Thea Hilhorst –December 10 th 2013

1. The land governance assessment framework (LGAF)an approach for participatory benchmarking, monitoring, and dialogue TheaHilhorst –December 10th 2013

2. Overview presentation • Aim and approach LGAF • Structure of the framework • Some findings • Using data for improving land governance

3. Why LGAF instrument was developed (2008) • Land sector reforms to be driven by country level, evidence-based assessment • Should be based on broad, participatory policy dialogue between/ within government and other stakeholders • Comprehensive assessment – across silos & strategicpriority setting • Need for land governance baseline to track progress both for in-country policy reform and for regional/global initiatives (VGGT, LPI )

4. Aim and Structure LGAF Framework • Set baseline (country scorecard) - for tracking progress • Consistent with the VGGT principles, and other (emerging) principles (‘responsible agro-investment’) • Pre-coded framework based on global experience • Rankings assigned by panels of local experts (gov, CSO, academia, private sector), justified by evidence • Goal is to arrive at consensus scoring- Aim for consensus: on strong points; what to improve and where to start (priority recommendations) • Results validated in national technical workshop, translation into policy recommendation • Conclusion presented to policy makers for concrete follow-up

5. LGAF approach: Substance and process • Substance: • Comprehensive analysis of land sector; • Assessment guided by framework of indicators, based on global experience of “good” land governance • Evidence-based (administrative data, studies, tacit knowledge) • Process: • Fast, low-cost assessment - Use available information – no new primary research (gaps can be identified) • Driven by national experts - Participatory - multiple sectors and stakeholders • Led by a country coordinator, working with national specialists to prepare background analysis; Scoring in 9 thematic panels

6. Voluntary Guidelines (VG) Topics Covered by the LGAF

7. Process and Steps: 4-6 months Final report & Score card 1 2 3 4 5 6 Platform/ observatory monitoring Dialogue

8. Framework

9. 5 thematic governance areas

10. 9 Panels

11. Panel – Indicator, dimensions and scores

12. Example Indicators Area Dimensions Score Transfer of public land to private use follows a clear, transparent, and competitive process; payments are collected and audited Area 3: Management of Public land A B C D Public land transactions are conducted in an open transparent manner. Payments for public leases are collected. Panel 5: Transfer of large tracts of land to investors Private Investment Strategy Policy implementation is effective, consistent and transparent and involves local stakeholders Public land is transacted at market prices unless guided by equity objectives. The public captures benefits arising from changes in permitted land use. Contracts involving public land are public with agreements monitored and enforced Policy to improve equity in asset access and use by the poor exists, is implemented effectively and monitored.

13. The scoring/ ranking: based on global experience

14. Example of coded answers Dimension 5.1.1 Public land transactions are conducted in an open transparent manner.(with the exception of transfers to improve asset equity such as land distribution and land for social housing). Assessment A–The share of public land disposed of in the past 3 years through sale or lease through public auction or open tender process is greater than 90% (Except for equity transfers). B –The share of public land disposed of in the past 3 years through sale or lease through public auction or open tender process is between 70% and 90%. (Except for equity transfers). C–The share of public land disposed of in the past 3 years through sale or lease through public auction or open tender process is between 50% and 70%. D– The share of public land disposed of in the past 3 years through sale or lease through public auction or open tender process is less than 50%. (Except for equity transfers).

15. 11 Indicators important for large-scale land acquisitions • Panel 1: Land Rights Recognition • Recognition of a continuum of rights • Respect for and enforcement of rights • Panel 2: Rights to Forest and Common Lands & Rural Land Use Regulations • Rights to forest and common lands • Effectiveness and equity of rural land use regulations • Panel 4: Public Land Management • Identification of public land and clear management • Justification and time-efficiency of acquisition processes • Transparency and fairness of acquisition procedures • Panel 5: Transfer of large tracts of public/communal land to investors • Transfer of public land to private use follows a clear, transparent, and competitive process and payments are collected and audited • Private Investment Strategy • Policy implementation is effective, consistent and transparent and involves local stakeholders. • Contracts involving public land are public with agreements monitored and enforced.

16. Results

17. Countries with LGAF (33)

18. Scorecards

19. Recognition and Respect for Existing Rights: Legal and Institutional Environment

20. Management of Public Land

21. Public Provision of Land Information

22. Transfer of Public Land to Private Use Follows a Clear, Transparent, and Competitive Process

23. Conclusions

24. Process • LGAF proven to be a good diagnostic tool • Comprehensive analysis across stakeholder much appreciated; Breaking down traditional silos in country = panels are important • Creates baseline for tracking progress – regular monitoring key quantitative indicators • Helps to focus efforts in land sector and encourage collaboration, basis for building platforms for stakeholder dialogue • Helped to start taking sometimes controversial issues forward / create space for dialogue • Tool for expressing & communicating country demand • Provides justification for investments/ interventions in land sector reforms • move up “land issues” on broad policy agenda;

25. Contribution to transparency & change • Information land sector pulled together, brings tacit knowledge on actual practice in the public domain • Brings (potential) change agents together; podium for potential “champions” • Building block for • Implementation (can agreement on strong and weak points (evidence) lead to change?) – allign… • Innovation? (pilot, sharing practice, capacity etc.) • Institutionalize dialogues and monitoring – allign.. VGGT • Demand for data from administrative system => transparency & performance? • More monitoring (timely check) & impact

26. Presenting data in accessible format LGAF Framework • Structures analysis • Structures assessment : comparable over time and between countries • Produces scorecards: strong & weak points • Baseline; also helps to identify opportunities for sharing good practice

27. LGAF prepares the ground for regular –reporting on land governance • Produces baseline & national platform demanding data & ability to use these data • Uses data from administrative systems: government responsibility to supply data (accountability) and has incentive to • Improve ability of systems to produce data • Undertake actions that will show progress) • Work towards regular reporting on short list of global land indicators (see also) –incl. Post- 2015 land indicators (land in name of women; mapping communal land; transactions recorded; expropriation, conflict, taxation)

28. More Information on LGAF instrument and findings • http://econ.worldbank.org/lgaf