributed to
lack of adequate knowledge in the laws related to real property because results from
observation showed that the actors in the formahzation process had no adequate
knowledge related to land law. These results conform to what Platteau (1995) men-
tioned that even ifjoint titling could provide the required protection to women within
the law, it would be impossible to carry out such an exercise without bringing to bear
all other problems associated with formal titling in Africa.
Results of the assessment of the strength of relationships, between marital status and
mode of ownership brought a goodness of fit between Chi Square value of 3.1 17 ; a
Cramer's V value of 0.585 and the Contingency Coefficient of 0.712. Literature
shows that Cramer's V value is not suitable for a table with a design of 2x2, therefore
since our table was of the design of 6 columns by 4 rows then the (Cramer's V:
0.585, p is 0.000; thus p < .001) or confidence at99%6 was taken.
These results imply that there is no significant relationship or correlation betwe'en the
married beneficiaries and the way they registered their land rights during the formal-
ization process. These results imply further that the coordinators of the formalization
process, including the land rights claimers, either did not know the requirements of
the law or they were pot guided adequately on the importance of including the names
of spouses in the titles. These results are also linked to the patriarchal practices that
cause imbalances between men and women. As CTWFT shows, men have always
been seen as allies of women hence the need for affirmative action to emancipate
them.
t25
These results are supplemented by the observation made in Msia village, where land
records showed respondents who had registered their land jointly with their sisters or
sometimes with their brothers. This practice was contravening the requirement of the
Village Land Regulations of 2001 which provided that joint ownership of land was
allowed for spouses only unless court permission is issued (uRT, 2001).
Furthermore, results from interviews with senior officials from MKURABITA
showed that the mere inclusion of female names is not enough as the actual control
of lands is in the hands of males. In the context of intergenerational equity, a mere
inclusion of the names of a spouse(as joint right holder) is a strong security to either
PartY, be it for a male or a female because joint tenancy has a benefit of right of sur-
vivorships. A right of survivorship means that if one spouse dies all land rights move
to the surviving owner hence reducing disputes.
Comparing the two study areas of Handeni and Mbozi, the results show aCrqmer's
V (0.372 or 0.4) which means there is a moderate association between these districts
in terms of how communities own land. The objectives of the National Land boficy
(1995) and the NSGRP of 2005 on reducing inequality are still a challenge. Larsson
(2006) in his study on the implementation of theTanzania Village Land Act saw the
question of land allocation as a challenge to the implementation of this law.
Furthermore, these results are similar to the argument which was raised by Platteau
(1996) that "farmers' wives" have not fared well under the registration and individu-
al titling. This has been so because registration only recognizes exclusive individual
rights in given pieces of land; the only rights that can be recognized in this process
126
are those of the principal landholders-men. Women as wives were disadvantaged in
the registration and titling process (World Bank (1989). Shivji (1999) also lamented
that a mere mention in the policies and laws about an emphasis on the possibility of
co-spousal registration and titling of customary rights without making it mandatory
was not enough.
(iv) Relationship Between Farm Size and Number of Children
The study was concerned with whether there was concern on the number of children
and the farm that the household owned. There are occurrences of trespass to many
rural privately and reserved lands in Tanzaniamainly by the youth who claim to have
land to use.
Results in Table 4.12 show the expected and observed number of children of the
owners of land which were registered during the formalization process in the study
areas.
Table 4-l2zLand Size * Children Cross Tabulationlhildren within the household
TotalFrequency 0-5 6 -10 I l - 1 5 t6-25
Land size
0-50 Cbserved Count 103 t 3 l 2( 5 263
Expected Count 100.( 126.6 30.1 3.6 263.0
)/o children in household 92.001 92.9% 76.501 75.Uo/a 90.401
5l -30.0 Observed Count l 0 I 28
Expected Count n.4 t4.4 3 .5 0.4 3 1 .0
% children in household 8.001 7. lo/a 23.501 25.Uo/a 9.9601
Total Count l l l 4 l 34 4 291
Source: Field Data, 2012.
r27
Results in Table 4-12 show that263 beneficiaries (90.4%) out of 291 benefrciaries
had children ranging from 0 to 25 while the land which they claimed to own and thus
title and register were of the sizes below 50 acres. This analysis excluded 13 benefi-
ciaries which were institutions. Results show fuither that 103 respondents or benefi-
ciaries who were (92%) had up to five children and they registered land of size
amounting up to 50 acres. This result implies that households of beneficiaries of
formalization with farm sizes ranging between 0 to 50 acres had between 0 to 25
children. OECD (2013) argues that more children implies lower income because in-
come earners in a household differ at life cycle stages.
Results further showed a weak relationship between farm sizes owned by the re-
spondents and their number of children (Cramer's V is 0.198, and the significance
level (phi) of 0.018 which means p<0.05. These results (Cramer's V:0.198,
p<0.05) mean that the relationship found in this sample about children in households
and the available farms or land size hold true in the total population from which it
was drawn. This result further implies that in the context of intergenerational e.quity
(sustainable social development), there is a likelihood that in the near future, these
children will be landless as their parents do not have land to sustain their livelihood
particularly for food security. The impact of this, as once pointed out in the
Brundtsland Commission (1987), is that where resources are distributed in an inequi-
table manner; there is iikelihood for a segment of social groups to trespass in protect-
ed or others' land so as to satisfy their needs.
As also once argued by Sharon (2000), the implementation of formalization of rural
land rights of villagers in the study areas was concretized on the existing inequities
t28
and inequalities. Based on the results of these assessments, it is apparent the land dis-
tribution and access among social groups at the household and village levels were
inequitable. It further needs to be noted that the use of land rights for borrowing im-
plies access to credit and improved income for the household of the borrower but al-
so it can compromise access of land by household member in case of default as land
can be foreclosed.
Summary of the Key Findings
a) On equitable distribution of land, the study found that formalization in both
case studies did not concentrate on the distribution of land as the approach
was more on adjudicating the land rights as claimed by the land users or those
that claimed to be the users. The assessment of relationships between farm
size and household size; male and female; marital status and mode of land
ownership showed inequalities of land distribution which implied that the
process was inequitable in the context of intra-generational equity. Married
males registered land as single owners hence denying the land rights to their
wives; this was contravening the law on protecting land rights of females.
b) On the exploration and examination of intergenerational equity, the study
found that there was no consideration of the size of household and the num-
ber of children within these households. Life cycles within households need
consideration when resources are distributed. Although in the Handeni Case,
village use plans were prepared, the study found that some villagers ignored
those plans during the adjudication hence jeopardizing the land access rights
t29
by segment of social groups mainly pastoralists. Lengoiboni (2011) had
complained about this injustice to the pastoralists. The study found that in the
Mbozi Case, there was no preparation of land use plans which in essence de-
fine the land uses which can be accessed in the near future hence promising
intergenerational equity.
c) There were many land rights that remained unregistered in both case study
areas which imply that the land rights to these individuals were not defined
and clarified as required under the law. In the Mbozi case, where adjudication
was systematic, the study found that titling and registration of the already sys-
tematically adjudicated land rights became sporadic as it was on the discre-
tion of the owner to either register or not. In the Handeni case where adjudi-
cation was sporadic and included preparation of land use plans, still many
land rights were uffegistered and there was abuse of the proposed land use
plans. These plans imposed land use rights on the land claimed to be custom-
arily owned by individuals or families. This resulted into social unrest in vil-
lages such as Bongi in the Handeni Case Study. All these happened because
the approach of preparing village land use plans (though participatory by de-
sign) theoretically assumes that unoccupied land in villages is not owned and
thus strict plans as those in urban areas can be effective.
130
4.2.2 Objective2
To investigate the extent of democratic participation by social groups and the
mechanism used for land rights formalization at the village level
(, Results of the Extent of Democratic Participation
On participation, results in Table 4.1.3 show the level of respondents' participation in
both study areas whereby 276 respondents (90.8%) participated in the adjudication
process by showing boundaries and size of their land. This was a significant ap-
proach towards boundaries adjudication.
Table 4-13: Participation in Land Size Determination per Case Study District
Cross Tabulation
Source: Field Data, 2012
Considering the size of the sample, the researcher used delta to determine relation-
ship between the case studies in the context of the participation of citizens in the
formalization process. Theory shows that with a delta of at least ten to fifteen percent
(10-15%) in one of the rows of table, and then it can be assumed that there is proba-
bly a statistically significant association between variables; especially where chi
square is not reliable. Reading from Table 4.13, the difference between the percent-
Case study district
TotalMbozi Handeni
Participation intermination
size
Yes Count 1 4 1 34 276
% within Case studydistrict
92.401 81.001 90.8%
oh of Total 79.601 11.201 90.8%
No Count 2C 8 28
% within Case studydistrict
7.601 t9.0% 9.2%
o/o of Total 6.601 2.601 9.2%
Total Count 262 42 304
r3 l
age of observed frequencies for the case of Mb ozi and that of Handeni showed a del-
ta of ll. oh that is, (92.4% minus 81.0%) which meant that there was probably a
statistical significant association between the case studies in how beneficiaries par-
ticipated in the formalizatron process. The results of the assessment of the democratic
participation between the two case studies showed Chi Square test (1,304) : 5.639
with phi:0.018 which implies a significant relationship between the case studies.
The symmetry measures for all values were less than 0.03 (phi--0.0136; Cramer's V
: 0.0136 and Contingency Cofficient:0.13A which implies that the relationships in
terms of participation between the two case studies during the formalization process
was not strong.
Results in Table 4.14 below, present the sex of beneficiaries of formalization and
their status on participation in the determination of the sizes of their sizes.
Table 4-l4z Participation of Beneficiaries in the Formalization Process
Source: F reld D ata, 2012
The results in Table 4.14 above further present symmetric measures of phi:0.921;
Cramer 's V 0.92 I which means 92.1% which is sreater than 5%o. Thus. the difference
between male and female in terms of participation according to registered farm size
is not significant statistically, but it is due to random chance.
Sex ofLand r isht holders
'TotalFemale Male NA
Part icipation in land sizedetermination
Yes Count J I 230 9 276
% within gender of land rights holders 92.501 90.601 90.jo/a 90.8%
No Count 3 24 I 28
% within gender of land rights holders 7.501 9.4o/c t0.0% 9.2%
Total Count 40 254 l 0 304
t32
This is so partly because of the fact that those who appeared to have their lands regis-
tered were male as they are the owners of land in the rural areas. In line with the
Feminist Theory, it is apparent that women relied on the decision of their husbands to
have their names included in the registered titles. It needs to be noted that in many
rural areas when a girl is married she finds her husband with the land which had been
inherited and as such to force her name to be included has not always been a signifi-
cant issue. In Mbozi, for example, one respondent, a female, educated and employed
as education officer said during the interview that including her name in the title was
not an issue as long as the land belonged to her and her husband. This result is sup-
plemented by the results from interviews with key informants who said that the ap-
proach of adjudication was by receiving land claims and then involving land owners
to determine their boundaries.
In the Mbozi Case Study, results from interviews with respondents, key informants
and from FGDs show that there were three levels of participation, namely during the
sensitization of the implementation of the formalization of land rights whereby the
Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development(MLHHSD) in
collaboration with the District Council coordinated the process; during the adjudica-
tion of farms/parcels boundaries and in the meetings of the village assemblies where
land rights claims were tabled for approval.
As presented earlier (see Tabl e 4.14 above), 276(90.5%) of the respondents who
were interviewed said that they were involved in showing boundaries of their farms
during the systematic adjudication.
133
In the villages of Ikana, Namchinka, Nkangamo and Iyendwe where formalization
has been done sporadically, results from interviews and FGDs with village leaders
showed that in some cases meetings of village assemblies were rarely called to ap-
prove land deals. Results from interviews with village leaders showed that in these
villages, formalization has been done mainly for 'outsiders' as a majority of those
who had registered the lands were those who had bought land from the village coun-
cils and thus, they wanted secured land rights over their land.
In another development, results from interviews with key informants at the District
level showed that there had been a serious problem of attendance of villagers and vil-
lage councils' members at the village councils and village assembly to decide upon
land rights claims. Results from interviews with key informants in Namchinka vil-
lage showed that there had been unethical practices by some village leaders, for ex-
ample, villagers casted a vote of no confidence against the former Village Chairper-
son and removed him from leadership following the selling of village land without
the consent of the village Assembly.
In practice, information from registers of rights of occupancy is a good indicator of
the effectiveness of participation of institutions in land allocation. Results from the
examination of the registers of customary rights of occupancy (CCROs) indicated
weakness or non participation of village assemblies and the registers of the CCROs
in approving and registering the land rights claims.
This is reflected in the information found in Iyendwe village where one respondent
had bought six parcels of which the adjudicated area was of approximately 49.0 acres
resulting into the ownership of 300 acres.
t34
Since the adjudicators knew that the village council was allowed, under the law, to
approve allocation of land with area not exceeding 50 acres, they decided to adjudi-
cate each farm with area less than 50 acres each. What was surprising from this result
was about how the registrar registered one individual as owner of six independent
farms each with 49 acres without the approval of the District Council as required by
the law. Results from interview with one informant showed that this had been hap-
pening as some elites who wanted bigger land colluded with adjudication officers to
ensure that bigger farms were subdivided into smaller farms of less than 50 acres so
as to avoid the requirements of the District Land Allocation Committee.
Results from interviews with key informants at the village and district levels showed
that lack of participation by the villagers led, in 2010, into breaking into the offices
of the Sakamwela and Halungu Villages Executive Officers whereby all village land
records were stolen.
Data in Box 4.1 present results of the interviews with key informants on the use of
village assemblies and village councils in approving land distribution during the for-
malization process in the Mbozi Case study.
Source: Interviews with 2 Kev Informants in Vwawa and Namchinka-6th June.20l2.
Results from interview with key informants in all seven villages visited could not
show any evidence in the form of copies of minutes of previous approvals from the
Village Offrce, including members who attended. This result on participation is simi-
Box 4-1: Reaction on the Meetinss of Villa Assemblies in Mbozi Case SYou lcnow mony titles (hati) were issued without following the laid down proce-dure". "Actilally, these meetings (meaning.meetings of village councils andvillageassemblies) ore never convened. (Kibona, 6rn June,2072).
135
lar to a conclusion made by Ikdal et al. (2004) that participation in the formalization
is theoretical as it had tried to decentralise power to local bodies and build upon ex-
isting institutions, customary norrns and rights. This is to the contrary; the norms said
here are those of patriarchy which also apply to Tanzania. Patriarchy also applies to
formal institutions such as the Village Councils and it is worse in the Village Assem-
blv.
Results from interviews with respondents showed that the VLTIs neither own nor
have control over the village land which the central government empowered them to
administer. This implies that they act as a go-between the customary sellers and buy-
ers in the formalization process through witnessing the transactions in question. As
once observed by Chimhowu and Woodhouse (2006), it is useful to recognize the
specific characteristics of what they called 'vernqcular land markels'- that is the
commoditized transfers of land within the framework of customary tenure - as essen-
tial if state land policies are to succeed in promoting the interests of the poor. This
can be compared with the results from Iyendwe village where one respondent had
rights to land with a total area of 300 acres. This respondent had not trespassed any-
one land but he bought land from individuals who might have been members of some
families or clan. This land transaction above 50 acres is illegal when it is not ap-
proved by the District Land Allocation Committee but in the hands of both the sellers
and the buyers it is legal as long as the sellers were bona-fide owners of the land. All
in all, such land alienation would have been illegal if the land in question belonged to
the village as an institution but unfortunately these villages do not own land as the
land belones to individuals who have mandate to either sell it or not.
t36
These results on participation prove what Ikdal, et al. (2005) said; that in many in-
stances discriminatory customary practices ovemrle equal rights-based statutory
laws. It is apparent that the participation of the VLTIs would be in the form of wit-
nessing land transfer possibly with a fee as this could facilitate the administration of
the village land office.
In the Handeni Case Study results from literature show that the formalization process
was based on the formalisation prograrnme proposed by the Peruvian economist
Hernando De Soto and his Institute for Liberty and Democracy (ILD). Unlike partic-
ipation in the Mbozi Case study, in the Handeni case study, the programme imple-
mentation team of the formalization process invited two Non Government Organiza-
tions (NGOs) namely, the Tanzania Pastoralists, Hunters and Gatherers Organization
(TAPHGO) and Legal and Human Rights Centre ((LHRC) to participate as observers
of the process. Results from interviews with respondents show that participation was
mainly in the farm boundary identification and in attending meetings of the village
assemblies to discuss land rights application.
The results from FGDs and key informant interviews revealed that the implementa-
tion team ensured participation through coordination of calling for meetings as re-
quired in the Village Land Act No.5 1999. Ole Kosyando (2007) a representative of
TAPHGO reported that there was little community awareness imparted concerning
the mission of the pilot project. Results from interview further show that each step
(see Appendix 2) of the intervention unfolded itself to the community almost in iso-
lation of the others. It was only towards the end of the process, during the application
of certificates of customary right of occupancy, that most people realized what the
t37
programme was driving at (Ole Kosyando, ibid). Results from interviews from key
informants in Handeni district showed that participation was effective through vil-
lage assemblies with neighbouring villages such as Kweisasu and Kwamkono and
that those meetings also approved the applications for customary rights of occupan-
cy.
According to Kosyando (2007), in Handeni District the meetings of the VLTIs (vil-
lage councils and general assembly) to introduce the project and mobilize community
support were omitted. This result implies that the formalization process in Handeni
Distrct was more of top down as what was important for the programme implementa-
tion team was to ensure that the project was completed within the planned time. It
needs to be noted that PBFP had hired students from the then UCLAS to facilitate the
process. Results fuither showed that Village Executive Officers (VEOs), possibly in
consultation with the Village Chairpersons, nominated the Participatory Rural Ap-
praisal (PRA) teams instead of these being selected by the Village Assemblies; hence
these members had knowledge of their roles in this exercise at the back oi their
minds. This is evidenced by the fact that in practice, calling a Village Assembly is
not effective when it comes to makins immediate decisions.
Results in Box 4.2 show the number of Village Assembly members with an example
of Bongi village. Assuming that each household had 2 individuals with age of 18
years; had married people; and that in a female headed household there was only one
person aged 18 years, then eligible Bongi Village Assembly members are 584.
138
Conducting such a meeting to approve 2 acres of land claimed by a villager from one
hamlet forming this village is not practical and such meetings are ignored.
Such a number of members to the VA can be difficult if not impossible to make ef-
fective decisions. This is similar to the just ended Constitutional Assembly of Tanza-
nia where the public is witnessing inegularities in addressing its intended objectives
partly because of the number of members and the complexity of managing such insti-
tution. Results from interviews further show that participation was weak because of
the lack of flexibility in the registration process.
Results from observations and interviews with respondents, further showed that, the
village land use plans which were prepared during the pilot were not acceptable by
some villagers. This result was also raised by Deininger, et al (2012) when they said
that pastoralists or shifting cultivators who had not received any group tenure certifi-
cates often had their rights infringed upon in the context of village land use planning.
