AUSTRALIA-WORLD BANK GROUP STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP IN VIETNAM Gender Theme BENEFITS OF JOINT LAND TITLING IN VIETNAM 1 Acknowledgements This policy note was prepared by Cuong Viet Nguyen, Consultant; Giang Tam Nguyen, Social Development Specialist; Helle Buchhave, Senior Social Development Specialist, all from the Social Development Practice; and Hoa Thi Mong Pham, Senior Social Development Specialist, of the Urban, Resilience and Land Global Practice of the World Bank. The policy note is based on a research paper by the same authors. The authors are grateful for the guidance provided by Kathrine Kelm, Senior Land Administration Specialist; and Susan Shen, East Asia & Pacific Practice Manager of the Social Development Global Practice. Thank you to peer-reviewers of the research paper Victoria Stanley, Senior Land Administration Specialist; Son Thanh Vo, Senior Agriculture Specialist; and Aneesh Mannava, Research Analyst. The research paper also benefited from comments made by Dr. Linh Hoang Vu, Senior Lecturer, Vietnam-Japan University; and Dr. Thang Nguyen, Director of the Centre for Analysis and Forecasting, Vietnam Academy for Social Sciences. Relevant officials from the General Department of Land Administration, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, reviewed the draft paper and provided useful inputs to finalize it. Thanks also go to Audrey Stienon, Consultant, for support to preparation of this note. Financial support by Australia is gratefully acknowledged. This policy note was prepared as part of the Vietnam Women’s Economic Empowerment Project of the Australia - World Bank Group Strategic Partnership in Vietnam - Phase 2 (ABP2). The project carries out comprehensive data- and evidence-based analyses on emerging challenges with the objective to increasing women’s economic empowerment. For more information on this publication and the Gender Theme of ABP2, please contact Task Team Leader Helle Buchhave (hbuchhave@worldbank.org) or Dung Thuy Vu, Team Assistant, World Bank Hanoi (dvu1@worldbank.org). Copyright © 2020 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank Group 1818 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20433 USA All rights reserved. Reference: Buchhave, H.; Viet Cuong Nguyen, Tam Giang Nguyen, and Thi Mong Hoa Pham. 2020. “Benefits of Joint Land Titling in Vietnam.” World Bank, Washington DC. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this report are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed in any manner to the World Bank, or its affiliated organizations, or to members of its board of executive directors or the countries they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any consequence of their use. Photo credits: Cover: Le Manh Thang / Shutterstock; page 2: Tong_stocker / Shutterstock; page 3: Neil Palmer / 2009CIAT; page 7: Dragon Images / Shutterstock. BENEFITS OF JOINT LAND TITLING IN VIETNAM Key Points • The 2003 Land Law mandating joint titling for married couples has increased the share of joint land titles in Vi- etnam, but men continue to control a disproportionate amount of land and assets because before this reform, rights were regularly issued to only one member of a household—usually the husband. The rate of converting singly titled land certificates to jointly titled ones has been low due to a lack of awareness about the possibility of and advantages to conversion, concerns about paperwork and costs, and sociocultural sensitivities. Demand should be increased for converting existing singly titles to joint ones. • Households benefit from having jointly titled land rights, increasing their expenditures by an average of 1.6 percent for agricultural land and 2.5 percent for residential land. • Individuals benefit from having explicit land use rights. People named as holders of residential land use rights in- crease their use of health care services by around 15 percent; and women named as holders are 2.33 percentage points more likely to have held a nonfarm job in the previous year. • A policy to convert remaining singly titled LURCs to jointly titled ones would yield net gains of 0.319 percent of the 2014 gross domestic product and would raise household expenditures enough to reduce the national poverty rate by 0.1 percentage points. CONTEXT Land is a social and an emotional issue, deeply inter- can be issued to an individual or to a household. For the twined with personal concerns of security, status, and latter, the LURC can be issued as a single or joint title, identity. It is also a key economic asset in deciding the although in either case the land is considered the common status of both men and women. Like many countries with property of all household members. The 2003 Land Law large rural populations, landholding is an important form mandates that all new LURCs for married couples be is- of property