PERCEPTIONS OF TENURE SECURITY: An exploratory analysis of pre-treatment

data in rural communities across

Ethiopia, Guinea, Liberia, and Zambia

1The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily the views and opinions of the United States Agency for International Development.

M. MERCEDES STICKLER, USAID1 HEATHER HUNTINGTON, Cloudburst Consulting Group

25 March 2015

OVERVIEW

Introduction Motivation Interventions Methodology Findings Summary Next Steps

INTRODUCTION

Impact Evaluation at USAID

• USAID Evaluation Policy (2011)– Evaluation is important for learning and

accountability– Impact evaluation required: pilots, scaling proven

methods– Third party (independent) evaluations

• USAID Land Tenure and Resource Management Office supporting 7 impact evaluations in Africa

• USAID is committed to building local capacity and promoting women’s empowerment in our work

Evaluation, Research, and Communication (ERC) Project• USAID Land Tenure and Resource Management

(LTRM) Office• 5 year project designed to improve the evidence

base on land tenure and property rights interventions

• Primary objective: Generate rigorous empirical evidence on the impact of newer customary rights recognition interventions

• ERC impact evaluations: – Ethiopia (2)– Guinea– Liberia– Zambia (2)

MOTIVATION

Motivation for the Research

• Africa effect– Land tenure formalization in Africa has shown

relatively weak impacts compared to other regions (Lawry, et al., 20141)

• Dearth of empirical evidence on the impact of newer customary rights recognition interventions

• Absence of gender-relevant evidence

1Lawry, S., Samii, C., Hall, R., Leopold, A., Hornby, D., and F. Mtero. 2014. The impact of land property rights interventions on investment and agricultural productivity in developing countries: a systematic review. Campbell Collaboration, Oslo, Norway.

INTERVENTIONS

Ethiopia: Land Administration to Nurture Development (LAND)

• USAID/Ethiopia

• Borana pastoralists in southern Oromia Regional State

• Formal demarcation and certification of customary pastoral land use claims

• Strengthen customary rangeland management institutions

• USAID/LTRM

• Improve compliance with the Kimberley Process

• Formalize customary tenure of land rights (surface)

• Introduce refinements to the existing system of parceling mining claims (subsurface)

Guinea: Property Rights and Artisanal Diamond Development (PRADD)

• Namati and the Sustainable Development Institute

• Integrated community land documentation methodology

• Boundary demarcation and conflict resolution

• Land governance and community empowerment

Liberia: Community Land Protection Program (CLPP)

• USAID/LTRM

• Codify customary land use and administration rules

• Issue customary land certificates at parcel/field level

• Extension services to promote the adoption of climate-smart agriculture

Zambia: Tenure and Global Climate Change (TGCC)

METHODOLOGY

Methodology• Prospective impact evaluations

– Randomized Control Trial (TGCC) – Difference in Differences (LAND, PRADD, CLPP)

• Mixed methods • Standard data collection instruments

– Household survey – Leader/community survey – Key informant interviews– Focus group discussions

• Sub-groups of interest– Women, poor, youth

Key Survey Modules

• Mediating factors: country contexts (governance, land use, cultural practices, socio-economic status, markets)

• Interventions: ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ interventions designed to strengthen tenure security

• Mechanisms: land governance, community empowerment, conflict, perceived tenure security, knowledge

• Proximate outcomes: perceived tenure security, investment, conflict mitigation

• Distal outcomes: land productivity, livelihood/asset changes

Data

Country

Project

Data Collection Period

Household Sample Size

Ethiopia

LAND Aug – Sep 2014 3,851

Guinea PRADD Oct – Dec 2014 2,000

Liberia CLPP Feb – Mar 2-14 1,661

Zambia TGCC Jun – Jul 2014 3,523

FINDINGS: LAND CONFLICT

Perceived likelihood of tenure insecurity

1 2 3 4 5

Significance: *=90-95%; **=95-99%; ***=99%+

Prevalence of land-related conflicts

• Varied % of households reporting land dispute in past 3 years– Ethiopia: 14%– Guinea: 2% – Zambia 26%

• But field-level data from Zambia suggests incidence is quite low– 11% of all fields had experienced a dispute in the

past 3 years• Sub-groups not always most disadvantaged

– In Ethiopia, youth significantly more likely to experience conflict…• 18% vs. 14% overall average

– …but the poor are slightly less likely to have experienced conflict• 12% vs. 14% overall average

Of those experiencing conflict, % HHs experiencing typesDispute Type Ethiopia Guinea Zambia

Boundary 52 48 71

Grazing 19 0 3

Inheritance Not asked 11 26

Land reallocation

Not asked 20 8

Natural resource

8 8 3

Rental Not asked 11 1

Satisfaction with dispute resolution: % households

FINDINGS: INVESTMENTS

Tree planting by subgroup: % households

Country

Overall Poor Youth Female Head

Guinea 21 (fruit) 13*** 17*** 12*

Liberia 88 (rubber) 82*** 88 83*

Zambia 11 (agroforestry)

11 10 11

Significance: *=90-95%; **=95-99%; ***=99%+

FINDINGS: DOCUMENTATION

Land documentation: % households

FINDINGS: LAND GOVERNANCE

Most important land decision maker1: % households

Authority Guinea Ethiopia Liberia Zambia

Customary2 77 54 87 100

Government

22 42 10 0

1For Liberia and Zambia, question asked for “most important decision maker for land-related issues;” for Guinea, question asked “who helps with farmland encroachment?”; for Ethiopia, “who has control of community grazing area?”2Customary here includes “Traditional Authorities” and “Communities as a whole” depending on country context.

Liberia: Ladder of Power

Transparent decision-making: % households

1 2 3 4 5

Significance: *=90-95%; **=95-99%; ***=99%+

Sub-groups disadvantaged by rules/decisions

1 2 3 4 5Significance: *=90-95%; **=95-99%; ***=99%+

Satisfaction with community land rules: % households

Perceived fairness of land allocation by subgroup (Lickert)

1 2 3 4 5

Significance: *=90-95%; **=95-99%; ***=99%+

SUMMARY

Summary• USAID’s impact evaluations represent some of the first on

interventions that strengthen customary land tenure security• Overall findings

– Customary tenure systems provide high levels of security to the majority

– Customary land governance institutions remain highly relevant– Customary land institutions broadly seen as fair and responsive

• Tenure security & land governance are highly context-specific– Wide variance in concerns about land

encroachment/expropriation– Differing directions in tenure security-investment relationships

• Sub-group effects vary across country and indicator– Statistically significant effects often expected direction but

mostly small– Sub-groups seen as slightly disadvantaged in land rules and

decisions– Baseline suggests that females are NOT consistently

disadvantaged

NEXT STEPS

Next Steps• Share baseline data with project implementers and the public

– http://usaidlandtenure.net/data

• Improve generalizability and external validity of the research– Standardized survey modules – Growing the USAID evaluation portfolio

• Link survey results to administrative data• Increase attention to the gendered nature of impacts• Improve measures of tenure security and land governance

– New proxies– Improved questionnaire design– Embedded survey experiments – Behavioral games

THANK YOU

http://usaidlandtenure.net/data

RETAINER

Impact Evaluation at USAIDUSAID designs, tests, and evaluates innovative and cost-effective land tenure and property rights

approaches around the globe that can be adapted, scaled, or used to inform new research, program

design, or national policies.

New research from USAID land and resource governance impact evaluation is building an evidence

base to demonstrate how secure land tenure may improve economic growth, food security, climate

change mitigation, and adaptation efforts, and gender equality.