Results from PBFP, TAPHGO and LHRC implementation and participation reports
(also see Appendix 2) showed that there was a participatory rural appraisal exercise
Box 4-2: Expeeted Village Assembly Members in Bongi VillageTotal Populatron:I263Female: 583Male: 680Workforce: 277Old people(60 years and above): 85Number of Households: 308Female Heads of households: 32Members to the Village Assembly: (308-32)*2 +32:584
Source: Bongi Village Executive Officer's Office, 2012.
139
that facilitated the preparation of the land use plans. Results further show that the
proposed land use plans were presented to the VA for approval. Based on the experi-
ence of the researcher of this study who had worked as a District Land Officer for
more than 15 years in the local government service in Tanzania, it is very rare for
Village Assembly to fully constitute a quorum of all villagers (with the age of 18
years and above (see the number of members of VA in Box 4.2). One respondent at
Bongi village told the researcher that the plans were planted on the land parcels that
belonged to some families such that they resulted into land ownership disputes be-
tween users and owners. Formalization did not entail compensation because in rural
settings many people use land which they do not own; a good example is of pastor-
alists who graze in the land of others. This result was also observed by Fairley (2013)
when she said that some occupations (social groups) such as those that use land
commonly like pastoralists were negatively impacted during the formalization pro-
CESS.
In the Handeni case study, results showed that there was a strict follow up to.make
sure that village assemblies meet to approve claims of customary rights of occupan-
cy. Although the indicator of these approvals was the availability of the minutes of
these assemblies, in both Bongi and Mbuyuni villages the village executive officers
(VEOs) had no copies of those minutes because the process was coordinated by
MKURABITA. Although the Village Land Regulations, 2001of the VLA set a ceil-
ing of not more than 20 hectares of land that one individual in village can occupy and
use but results showed that there were approvals of customary right of occupancy for
140
land beyond the ceiling without the consent of the District Council as required under
the regulations.
Results in Box 4.3 present the remark of a land official on the effectiveness of the
local government authorities in approving land size during formalization.
Box 4-3: Interview with a Handeni Informant on A aI of Land Size
Source: Interview with a Key informant in Handeni Land Office on 1710812012
(it) Results on the Formalization Mechunism in the Mbozi Case Study
Results from interviews with the key informants showed that the pilot villages (seven
villages were covered as pilot in2004) used systematic adjudication in which bound-
aries of each farm in a village (its existing land uses and the names of the owners)
were all recorded. Results further showed that owners whose farm boundaries were
adjudicated were free to apply for issuance of the certificate of customary right of
occupancy (CCRO) at the district land office. This implies that actual titling was go-
ing on at the district instead of at the village levels as provided for in the village land
regulations on the processing of CCROs.
no permits are sought from the District Council fur approval of land bigger thatfifty aues.
t4l
Plate 4.2 shows an index map with all parcels which were systematically adjudicated
in Sakamwela'Village. SK4l l represents the parcel number of the parcels.
Plate 4-L: Index Map Showing Adjudicated Farms in Sakamwela ViIIageSource: Photo Taken bv the Author at Sakamwela Villase Office on 1210612012
Results from interviews showed that even where adjudication was systematic, titling
and registration became sporadic in approach whereby those who wished to register
thefu land rights did so. This option by the government has negative implication to
the poor especially women because their rights remained insecure hence unproiected.
This current security of tenure vacuum increasingly generates social instability
through land disputes and land grabbing (Enermark. eta1..,2014).
j
142
Results in Table 4.15 showed the elements of the formalization process, which, Fair-
ley (2012,2013) baptised as "Mbozi Model". Mbozi Model entails systematic adju-
dication whereby a team of experts gathers with members of the village council
(which includes the village chairperson and the village executive officer); users or
occupiers of the parcels; and by using the tools available to them, inscribe the bound-
ary by noting and saving the coordinates of each parcel in the entire village (Fairley,
2013).
Table 4-15: Components of Mbozi Formalization Model
Task Actor RoleVillage boundary deline-ation
Land surveyors and cartog-raphers
To identify the bounda-
ry of the villageCreate a map showingcoordinates of the vil-laee
Aerial photography, orobtaining satellite im-agery
District Surveyors, villagecommunities, neighbouringvillaees
To ensure that they areavailable for use
Creating a land use plan National Land Use Plan-ning Commission (NLUPC)with the PLUM Team atdistrict and village levels.
Ensure guidance in thepreparation of the vil-lage land use planthrough participatorytechnioues
Systematic adjudicationof farm boundaries
Plot or farm owners, districtland officials, village coun-cils
Clarifying farm bounda-ries of land rightsclaimants
Issuance a Certificate ofVillage Land(CVL)
Commissioner of Lands To issue the certificateof land with conditionsfor administering thevillaee land
Issuance of CCROs VLTIs-Village Councilsand the Assembly
Issuance of a CCRO toa villager or land ownerwhose claim was ap-proved bv the VLTIs.
Registration of CCROs District Land Officer To register the CCROsat the District LandReeistry.
Source: Fairley (2012,2013) with author's amendments
t43
Fairley (2013) saw the preparation of CCRO as quite simple as a land right holder
had to submit the application for a CCRO (duly signed by the appropriate witnesses,
including the Village Executive Officer) with evidence of their parcel identification
to District Land Offrcer. Availability of high-resolution satellite imagery (or aerial
photography) forms the basis for sketching parcel boundaries whereby the surveyor
simply delineates the parcel, hand-drawing the boundary onto a high-resolution
printout of the satellite image (Fairley, 2012). This model as described by Fairley
(ibid) was used during the pilot phase and has been the base for fuither adjudication
process although results from the actual observation found that everything had been
turned to spot adiudication partrculady in villages where adjudication was not sys-
tematic.
Results from implementation reports showed that the process involved digitizing the
sketches on the geo-referenced layers at Mbozi District headquarters. In districts with
no satellite imagery in place, hand-held Geographic Information System (GPS) sets
were used to record relatively precise geographic coordinates of the parcel bounda-
ries. This resulted into the development of a cadastral registry with all parcels availa-
ble in each village that has been surveyed. At the same time that the parcel registry
was being created, whereby information about each parcel was also collected - the
name of the owners (who are given a paper that states the unique identification for
their plots of land), and the names of all owners of bordering parcels (Fairley, 2013).
This information is also entered in the computer situated at the district land office.
Results from interviews showed that with systematic adjudication approach, every
parcel is adjudicatsd; details of owners recorded and a map is produced.
144
Results further showed that formalized land rights are registered in the District Land
Registry while the Village keeps copies of the registered rights in the Village land
registry (VLR). The Village Executive Officer (VEO) is responsible for the mainte-
nance ofthe register.
Results from interviews and FGDs in Mbozi District showed that although at the start
of the process the boundary adjudication was systematic, the titling and registration
became sporadic whereby those who wished to have a ccRo had to apply for it.
Further results from interviews with key informants at the district and levels of the
villages of Iyendwe, Namchinka,Ikana and Ndalambo showed that both boundaries
adjudication and registrations were conducted on demand or sporadically.
Results from the interview with one of the GIS Pioneera on the sporadic adjudication
mechanism showed that the process starts by a land rights-holder (customary or oth-
erwise) to hire a GIS Pioneer (a person with expertise in using a hand held GPS from
the district land office who accompanies the applicant to the farm to take details of
the farm boundary, details of the land owner(s) and then prepares a CCRO. Results
further showed that what was sometimes needed was the proof of the village leaders
that the applicant owned the land or has bought it from an individual. The GIS Pio-
neer proceeds with the preparation of the farm plan (also known as deed plan) and
the CCRO after which the document is sent to the owner and the village leaders to
sign and stamp before returning it to the District Land Registrar for registration.
* Fairley (2013) describes this person as one who can use a handheld GPS to capture farmscoordinates and use them to prepare a Plan to fix in the CCRO.
145
Results in Table 4.16 below show the status of formalization in Mbozi Case Study
whereby in villages where systematic adjudication was applied (Sakamwela, Msia
and Iyula) a total of 2149 land parcels belonging to various individuals had their
boundaries adjudicated. Since registration of land rights turned to be sporadic only
590 land rights which is 27 .5oh were titled and registered at the District Land Regis-
try.
Table 4-16: Site Villages and Adjudication in Mbozi District
Source: Mbozi District Council, 2012.
Data in Tabie 4.16 above shows that in such villages as Ikana, Nkangamo.
Namchinka and Iyendwe where boundary adjudication was sporadic, about 276'land
rights were titled and registered. As results it is clear that those who adjudicated their
farms were at liberty to determine who to include in the title as land rights owners.
Results from this table also indicate that systematic boundary adjudication was gen-
der or sex sensitive as names of both male and female were also recorded. It is, how-
ever, half baked as the relationships of owners were not recorded. What remains as a
challenge is the clarification of the marital status of those who are recorded as male
and female because they could be brothers and sisters, wives and husbands or mother
s and their sons. With the sporadic system of adjudication as it comes on demand, the
Village No CCROs Letter ofOffer
Adjudicated Farms& OwnersF&M M F Institutions
Sakamwela 207 150 884 74 9 4Msia 200 l l 0 1025 58 l8 a
J
Ivula 183 183 15 58 8 j
Ikana 9 l 4 0 I2 0 3Namchinsa 25 0 0 1 l 0 0Nkangamo 96 0 T6 4 l 5 5Iyendwe 64 I 2 t4 0 0Total 866 448 t.942 268 40 18
r46
madtal status of the applicant was not necessarily considered during the land rights
registration process.
Besides, results in this table show the number of adjudicated land rights which re-
mained insecure, for example, in Sakamwela village 764(78.7%) land rights re-
mained insecure because out of 971 boundaries adjudicated parcels only 207 (21.3%)
parcels were titled and registered. This implies that lands right of 764 owners
(78.7%) of several socially wlnerable groups have not been registered hence they are
subject to manipulation. This indicates inequity in the formalization process.
Figure 4-4 presents a graphical relationship between adjudication and actual land
titling in Mbozi Case Study.
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
-Adjudparcels(AP)
*ccRos
-%(AP)
"'""- .\"no.-."'-
{"*Figure 4-4: Adjudicated and Titled Parcels in the Mbozi Case Study
Source: Compiled from field work, 2012.
Results in Figure 4.4 are related with the results from the District Implementation
Report of the Mbozi District (2012) which show that about 17670 CCROs were reg-
istered, 17 ,}4lfarms had been adjudicated with the GIS and the names of their own-
t47
ers are in blacket as follows: II,282 (male and female), 5,128(male), 450(female)
and 1 8 1 (institutions).
Results from archives, interviews and literature in Mbozi District show that the use
of either systematic or sporadic mechanisms of adjudication had not captured all
ownerships of land into the land registers as argued by proponents and scholars on
systematic adjudication.
The adoption of optionality for land owners to either register their land rights or not
as provided for under the 1999 Village Land Act and its regulations have paralysed
the global efforts in ensuring that land rights of all become secure and thus equitable.
This is against thefit-for-purpose approach element of inclusiveness in scope to cov-
er all tenure and all land (Enemark. et.al,2014). Adjudicated land parcels remained
unregistered hence were insecure and inequitable as the positions of users of unregis-
tered land rights remain inequitable and could be subjected to alienation.
Results from interviews and actual observations reveal that although village land
administration is decentralized, this is theoretical but in practice, all mechanism of
formahzation are centralized at the district land office level because in all seven vil-
lages the researcher visited, there was no single village where the village executive
officer (a village land officer for this matter) was capable of preparing a land title
(ccRo).
Results from the Mbozi case study showed that the mechanism is mixed and the pro-
cess is still centralized x the district level. This concurs with what Tuladhar (2004)
said about land rights registration, that in many developing countries, citizens have to
148
travel long distance for registration, and
not afford these costs and time, they do
hence they leave them insecure.
this involves high costs. Because they can-
not even title and register their land rights,
(ii, Results of the Formurization Mechanism in the Hundeni case study
Result from interviews and focus group discussion with respondents and key inform-
ants including a report by Mkulila Q007)who participated on behalf of LHRC, showthat formalization used spot adjudication. Issuance of ccRo through a demand
driven process (spot adjudication and registration) was something that was danger
during the first time registration as it adds threat or danger to the land rights of therural poor communities (Mkulila, 2}}7;Deininger, 2003).
Plate 4-3 shows one of the seven village Land Registries which were built as part offormalization process in Handeni District.
Plate 4'2: office of Mbuyuni village Land Registry Built by MKURABITA
Source: Photo by Goodwill Richard ong/g/2012.
t49
Results of the observation showed that the office was no longer busy with the actual
formalization process. Although formalization was not going on effectively, villages
have good and appropriate offices for this role among others.
Results from interviews and FGDs further showed that mechanism of formalization
was sporadic or demand driven, land rights claimers had to fill in application forms
to claim their land use rights, then the village council and the village assembly had to
discuss and approve or reject the land rights claims. Results from interviews with key
informants and from implementation report further showed that members of the Pro-
gramme Implementation Unit (PIU) assisted village councils to prepare village by-
laws. These by-laws were needed for enforcing the land use plans of their respective
villages particularly through classifying land use for the diversity of social groups
mainly pastoralists and peasants as they were expected to reduce land related dis-
putes between these groups. Results from interviews with key informants and the
discussion with the Focus Group of pastoralists blamed some villagers abusing the
approved formal land use plans. Results from discussions with pastoralists in Bongi
Village, for example, showed that some customary land owners refused the proposed
land uses plans hence several informal land use changes took place resulting into
disputable land use patterns.
Results from interviews with key informants and reports of the participating organi-
zations during the piloting of this study area, showed the entire formalization in the
Handeni Case Study unlike that of the Mbozi Case Study aimed at assessing the
functionality of the Village Land Act, 1999 and the Land Use Planning Act, 2007 in
the administration of village land rights.
150
This shows the differences in the implementation of the National Land Policy (1995)
in the context of the objectives of this study. Results from interview with the key in-
formants showed that about 600 CCROs had been prepared by the time the project
ended on 18fr December, 2006.
Results in Figure 4-5 show a sunmary of the issued 617 CCROs in the seven pilot
villages as quoted from the partiiipation reports (Ole Kosyando,2007; Mkulila,2007;
MKURABITA,2OO6).
Formalization in Handeni District
I bongi
r mbuyuni
r nkale
r sindeni
r kwamkono
I kweisasu
I mzeri
Figure 4-5: Formalization Coverage in Handeni Case Study
Source: Field Data. 2012.
Results in Box 4.4 below show 18 planned activities in the formalization process in
the study area. Activities starting from number I to 12 were mainly on mobilization
and preparation of the village land use plans. These were seen as a weakness in the
proposed procedure for the implementation of the Village Land Act and the Land
151
Use Planning Act. Results in Box 4.4 further showed that activities starting at num-
ber 13 to17 were on land rights individualization, titling and registration. The con-
struction of the Village Land Registries came at the end (Ole Kosyando, 2007).
Results from the pilot implementation reports and interviews with key informants
further showed that, Handeni pilot had aimed at adjudicating of 3500 parcels but be-
BOX 4-4: Formalization Planned Activities in Handeni District
1. Formation, mobilization and orientation of trvo teams, namely the II'IKUL{BITAstaff, and proj ect specific recruits from UCLAS, and the multi-disciplinary teamfrom the Handeni Disrict Council - both teams assembled before ttre actualinauguration of the project fieldrvork.
2- Identitjcation of project villages based on criteri.a agreed upon b;* the DistictCouncil and h'IKURdBITA Programme lr'Ianagement Unit-
3- Training of the Project team. and \rillage.'\Yard Executile Officers on the use ofHand-held GPS sers.
'+. Facilitation of lillage boundaries adjudication proEess-i. Surr,eying of village land boundaries and production of village land maps for deed
plans - leading to the protision of \rillage Land Certificates.6. Conductingparticipatory rapid appraisal pRal and facilitating detelopment of land
use plans (loosely incorporating raining of \l ard Facilitation Teams).V - Technical data collection - zoning and actual demarcatiun of the different land uses.8. Preparation of village maps indicating the various land uses proposed9. Conducting Issue Based \Yorkshops - with villagr councils to initiall-v adopt the
land use plans as proposed br" the \''LU[,I teams" and proposals for br,'-larvs toenforce the plans-
t0. It'falcing necessan: revisions as recommended from the rvorkshops-i 1. Holding \iillage General Assemblies to adopt the proposals for Land Use Plans and
Bylarvs as presented by the Village Councils.13. trncorporating recommended changes from the General Assemblies in the land use
plans and b1,'larvs-13. Disuibution and filling of application forms fur Certificates of Customan'Rights of
Occupancl',14. Holding of Village Council meetings and \tllage General Assemblies to
respectivell' consider the applications.15. Conducting sun'e1, of land parcels-16. Preparation and issuance of letters of offer-lT.Processing and issuing Certifrrates of Customaq' Rights of Occupancy to
individuals18. Consmrction of \rillage Land Regisries.
Source: Ole Kosyando (2007), MKURABITA (2006).
t52
cause of the limitation of time and resources, the exercise was left with the Handeni
District Council for continuation. According to Ole Kosyando (ibid), by the time PIU
left Handeni District on the 9th of December 2006, some activities were incomplete
including the meeting of the village land tenure institutions to approve the applica-
tions for CCROs. Results from documentary research show that beneficiaries and
other local actors were involved in the process other than participating due to the fast
tracking nature of the pilot exercise. There was no time for the village leaders to con-
ceptualize, masticate and understand the purpose of the programme.
Commenting on this fast tracking of land formalization, Byamugisha (2013) laments:
"...meny internationally driven efforts to spur land administration reform andboost agricultural production in sub-Sahqran Africa have suffered due to theirreliance on foreign implementers engaged only for a limited time, typically
backed by short-term donor contracts that aren't well-positioned to affect last-ing institutional change ".
It is apparent that fast tracked exercise like this could not improve the ability of
the VLTIs to sustain the process save for the buildings which are named village
land registries although they are just normal Village Executive Officers' offices.
This was evidenced durins the field visit as villaee leaders said that formalization
process was not going on.
Results in Figure 4-6 below reveal the output of spot adjudication through an index
map which shows parcels which were sporadically (spot) adjudicated in Bongi vil-
lage including their areas whereas the whitish space show parcels which were not
adjudicated.
153
Figure 4-6: Index Map of Spot Adjudicated Parcels in Bongi Village.
Source: Ole Kosyando (2007), MKURABITA (2007).
Detailed observation of this plan shows some land parcels which have not been adju-
dicated and thus their ownership status is not registered and hence it is subject to ma-
nipulation should there be any land acquisition. This also implies that possibly some
of the boundaries might have overlapped to parcels whose boundaries were not adju-
dicated. Results from interviews with key informants at the District Land Office in
the Handeni Case study showed that formalization was going on slowly depending
on the demand of the villagers. Results from literature show though the sensitization
was inadequate, the fast tracking of the process enabled achievements in terms of
land rash for grabbing and the preparation of village land use plans. This situation is
evidence that the process of formalization adopted the one size fit for all approach
r54
instead of the "/it-ftr- purpose land administration proposed by Enermark. et
al.,(2014) which is flexible as it listens to what communities are used to.