ownership in Vietnam. Most notably, a person sued to both husband and wife. Nonetheless, men con- who holds land use rights can use them as collateral, in- tinue to control a disproportionate share of Vietnamese creasing their access to credit, which can then in turn re- land and assets because many certificates issued before duce poverty rates (Nguyen 2008; Swain, Sanh, and Tuan July 1, 2004, remain in the name of a single spouse, usu- 2008; Lensink and Pham 2012; Van den Berg 2014). ally the husband. In Vietnam, land use rights for agricultural (e.g., According to article 98 (4) of the Land Law (2013)1 the cropland) or residential land are granted by local authori- full names of both husband and wife must be included on ties through land use rights certificates (LURCs), which a LURC for common property unless both parties agree to 1 The 2013 Land Law came into effect in 2014. It is more detailed and has seven more chapters and 66 more articles than the original 2003 Land Law. 1 1 record only one name. According to this article as well as Yet previous studies have shown that the inclusion of both decree 43/2014/ND-CP of May 15, 2014, which guides spouses on a LURC is crucial to increasing gender equal- the implementation of the land law, a LURC with only ity. In Vietnam, the fact that women are less often named one name can be revised at the request of the current in LURCs makes them less likely to have access to formal holder of the land use rights. The process is not very com- capital (MPDF 2016); and women from ethnic minorities plicated, and does not require the issuing of a new certifi- are awarded a smaller proportion of land in divorce cases cate; rather, a note of conversion can be added for cases than men (Do and Hoang 2005; Nguyen 1999; Oxfam that the land registry finds eligible. In principle, therefore, 1997). Married women without land use rights are more legislation and guidelines for promoting gender equality economically dependent on their husbands, more fearful in access to land are well in place. In practice, however, of getting a divorce, and more likely to suffer from do- the process of conversion depends entirely on the initia- mestic violence (World Bank 2008). Women whose tive of an individual landholder and his or her spouse. A names are included on LURCs, either as sole or joint own- spouse might not see the need to initiate a conversion or ers, have higher per capita expenditures, lower poverty might find it awkward or otherwise difficult to discuss this rates, and higher self-employment rates compared with potentially controversial topic. women whose names are not included (Menon, Rodgers, and Kennedy 2016). 2 2 WHAT WE DID This study assesses the impact of different types of are whether one has been issued an agricultural or resi- LURCs on individual and household welfare, expanding dential LURC, with controls for age, education, ethnicity, on the previous research of Menon, Rodgers, and Ken- urban residence, household consumption, land area, and nedy (2016), which assessed the effects of LURCs on ag- district. We also regress household-level outcomes—ex- ricultural land on household welfare. This study considers penditures, credit levels, and incomes—on whether the more recent data from the Vietnam Household Living household’s LURC is singly or jointly titled. Notably, the Standards Survey (VHLSS) of 2014 in addition to VHLSS distribution of LURCs is not randomized, making it diffi- data from 2002–08, and includes an analysis of LURCs cult to estimate the causal effects of LURC status and for agricultural as well as residential land. thereby limiting the conclusions that can be drawn. The third section, using 2014 demographic data and LURC The study findings are presented below in three sections. distributions, offers a cost-benefit analysis of efforts to The first is an analysis of land use and LURC distribution convert and reissue all remaining singly titled LURCs to trends based on the VHLSS data. The second draws on a jointly titled ones. We estimate the benefit as the impact group of impact evaluations that compares the effects of difference between single- and jointly titled LURCs as having different types of LURCs. We regress individuals’ calculated in the impact evaluation section and estimate employment and health care outcomes on whether their costs as those of reissuing a LURC. name was included on a LURC. The treatment variables 33 WHAT WE FOUND This study presents four key findings suggesting that an the share of singly titled LURCs that were held by men increase in joint titling has a positive impact on the em- fell as more of their wives gained explicit land rights. powerment of women and the health and economic out- Nonetheless, a man remains more likely than a woman to comes of individuals, and it increases a household’s ac- hold a land title as an individual or head of household (fig- cess to credit and its expenditures. ure 1). In 2014, 46 percent of LURCs for cropland were held by men compared with only 15.7 percent by women. 1. There has been a remarkable increase in Women who are named on individual LURCs are more likely than men to be single (unmarried, widowed, or di- jointly titled LURCs since 2004, but the vorced). Of the residential LURCs issued to married cou- percentage of LURCs that are singly held by ples (households), 39 percent were titled to a male head of a woman is still much smaller than those household compared with 6.2 percent to a female head of household, underscoring how, absent a requirement to singly held by a man. convert relevant existing individually held land titles to In accordance with the 2003 Land Law, the share of joint ones, married women are less likely than their hus- jointly titled LURCs has risen over the last decade. From bands to hold explicit land use rights. 2004 to 2014, the share of jointly titled cropland rose from 11.6 to 38.3 percent, while the share of jointly titled resi- dential land rose from 15.7 to 55.6 percent. Meanwhile, 4 4 Notably, an agricultural LURC, which is less valuable 2. Joint land titling improves household than a residential one, does not lead to more credit. In ad- outcomes, increasing access to credit and dition, having a jointly titled LURC has no impact on mi- raising per capita expenditures. crocredit, which does not require collateral. Joint titling is found to yield significant benefits to both Having a jointly titled LURC, particularly for residential individuals and households. The most recent data that are land, improves other household outcomes as well, includ- included in this analysis confirms that when a woman’s ing per capita expenditures and income structure (table 1). name is included on a LURC, her household has a higher Having a jointly titled LURC rather than a singly titled than average household loan (figure 2). In 2014, the aver- one increases household per capita expenditures by age formal loan levels for households with a jointly titled 1.6 percent for agricultural land and 2.5 percent for resi- residential LURC (VND 6.65 million)2 or residential dential land. While there is no significant effect of having LURCs titled to individual women (VND5.49 million) a jointly titled agricultural LURC on credit levels or in- were higher than those to households with residential come structure, a jointly titled LURC for residential land LURCs titled to individual men (VND 4.09 million) or increases formal credit levels by 30 percent and informal those without a LURC (VND 2.55 million). However, credit levels by 17.3 percent. A jointly titled LURC for these trends do not indicate a causal relationship. We residential land also increases the share of nonfarm busi- therefore ran a regression that finds that having a jointly ness income by 1.8 percentage points, suggesting an in- titled LURC for residential land led to a 35.1 percent in- crease in the share of loans used in nonfarm businesses. crease in the amount of a households’ formal credit and These are important changes because increased per capita an 18 percent increase in the amount of informal credit. spending indicates that households are getting wealthier. 2 VND = Vietnamese dong. 55 3. Joint titling improves health care Named inclusion in LURCs can also affect women’s employment. Women named in LURCs for agricultural outcomes and increases women’s and residential land are more likely to have held non- employment in nonfarm jobs. farm jobs in the previous year by 1.76 and 3.12 percent- age points, respectively. For a woman in an ethnic Individuals named on the LURC have better health care minority, being named in an agricultural LURC in- and employment outcomes (table 2). Named inclusion creases her likelihood of having wage employment by in residential LURCs increases an individual’s health 3.74 percentage points and nonfarm employment by care utilization by 15 percent, suggesting that land ti- 3.62 percentage points. tling can increase the decision-making power of indi- viduals within the family. 6 6 4. A policy effort to convert the 0.10 percentage points. However, the impact of this shift would be limited because the increase in expendi- remaining singly titled LURCs into jointly tures is only large enough to alter the poverty status of titled ones would reduce poverty rates households living just below the poverty line, even and yield a net benefit. though others would also receive personal gains. An effort to convert the remaining singly titled LURCs Based on the estimated benefits of jointly titled LURCs, into jointly titled ones could lead to a small but notable the net benefit of reissuing existing singly titled reduction in poverty because it would result in an in- LURCs as jointly titled ones would be about crease of household expenditures. Such conversions of VND 970 billion (US$46.1 million) for agricultural agricultural and residential LURCs could lift an esti- land and VND 11,606 billion (US$555.2 million) for mated 184,000 and 735,000 households, respectively, residential land—0.025 and 0.294 percent of the 2014 above the poverty line, reducing the poverty rate by GDP, respectively. 