Summary of the Key Findings
a) The mechanisms of adjudication used in both cases were also a factor to in-
equity. The use of sporadic or spot adjudication in Handeni District resulted
into what Ole Kosyando (ibid) called land grab as some individuals lashed to
register land which they were not using by then. In the Mbozi case, the mech-
anism of systematic adjudication during boundaries adjudication was a suc-
cess but since actual titling and registration became sporadic then many land
rights remained unregistered hence insecure for the owners. A good example
was in Sakamwela village where only 200 parcels were titled and registered
out of 800 systematically adjudicated parcels.
b) The government actors were very much concerned with the issue of gender
access and rights protection and ensured that the names of the females were
included in the CCROs during the formalizationprocess.
c) The approach of using claims of existing land rights contributed to the failure
of equitable distribution of land and access as there was no room for consid-
ering those who needed land for their use; This implied that faimess and jus-
tice in considering and allocating land to those who needed land had no
chance during the formalizationprocess; Also laxity in titling and registration
left systematically land rights unregistered and hence this brought about ine-
qualities.
155
The use of the tsrm "customary" contributed to the failure of equitable distri-
bution and access because some segment of social groups were regarded as
foreigners; hence denied even their longstanding occupation and the use of
the land, this was particularly so in the Handeni Case Study where the use of
the term 'customary' in the formalization process, affected pastoralists.
The Government, donor communities and NGos that participated in the for-
malization process made the process successful. NGOs such as LHRC and
TPHGO which participated in the Handeni Case acted as watchdogs to see to
it that rights of the diversity of social groups such as pastoralists and women
and others were considered during the process. This, supported the promo-
tion of the equitable distribution ofland access to land a success.
Lack of control of the village land: This is a result of the fact that local gov-
ernment at the village level does not have control over land it is in the hands
of clans, families and individuals. A local government which does not control
land is almost irrelevant given that the concerns of rural people are so focused
on land (Bruce, 1994; Sundet, ibid).
4.2.3 Objective 3
To identify factors and actors that have contributed to the success, problems
and or failure of the equitable land distribution of and access in the land for-
malization process at the household and village level.
(, Unregulated Customs and Traditions
d)
e)
1s6
Results from interviews with key informants recognize that ethnic groups are diffi-
cult to control and that there are disparities of these groups so the use of customs and
rules affects the notion of public land concept. Results in BOX 4.5 show the view of
the key informant on the effects of customs and traditions on promoting equity. The
National Land Policy of 1995 recognizes the customary law but in practical terms
there are no checks and balances mechanisms to verify them.
Box 4-5: Effects of Customs and TraditionsSection 20(2) of the Village Land Act is vital in handling the disadvantagedgroups but customs and traditions which exist are o bottleneck as they cannot bechanged".
Source: Interview with Key Informant at the Ministry of Lands, 41712012
Plate 4-4 shows the representatives of the pastoralists during discussion (Focus
group) with the researcher in the Office of Bongi Village Executive Officer.
Plate 4-3: FGD with Pastoralists at Bongi Village Land Registry
Source: Photo by Mr.Godwill Richard on9l8l20It;-
t57
Results from this discussion blamed the use of the term "customary tenure" inthatit
was interpreted by the village leaders as referring to the local ethnic groups and
communities where fore-fathers or ancestors of the ethnic groups lived. This act dis-
criminated against the pastoralists as they were not regarded as people originating in
the land, as they had just settled in the village; they thus lost their longstanding land
access rights mainly for grazingand medicinal purposes. Results showed that the so
called local or indigenous people appeared and claimed rights to land which they had
neither occupied nor used for generations but claimed that their ancestors had once
lived there or were buried there.
Results showed also that lack of traditional leaders or elders with indigenous spatial
knowledge (ISK) including customs and traditions concerning various rural areas and
their history, have affected the fair treatment during the formalizationprocess in both
study areas. This concern was also raised by Fairley (2013) who pointed out that
customary systems are usually managed by a land or village chief, traditional ruler or
council of elders. Lack of this composition in our villages has made it easy fot for-
mal village leaders to sometimes collude with unethical individuals to abuse the cus-
toms and tradition.
158
Results in Box 4-6 narrate the effects of unregulated customs and tradition on equita
ble distribution and access to land especially with respect to gender equity.
Box 4-6: Effects of Customs and Tradition on gender
"There is a challenge of gender inequity because of Nyiha tribe which dominatesEast Mbozi constituency. For Wanyiha the issue of gender equality had improveddue to sensitization. Nyiha families are polygamists such that in case when a malehead of household dies disputes over property inheritances arise."To avoid such oc-currences, women are being involved because in most cases those men are the oneswho die first. Wanamwango ore quite exploitative, especially those from Zambia,and in most cases they do not like women to participate in the decision-making pro-cess " .
Source: Interview with a Key Informant at Mbozi Land Office. 1510612012
Similarly, data in Box 4-7 show the results from interviews with key informants in
Handeni District which prove that control of land is in the hands of clans and fami-
lies and not the VLTIs.
Box 4-7: Customs and Land Access in Handeni Case Studv
Source: Interview with a Land Official at Handeni Land Office on 8.08.2012
This implies that inequities and inequalities in land ownership will persist unless
there is a joint effort to clear misunderstandings of the legality of land in the villages
by the government otherwise the landless will remain landless unless other land mar-
According to the Wazigua tradition, lqnd is inherited; therefore if one wants land he
or she has to apply for it from the clan of the family group. Land is inherited; other-
wise one has to apply for it from the clan land because many communities live on
clan land. Our clan of Mbuzini has many individuals. In some villages there are
Iandless who are engaged in non-farm or agricultural activities.
159
ket forces such as redistribution are in place. As observed and reported by Ole Ko-
syando (2007),joint titling and registration by women and men was the exception
rather than the norrn, and men, often in polygamous marriages, registered all proper-
ty under their name.
(ii) Results on Mechanism and Approach to Formalization
Analysis of data on formalization from both case studies shows that the use of spo-
radic registration left many land rights undefined and insecure. This Optional regis-
tration allowed those whose land had been systematically adjudicated to opt to regis-
ter or not register their land rights. In the Mbozi case, for example, systematic adju-
dication adjudicated boundaries of about 971 land rights in Sakamwela village but
only 207 CCROs (21%) of these were titled and registered; in Msia village there
were I 104 adjudicated parcels whereby only 200 CCROs (18%) were titled and reg-
istered. This implies possibility for intra-generational inequity as the identified rights
among various social groups such as male and female, children and others are not
known in the village land register. Feminist theory is concerned with the emangipa-
tion of both male and female.
In the case of Handeni, the use of spot or sporadic adjudication left many rights un-
registered as the approach depended on the voluntary claims by the would be land
owners. Results show that in Bongi village, for example, formalization approach of
spot adjudication created what Ole Kosyando (2007) called new landlords and for-
malized landlessness. Results from the interview with the village executive officers
showed that the identification of land owners during the adjudication process was a
160
challenge to the village leaders as they did not know the owners of some parcels es-
pecially those which were not developed.
Results in BOX 4-8 show the position of the legal officer on the issue of landlessness
in the formalization process.
Box 4-8: Remarks of a I Officer on Formalization and Landlessness
Source: Interview with a Senior Lesal Officer in the MLHHSD on 4.7.2012
It is apparent that the formalization process did not entail allocation as provided for
in the policy, laws and regulations which means that one who had no land to claim to
be formalized(adjudicated, titled and registered) will remain as landless.
(iit) Formalization Approach of sporadic registration
Results from the interviews with key informants at the MLHHSD and at MKU-
RABITA showed each had approaches of registration of rural land rights as claimed
by the existing users. There was no redistribution or assessment of the land rights
needs among villagers. Although the PRSP recognized the rampant inequalities in
terms of rural land ownership patterns the implementation strategy of the Village
Land Act aimed at recording the existing land rights without considering earlier ob-
served inequalities in land ownerships. The PMU of MKURABITA though focusing
on the testing of the functionality of the enacted new land laws, attempted to address
the issue of sex by ensuring the inclusion of the names of women in the titled and
registered land rights.
There is no consideration for vulnerable groups, the status quo will be maintained,and if one is landless then he or she will remain landless.
r61
This result is similar to what Smith (2008) contends when he refers to formalization
as a documentation that builds a public memory that permits society to engage in
such crucial economic activities as identifuing and gaining access to information
about individuals, their assets, their titles, rights, charges and obligations; establish-
ing the limits of liability for businesses; knowing an asset's previous economic situa-
tion; assuring'protection of third parties; and quantifying and valuing assets and
rights. Sporadic registration as a factor enabled the knowledgeable elite to register
their rights while those who were not aware of the importance left their rights inse-
cure.
(w) Village Land Tenure Institutions (VLTIs)
Results from interviews with key informants on their ability to allocate land, showed
that these institutions, particularly the village assembly, rarely meet to approve a land
rights claims. This result was witnessed in seven villages visited in Mbozi district
and even the senior land officials confirmed that these meetings are rarely called. In
Handeni, results from interviews with respondents showed that these institutions
meet to approve land rights claims but they have no land to allocate as all land be-
longs to individual clans and families.
The Composition of the Village Assembly: According to the Local Government (Dis-
trict Authorities) Act No.7 of 1982, a village assembly is composed of all villagers
aged 18 years and above and it insists that atleast 50% of this group must attend the
meetins for it to be valid.
t62
Results in Table 4-L7 show that by year of 2012 Msia village assembly was com-
posed of 2,988 members. From this table it is apparent that such a number of mem-
bers to the village assembly can be ineffective when it comes to making decisions.
The composition of the village assembly depends on the population of each category
of sex. Such a composition is ineffective and that is why results from interviews
showed that the VA meetings were rarely convened for the purpose of approval of
land rights claims. Results from the examination of village documentation in all the
nine villages did not show any evidence of the minutes of the village assemblies.
This problem is structural because not every issue is sensitive to all villagers to the
extent that members may always wish to attend the meeting in which they are mem-
bers. The experience of the researcher shows that in some cases, members to the Vil-
lage Councils all attend the meeting if they are sure that there will be a sitting allow-
ance. This has always been the cases in land deals that need evidence of meetings of
the VC before the application is forwarded to the higher authorities for approval.
Where VLTIs as local government institutions are weak and ineffective then fairness
and justice become a nightmare. Bruce (1994) remarked on this situation 20 years
ago by saying that control of land and viable local government seem to be inextrica-
able 4-17: Members to Villaee Assemblv in Ivula Villaee in MboziS/N Category Number
I Total population 6288
2. Children under the age of 18 years 3300af Number of households 1 5364. Village Assembly Members(6288 less 3300) 2,988
Source: Iyula Village Executive Office, 2012.
t63
bly tied together in rural Africa. A local govemment which does not control land is
almost irrelevant, given that the concerns of rural people are so focused on land
(Bruce, 1994).
(v) Methods of Land Access
Land in rural areas, as is the case. even in urban €reas, can be accessed by inheritance,
direct acquisition (buying) or free allocation by the government authority.
Results in Table 4-18 indicate the sexes of beneficiaries of formalization and how
they accessed land which was formalized.
Table 4-18: Sex and Means of Land Access
Source: Field Data, 2012
Note: VA :Village Authority; I :Inheritance and DA :Direct Acquisition
Results show that 179 beneficiaries (57 .9%) got land through inheritance while direct
acquisition (buying) amounted to 79 beneficiaries (26%) and the allocation by village
assembly was to 49 beneficiaries (16.1%). In the sexual analysis, results show that,
25 female (62,5%) and 151 male (59.4%) got land through inheritance. Direct acqui-
sition which means buying from owners was the second means of access whereby l0
female (25%) and 67 male (24.6%).
SexMethods of Land Access
TotalVA I DA
Female Frequency 5 25 10 40
%o within sex 12.5o/o 62.5Yo 25.UYo r00.0%
Male Frequency 36 l 5 t 67 254
%o within sex 14.2% 59.4% 26.4%;o 100.0%
Count 49 t76 79 304
164
Results in Figure 4-7 below present a graphic view of the land access. It is apparent
that inheritance takes a lion share in land access whereby out of 262 benefrciaries
176 beneficiaries (67.2%) inherited land. Inherited land is a clan or family land un-
like a self acquired land.
Means of Land Access in the Studv Areas
Direct Acquisit ion
lnher i tanceI Number
Village Authority
Figure 4-7: Means of Land Access in Both Study Areas
Source: Field Data, 2012
From the experience of the researcher, even where an individual buys land from an-
other person, the law requires the VLTI to certifu the transaction. Those whb ac-
cessed land from the village authority were allocated unoccupied village land, some
of which resulted into disputes as village assemblies did not approve them, for ex-
ample, in Iyendwe and Sakamwela villages. As the results show, this implies that
those whose parents had no land to allocate to their heirs could remain landless.
This applies to those who had no money to buy land and meet the cost of land acqui-
sition which includes meeting the cost of the village council to consent the land sale.
Similar results by FAO show that disparities on land access are one of the major
causes for social and gender inequalities in rural areas.
165
Gender differentiated rights to land have implications on rural food security and nu-
trition as well as on the wellbeing of rural families and individuals.
Data in Figure 4-8 present the challenges facing village leaders in the administration
of the village land.
Figure 4-8: challenges to village Leaders on Village Land Administration
r Lack of land todistribute
r Lack of Capacity
r Land Disputes
Source: Interview with Leaders from Case Villages,2}l2
It shows that out of nine leaders interviewed, 2 (22.2%) mentione d capacity io ad-
minister village landwhile 4 (44.4%) mentioned land disputes while 2 (22.2%o) men-
tioned the lack of land to allocate as challenges while 1 leader (IIJ%) had no com-
ment. These rdsults concur with the concerns raised by respondents on the formaliza-
tion process who said lhat these village leaders and their councils do not have land to
allocate as the land belongs to individuals through their clans and families.
Results from interviews further showed that some village leaders such as the Chair-
persons of Iyendwe and Sakamwela villages respectively were ousted from power by
166
the Village Assemblies following allegation that they alienated land to non villagers
without the approval of the village assemblies. However, the land allocation, though
unapproved by the VLTIs, was registered at the District Land Registry. Similar re-
sults related to land conflicts particularly between farmers and pastoralists were re-
ported by the representative of TAPHGO. Results further show that the approach to
formalization was not in the hands of village councils hence rural communities be-
came aware of the purpose of the project in its final stage when they were asked to
fill in applications for certificates of rights of customary occupancy. Similar results
by Ole Kosyando (2007) showed that formalization process in Handeni case raised
awareness of land ownership to "near hysterical proportion", paving way for unantic-
ipated rash for land rights claims or grabbing.
Results from interview in Box 4.9 show how weak the VLTIs are especially when it
cames to equitable land distribution in the formalization process.
BOX 4-9: Available Land Access Approach for the Landless
An individual can only get land by hiring from those who have enough land. In this
village we have families with land which is enough for leasing out to others for de-
velopment.
Source: Interview with the Key Informant in Mbuyuni Villaee on8l8l20l2
The weakness of these institutions emanates from the fact that they lack legitimacy
when it comes to decisions of land allocation. Besides. members to these institutions
are the customary owners of the land and thus can end in conflicts when one member
senses the possibility of losing his or her land rights.
r67
As land distribution roles were delegated to the VLTIs, the study asked respondents
to explain their perception on the abilities of these institutions to allocate village to
their villagers.
Results in Table 4-19 show the extent of satisfactions from the respondents.
Table 4-19: Extent of Satisfaction by Sex and Institutions for VLTIs to AllocateLand
Source: Field Data, 2012
Kev:Very Much satisfied - can best allocate village land; Much satisfied - can fairly allo-
cate land; Satisfied - can allocate; Very Little - can poorly allocate land.
Those who were very much satisfied that the VLTIs can allocate land to villagers ad-
equately werc 32 in total whereby male were 27(8'a.a%); female 2(6.3%) and the NA
represented directors of organizations which were23(9.4%). As results further show,
102 respondents (33.8o/o) werc satisfied and in terms of sex 16 female (15.7%) and
81 male (79.4%) were in this category.
Figure 4.9 below presents a graphical situation on the perception of respondents on
the ability of VLTIs to manage the village land. These results are in line with the re-
sults from interviews with respondents who said that village councils do not own
Extent of SatisfactionSex
TotalFemale Male lnstitutionsVery Much Satisfied 2(63%) 27(84.4%) 3(e.4%) 32Much Satisfied e(r2.7%) 6r(8s.e%) r(r.4%) 7 lSatisfied r6(rs.7%) 8r(7e.4%) s(49%) t02Very Little t3(r3.4%) 83(8s.6%) 1(1 .0%) 97
40(13.2%) 2s2(83/%) r0(33%) 302
168
land. In practice, these institutions have been helpful in acting as witness when land
is transferred from one hand to the other.
Figure 4-9: Respondents' Perceptions on the Ability of VLTIs to Distribute Land
Source: F ield data, 2012
The results presented above concur with the result by Fairley (2013) that national
policies designed to incorporate all land in a one-size-fits-all cadastre are unlikely to
tecognize the variability of environmental conditions or differences in regional and
local histories, politics, and economic circumstances. The findings from this study do
not differ from those of Fairley (2013) that the policies and strategies behind rural
land rights formalization in Mbozi and Handeni Districts have made some existing
land rights insecure that is why there had been elements of land disputes between and
among social groups.
As previously pointed out by Fairley (ibid), lack of recognition of congruence be-
tween daily needs of rural social groups and everyday lives, on one hand, and gov-
ernment intervention, on the other, and has made formalization inequitable in terms
50
,40b0s30Ezotu10
0Agree
stronglyAgree Neither Disagree Strongly
agree or disagreedisagree
r Handeni:Mbozi
t69
of intra-generations. This implies that formalization process was to a large extent
void of assessment of the land rights needs among various groups as the process con-
centrated on the registration of the existing rights which in essence were distributed
in an inequitable manner.
Summary of the key Findings
a) In both case studies, participation was in the form of showing boundaries of farms
during boundaries adjudication and for some, during the attendance of the statuto-
ry meetings of the village councils and village assemblies. Furthermore, close par-
ticipation was in the case of Handeni District as their mission was to test the
workability of the new laws but in the Mbozi case participation was effective dur-
ing the systematic adjudication and became ineffective afterwards.
b) Mechanisms used for formalization were Systematic and spot or sporadic bounda-
ries adjudication in both Case Studies. On titling and registration both cases used
the sporadic titling and registration. This approach left many land rights insecure
especially in the Mbozi Case where a lot of resources (financial and human) had
been used to systematically adjudicated boundaries of many farms. Generally, the
process lacked what Shao (2008) calls democratic participation as some segments
of village assembly members (the pastoralists in Handeni District) were denied
land rights access.and ownerships for the areas which they had been using for
grazing purposes for many years.
170
4.2.4 Objective 4
To idenffi roles played by central and local government institutions and villagers
towards promotion of equitable distribution of and access to land to the household
and village levels.
Results in Table 4-20 below present actors and the roles which they played or where
expected to play in the formalization process in both case studies.
Table 4-20: Main Institutions and Villagers in the Formalization Process
Institution RoleMinistry of Lands, Hous-ing and Human SettlementDevelopment (MLHHSD)
Ensured implementation of the VLA by initiating apilot in Mbozi District; Surveyed Villages and is-sued Certificate of Village Land; Supplied relevantstationeries in pilot villages; Applied Systematic ad-judication and provided land professionals; con-structed village land registries.
President Office Facilitated operation of the PBFP through fundingDonor Communities(World Bank, EU)
Provided funding in the formalization process
Village Council Received claims for land rights and had to submitthem to the Village Assembly.
Village Assembly Approve or reject land rights claimsMKURABITA Coordinated the process in Handeni Pilot by financ-
ing the process; employed spot adjudication; hiringof staff in the formalization; built the village landregistries; ensured compliance to the laws in pro-moting equity by including names of women in theCCROs and coordinated land use plans and villageby laws; constructed 7 village land registries.
Handeni and Mbozi Dis-trict Councils
Ensured compliance to the local government laws;land officer registered CCROs, participated in theprocess through technical staffand village leaders.
Villagers Showed the boundaries of the land they owned;members to the village assemblies and some to thevillage councils; clarified on customs and norms re-lated to villase land tenure
Source: Own Construct, 2014.
r7l
Villagers in both case studies played two roles as land owners who had to show the
boundaries of their land so as to facilitate adjudication process; as members to the
Village Councils and Village Assemblies they played the role of approving the
claims of land rights as submitted by claimers.
Results from Mbozi Case Study showed that the Ministry of Lands, Housing and
Human Settlements Development and Mbozi District Council (referred to as gov-
ernment institutions) played a significant role in promoting intra-generational equity
through the use of systematic adjudication whereby land rights owners were record-
ed.
Results in Figure 4.10 shows how systematic adjudication ensured identification of
ownership patterns by showing sex of owners including cases where male and female
owned the adjudicated lands.
Number of owners
Male and Female
I Number of owners
Figure 4-10: Results of Systematic Boundary Adjudication and Sex in Mbozi
Case Study
Source : F ield D ata, 20 12
t72
Results from Figure 4-10 further showed that in Mbozi District, only 35 female
(I3.4%) had the boundaries of their farms adjudicated as sole owners. As the objec-
tive of the exercise was to record claims as they were submitted, it is apparent that
the process did not address the problem of inequity that still exists in these areas.
Results from interview with key informants show that the adjudicated team played a
significant role of ensuring cultural norrns which biased against women on clan land
are not entertained. Unfortunately, it was beyond the scope of this study to investi-
gate this matter.
This was a good start for the promotion of equity as the names of both male and fe-
male were made clear during the initial adjudication process. However, this was in-
adequate as there was no clarification on the rights of those mentioned, for example,
results of the archival documents showed names but did not describe relationships of
those who were mentioned. As pointed out earlier, this effort was half-baked because
during the actual titling and registration of land rights, the govemment left the pro-
cess to be optional resulting into some rights remaining unrecorded. This appqoach
made the entire process inequitable in term of intra generation.
(i) Promoting procedural/participatory eq uity
Results from interviews showed that these institutions were supportive in ensuring
that there was proof of ownership whenever there were alienation between one vil-
lager and the other. From the interviews with respondents these local institutions,
namely, the Village Councils and Assemblies are legitimate when it comes to making
decisions on the welfare of villases and their members.
' l
I
I
173
In the context of the promotion of distributional equity, results from interviews with
key informants and progress reports showed that the process of formalization did not
include new allocation or distribution of land; therefore, the roles of the VLTIs was
to prove if the presented land rights claims were authentic or not. Unfortunately
enough, results from interviews with key informants at the District level showed that
meetings of village councils and village assemblies were rarely conducted and where
they were convened there was no evidence in the form of minutes of either a village
council or a village assembly to show decisions on the land rights claims. The pro-
cess of formalization did not entail actual distribution as there were approvals of land
claims as submitted to the village assembly for decision making. Although formali-
zation in Mbozi District did not involve preparation of village land use plans, results
from observation in the offices of villases that the researchers visited showed that
there were village land use plans.
The presence of village land use plans was an indicator for the existence of descrip-
tion of the uses of land which if complied with can help the current and future gener-
ations hence inter generational equity.
Data from the formalization implementation reports showed that the MLHHSD
played a significant role in the form of sensitization of the village land law and the
importance of formalization of land rights of villagers, and revealed the provision of
funds (with the support of donor community such as the World Bank etc), provision
of technical staff especially land surveyors and cartographers who prepared aerial
photos, adjudicated boundaries of parcels and the actual certification of land rights in
pilot villages within the areas. Results from interviews and focus group discussions
174
in Mbozi case. study showed that the Central Government played a role of financing
the design and construction of village land registry in some pilot villages so as to
host the effective administration of the village land. However, results from observa-
tion in the case villages such as Iyendwe, Ikana and Namchinka found that the offic-
es had no facilities for storage of land records. These villages are implementing for-
malization in a sporadic approach.
Although the Village Land Regulations (2001) require that in each village there
should be a village land register, results from observation during the field visit in
Mbozi and Handeni Case Studies found that only one village of Msia (pilot village)
out of the nine sample villages had a village land register and this amounted to
Il.1% of the sample villages.
This has a long-time effect on the entire villagers and others as they cannot access
land information especially when a need arises such as transfer, mortgage, or proof
before the court of law in case of a dispute.
Results further showed that, actors in the formalization process could not play their
roles adequately in protecting rights of lulnerable groups especially married females
because as analyzed earlier in this study about 164 (62.1%) manied male claimed
their land rights as single individuals and later they were titled and registered as such
without guidance of the registrar of the customary rights of occupancy. This result
implies that key actors could not adequately play their roles of protecting rights of
some vulnerable groups like women and it is a good indicator the actors were not ef-
fective in promoting access to land by women as provided for in the laws, policies
175
and regulations. These results were also noted by Hanstad (2014) who argued that
the existence of laws, policies and regulations protecting women's rights does not
mean that women can actually exercise those rights.
Table 4-21 shows the decentralized powers of land size distribution as provided for
under Regulation 76(1) of the Village Land Regulations, 2001 of the 1999 Village
Land Act.
Table 4-21: Consent on Village Land Size Holding in Tanzania
SA{ Land Size (Hectares) Consenting Authority
I 0-20 Villase Council to consent
2. 21-s0 District Council to signify in writing to the vil-lage council that it consents to that application
3 . More than 50 Commissioner of Lands
Source: Village Land Regulations, 200i
Legally, joint ownership applies well where owners acquired land at one time but as
majority of rural male inherits land before marriage then the jointly registered rights
are tenancy in common. Results further show that the decentralized role of the
VLTIs to distribute land to villagers was abused as some Village Leaders (Chairper-
sons and Village Executive Officers) allocated or alienated village land to outsiders
without the approval of the VLTIs resulting into land disputes. These malpractices
forced Assemblies of the villages of Sakamwela and Namchika to remove from of-
fices Chairpersons of the respective villages based on the provisions of the Local
Government (District Authorities) Act No.7 of 1982. The misconduct of these lead-
ers resulted into the distortion of the intra-generational equity as available land for
176
future distribution and access among villagers was compromised through inequitable
distribution to those regarded by the villagers as foreigners.
Results from the village land registers showed that village institutions did not abide
by the requirements of this law in performing their duties in this matter. The data
showed that in Iyendwe village, for example, about 22 respondents titled and regis-
tered their land rights out of which 3 respondents (13.64%) registered land with area
above 50 acres without the approval of the VLTIs as there was no evidence in the
office. Results further showed the decentralized functions of allocating land to
VLTIs were not effective in the study areas as village leaders colluded with the "GIS
Pioneers" to fast track sporadic adjudication without considering the allowed farm
size of not more than 50 acres. This practice was popular in villages where adjudica-
tion was sporadic such as Iyendwe, Namchinka, Nkangamo and Ikana. In Namchin-
ka village, for example, results of the analysis of the data from the district land regis-
try (as the Village had no Register of Village Land) revealed that one individual had
acquired about 200 acres spread into 8 CCROs each with approximately 49.02 acres.
Data showed that for example, the holders of CCRO No.43MBZ 117581 and
43MBZ|I7588 had 81.273 and 90.871 acres respectively making a total of 172.144
acres. In Iyendwe Village, results from interview with respondents realized that vil-
lage institutions were not playing their roles in controlling land sizes. In this village,
results show that one respondent had formalized about 13 separate farms (each with
an area of at least 49.3 acres) and all ten parcels were registered in his name making
a total area of 494.856 acres while the rest farms were resistered in the name of his
wife. Similarly, results also show that out of 41CC;, registered, one person
t77
owned 3 separate farms in his name (62M82119567, 62MBZ|571 and 62MBZ 1572)
making a total of 93.553 acres.
These results imply that the VLTIs did not play their role of ensuring that land size
above 50 had to be approved by the District Authority as provided for in the Village
Land Regulations. These results have equity implications because if the village land
transfers go on like this there is likelihood that in the near future, there will be no
land for allocation and access to the landless and the young generation. These
CCROs were registered without the approval of the village councils and even the dis-
trict land allocation committee as required under the Village Land Act No.5, 1999
and thus they are null and void.
Results of this nature had earlier been mentioned by Deininger (2003) who said that
one of the problems of using sporadic adjudication during the first time registration is
that the well-to-do people (elite) can use the chance to grab land belonging to others
or which is needed for common use etc. The participatory approach which is known
as systematic adjudication would have been useful if and only if the government had
continued using it. However, even where it has been used as was the case in Mbozi
District, the actors let the actual documentation of land rights became sporadic hence
the turned out to be insecure. According to the Village Land Act No.5, 1999, Village
leaders have a role of coordinating the preparation of CCRO through consultation
with the VLTIs, but results from observation and interviews with key informants in
Mbozi District show that in villages such as Iyendwe, Namchinka, Ikana and Nkan-
gamo where adjudication methods was sporadic, land owners who wanted to formal-
ize thefu land had to seek the service of the GIS Pioneer (an individual who can use a
r78
hand-held GPS) to survey their farms. Then the GPS Pioneer had to accompany the
landowner to the village where land is located to undertake boundary adjudication.
+Results in Plate 4.p show the process of preparation of a map to be affixed on the
CCRO. It is a computerised process which is possible at the District and not at every
rural environment.
Plate 4-42 Computerised CCRO Preparation in the Mbozi Case Study
Source: Photo by the Researcher on 1510612012Results from interview with the key informant and observation showed that this plan
of a parcel was being prepared by GIS Pioneer in Mbozi Land Offrce after the spo-
radic boundary adjudication. From this plate, the names such as Paulo Sichalwb and
Salama Njisiwe refer to neighbours. Other details such as Shamba Na 83 mean Farm
No.83 while Ekari means acres (7.065 acres). The adjudication process uses general
boundary approach which has no fixed beacons.
The work is done in GIS Laboratory. "GIS Pioneer" accompanies the land owner to
the village; meet the village leaders and some neighbours to verify boundaries. Re-
sults from the interview with kev informants show further that after the GIS Pioneer
t79
had taken the details of the boundaries of the land, they prepared the farm plan and
the Certificate of Customary Rights of Occupancy (CCROs).
After the CCRO is ready, it is signed by landowner(s) and then taken to the village
leaders for signature and back to the District Land Officer (register of customary
rights of occupancy) for registration. This process of sporadic titling and registration
entails what can be regarded as 'going back andforth" for the rural land owners and
thus it is expensive. Data on Ikana village which has an area of 4519 Ha show that
there are only 23 parcels with total area of l98l.93 acres had been adjudicated, titled
and registered but the village has a population of 654 people. Speculators had ac-
quired and registered their land in this village because the land is along Tunduma-
Sumbawanga Highway and the soil is said to be fertile and suitable for paddy farm-
ing.
The result on the preparation of CCROs at the District level in Mbozi was also ob-
served by Fairley (2013) which implies that the roles of the village leaders, particu-
larly the village executive officer, to prepare customary rights of occupancy, are not
performed at the village level as claimed by the government.
Reports from the Program Implementation Unit (Pru) of MKURABITA, the partici-
pation and progress of NGOs and the interviews with respondents showed that
MKURABITA played key role in collaboration with the villages during the pilot
stage. Results from interviews with the key informants showed that in Handeni Dis-
trict, there was a team of graduate students who were hired from the then University
College of Lands and Architectural Studies (UCLAS) now Ardhi University ,to par-
ticipate in the implementation process of the exercise.
180
Data further showed that Handeni District Council and Village institutions mainly
village councils and the village assemblies(VlTls) had a role of receiving processed
documents from the implementation team and endorsing them and chair relevant
meetings to discuss and approve or reject the application of land rights claims. It is
obvious that as the exercise was a project with a fixed period of time (82 days) every
planned activity had to be done as scheduled and meet the mission plans as expected.
Results from interview with PIU members at MKURABITA and a report by Ole Ko-
syando (2007) showed that the plan was adjudicate 3500 farms in 7 villages but by
the time the exercise ended, only 617 CCROs had been prepared. There were several
planned activities related to the formalization process in the Handeni Case Study as
summarised in Appendix 2.
Results from literature and interviews showed that MKURABITA played a signifi-
cant role of coordinating closely the procedure for approval of land rights claims as
they were submitted to the Village Land Tenure Institutions for either approval or
rejection. In the context of intergenerational equity which required setting land use
rights for present and future use, results showed that there was participatory guidance
for preparation of village land uses plans including by-laws so as to ensure compli-
ance and enforcement. The preparation of village land use plans was one of good
achievement in the context of sustainable development or intergenerational equity as
they defined land uses classes for current and future uses. With the village use plans
there were areas set for future use; current use by different groups such as pastoral-
ists and peasants etc. It was unfortunate as results from Bongi village showed that
some individuals were against the proposed land use plans claiming that their land
181
had been taken. In practice, one of the weaknesses of the theory behind approach in
the preparation of the village land use plans is the assumptions that unoccupied land
in villages is not owned and thus these plans tend to impose land uses rights on the
user rights of other people resulting into land related conflicts and hence inequitable.
Even Deininger. et.al., (2012) were concerned about this wrong practice inTaruania.
Results from interview with key informants and the available documentation show
that the roles of MKURABITA in the Handeni case study was to test the workability
of both the Village Land Act (VLA) of 1999 and the Land Use Planning Act No.6 of
2007 which had just been enacted by then (ole Kosyando, 2007, MKURABITA,
2007).
Data in Box 4.10 is a result of interview with key informant in Bongi village who
blamed the District Land Office for interfering with, adjudicating, titling, registering
and issuing a land rights to an individual without the approval of the Village Assem-
blv.
Box 4-10: Weakness of District land Office in Village Land Administration
One non Governmental Organization (NGO) applied for land from our villageto construct a University and villagers agreed as they expected to benefit fromthe service in the form of employment and enrolment of their children. Later
on, we came to realise that the NGO had neither such a plan nor ability to do
so.
rce: Interview wi gr xecutlve
In line with the narration made in Box 4.10, results from archival records in the Vil-
lage showed that two individuals who identified themselves as representatives of
Mwenge University College of Education were allocated land of 364.9 acres vide
CCRO No.8/HDN/129 of 3010812010 for development of a University in the village.
r82
Results from interviews with the key informants at both the village and district levels
showed that the District land allocation Committee was not consulted to approve the
land distribution as the law requires. In such transactions, the Trustees Incorporation
law requires that those accepting allocation of land on behalf of the registered trus-
tees must be registered trustees. Results from records and interviews with the key
informants showed that during the allocation of land they did not verify if those who
accepted the offer were registered trustees of the Catholic Diocese of Moshi or not.
This implies that those entrusted with the power to manage village land are not
knowledgeable with the law and thus compromising availability of land for the future
generation in their villages. During the field visit in the village, already a letter with
Reference Number I/SKJ/BG 12812012 undated had already been drafted to go to the
Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements De-
velopment (MLHHSD) to revoke the CCRO, This, again, is an evidence that the Vil-
lage Leaders who have been delegated these sensitive roles do not understand the
village land administration procedure.
Furthermore, results from progress and implementation reports showed that PIU of
MKURABITA was strict in the coordination to ensure that all land rights claims
were presented to the meetings of the vill4ge assembly for approval. However, Ole
Kosyando, (2007) who participated in the exercise argued that these meetings did not
ascertain sizes or boundaries of the claimed land rishts. Results from the interviews
with the key informants at all levels that particip"r; in the program could not pro-
duce the minuies of the VA to show the details of those who attended.
183
Ole Kosyando (ibid) reports that there was quite some struggling from practically
everyone to grab as much unused land adjacent to one's farm as was possible. In this
process of land grabbing, backed by a misconception of the "customary" right of
occupancy, those claiming that their ancestors were buried under certain land and,
therefore belonged to them, displaced a lot of people. As Ole Kosyando (ibid) report-
ed, the misconception of the word 'customary tenure' resulted into indigenous com-
munity, mainly the Wazigua and Wabondei, removing from land some communities
mainly the pastoralists. Results from interviews and focus group discussions with
representatives of pastoralists in Bongi village revealed that the village leaders could
not enforce the approved land use plan because of the misconception of the term cus-
tomary which was used to deny those rights to the use of the designated areas for
grazing purposes. These results serve as evidence that the formalization process has
been inequitable in terms of land distribution and access to by all social groups as
stated by the National Land Policy (1995).
Save for the involvement of the VLTIs in endorsing or rejecting land claims, cgrtain
social or occupational groups particularly the pastoralists became vulnerable as the
land that they were using for grazing purposes was claimed by other villagers. These
results imply that the entire process for distribution was inequitable in the procedure
or participation. As argued by Mc-Dermott (2011) regarding the contextual equity,
unequal power (re)produces inequity in its other dimensions which in essence means
that in the Handeni Case Study there were some social groups which were powerless
in the decision making process, hence the in-equitability in the process and thus in
the outcomes.
184
Results from literature showed that one of the roles of the villase leaders is to ensure
that statutory meetings are convened to deliberate on the village land issues. The in-
dicators for this were the village minutes for both village assemblies and village
councils; however, results of the interview with the village leaders in all nine villages
visited proved the absence of those records. In Bongi village, there were files with
some application of customary rights of occupancy but applicants could not differen-
tiate between joint tenancy and tenants in common as co- occupancy, hence even rel-
atives like brothers and sisters or son and his father, registered their land jointly
without the consent of the court as required under the law. This situation is caused
by the fact that these leaders had no experience of land titling including co-
ownership issues like these.
(ii) Administrution of the village lands registers
The study was interested in assessing the availability of land registers which in turn
provide land information at the village level. Results from observation showed that
registers were provided in the Handeni Case Study while in the case of Mbozi it was
only in the pilot villages such as Msia and Sakamwela.
Results in Box 4.11 show the remark of the Ministry on the administration of village
land resisters.