77 POLICY IMPLICATIONS • Jointly titled LURCs contribute to increases in access • Ethnic minorities disproportionately make up poor to credit and household expenditure levels, which can households in Vietnam, and local studies show that increase consumption and investment in production cost represents a barrier to their requesting applica- and reduce poverty rates. Evidence suggests that be- tions. Because the reissuance costs can be close to the ing named in a LURC increases a person’s decision- monthly per-capita income of a poor household, the making power in the household. Thus, the net benefits government should consider financial aid schemes of reissuing singly titled LURCs as jointly titled ones that would assist such households with the process. for married couples are positive, suggesting that the Vietnamese government should consider more ac- • Provincial authorities should continue their efforts to tively converting and reissuing the certificates. modernize their land-related databases and improve the accuracy of data on the progress of reissuing • The government should prioritize converting residen- LURCs. tial LURCs, which yield substantial benefits. Case studies in Vietnam demonstrate that conversion re- • Lastly, the government should monitor and evaluate quests are not being made due to a lack of awareness the enforcement of women’s land rights. Successful around women’s rights regarding land, concerns land access projects3 have demonstrated the critical about complicated and lengthy procedures and related role that communication plays in raising citizen de- costs, and sensitivity within households and commu- mand, enabling women to benefit from joint titling nities when a spouse requires joint titling. The gov- and avoid the risk of economic loss in cases of inher- ernment could use a mass campaign to increase itance or divorce. The government could work with awareness of the reissuance campaign, ensuring that communes and village representatives to strengthen households are aware of the procedure for changing communications around women’s land rights, espe- their LURC status. The campaign should aim to pre- cially in rural and remote areas. sent an opportunity and limit the risk of stigmatization for converting current LURC into joint titles. Provin- cial authorities should assist households seeking to undertake this process. 3 Successful experiences include for example World Bank supported pilot projects in the province of Nghe An in 2002 and later in twenty prov- inces/cities nationwide in 2003-2004; the World Bank’s Vietnam Land Administration Project in nine provinces (2008–15), and USAID’s Women’s Access to Land in Vietnam Project in Hai Duong and Long An provinces (2014–18). 8 8 REFERENCES Do, T. B., and T. S. Hoang. 2005. “Land Management and Using by Nguyen, C., and M. Van den Berg. 2014. “Informal Credit, Usury, or Women in Ethnic Minority Group of Co Tu.” Women’s Studies Jour- Support? A Case Study for Vietnam” Developing Economies 52 (2): nal 4 (71). 154–78. Lensink, R., and T. T. T. Pham. 2012. “The Impact of Microcredit on Nguyen, N. T. 1999. “An Investigation on Female-Mastered House- Self-Employment Profits in Vietnam. Economics of Transition 20 (1): holds and Land Using in Ethnic Minorities.” Hanoi, Vietnam. 73–111. Oxfam. 1997. Gender Issues in Granting Land Rights. United King- MPDF (Mekong Private Sector Development Facility). 2006. “Women dom: Oxfam. Business Owners in Vietnam: A National Survey.” Private Sector Dis- cussions 21. IFC-Gender Entrepreneurship Markets Initiative/Mekong Swain, R. B., N. V. Sanh, and V. V. Tuan. 2008. “Microfinance and Private Sector Development Facility, Hanoi. Poverty Reduction in the Mekong Delta in Vietnam.” African and Asian Studies 7 (2–3): 191–215. Menon, N., Y. Rodgers, and A. Kennedy. 2016. “Land Reform and Welfare in Vietnam: Why Gender of the Land-Rights Holder Matters.” World Bank. 2008. Analysis of the Impact of Land Tenure Certificates Journal of International Development 29 (4): 454–72. with Both the Names of Wife and Husband in Vietnam. Washington, DC: World Bank. Nguyen, C. 2008. “Is A Governmental Micro-Credit Program for The Poor Really Pro-Poor? Evidence from Vietnam,” The Developing Economies 46(2): 151–87. 99 With support from: 8 Dao Tan Street, Ba Dinh District, Hanoi, Vietnam Telephone: +84 24 37740100 Facsimile: +84 24 37740111 Website: www.dfat.gov.au 8th Floor, 63 Ly Thai To Street, Hoan Kiem District, Hanoi, Vietnam Telephone: +84 24 39346600 Facsimile: +84 24 39346597 Website: www.worldbank.org/en/country/vietnam 10