Box 4-11: Position of the MLHSD and Land ters at the VilVillage land registers ore at the district land ffice; therefore, if there is a personwho wants to examine land ownership information about a farm he or she has to goto the district land ffice.
Source: Interview with the Senior Land Official on 11 Jnly,2012
185
The remarks in BOX 4-11 is against the provisions of the law as it requires every
village to have a register of the village land. The district keeps records of registered
CCROs but each village is supposed to have a register for regular scrutiny by villag-
ers and other communities. Results from the examination of the records from the
Mbuyuni Village Land Register showed the programme prepared 49 CCROs but re-
sults from the District Land Registry showed that76 farms had been adjudicated, in-
dividualized and issued with the CCRO. This result implies that the role of preparing
the certificate of customary rights of occupancy is done at the District Land office
thus this role is theoretically decentralized but in practice it is still at the district lev-
el.
Results from a participation report by Mkulila (2007), who participated in the for-
malization process in the Handeni case study on behalf of the Legal and Human
Rights Centre (LHRC) showed that there were discrimination practices against mar-
ried women done by their husbands as they did not allow them to have their names
included in the registered land rights. There was a serious instance of polyganly and
other rituals of the Zigua community on women's land ownership that affected wom-
en (LHRC, 2007).Box 4.I2 shows result from interview with the Director of Proper-
ty and Business Formalization (DPBF) on the sexual issues during formalization pro-
CESS.
186
In line with the view in Box 4.12, it is apparent that even where the names of female .'
were included in the CCROs and defined as joint tenancy, many of the co-owners
missed some of the four important unities of time, title, interest and possession
Box 4-l2z Perception on the Control and Ownership of Land Resources
"You lcnow Tiba, control of larld resources is still in the hands of men. "We should
not rely on the statistical data only on ownership patterns".
Source: Interview with the DPBFP of PBFP 12th Julv. 2012.
This remark was also raised by Hanstadt lZOt+) who said that measuring legal
frameworks may be the easiest route to assess secure tenure for women but the exist-
ence of these policies, laws and regulations protecting women's rights do not mean
that women can actuallv exercise those rishts.
As results showed earlier in this study, many beneficiaries accessed land through
inheritance hence the spouse did not acquire at the same time; they had no equal right
to possession of the whole land as their husbands inherited land before mariiage.
Thus, as some of these elements were missing, the formed joint tenancies were inef-
fective and thus can be treated as tenancy in common6.
s Tim Hanstad is CEO of Landesa, a global development that works to secure landrights for the world's poor women and men. www.landes.org
6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenants in-common#Tenancy in- common accessedon Tuesday, 6tn May of 2014).
r87
This result on gender inequity as narrated here is an evidence that the formalization
process and the actors had no power on the patterns of land ownership relations be-
cause what was being done was registration of existing land rights as claimed which
were already gender biased. As earlier reported, Ole Kosyando (2007) from Tanzania
Pastoralists, Hunters and Gatherers Organization (TPHGO) narrates on the failure of
government institutions to control land grabbing:
Village Councils and Assemblies approved nearly every application and there wasno way the meetings could ascertain the size or boundaries of the land under appli-cstion. There was quite some struggling from practically everyone to grab as muchunused land adjacent to one's farm as was possible. In this process of land grabbing,backed by a misconception of the "customary" right of occupancy, those claimingthat their ancestors were buried under certain land and, therefore belonged to them,displaced a lot of people. Pastoralists were among the main casualties of this newcriterion of land ownership (page 15)...The misconception of the word "Customary" in the Certificate of Customary Right ofoccuponcy could be a basis for discrimination and conflict. In the context of the pilotproject area, the perception that emerged around the word was that to do with thelocal, the traditional, the ethnic or the clan or wider family historicql right to theland, which should exclude others on those bases (page 22).
The above argument by Ole Kosyando is supported by the results from interviews
with key informants in the Handeni Case who admitted that the control of farm size
distribution as provided for under Regulation 76(1) of the Village Land Regulations,
2001 was impossible.
188
Results in Box 4-13 show the results of an interview with the Director of Property
and Business Formalization Programme (DPBF) who supported concerns of Ole Ko-
syando(ibid) on the role of controlling land size during formalization.
Box 4-13: Roles of Managing Land Size in Formalization
Land size control is dfficult under formalization because you haveto delineate the area according to the information provided by theIand rights claimer there were no land size control.
Source: Interview with DPBF- MKURABITA onl3l07l20l2
Data from interviews with key informants showed that village land tenure institutions
could not manage the farm size as required under the Village Land Regulations. Re-
sults in Box 4-14 present the views of the Village Executive Officer on the issue of
controlling farm or land size during the adjudication process.
Box 4-l4z Causes of Failure to Manage Land Size in Formalization
Control of land size and legality of ownership was dfficult because the ad-judication team composed of the youth who were easily by passed (bribed)
by the land grabbers and after all they were not conversant with land own-erships in the oreas save for the clan issues.
Source: Interview with VEO of Mbuyuni Village on09l08l20l2
Similar result on the issue of setting of land ceiling came from the interview with the
key informant at the MLHHSD who argued that the land ceilings proposed in the law
have no control in practice and even those in existence lack management from higher
authorities. Box 4-15 shows the position of the key informant on the role and focus
of the Government on formalization process.
189
Box 4-15: Position of the Government on the Focus of Formalization
Formalization is concentrating on existing land rights; therefore granting custom-ary land rights will depend on the ovailability of reserve land within a village area(r3/07/2012).
Source: Interview with the Senior Leeal Officer" MLHHSD on 1310712012
It is apparent from these results that the role of the institutions in the formalization
process did not aim at reducing the existing land inequalities and inequities experi-
enced in rural areas. In terms of participatory equity, the above statement implies that
the use of people who are not conversant with the traditional and customary issues
related to rural land can alter the patterns of rural land ownership. Results from ob-
servations in the sampled villages showed that much of the formalized land was bush
land; hence, it was only possible for the youth to walk in those areas to identiff
boundaries. Since the process was sporadic, adjoining neighbours were not always
available during adj udication.
Village land use plans are vital when it comes to inter and intra generational equity
as they define who is to use which land resources currently and in the future. Results
from interview with the Head of the Department of Lands, Natural Resources and
Environment in Handeni District Council showed that the VLTIs were not capable of
ensuring that the proposed village use plans are adhered to through the use of the ap-
proved by-laws. As discussed earlier, the experience of the researcher is that often
village land use plans are in many cases prepared in such a manner as to impose land
use classes on the rights of other customary land rights owners. This was the case in
Handeni District as farms owned by some families were proposed to be used as ei-
ther grazing areas or village forest without the consents of the owners.
190
Box 4-16 presents the results from the interview with the Senior Land Official in the
Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development (MLHHSD) on
challenge of achieving the promotion of equitable distribution of and access to land
to all citizens.
Box 4-16: Remarks on Achieving Equitable Land Distribution
Equitable distribution and access to citizens meant everyone as o citizen and
not about the land size - in practice the implementation of this objective is
challenged by several issues such as culture and traditions which are discrimi-
nating (women and girls) in some areas.
Source: Interview with MLHHSD Senior Land Official. Dar es Salaam,l310712012
On the issue of ensuring that common land users such as pastoralists are allocated
land, results from interviews with key informants at the MLHHSD revealed that the
handling of common user groups such as pastoralists, is a challenge as it appeared
unclear to them as who exactly should be allocated land. Results from observation
during the field visit and interviews with key informants at all levels, commended
MKURABITA for the role they played in the construction of buildings that host the
Village Land Registry
191
Results in Box 4-17 show the strategy of the Handeni District Commissioner which
shed light towards addressing the problem of inequity especially on land access by
pastoralists.
BOX 4-17: Handeni District Strategy to Deal with Pastoralists
We have a stroteg) to resettle pastoralists because there are about 340,000 Ha ofIand which is not suitable for ogricultural development". This land is suitable forgrazing purposes while 300,000 ha are suitable for agriculture development. Weare planning to delineate land where pastoralists will be settled so that each willbe allocated land and become landowners and pastoralists" In Sindeni Villagethere is a pastoralist who has 700 heads of cattle but the village carrying capacity
for livestock is for 3))cattles only.
Source: Interview with Handeni District Commissioner on 1010812012
Box 4-18 presents results of the focus group discussion with the pastoralists on how
they were treated during the formalization process in this case study. This is in line
with the remarks made by an official from the MLHHSD that the govemment did not
know how to handle issue of mass tenure.
Box 4-18: Concerns of Pastoralists on Formalization in the Handeni Case Study
We were here during MKURABITA but we were unfairly treated during the landdistribution and titling process-now we are in Kwagunda Hamlet. We were notallocated land and the Human Rights Commission cqme qnd we complained... butin this village there are individuals with 200 acres covered by bush and forests.We have about 4000 cattle and 6000 goats here in Bongi village. Under MKU-MBITA, some areas have been delineated and we have been denied access, but
there are big lands which are not used but are claimed by the villagers to be
farms". (09tn August; 2012).
Source: Focus Group Discussion on 9th August, 2012
Results from examination of village land files and interviews with key informants in
Bongi village also showed that there were clan and families that claimed land rights
r92
for titling as groups other than individuals as was the mission of the formalization
process. Information from File documentation showed an application from one fami-
ly which wanted to register a land with estimated area of approximately six hundred
acres (600). Results showed that the family which had seventy seven (77) members
had appointed its eight individuals to be trustees of the rest. In the application docu-
ment it was shown that one man had been appointed to be a trustee team leader. Re-
sults from interview with the key informants at the Village showed that this applica-
tion was approved by the Village Council. Considering the size of the land in ques-
tion, it means that this application was subject to the approval of the Commissioner
for Lands. One question which each of us needs to ask is about the security of land
rights among these 77 members. It is apparent that even if the CCRO was issued and
registered, it was null and void before the law because this ownership is entirely in-
equitable in all aspects.
Besides, those who claimed to be trustees had not been registered as such, save for
the family itself. The Trustees Incorporation Act No.375 R.E of 2002 provides pro-
cedure for the registration of trustees. Generally, the mere act by the Village Council
to approve such land rights claim was contravening the law as the family was not a
legal entity. The approach entails indicators of inequities in terms of land size distri-
bution, intra generational and intergenerational as the land rights of the members are
not clarified. This problem is an indication that some families still prefer to own
land as clan or family groups although the aim of formalization was to get rid of such
traditional land ownership.
r93
Summary of Key Findings
(i) Institutions ensured that all existing rural land owners showed their lands to the
adjudication teams for adjudication of boundaries. The form alization process be-
ing pilots, the coordinating agencies were close to ensure that the requirements of
the laws are followed as required. Coordinating agencies ensured that land rights
were recorded during the adjirdication process; for example in the Handeni case,
coordinators concentrated on those who offered themselves to have their farms
adjudicated while in the Mbozi District, all farms were adjudicated systematically
during the pilots although later the process turned to be sporadic for both bounda-
ry adjudication and registration;
(ii) Institutions, mainly the coordinators, and the relevant local government authori-
ties ensured that rights of women were protected through the inclusion of their
names during the adjudication and titling process especially in the case of
Handeni District. In the Mbozi case, this was effective during the systematic ad-
judication as the land surveyors managed to record names of both males and fe-
males although the actual titling and registration became sporadic leaving many
land rights unregistered and hence it was inequitable;
(iiD The donor communities and NGOs played significant roles by financing the for-
malization process and acting as watchdogs hence facilitating the compliance to
the laws.
194
4.2.5 Summary of Performance in Promoting Equitable Distribution and Access
to Land in the Case Study: A Cross Case Analysis
In line with the presentation of results and discussions made so far in relation to the
objectives of this study, a cross- case analysis between the case study areas is sum-
marised here. As abstract terms they can be measured by analyzing results in terms
of land size distribution and gender equity which, as pointed out earlier in the PPAs,
are associated with the rural poverty. As presented throughout the literature and the
actual field results in both case study areas, the MLHHSD and PBFP/MKURABITA
were the coordinators of the formalization process in these case studies.
(i) Land Size Distribution in the Stady Areas
Results from the analysis in the performance of the coordinators of formalization in
the two study areas in terms of equity in the distribution and participation in the for-
malization process are as follows:
Results of the performance test in terms of land size distribution between the two dis-
tricts with the use of a sampl e of 262 respondents from Mbozi and 42 responde.rts
from Handeni case studies showed the goodness of fit Chi Square Test of X 2 (1, 304)
:6.713, while phi:0.010. According to the rule, these results (phi < 0.05l statistical-
ly imply that there is a relation between sizes of registered land parcels which are
owned in these two districts. It can be concluded from this result that the perfor-
mance of the two institutions in distributing farms is similar. The strength of rela-
tionship between these two case studies in terms of farm sizes means that the
MLHHSD and MKURABITA used the same approach in the recording of land rights
for formalization. This result is supplemented by the results from interviews and
195
documentation on formalization which showed that formalization was based on re-
ceiving land rights claims from owners.
Table 4.22 ptesents a summary of general performances between the case studies in
the context of the four objectives of this study.
196
able 4-222 Summary of Perlbrmance Between Case Studies Based on vesStudv Obiective Mbozi Case Studv Handeni Case StudyEquity in distribution andaccess to land
The approach concentrated on registering land rightsas requested by the villagers-gendered equity within intra-generational equity wasnot handled
The approach concentrated on registering landrights as requested by the villagers;Inter-generational and intra-generational equitywere of the concerned through village use plans
and inclusion of female names in the titles.Participation and mecha-nism of adjudication
Beneficiaries participated and formalization em-ployed systematic adjudication hence it coveredmany farms although titling became sporadic leavingmany rights unregistered hence it was inequitablewithin and between senerations.
Benefi ciaries participated and formalization em-ployed spot adjudication which leave many landrights undefined hence inequitable.
Driving forces for oragainst equitable distribu-tion
Laxity in enforcing lawApproach of formalization which aimed at register-ing land rights as claimed
Approach of formalization which aimed at regis-tering land rights as claimed;The misconception of the word "customary" af-fected some social groups in accessing or evenregistering the land they had been using.
Roles played by the Gov-ernment Institutions in theformalization process
Constructed the village land registry in the pilot vil-lages; Facilitated the sustainability of the formahza-tion through collaboration with the local government
authority,
Preparation of modem village use plans; Con-struction of modern village land registry in sevenvillages;Lacked sustainability of the formalization as themission of the programme was to test the lawsand not to implement them.
Source: Survey Data, 2012
r97
Furthermore, it is clear that formalization in Mbozi Case Study supported by the do- .'
nor communities such as the World Bank, had adjudicated more than 19,000 land
parcels and the approach had become sustainable in terms of continuity. The opposite
was true with the Handeni Case Study because upon MKURABITA completing their
mission, the formalization also slowed down and even during the field visit in the
District nothing was going on.
(ii) Performance in Sex Considerution Between Districts
Results in Table 4-23 present the ownership mode by male and female in the two
districts.
Table 4-23: Sex * District Cross Tabulation
Count Case studv district
TotalMbozi Handeni
SexFemale
J I J 4C
Male 2t5 39 254
NA l 0 0 l cTotal 262 42 304
Source: Survey Data, 2012
This result is in line with results from interviews with the key informants from both
districts that the approach of formalization focused on claims of land rights as sub-
mitted by the claimants. In many rural African environments land rights are in the
hands of men; even the first formalization under villagization of 1975 focused on
registering heads of households (who were mainly men) hence denying women land
ownership rights.
198
Results in Table 4-24 are supplementing the results in Table 4-23. This Table shows
the goodness fit Chi-Square Test, x2 (2,304), : 3.448, with phi : 0.lZg which is
greater than 0.05.
Table 4-24: Sex and District- Chi-square Tests
Source: Field Data, 2012
The result G, > 0.05) implies lack of significance between sexes and thus there was
no relation in terms of consideration of sex during the adjudication and titling pro-
cess in the two districts. It implies that this approach was gender insensitive and thus
did not promote land access by gender as intended in the land policy and even in the
Gender and Women Development Policy of 2000. This policy required the institu-
tions responsible with land surveying to consider and allocate adequate land to both
men and women.
It is apparent from the results that the Handeni Case was successful in enabling
women to have secured land rights registered because of the cross monitoring of the
process. The Mbozi Case Study was able to ensure recording of all land rights by use
of systematic adjudication although the actual documentation of land rights turned
out to be sporddic.
Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Likelihood Ratio 5.032 2 .081
Linear-by-Linear Association .81 l .368
N of Valid Cases 304a. I cells (l6.7yo) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.38.
r99
In terms of continuity and sustainability, Mbozi District is successful because from
2004 to the time the field research was conducted more than 17670 parcels had been
formalized an! the process was continuous. Unlike in the Mbozi Case Study, in
Handeni Case Study a token of almost 600 farms had been adjudicated and issued
with CCROs in seven Villages- only and the process officially ended when the
MKURABITA brigade stopped. Again, it was learnt that by the time the team left the
pilot, even these 600 CCROs were at different stages of registration although they
had been prepared. It needs to be noted that the registration process was top down as
it depended on the PMU facilitation.
This result is supplemented by the qualitative results which show that formalization
in both study areas concentrated on dealing with land claims as presented by individ-
uals. Therefore, there were no mechanisms of identiffing certain vulnerable groups
to be considered for land allocation and access. This was the fear of Shivji (1999)
when he said that a mere mention of gender in the policy and laws was not enough.
200
(iii) Performance in Participation Between the District Case Studies
Results in Table 5.25 present the trend of participation during the formalization
which was more in the determination of farm size during the adjudication process.
Table 4-25: Participation * Case Study District Cross tabulation
Source : F reld D ata, 20 12
Results from this Table show that 242 respondents (92.4%o) and 34 respondents
(80.95%) from Mbozi and Handeni Districts respectively said that they participated
in the adjudication of the boundaries of their land parcels during the formalizatron
process.
Results from the test of performance show a goodness of fit chi square test X 2
(1,304) of 5,639; with a phi : 0.018. These results ( p < 0.05 imply that there is a
relationship in terms of participation between Handeni and Mbozi Case studies. This
performance difference in the participation between the two case studies means that
there was no similarity between the MLHHSD and MKURABITA when it came to
participation or involv'ement of villagers during the formalizationprocess. This result
is supported by the results presented by Ole Kosyando (2007) who said that in
Handeni case study, the communities started to understand the purpose of the pro-
gramme as it was approaching the end.
Case study district
TotalMbozi Handeni
Participation in land size determina-
tion
Yes 242(92A%) 34(80.es%) 276
No 20(7.6%) 8(9.05%) 28
Iotal 262 42 304
201
The formalization approach in Mbozi Case Study, as implemented by the Govern-
ment, was in line with the implementation of the National Land Polic y, 1995 and its
subsequent Village Land Act No.5, 1999.
This study, being evaluative in nature, concludes that the formalization process en-
forced the existing inequalities which are a result of the inequities in the procedure of
land distribution and access. This conclusion was also made by Sharon (2000) while
remarking on inequities in land resource distribution. However, this initiative can be
seen as an historical improvement in the tessellation of farms in rural settinss in Tan-
zania.
In the Handeni Case Study, the programme aimed at testing or identifying weakness-
es of the Village Land Act No.5, 1999 andthe Land Use Planning Act No.6 of 2006
but the entire process was like a consultancy assignment. This was also observed by
Mkulila (2007) of LHRC who said that the exercise was full of fast tracking for dura-
tion of 82 days only. Results from observation showed that PBFP constructed mod-
em Village Land Offices which are now more of Village Executive Officer's Offices
rather than the Village Land Registries as were initially intended.
Results from observation in villages visited and even at the District Land Office in
Handeni did not show a significant sign of continuing the formalizationprocess. Re-
sults from interview with village leaders showed that formalization stopped because
communities are not adequately aware of the benefits of the exercise.
202
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
This chapter presents conclusions and recommendations about this study. In the in-
troduction of this study, the problems of skewed distribution of and access to rural
land in Tanzania, weak governance in dealing with rural land and the resulting land
conflicts and the initiatives of the National Land Policy (1995) to address this press-
ing issue were presented. This study was guided by the overall objective of exploring
and examining the extent to which formalization of village land rights promoted eq-
uitable distribution of and access to land by the diversity of social groups in Mbozi
and Handeni Districts inTanzania.
By focusing on this objective, this study aimed to contribute to knowledge on cadas-
tral research in rural land administration and to add to knowledge relating to the need
to re-engineer the decentralised rural land administration system in Tanzania. The
overall objective was broken into five specific objectives as previously narrated in
section 1.3.1. This chapter conclusions and recommendations based on the key find-
ings as presented in chapter four ofthis thesis. Finally, areas for further research are
proposed.
5.2 Summary of Key Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations
The summary of the major findings emanating from this study which were presented
in Chapter Four are now presented here to ease the linkages between them, conclu-
sions and the recommendations. They are within the framework of the obiectives of
203
this study. To be focused, the major key findings conclusions and recommendations
for each of the research objective are presented below.
5.2.1-Research Objective I
To explore and examine the level of equity in distribution and access to land among
social groups at the household and village levels
Summarv of Kev Findings
Formalization process was inequitable as it did not deal with land distribution and
access and thus left land ownership patterns in an inequitable manner. Assessments
of relationships between land sizes owned and the sizes of the households of owners
were size proved this situation. Intergenerational and intra-generational inequities
were realised in the form of weak relationships as even land use plans were ignored
including longstanding occupation and use of land by social groups such as pastoral-
ists.
Conclusions
The formalizatron process relied on the claims of existing land rights, hence, in equi-
table in distribution and access because those who had no land by then could be con-
sidered as a result some social groups like pastoralists in Handeni District were dis-
criminated; Basically, those who had been accessing land for their livelihood lost the
access rights as the parcels were registered to those who claimed to be owners.
204
Recommendations
ln line with the key findings presented above it is recommended to the Ministry of
Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development (MLHHSD) to
(i) Devise a mechanism for redistribution of rural land by enacting micro poli-
cies that can vest all property rights in vacant lands in the hands of the Dis-
trict Commissioners for redistribution and access.
(iD revise the approach of formalization by not only dealing with land rights
claims but also receiving applications for land allocation from those with no
land so as to facilitate equitable distribution of/and access to land to social
groups in villages inTarzania. The wise use of elders who are knowledgeable
with the customs and history of the areas will be useful;
(iiD work closely with the Ministries responsible for agriculture and Regional
Administration and local government to conduct land needs assessments at
each village and household. This assessment is vital as it will enable the Dis-
trict Government through the District Council, to understand the future land
needs and thus control alienation or even negotiate with land owners in the
villages so as to have their land availed for lease or rental to those in need;
This recommendation is not new as it was once made by the MLHHSD to all
district land officers to undertake a village viability assessment by establish-
ing carrying ,capacity of each village based on population for 20 to 30
years(Lerise,l996; Sundet, ibid).This was then in line with the Village Land
Titling under the Agriculture policy of 1983 aiming at identifying land for
foreign investors, a mission that proved a failure;
205
(v)
(iv) Extend adjudication and titling to other categories of tenure such as village
forests, water catchment areas, etc by even paying compensation to those who
claim to have rights in those areas as this is equitable hence it has intergen-
erational equity.
Participate in organizing awareness campaign and training aiming at building
the capacities of local institutions, rural land owners to participate adequately
in matters related to good local land governance especially in the allocation
of land to the diversity of social groups.
5.2.2 Research Objective 2
To identify factors and actors that have contributed to the sltccess, problems and/or
failure of the equitable land distribution of and access in the land formalization pro-
cess at the household ond village levels.
Summarv of Key Findings
The use of sporadic adjudication resulted into the loss of longstanding use of land
rights by pastoralists; laxity in actual titling and registration left systematically adju-
dicate rights of women untitled in Mbozi District. Relying on claims of existing land
rights left those with insufficient land unconsidered. Generally, Village lands Tenure
Insitutions were ineffective in administering village land especially in the control of
village land.
(ii)
206
Conclusions
(i) Formalization has managed to put into registry more than 17,000 CCROs for
a period of 8 years (2004-2012) in Mbozi District, which is an achievement
for recognizing existing longstanding land rights. Although the NLP principle
objective was to promote equitable distribution and access of land, still the
process has not been equitable (fair and just) as there was no land need as-
sessment for the diversities of beneficiaries hence the previously pronounced
land inequalities have remained intact. Also, life cycles of rural communities
were not considered.
The entire process of formalization did not aim at addressing the problem of
land inequality as intended rather it focused on the titling of the existing land
rights as claimed by the owners. The only attempt in the context of intra gen-
erational equity was the identification and inclusion of the names of women
or spouse in the CCROs. There is no significant difference between the two
case studies in terms of performance because each actor had a separate objec-
tive; while the MLHHSD through her Strategic Plan for Implementing New
Land Laws (SPILL) was implementing the Village Land Act, in the other
hand MKURABITA was testins the workabilitv of the VLA and the land Use
Planning Act.
Recommendations
This study recommends to the Ministries responsible for Lands, Regional Admin-
istration and Local Government to I
207
(i) Devise mechanisms for the documentation, coordination and regularization of
all customs and traditions related to land administration in villages so as to
give opportunities to local leaders to understand and apply them during the
meetings of VLTIs. It needs to be noted that in Tanzania, election and ap-
pointment of local leaders are not based on customs or areas of origins hence
applying customs and tr;ditions which are not codified can cause problems to
leaders as some abuse them:
(ii) Review the Local Government (District Authority)Act,l992 so as to allow
District Commissioner to appoint at least two elders who are knowledgeable
with the customs and traditions to be members of the Village Councils as this
would improve democratic participation and governance; This recommenda-
tion could be copying the Zanzlbar approach where Shehas are appointed by
District Commissioners. In addition, revise the roles and compositions of Vil-
lage Assemblies that are to the approval of land allocation as they have been
ineffective;
(iii) Orgarize and finance in job training to village leaders on the basic land ad-
ministration laws and procedure and this can be done at the wards level by
using Authorised Land Officers and District Solicitors as they are well quali-
fied for this assignment.
(iv) Strengthen democratic governance by putting in place checks and balances
mechanisms in the decisions make by VLTIs in land claims determinations.
208
5.2.3 Research Objective 3
To investigate the extent o.f democratic participation by social groups in and the
mechanism used for land rights formalization at the village level
Key Findings
The process was undemocratic in terms of participation as only participation was
limited to boundary adjudication while the issue of recognizing longstanding occupa-
tion and use of land became undemocratic resulting into loss of rights.Generally, the
process lacked what Shao (2008) calls democratic participation as some segment of
village assembly members (the pastoralists in Handeni District) were denied land
rights access and ownerships for the areas which they had been using for grazing
pwposes for many years.
Conclusions
Participation by all citizens in the decision making on matters connected with their
occupation or use of land has been ineffective; this was proved by the eruption of
land related disputes that occurred in Iyendwe and Sakamwela villages. Besides, lack
of the minutes of the VLATIs that approved all formalized lands in both Districts is
an indication that there is ineffective participation of citizens.
Formalization process was more of top down in nature as it was implemented as a
project from the higher goveflrment levels. Participation was non democratic as seg-
ment of social groups like pastoralists in Handeni District were denied their
longstanding occupations and use of land rights. This was contravening the require-
209
ment of the principle of the NLP which
ing occupation and use of land.
insisted on recognition of existing longstand-
Recommendations
The study recommends to the Government through the Ministries responsible for
Lands, Agriculture and local g6vernment; donor communities and non government
organizations and civil societies to:
(i) Increase the efforts of adjudication and titling by focusing more on the seg-
ment of social groups which are vulnerable so as to reduce rural land inequal-
ity; this should include formalizing other tenure found in village hence mak-
ing them inclusive.
As already pointed out earlier, the meetings of Village Assemblies were inef-
fective and difficult to manage, thus, strengthen the roles of the Village
Councils in facilitating the participation of the diversity of social groups
when dealins with land rishts issues.
5.2.4 Research Objective 4
To identifu roles played by government institutions and customary land owners to-
wards equitable land distribution and access at the household and village levels
Kev Findinss
The Government institutions and customary landowners played roles by showing
boundaries of their lands; facilitating the implementation of the land policy by re-
(ii)
210
Icording existing land rights; ensuring inclusion of the names of women in land title
and financing and providing expertise in the process of formalization.
Conclusions
It can be concluded that VLTIs did not perform their duties of ensuring equitable dis-
tribution of and access to land as provided for in the law. In the Mbozi case, there
was no evidence that these institutions held meetings to deliberate on the submitted
land claims. In the Handeni case, under the coordination of MKURABITA, these
institutions met to deliberate on land claims. However, the process was inequitable in
terms of procedure because in cases when the village assembly unlawfully rejected
land claims, there was no checks and balances on that decision (there was neither jus-
tice nor fairness).
Recommendations
This study recommends to the Government through the Ministries responsible for
Land and Local Government in collaboration with civil societies and non g6vern-
ment organizations to
(i) Build the capacities of local actors in boundaries adjudication, titling and reg-
istration so as to enable them practices this role as provided for in the poli-
cies, laws and regulations;
review the structure of the roles of the administration of village land so as to
have in place defined answerable officials in matters related to transparency,
equitable land identification for distribution and access by villagers. This is
vital because from National to District Levels there are clear public officers
(ii)
2t1
responsible for land administration while at the Village level there are institu-
tions (village council, village assembly) which cannot be held responsible
should there be malpractice as is the case now almost everywhere in the
country.
5.3 General Conclusions
Formalization partly achieved the principle of the NLP which became the objective
of VLA of ensuring that the existing rights are recognized but longstanding occupa-
tion or use of land by some groups such as women, pastoralists were not clarified and
secured by the law through titles.
Regulations of the amount of lands that any one person or corporate body may occu-
py or use have been set in the laws but during the formalizatron the well connected
individuals managed to register as big land as they wanted/could. Why, because, the
VLTIs have no control over land in their villages.
The village land rights formalization process as conducted in both case studies could
not adequately promote equitable distribution of and access to land by the diversity
of social groups in Mbozi and Handeni Districts. The significant achievement was
promotion of land access by gender through inclusion of the married women in the
CCROs as joint owners which is termed intra-generational equity. In the context of
intergenerational equity, the process especially in Handeni District attempted to pre-
pare village land use plans, which in essence, define land use rights for the current
and future generations. In the relationships between land size and household size;
marital status and mode of ownership, there were laxity. In the participatory equity,
the process was not successful as the decentralized institutions did not play their
212
roles of distributing land and facilitating land access as some segments of social
groups such as the pastoralists, youth and those who needed land rights access had no
opportunity in the process. Even where, these meetings were convened as was the
case in Handeni District, there was a problem of checks and balances to ensure fair-
play in the process. Generally, inequalities and inadequacy of land to beneficiaries
are still high prompting the need for rural land re-distribution.
5.4 Suggestions for f,'urther Studies
Gathering from the study, it is apparent that registering rural land rights (which pro-
vides secure tenure) to rural land owners in villages based on what they claim to own
will not, in the long run, facilitate economic growth and poverty alleviation to house-
holds in these villages. The existing rural or village land ownership distribution pat-
terns and their associated historical local land governance are full of inequities.
Therefore, several areas for further research have been identified; however, four are-
as which require immediate investigation are presented hereunder:
(D Investigate Causes of Reluctance for Tilting of the Systematically Adju-
dicated Parcels in Mbozi District: Many farms were adjudicated systemati-
cally in Mbozi District but majority of owners of these parcels did not form-
lize their land through titling and registration. Implication of this to the wel-
being of these households and individuals is needed;
(iD Assessing mechanism for redistribution of land within the small scale
farming sector
(iii)
(iv)
2t3
The study was conducted in the sector referred to as small scale farming.
Land size distribution studv should be conducted between households and in-
dividuals within the small scale (rural clan and lamily land) so as to facilitate
ownership of minimum size of land for sustainable rural household develop-
ment. Thus, further research is needed to examine the mode of land redistri-
bution within the small scale farmins svstems rnTanzania.
Evaluating and Regulating Customs and Traditions
The structure for decision making and democratic participation in the village
land administration, particularly land allocation, relies on the village land
tenure institutions (VLTIs) which are village assemblies and village councils.
These institutions, inadequately, consider customs and traditions but even
where the customs and traditions are mentioned, it is difficult to rely on them
as they are neither regulated nor codified. Therefore, there is a need for flexi-
ble by-laws and local government laws to enable regulation of these norms so
as to have in place equitable participation and inclusiveness in the village
land administration in rural Tanzarta. A study to evaluate and regulate the
customs and traditions in village land rights allocation rnTanzama is needed.
Develop framework for the adjudication of other common user rights in
rural areas
Formalization that this study evaluated concentrated more on individual ti-
tling leaving other commonly owned areas left untitled hence insecure. The
"fit for purpose" insists on a land administration system which is inclusive by
covering all tenure types and natural resources management. Development of
214
such a framework requires an in-depth investigation. Thus, there is a need to
conduct a study which will come up with a framework for formahzatron of
common land uses.
215
REFERENCES
Agarwal, Bina. (2003) "Gender and Land Rights Revisited: Exploring New Pro-
spects via the State, Family and Markets." Journal of Agrarian Change 3
(1-2):18-24.
Ali, D.A., Deininger, K and Goldstein, M (2011), Environmental and Gender Im-
pacts of Land Tenure Regulari zationin Africa: Pilot evidence from Rwan-
da, Policy Research Working Paper 5765, World Bank, Washington D.C.
Amanor, K.S and Moyo, S. (2008), Land and Sustsinable Development, zed Books
Ltd, New York, United States of America (USA).
Arko-Adjei, A. (2011), Adapting Land Administration to the Institutional
' Framework of Customary Tenure: The Case of Peri-Urban Ghana,
PhD Thesis, Sustainable Urban Series 39, Delft University of Science
and Technology, The Netherlands.
Babbie, E (2011), The Basics of social Research,4th Edition, ISBN 13:978-0-495-
81224-I. Wadsworth Cengage Learning Printed in USA.
Block, T. and Foltz, J. (lggg),Recent Tenure Reforms in the Sahel: Assessment and
Suggestions for Redirection. BASIS Project, Madison, Land Tenure
Center.
Bruce, J.W. (1994), "Review: The Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry
into Land Matters (Shivji Commission)," prepared for the World Bank.
Byamugisha, F.F.K (2013), Securing Africa's Land for Shared Prosperity: A pro-
gramme to scale up reforms and investment. A World Bank Publication.
2t6
http ://elibrar)'. worldbank. org/content/book/97 8 0 82 1 3 9 8 1 04 acces sed on
Thursday lst August, 2013.
Catalla, R.F. (2001), Small-Scale Land Distribution in Cambodia: Lessons from
three studies.http ://www. ccc-
cambodia.org/downloads/adiladireport/Land%20 distribution%20 re-
porl%20final-Eng.pdf accessed on Sunday 13th May, 2013.
Challen, R. (2000), Institutions, Transaction Costs and Environmental Policy, Chel-
tenham: Edward Elgar.
Chimhowu, A. and Woodhouse, P. (2006), Customary vs Private Property Rights?
Dynamics and Trajectories of Vernacular Land Markets in Sub-Saharan
' Africa. Journal of Agrarian Change, 6: 346-371.
http ://onlinelibrary. wiley. com/doi/ I 0. I 1 1 I /j . 1 47 1 -
0366.2006.001 25.x/abstract retrieved on Saturday, 20'h July, 201 3.
Claussen, J., Holden, S.T, Luoga, F.D, Semboja, J. (2008), Annual Review of the
Property and Business Formalization Programme in Tanzania.
Colman, A.M (2006), A Dictionary of Psychology, Oxford University Press, bxford
Reference Online, University of Illinois - Urbana Champaign.
http ://www. oxfordreference. com/views/ENTRY.html?subview:Main&e
ntrvn87.e2836 retrieved on 15th May,20ll.
Cotula, L.; Toulmin, C. and Quan J. (2006), "Policies and Practices for Securing and
Improving Access to Land", Issue Paper No.1; Intemational Conference
on Agrarian Reform and Rural Developmen(ICARRD); IIED and FAO-
www.icarrd.org/icard_doc dowrVissueJaper.l.pdf retrieved on
Wednesday, 1 5th June,20II.
217
creswell, J.w (2009), Research Design: eualitative, euantitative and Mixed
Method Approaches, Third Edition; Sage Publishers, Thousand Oaks,
Califonia.
Dale P' F. and Mclaughlin J. D. (1999), Land Administration, Oxford University
Press Inc, New York.
Deininger, K. (2003), Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction. A publi-
cation of the world Bank and oxford University press, The world Bank
Deininger, K; Selod, H; and Burns, A. (2012),The Land Govemance Assessment
Framework: Identifying and Monitoring Good Practice in the Land Sec-
tor (Agriculture and Rural Development), the World Bank, Washington
, DC.
Deininger, K; Augustinus c.; Enemark, S. and Munro-Faure p. (2010), Innovations
in Land Rights Recognition, Administration, and Governance. A World
Bank Study, World Bank, Washington DC.
Deininger, K. and Feder G. (1998), Land Institutions and Land Markets, The World
Bank, Development Research Group, Rural Development.
Deininger, K. and Binswanger, H. P (1999), The Evolution of the World Bank's
Land Policy: Principles, Experience, and Future challenges", world
Bank Res earch Observer | 4(2), 247 -7 6
Deininger, K; Daniel A.A; Holden, S; and, zevenbergen, J (2008), Rural Land certi-
fication in Ethiopia: Process, Initial Impact, and Implications for other
African countries in world Development, volume 36, Issue 10, october
2008, Pages 1786-1812.
218
Diymett, B.D (2010), Inter-organizational Linkages and Firms' Innovativeness in
Least Developed Countries: The case of metal working and engineering
sector in Tanzania. PhD Thesis, University of Dar es Salaam.Dar es Sa-
laam.
Enemark, S; Keith clifford Bell, K.c ; Lemmen, c; Mclaren, R (2014), Fit for pur-
pose Land Administration, Joint FIG/World Bank Publication No. 60,
International Federation of Surveyor, FIG Office,
Copenhagen, Denmark.
Fairley, E (2012), Upholding Customary Land Rights through Formalization: Evi-
dence from Tanzania's program of Land reform
cessed on Thursday, 2SthFebruary, 2013.
Fairley, E (2013), Upholding Customary Land Rights through Formalization: Evi-
dence from Tanzania's Program of Land reform, PhD Dissertation, Uni-
versity of Minnesota, United States of America.
Feder, G., onchan, T and Chalamwong y. (1988), "Land policies and Farm frerfor-
mance in Thailand's Forest Reserve Areas" Economic Development and
Culture Change 36(3): 483-501.
Food and Agriculture organization of the United Nations (FAo), (2011), state of
Food and Agriculture 2010-l I: lhomen in Agriculture, Closing the gen-
der gap for developmenf, Rome, Italy.
219
FAO(1999), Multilingual Land Tenure Thesaurus, FAO Rome
http : //www. fao. or g/DOCREP/00 5DQ03 8E/x203 8e08.htm accessed on
2t07t20r2
FAO (2002), "Land Tenure and Rural Development", Land Tenure Studies, United
Nations, Vol. 3.
Foot, D. & Venne, R. (2005) "Awakening to the Intergenerational Equity Debate in
Canada." Journal of Canadian Studies. http://en.wikipedia. org/ wiki/
Equity theory accessed on Friday, 25th April, 2014.
Ghebru, H. H (2010), Land Policy Reforms and the Land Rental Market in Ethiopia;
Equity, productivity and Welfare implications, PhD Thesis, Norwegian
University of Life Sciences (uMB).
http://arken.umb.no/-steiho/PhD%20 THESIS%20-
%20HOSAENA%20G%20GINAL).pdf retrieved on Friday 7'h Sep-
tember,2012.
Golafshani, N. (2003), Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research.
The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-606.
http ://www.nova. edr-r/sss s/QR/QR8-4/go lafshani.pdf accessed on Tues-
day,7thJuly,2014.
Gray, D.E (2004), Doing Research in the Real World, SAGE Publications Ltd, ISBN
0 7619 4878 3.
GTZ (1996), Land Tenure in Development Cooperation, Guiding Principles: Sum-
mary Working Paper http://www.mpl.ird.frlcrealtaller-
colombia/FAO/AGLL/ pdfdocs / en gli sch.pdf retrieved on 28 I 06 I 20 | 1 .
220
Gugerty, M., Timmer, C.P (1999), Growth, inequality and poverty alleviation: Impli-
cations for development assistance. Mimeo.
Hall, R (1998),Design for Equity: Linking Policy with Objectives in South Africa,s
Land Reform, Review of African political Economy,yol. 25, No. 77,
Britain's African policy: Ethical, or Ignorant?, 451-462, Taylor & Fran-
cis, Ltd. http://www.istor.org/pss/400650i retrieved on 28th June.
2011.
Hanstad,T. (2014), Opinion: The drunkard and the streetlight; How not to searchfor
women's land rights in Africa: in the East African Newspaper, Aprll26-
May 2,2014, Printed by Nation Media Group, Nairobi, Kenya; page 17.
Havinal, v. (2011), Management and Entrepreneurship, New Delhi, New Age
International Publishers.
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) (200g), Land Tenure:
Ikdahl, I.,
Alignment of design features with IFAD Strategic objectives and les-
sons learnt; analysis and results framework (KSF3), version of January,
2008. http://www.ifad.org/iob/index.htm accessed on Monday, il July
2014.
Hellum, A., Kaarhus, R., Benjaminsen, T.A., Kameri-Mbote, p.(2005),
Human rights, formalisation and women's land rights in southern and
eastern . Africa, Studies in Women,s Law No. 57
http ://www. ielrc.org/content/w05 07.pdf retrieved on Thursday, 25th Ju-
Ly,2013.
221
Jacoby, H. G. and B. Minten (2007), "Is Land Titling in Sub-Saharan Africa Cost-
Effective? Evidence from Madasascar." World Bank Economic Review
2 I (3 ) : 461 -48s .
James, R.W. (1971), Land Tenure and Policy in Tanzania, East African Literature
Bureau, Nairobi, Kenya.
Jayne, T.S; Yamano, T; Weber, M. T; Tschirley, D; Benfica, R; Chapoto, A; Zulu,B.
(2003), "Smallholder income and land distribution in Africa: implica-
tions for poverty reduction strategies" Food Policy 28:253275.
Kalabamu F. T. (2000), Land tenure and management reforms in East and Southern
Africa - the case of Botswana, Land Use Policy, Vol. 17, Issue 4, 30 Oc-
tober 2000, pp. 305-319.
Kagwanja, J., (2008), Land Policies for Improved Land Governance, Food Security
and Poverty Reduction: Lessons from the AU-ECA-AfDB Land Policy
Initiative, Workshop on Land Governance and Emerging Development
Agendas: Legal Empowerment, Climate Change and Food Security, No-
vember 24-25, Oslo, Norway.
Kajembe, G.C (1994), Indigenous management systems as a basis for community
Forestry rnTanzani4 A case study of Dodoma Urban and Lushoto Districts;
Tropical Resource Management Series No. 6; Wageningen Agricultural Uni-
versity, The Netherlands.
Kajembe, G. C. and Luoga, E. J. (1996), Socio-Economic Aspects of tree farming in
Njombe District. Consultancy report to the Natural Resource Conserva-
tion and Land use Management Project, Sokoine University of Agricul-
ture. Tanzania. pp. 9 - 19.
222
Kothari, C.R (2004), Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques, New Age
International Publishers, 2"d Revised Edition. New Delhi, India.
Knight, C. Gregory (1969), "Fieldwork and Local Government: An Example from
Tanzanra" African Studies Bulletin, African Studies Association, Vol.
12, No. 3, pp. 265-273. http://wwwjstor.org/stable/523206 accessed on
Monday, 21" July, 2014.
Knight, R.S., (2010), "Statutory recognition of customary land rights in Africa: An
investigation into best practices for lawmaking and implementation",
FAO Legislative Study Number 105.
www.fao.org/docrep/0 1 3/i 1 945eli I 945e00.pdf retrieved on Friday, 0 l't
March,2013.
Koda, B.O (2000), The Gender Dimensions of Land Rights inTanzania: Case study
of Msindo Village, Same District, Unpublished PhD Thesis, University
of Dar es Salaam.
Lastarria-Cornhiel, S. (2006), Gendered Impacts of Property Formalization in Boliv-
ia and Laos, A paper presented at Intemational Conference on Land,
Poverty, Social Justice and Development, 9-14, January, ISS, The
Hague, The Netherlands.
Lemmen, C. (2012), A Domain Model for Land Administration, PhD Thesis, ITC
dissertation number 210, Technische Universiteit Delft, The Nether-
lands.
Lengoiboni, M. (2011), Pastoralists Seasonal Land Rights in Land Administration: A
Study of Northern Kenya. PhD Thesis, Wageningen University, Wa-
geningen, the Netherlands.
^ a azz)
Lerise, F.S.(l996), Planning at the End of the River: Land and Water Use Manage-
ment in Chekereni -Tanzania, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Human Set-
tlements, Institute of Town and Landscape planning, Royal Danish
Academy of Fine Arts, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Munji, 4.3(1996), The Case of Women's Rights to Land in Tanzania: Some obser-
vations in the coniext of AIDS, UTAFITIOIew series) vol.3 No.2, I 1_
38 .
Matata, J. B', Anandajavasekaram, w. p., Kiriro, T. N., wandera, E. o. and Dickson,
J. (2001), Farming system Approach to Technology Deveropment
and rransfer, A source book, FARMESA,.Harare, zimbabwe.420pp.
Maxwell, J.A (1996), Qualitative research design; an interactive approach. Thou-
sand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage publications.
Mc-Dermott, M, Mahanty, S and Schreckenberg, K (20rr), Defining Equity: A
framework for evaluating equity in the context of ecosystem services. A
working paper prepared for the project 'safeguarding local equity as
global values of ecosfstem services rise,. http//redd-
for%20website%2Ofinall.pdf retrieved on Tuesday lgth June, 2013.
Mchomvu, A.S.T; Tvngaraza, F.s.K and Maghimbi, S. (2002),.,Social Security sys_
tems in,Tanzarria" Journar of social Development in Africa,yoL 17,
NO. 2.
Meinzen-Dick, R., and Mwangi, E., (2009), "cutting the web of interests: pitfalls of
Formalizing Property" , Land (Ise policy.26(l),36-43.
224
Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Ex-
panded Sourcebook, Second Edition, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mkulila, K. (2007), Practical Experiences on Land Registration in the Implementa-
tion of the Village Land Act No. 5 of 1999;Handeni Pilot Project by
Mkurabita, A participation report(l8th September - 10th December,
2006) ,Legal and Human Right Centre,Dar es Salaam,Tanzania.
Mwakusa, J.T., (1999), The Policy Paper and Implications on Pastoral Lands,
Mimeo.
Mukandala, I.M (2009), An evaluation of the Effectiveness of Rural Land Title Cer-
tification Programme rn Tanzania-the Case of Mbozi District - Mbeya
region; Unpublished MSc Dissertation, Ardhi University, Tanzania.
National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) and Office of Chief Government Statistician
(OCGS), Zanzrbar (2013),2012 Population and Housing Census: Popu-
lation Distribution by Administrative Units; Key Findings. Dar es Sa-
laam, Tanzania: NBS and OCGS.
http ://www.nbs. go.tzlsensa/PDF/20 I 2%20PHC%20POPULAR
%20VERSiON.pdf retrieved on Tuesday, l6th July, 2013.
Ngaiza, M. K. (2002), Gender dynamics in Poverty Alleviation in Tanzania: Ngara
District Case Study, tJnpublished PhD Thesis, University of Dar es Sa-
laam.
Nyato, D. E. (2012), The Social and Economic Impacts of Individualization, Titling
and Registration of Rural Land; The Case of Mbozi District-Mbeya Re-
gion, MSc Dissertation, Ardhi University, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
225
odhiambo M.o (2006), Improving Tenure security for the rural poor, Kenya, Tan-
zama and Uganda case study.
http://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/k0782e/k0782e 00.pdf retrieved on
25th February,2017.
okoth-ogendo, H.w.o. (1985), "Development and the legal process in Kenya: an
approach to the analysis of law in rural development administration" In-
temational Journal of the Sociology of law, 12.
Ole Kosyando, L. M. (2007), MKURABITA and the implementation of the Village
Land Law - Act No. 5 of 1999: A participation report of the pilot project
in Handeni District, September 18 - December 8, 2006, Published by
Tanzania Pastoralists, Hunters and Gatherers Organization(TPHGO) with
support from Norwegian People's Aid. www. landri ghtswatch.net retrieved
on Saturday 13th Apri l , 2013.
Pedersen, R.H. (2010), Tanzaria's Land Law Reform; the Implementation Chal-
lenge, Danish Institute for International Studies DIIS Working Paper
2010:37 http://www.diis.dk/graphics/Publications/WP2010/WP2010-
37.rhp.web.pdf retrieved on Tuesday 12th March,2013.
Pia Aberg, E.J (2005), An Evaluation of the Land Laws in Tanzania, MSc Thesis,
Lule6 University of Technology, Sweden. http://epubl.ltu.se/1404-
5508/2005/057/LTU-SHU-EX-05057-SE.pdf retrieved on Wednesday
6th March. 2013.
226
Place, F. and S. E. Migot-Adholla (1998), "The Economic Effects of Land Registra-
tion on Smallholder Farms in Kenya: Evidence from Nyeri and Ka-
kamega Districts." Land Economics 74(3): 360-373.
Platteau, J-P. (1995), Reforming land Rights in Sub Saharan Africa: Issues of Effi-
ciency and Equity, United Nations Research Institute for Social Devel-
opment GfNRISD), Geneva, Switzerland.
Polack, E. (2012), African land solutions: making the resource blessing a reality. An
article on land acquisition. http://www.iied.org//african-land-solutions-
making-resource-blessins-reality retrieved on Friday 8th March, 2013.
Property and Business Formalization Programme (PBFP) (2007), Progress Report of
the Handeni District Land Registration Pilot Project, Programme Man-
agement Unit, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Quan, J- (1997), The Importance of Land Tenure to poverty eradication and sustaina-
ble development in Africa: Summary of Findings. Natural Resource In-
stitute, Chat-
ham. .u
quanpov.r-tf. Retrieved on l lth May, 2011.
Ribot, J. and Peluso, N. (2003), A theory of Access. Rural sociologt,6g: 153-1g1.
Roux, L and Bany M (2009), Paradigms, Research and Registration Systems, A pa-
per presented at the 7th FIG Regional Conference, Spatial Data Serving
People: Land Governance and the Environment - Building the Capacity;
Hanoi, Vietnam,
htto://www tloublvi rs/ts02
accessed on Thursday, 24th July, 201 4.
19-22 October
227
Rwechungura, J.K (2011), Community Participation for Secure Tenure to Land Oc-
cupiers: Cases from informal Settlements in Dar es Salaam City,Tanza-
nia. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Dar es Salaam.
Rwejuna, C.S (2006), Transformation of Smallholder Farming Systems in the Cen-
tral Semi-Arid Lands of Tanzania: A Case study of Rice Inigation
Schemes in Dodoma Rural District, Unpublished PhD Thesis, University
of Dar es Salaam.
Sanga, R.T (2009), Assessing customary land rights registration on credit access by
farmers in Tanzania, Unpublished MSc Thesis, University of Twente,
Enschede, The Netherlands.
Schwarz, J. (2011), Applied Data Analysis: Lecture 6: Contingency Analysis for
MSc in Business Administration, Lucerne University of Applied Scienc-
and Arts (Hochschule Luzern).
http : //www. schwarzpartners. ch/Applied_D ata Analysi s_2 0 I 1 /Lect%2 0 0
6 EN.pdf retrieved on Wednesday lOth July, 2013.
Sekkandi, F. M (no year), Social, Political and Equity Aspects of Land and Property
Rights
http : //j uri safrica. or g/docs/articles/S ocial_Political and_Equit), in
Land_Tenure 1 .pdf retrieved on Monday, 3rd Febru ary, 20I 4.
Sekaran, U. (2003), Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., ISBN 0-471-20366-1, Printed in the United
States of America.
228
Shao, I.F (2008), Democracy and Land Conflicts in Tanzania: the case of Pastoralists
versus Peasants, Tanzania Journal of Development Studies, Vol.8, No.2,
7 I -83 .
Shao, I.F (1992), The Political Economy of Land Reforms in Zanzibar: Before and
After the Revolution, Dar es Salaam University Press, Dar es Salaam.
Shao I. F (1995), The Impact of Financial Institutions and Credit in Tanzania Rural
Sector: The case of cooperative and Rural Development Bank, PhD The-
sis, University of Dar es Salaam.
Sharon B. (2000), "Costing the Earth: Equity, Sustainable Development and Envi-
ronmental Economics", New Zealand Journal of Environmental Law,4,
227 -243. http://www.uow.edu.aul-sharonb/esd/equitlr.html retrieved
on Monday, l5th July, 2013.
Shipton, P. (1989), How Private Property Emerges in Africa: Directed and Undi-
rected Land Tenure Reforms in Densely Settled Areas South of the Sa-
hara, D epartment of Anthropolo gy, Harvard University, U. S.
Shivji (1999), Land Acts, (1999): Cause for Celebration or Celebration for iause?
Paper presented as key note address to a Workshop on Land-Morogoro,
(19'h -20ft February.
smith, B. (2008), "Searle and De Soto: The New ontology of the social world", in
Barry Smith, David Mark and Isaac Ehrlich (eds.), The Mystery of Capi-
tal and the Construction of Social Reality, Chicago: Open Court, 2008,
35-5 1.
http ://ontolo gy.buffalo.edu/document ontology/Searle&desoto.pdf re-
trieved on Thursday 25tn July, 2013.
229
Sundet, G. (2006), The Formalisation Process in Tanzania: Is it empowering the
poor? A Note Prepared for the Norwegian Embassy in Tanzania, De-
cember 2006.
Toulmin, c. & Quan, J. (2000), Evolving land rights, policy and tenure in sub-
Saharan Africa in c. Toulmin & J. Quan (Eds.), Evolving land rights,
Policy and Tenure in Africa. London: DFID/IIED/NiRI, pp. l-30.
Tuladhar, A.M (2004), Parcel-based Information system: Concepts and Guidelines.
PhD Thesis, ITC Published and Distributed by ITC Printing Department,
Enschede, the Netherlands. ITC Dissertation Series No.115, ISBN: 90
6164 224 8.
Tsikata, D (2001), Land Tenure Reforms and Women's Land Rights: Recent Debates
in Tanzania.
http : I I xa.yimg.comlkql er oups I 20 67 4 633 I 126268897 3 I name lDzo dzi+T si
kata%26%23 3 9%3Bs+Paper+on+Land+Refbrms.pdf retrieved on Mon-
day l5 th Ju ly ,20l3.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDp) (2011), Human Development Re-
port,
http ://www.undp. org/content/undp/en/horne/librarypage/hdr/human dev
eloprnentreporl2Ol l/ retrieved on Monday l5th July, 2013.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (LINECE) (1996), Land Admin-
istration Guidelines with Special Reference to Countries in Transi-
tion, New York and Geneva.
United Nations Research Institute for Social development (2011), Social develop-
ment in an uncertain world, LINRISD Research Asenda 2010-2014
230
http ://www.unrisd.org/8025 6842004CCC77l(httplnfoFiles)/43 BFA3 3 87
807E7E680257920004253C7/$file/ResAge I 0- 1 4a.pdf retrieved on Sat-
urday 9th March, 2013.
USAID (2007), Land and Business Formalization for Legal Empowerment of the
poor: Strategic Overview Paper by: John W. Bruce, Omar Garcia-
Bolivar, Michael Roth, Anna Knox, and Jon Schmid of ARD Inc.
United Republic of Tanzania (URT) (1975), The Villages and Ujamaa Villages (Reg-
istration, Designation and Administration) Act, No.2l of I975. Dar-es-
S alaam. T anzania: Government Printer.
URT (1983), The Agricultural Policy of Tanzania, Ministry of Agriculture, The
Government Printer, Dar es Salaam.
URT (1994), Report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Land mat-
ters, Volume One: Land Policy and Land Tenure Structure, ISBN
9l-7106-352-8.
URT (1995), The National Land Policy, Government Printer, Dar es Salaam.
URT (1997), Mbozi District Socio-Economic Profile, Planning Commission and
Mbozi District Council, Dar-es-Salaam.
URT (1999a), The Land Act No.4, Printed by the Government Printer, Dar es Sa-
laam.
URT (1999b), The Village Land Act No.5, Printed by the Government Printer,
Dar es Salaam.
URT (2000),Gender and Women Development Policy, Printed by the Government
Printer. Dar es Salaam.
23r
URT(2001) ,Vi I lageLandRegulat ionsof theVi l lageLandActNo.5of1999,Pr in t
ed by the Government Printer, Dar es Salaam.
URT (2005a), Strategic Plan for the Implementation of the Land Laws (SP[L),
Ministry of Lands and Human Settlement Development, Dar es Salaam.
URT (2005b), National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (I.ISGRP),
Vice President's Office, Dar es Salaam.
URT (2010), National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty II (NSGRPII),
Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
URT (2000), Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), Printed by Government
printer, Dar es Salaam.
URT (2003), Tanga Region Social Economic Profile, a joint publication of the Na-
tional Bureau of Statistics and Tanga Regional Commissioner under the
coordination of the Ministry of Planning, Economy and empowerment,
Dar -es-Salaam.
United States (1965), Tanzania Zambra Boundary, International Boundary Study
No.44, Department of State, Washington DC.
Van den Brink, R.(2003), Land policy and land Reform in Sub Saharan Africa: Con-
sensus, Confusion and Controversy. A paper presented at different
meelings on Land Issues in Africa.
http://www.oxfam.org.uk/resources/learning/landrights/downloads/ssalpl
I.rtf retrieved on Wednesday 8th June, 2011.
World Bank (2005), Gender Issues and Best Practices in Land Administration Pro-
jects, A Synthesis Report prepared for Gender and Rural Development
232
Thematic Group (PREI\{/ARD) and the Land Policy and Administration
Thematic Group (ARD) of the World Bank.
Yin, R.K. (200g),Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4ft edition, Applied
Social Research Methods Series, Volume 5, Sage Publications.
Yngstrom, I. (2002), Women, Wives and Land Rights in Africa: Situating Gender
beyond the Household in the Debate Over Land Policy and Changing
Tenure Systems. Oxford Development Studies, Vol. 30, No. 1.
Newspapers
Nation Media Group Q}l|),East African Newspaper, page 17, Nairobi, Kenya.
^ a aZ J J
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Multipurpose Questionnaires Used the Field Research
Part One: Questionnaire to village level actors (village council, adjudication
committee, Village Chairpersons and Village Executive Officers (VEO)
RURAL LAND RIGHTS FORMALIZATION IN TANZANIA AND EQUITY
IMPLICATION: THE CASE OF I/IBOZI AND HANDENI DISTRICTS
BY: Alphonce Yustin Tiba
Introduction
This questionnaire/checklist is confidential and you are voluntarily requested to fill
it. You have been purposeful selected to participate in this study because of your
wider knowledge in this subject. The objective of this study is to examine the extent
to which the land rights certification or formalization process has distributed village
land equitably among social groups. Social groups in this study refer to men, women,
pastoralists, children and other vulnerable ones found in these villages. It is antici-
pated that the findings of this study will enable the policy maker to look on how the
issue of equity in land distribution and access can be further improved inTanzanta.
General Profile:
1. District:
2. Ward:
3. V i l lageName. . . . . .Area:
4. Population of the Village: Individual number:
1. Female:2. Male:
5. Population cdtegory:(ii) Able people:
(iiD Old people:(iv) Children under 18 years:.
(v) Average size of households:. ..(vi) Female heads of households:...
6. Main economic activities:
234
( i ) . . . . . . . . . . :( i i ) . . .(iii) .
7. Would you please give us the average size(in hectares) of land owned by vil-lagers in your village (mark with /): -check the Village Land Register)a) Less than I ha t 1b) Between I and 5 ha t lc) Between 6 and 10 hq. t ld) Between 1l and 15 ha t le) More than l5ha t l
8. What are the main types of livestock kept in your village (mention name andnumber if possible):
, (D . . . .(i i) ...
:(iii) ..
9. What can you say about the available land in your village for distributionamong village members?
1. Very Sufficient t l2. Sufficient t I3. Not suffrcient t I4. Idonotknow t l
10. If the answer to question 9 is 3, then how can you make more land availablefor detailed distribution among new generation?
I 1. Size of land used as (area in sq.m):(i) Dispensary..(ii) Health post..(iii) Shop.(iv) Market(v) Grazing areas.(vi) Playing ground
12. As a village leader what do you see as a very challenging problem in yourday to day land management function in this village?
a. Lack of land to distibute t 1b. District leaders intervention t lc. Lack of capacity t ld. Land disputes [ ]
235
13. How do you differentiate your formalized land from that which is not formal-ized?
(i) Strongly Best I l(ii) Best t l(iii) Similar I l(iv) Slightly.better t l( v ) Idonotknow t l
14. Are there people with land which is not sufficient for their economic activi-ties?
1. Yes 2. No15.If the answer to Q.14 is YES where do you get land to allocate to them?16. Do you have a village land use plan? 1.YES 2.No17. If the answer to Q.16 is No explain how you deal with land use distribution in
your vil lage?..............18. In the process of issuance of CCROs what do you regard as the most chal-
lenging issue?(i) The cost of titling t l(ii) Boundary identification I l(iii) Lack of knowledge in the titling process t l(iv) Identifying land owners t l(v) No issue t l
19. Do you organize avlllage council meeting to approve land allocation in yourvillage?
1. YES 2. No
20. For any answer in Q.l9 ex-plain.
Thank you very much for taking your time
236
Part 2z Questionnaires Directed to Beneficiaries of Formalization (CCRO Hold'ers)
RURAL LAND RIGHTS FORMALIZATION AND EQUITY IMPLICATIONIN TANZANIA THE CASE OF MBOZI AND HANDENI DISTRICTS
B!: Alphonce Yustin Tiba
Introduction
This questionnaire/checklist is confidential and you are voluntarily requested to fill
it. You have been purposeful selected to participate in this study because of your
wider knowledge in this subject.
The objective of this study is to examine the extent to which the land rights certifica-
tion or formalization process has distributed village land equitably among social
groups. Social groups in this study refer to men, women, pastoralists, children and
other vulnerable ones found in these villages. It is anticipated that the findings of
this study will enable the policy maker to look on how the issue of equity in land dis-
tribution and access can be further improved rnTanzania.
Date:,District:Ward:.Village:
CCRO Number:
2. What is the size of your household?
01. 1-3 t I 02. 4-s t l03. 6-e t l 04. 10-15 t l
Socio-Economic Data:3. Gender: 1. Female [ ] 2.Male t l4. Age range: 01. 18-25 t I 02. 26-35 t l
03. 36-4s t I 04. 46-ss t l0s. s6-6s t l
5. Education Level:
237
(i) Adult education t l(ii) Primary Education t l(iii)Secondary Education t l(iv)Higher education t l(v) University education t l(vi)No formal education t l
6. Marital status:(i) Single t l(ii) Widowed t l(iii)Divorced I l(iv)Manied t l(v) Separated t l
7 . Number of children within the household/family (circle the appropriate).
Numberofboys | 2 3 4 5 6
Numberofgirls I 2 3 4 5 6
8. Education of children (enter number of children at the appropriate status)
(i) Pre education t l(ii) Secondary education t l(iii)Primary education I l(iv)post secondarY education t l(v) University education, t l
9. Please tell me if formalization of land has protected the rights of married fe-
male.1. Very stronglY I l2. Strong t l3. Quit a bit t l4. Do not know t l5. No answer t l
10. Occupation (rnark the { appropriate ):(i) Rural farm works t l(ii) Shop keeper t l(iii)Primary school Teacher t l(iv)Secondary school teacher t l(v) Pastoralist t l(vi)EmploYed out of the village t l
238
l1' Size of the land owned and formalized: (tick the range in which it falls)(i) 0_5 acres t l(ii) 6_10 acres t l(iii)t t_15 acres t l(iv)16_20 acres t l(v) 2l_above acres t l
12' Are customary rules and traditions considered during the distribution of land?l. yes 2. NoExplain:.
13. Nature of ownership of land:(i) Allocated by rhe village Council t l(ii) Inherited
(iii) Direct Acquisition i i14. Did you participate in the determination of the size and use of your land?l. yES 2. No.
Explain
15' Tell me how much you are satisfied with the village council in its ability todistribute land among village members:1. Very Great satisfied2. Great satisfied3. Satisfied4. Very little
t lt lt lt l
l6' village assembly and councils are not capable of distributing land to varioussocial groups according to their need. (put the / in the right answer.l. Agree strongly t l2. Agree
t l3. Neither agree nor disagree [ ]4. Disagree t l5. Strongly Disagree t lExplain.
l7' what motivated you to formarizeyour land? (circle the appropriate answer)(i) It was a government project t l
239
(ii) I wanted to get loans from banks t l(iii) I wanted money for school fee of my children t l(iv) I wanted security of my land t l(v) I did because others were doing t l
18. Mark (/) as your reflection on the extent to which formalizatron process hastaken on board the requirement of customs and tradition of the resident of thisvillase in the distribution of and access to land:
1. Very Strongly [ ], 3. Fairly t2. Strongly t I 4. Ignored t 5. No answer [ ].
Thanks for Cooperation
Part 3: Questionnaires to Top Officials From Coordinators
VILLAGE LAND RIGHTS FORMALIZATION IN TANZANIA AND EQUI.TY IMPLICATION: THE CASE OF MBOZI AND HANDENI DISTRICTS
BY: ALPHONCE YUSTIN TIBAIntroduction
This questionnaire is confidential and you are voluntarily requested to fill it. You
have been purposeful selected to participate in this study because you are the pillar to
the effective implementation of the National Land Policy and the associated land
laws particularly the village land law.
The issue of inequitable land distribution is highly known in Africa. The objective of
this study is to examine the extent to which the land rights certification or formaliza-
tion process has distributed village land equitably among social groups. Social
groups in this study refer to men, women, pastoralists, children and other vulnerable
ones found in these villages. It is anticipated that the hndings of this study will ena-
ble the policy maker to look on how the issue equity in land distribution and access
can be fuither improved rnTanzania.
TOP OFFICIALS IN THE MINISTRY OF LANDS AND MKURABITA
1. The National Land Policy,1995 emphasizes equitable land distribution among all
citizens. To what extent has this statement has been achieved?
] ,Il )
240
2. It also promises the setting of land ceilings in the allocation of land. How have
you handled this in the formalization process?
3. Village institutions are responsible with land titling including land distribution-
where do they get land to distribute if we assume all land is customarily owned
by various individuals in these villages?
4. How are rights of dependants such as women, married, and children (male, fe-
male, children safe guarded?.
5. Tanzania had traditional institutions abolished but there are customs and tradition
then how are these taken onboard in the land certification process?
6. What do you think are challenges facing your office in managing the village land
admini stration in T anzama?
7. You have been implementing the Village Land Act since 2001. Are there chal-
lenges besides those of f,rnance in the land distribution process particularly equi-
table land distribution?
8. Some studies show that in rural settings in Sub Saharan Africa there is an in-
creasing gap in land size holdings at the household level and that there is a poten-
tial for land redistribution among communities. What is your comment on this
argument?.
9. How is the issue of vulnerable groups such as women, pastoralists are being han-
dled in the formalization process putting in mind the increasing population and
uncontrolled movement of some of these groups.
10. In some villages in Mbozi District several land parcels have not been issued with
CCROs and as such the mission of the Ministry to see to it that all land is regis-
tered and their owners are known as not been achieved. What can you sav about
this?
1 1. In some villages statutory meetings are not held to issue CCROs but yet CCROs
are issued What is your comment on this observation?
12.In Handeni District, MKURABITA took part and later your Ministry has done a
lot. Is there any difference in their approach? What do you think need to be done
to cement this?
13. What do you think needs to be done to enhance equity in the village land admin-
istration system rn T anzania?
241
Appendix 2: Steps Used in the Formalization Process in Handeni District
Forrration of the DistrictPLLII\II Team
Idartiff ullages that qualifiT forthe prc granune (No boundary
confl i c[ with nei ghb ows)
M obilizati nr / awarenesscretion- meetings with
Village Councils
Send forms furadjudication ofb ormdari es with nei glrb orxs
Acquisiton of satelliteinages and zurvry of
boundaries
Forrration of Village Land UseIvlarugernent Teams Application fcr Village
Land Crtifrcates sent tothe Commissioner frr
LandsConducting FRA and Technical Data
Collection
Constfliclion ofl-andRegistriesIszue Based Workstrops fur deliberaton of
Land Use Plans by Village C ouncils
Issurng Forms 18and 44 to applicants
Preparation of B y-laws and approml byVillage G overnmsris and the Di stri ct
Council
Issuing Certificatcs of Cnstonury Rights ofOcct4aruy and Begbtrdion
Source: Ole Kosyando of TAPHGO(2007) and MKURABITA, 2007
242
Appendix 3: One of the Research Clearance Letter Issued to the Researcher.
t"ttt' it%,$
A]YI VER S IITY OT TIA I? - ES - SA LAA ]UrOFFICE OF THE VICE.CHANCELLARP.O. BOX 35091 r DAR ES SALAAM r TANZANIA
Ref. No: AB3/12(B)Date: 7'n May, 2012To: The Regional Administration Secretary,
Dar es Sa laam Reg ion .
UNIVERSITY STAFF AND STUDENTS RESEARCH CLEI\RANCE
The purpose of this letter is to introduce to you Mr. Alphonce Yustin Tiba who is a bonafidestudent of the University of Dar es Salaam and who is at the moment conducting research.Our staff members and students undertake research activi t ies every year especial ly duringthe long vacation.
In accordance with a government circular letter Ref.No.MPEC/R/10/1 dated 4'h July, 1980 theVice-Chancellor was empowered to issue research clearances to the staff and students of theUniversity of Dar es Salaam on behalf of the government and the Tanzania Commission forScience and Technology, a successor organization to UTAFITI.
I therefore request you to grant the above-mentioned member of our University communityany help that may facilitate him to achieve research objecrives. Vvhat is requireo is yourpernrission for him to see and talk to the leaders and members of your institutions inconnection with his research.
The t i t le of the research in question is "Vi l lage Land Rights Formalization in Tanzania andEquity lmplications: Cases of Mbozi and Handeni Distr icts".
The period for which this permission has been granted is May, 2O12to August, 2012 and wil lcover the following areas/offices: Dar es Salaam Region.
Should some of these areas/offices be restricted, you are requested to kindly advise him as towhich alternative areas/offices could be visited. In case you may require further information,please contact the Directorate of Research, Tel. 241 0500-8 Ext.2087 or 2410743.
\ r , /\ vrcE cHANcltlfS^too*
,,oM' *,'" "i'f"'rl[ ;'i -1 il
VICE.GHANCELLOR
l ) i r d u l r 1 5 5 : l I l I 0 7 { ) ( )l c l ( l r l k ' i l ( : : : i l l : J l ( ) S l l { L l { c \ 1 . : r ) ' .
Telct irx: +255 l2 2.+10078
I o lcgruphic Ad(lrcss: t rNlVlt l tSl lY () l i l ) -^ l { l :S 5/\ l A,1lvl| )-nra i | : 1g41lr-rlirr.rnlrr11r;,g
Wcbsitc at lc l tess: r ! \ r ' . ! . (x l i r r . : , r r /
243
Appendix 4: Handeni District Before Subdivided to Form Kilindi District
TANGA REGIONAD lUtt{ISTR"*TtO t{ & ROAD t{ET$pRK
LegsndEl Reoionrl h€idqqan. l
I 0i i f idheldqu.ner
{'/no"o
/\a Rrilqry
A
$cale 1 ,400,000
50 0 50 100 Kilometers
Source: Ta{rga Regional Profile, 2006
244
Appendix 5: Data Matrix for Data Presentation and Analysis
Ele Edit View Data Trsnsform Analfre Direct Marketing graphs Utilities Add-ons Window Help-- .r:..:_ g ! ,r-._r,
:-T frT L=J 83..*:d ffifu# $B ff H ffi+tr %$st'*:) -''l}j
i +.
$'-{ 't;i
widthi i Region vihere d " {1- Mbeya} None 5
0 Case study dist {1. Mbozi},-. None I
-*- "hl-qi*'.gte--.---i- -. . Sglc**- l\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ lnput
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ Input
\ InputI CapDistr
String
Numer ic
String
Numer ic
I'lumeric
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Numer ic
Numer ic
llumeric
Numeric
Numeric
Numeric
Nurneric
Numer ic
I'Jumeric
= Center
= UenterE l i p n f o r
- v u l l t t l
E Center
E Center
- v E l l L E l
E Center
- v t t l t E l
E C p n t o r
- u E t t t t r l
E Center
- u E t [ c l
- v E r t r t r l
$ Nominal
d Scale
{$ Nominal
S Nominal
gf Ordinal
6l oroinalgf ordinal
$! lJominal
{fr trlominal
$ Nominal
d Scalep Scale
d Scale
S Nominal
gf orlinat
$ l, lominal
gl ordinal
$ Norninal
g[ Ordinal
7
B1 A
I
I
U
o
B
I
I
I
6
B
I
o
I
I
o
I
0
0
0n
U
0
0
0
L
0
0n
0
0
0
U
fi
I U
1 0
I
6
1 0
1 0
I
1 1't0
1 at l
1 1
t 3
1 01 n
€ f o n t o r
E Center
15 E CenterCerti f icate of C..- l lone
gender o f landr i , . {1 . female} - .
Househo ld s ize i1 1 -31
age in years for {1. 16-25}
educat iona l leu . - . {1 . Adu l t ed . .
lulari tal status {1, Single}
Occupation oft {1, Rural far..
Mode of owning... {1 , loint own,.
Land s ize owne, , - None
lJumber of chi ld . . {1. 0-5}
The land size of,. . None
Name o f the . , i l l . . - {1 . l kana} - , -
Part icipation in "" {1. Yesi..-
l ' l e thods o fge t t . {1 . v i l lage a - .
Satisfact ion for . . {1. r, 'sry grea.,
Motivation forfo {1. Goyernm-.
Agreement on . {1. Agree st
None
None
lJone
Flone
None
None
None
None
None
lrione
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
245
Appendix 6: Equity Issues in the Village Land Administration
Section 3(2): Womenhave the same rights as men to acquire, hold, use and
deal with land
Section 20 (I)(2): Customary laws have to be in accordance with the NLP
and with any other written law including the Constitution. Therefore, cus-
tomary law is void and inoperative when it denies women, children or per-
sons with disability lawful access to ownership, occupation or use of land
Section 23(2)(c): The Village Council shall have special regard for the
equality of persons and therefore shall treat equally women's and men's ap-
plications for customary right of occupancy.
Last subpart of Part IV, deals with the adjudication of the boundaries of and in-
terests in land, which is necessary before any grants of customary rights of oc-
cupancy can be given. The Village Council can establish a Village Adjudication
Committee whose members are elected by the Village Assembly. This Commit-
tee shall consist of a maximum of nine persons and not fewer than four of them
shall be women.
Source: Village Land Act No.5, 1999 and FAO.
246
Appendix 7: Pilot Villages in Handeni Case Study.
T
a
BbirbtHEEd+ut€.
\llqaSxttr
- Dblit&udrry
- lhhmd
: Ofi*rua&
- VlqaBurdrty
t+0 a 0 4 0---
kibrneten
Source: MKURABITA. 2007.