Publication: Kenya Land Governance Assessment Report
Loading...
Published
2016-06-27
ISSN
Date
2017-10-11
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
The Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF) is a diagnostic tool to assess the status of land governance at country level using a participatory process that draws systematically on existing evidence and local expertise rather than on outsiders. The analysis covers nine themes: land tenure recognition; rights to forest and common lands and rural land use regulations; urban land use, planning, and development; public land management; process for transfer of public land to private use; public provision of land information (land administration and information systems); land valuation and taxation; dispute resolution and review of institutional arrangements and policies. The assessment follows a scorecard approach and produces a matrix of policy priorities matrix. The LGAF process helps to establish a consensus on (i) gaps in existing evidence; (ii) areas for regulatory or institutional change, piloting of new approaches, and interventions to improve land governance on a broader scale (e.g. by strengthening land rights and improving their enforcement); and (iii) criteria to assess the effectiveness of these measures. This report presents the result for Kenya.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Kameri-Mbote, Patricia. 2016. Kenya Land Governance Assessment Report. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/28502 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication The Land Governance Assessment Framework : Identifying and Monitoring Good Practice in the Land Sector(World Bank, 2012)Seventy-five percent of the world's poor live in rural areas and most are involved in agriculture. In the 21st century, agriculture remains fundamental to economic growth, poverty alleviation, and environmental sustainability. The World Bank's Agriculture and rural development publication series presents recent analyses of issues that affect the role of agriculture, including livestock, fisheries, and forestry, as a source of economic development, rural livelihoods, and environmental services. The series is intended for practical application, and hope that it will serve to inform public discussion, policy formulation, and development planning. Increased global demand for land because of higher and more volatile food prices, urbanization, and use of land for environmental services implies an increased need for well-designed land policies at the country level to ensure security of long-held rights, to facilitate land access, and to deal with externalities. Establishing the infrastructure necessary to proactively deal with these challenges can require large amounts of resources. Yet with land tenure deeply rooted in any country's history, a wide continuum of land rights, and vast differences in the level of socioeconomic development, the benefits to be expected and the challenges faced will vary across and even within countries, implying a need to adapt the nature and sequencing of reforms to country circumstances. Also, as reforms will take time to bear fruit and may be opposed by vested interests, there is a need to identify challenges and to reach consensus on how to address them in a way that allows objective monitoring of progress over time. Without this being done, the chances of making quick progress in addressing key land policy challenges are likely to be much reduced. The Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF) is intended as a first step to help countries deal with these issues. It is a diagnostic tool that is to be implemented at the local level in a collaborative fashion, that addresses the need for guidance to diagnose and benchmark land governance, and that can help countries prioritize reforms and monitor progress over time.Publication Brazil Land Governance Assessment(Washington, DC, 2014-06)This report on the assessment of land governance in Brazil summarizes and discusses the results of a series of standardized self-assessments of the land governance situation in Brazil, conducted entirely by Brazilian speakers. Therefore, these findings represent the perception of local experts based on their experience of news and data available. The main aim of this report are federal and state authorities directly involved in land governance in the evaluated states and other states. The general objective of the development of this assessment is to measure reliably the skills and the performance of land governance in a cross section of the country. This assessment is highly relevant and timely, as the land and real estate of natural resources linked to the land are the central core of the current competitiveness of Brazil and its strategically valuable position in the changing world economy. The evaluation methodology was the Assessment Framework of Land Governance (LGAF) developed by the World Bank. It focused on five key areas of good land governance and three additional topics. Key areas were: legal, institutional and associated policies to land rights; planning of land use and taxation; identification and ownership of land management of the state; provision of public land information; and dispute settlement. The optional modules used in some evaluations focused on the large-scale acquisition of land, forestry and the regularization of land tenure. Based on the LGAF in related workshops and review of some publications, the review has identified four areas of relative force on the Brazilian land governance. They include the guarantee of property rights, transparency in allocation of public land, public accessibility of information on registered land and transparency of increasing concern emerging from the influence of democratic and social movements. In addressing these and other areas of reform of land governance, the efforts of the newly created Inter-ministerial Working Group on Land Governance (IMWG) will be vital. That is particularly so because some of the reforms depend on the consistency of improving legal and institutional framework for land governance, which is necessarily a collaborative and cross-sector enterprise. This report therefore calls on the IMWG to join the Presidents Office to create an annual and transparent work program, for a period of at least three years with a regular mechanism of agreed reporting to the IMWG Office and Civil Office of the Presidency.Publication India Land Governance Assessment(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2015)As India continues to urbanize and move towards a less agricultural- and more industry-based economy, land demands will continue to grow. Its urban population is expected to increase by more than 200 million by 2030, requiring 4 to 8 million hectares of land for residential use alone. Demands for infrastructure and industry could add a similar amount, summing to total land demand of 5 to10 percent of the land area currently used for agriculture. If not handled well, such massive land use change may increase vulnerability and food insecurity, rent-seeking, environmental problems, social dislocation, inequality, and conflict. But it also provides an opportunity to address the underlying structural issues, propelling India into the league of middle-income countries and laying the ground for significantly advancing shared prosperity and reduced poverty. This synthesis report presents results from land governance self-assessments by six states: The fact that land is a state subject implies that actions to improve land governance need to be initiated at state level. To identify opportunities, six states implemented the Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF), a tool that allow comparing the status of their land governance against international good practice along a set of dimensions in a very participatory process. Results are summarized in state reports that were validated publicly and discussed with policy makers in each state. This national report complements these and draws out common areas.Publication Land Governance Assessment Framework Implementation in Ethiopia(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2016-01)The Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF) is a diagnostic tool to assess the status of land governance at country level using a participatory process that draws systematically on existing evidence and local expertise rather than on outsiders. The analysis covers nine themes: land tenure recognition; rights to forest and common lands and rural land use regulations; urban land use, planning, and development; public land management; process for transfer of public land to private use; public provision of land information (land administration and information systems); land valuation and taxation; dispute resolution and review of institutional arrangements and policies. The assessment follows a scorecard approach and produces a matrix of policy priorities matrix. The LGAF process helps to establish a consensus on (i) gaps in existing evidence; (ii) areas for regulatory or institutional change, piloting of new approaches, and interventions to improve land governance on a broader scale (e.g. by strengthening land rights and improving their enforcement); and (iii) criteria to assess the effectiveness of these measures. This report presents the result for Ethiopia.Publication Land Governance Assessment(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2016-05-06)The Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF) is a diagnostic tool to assess the status of land governance at country level using a participatory process that draws systematically on existing evidence and local expertise rather than on outsiders. The analysis covers nine themes: land tenure recognition; rights to forest and common lands and rural land use regulations; urban land use, planning, and development; public land management; process for transfer of public land to private use; public provision of land information (land administration and information systems); land valuation and taxation; dispute resolution and review of institutional arrangements and policies. The assessment follows a scorecard approach and produces a matrix of policy priorities matrix. The LGAF process helps to establish a consensus on (i) gaps in existing evidence; (ii) areas for regulatory or institutional change, piloting of new approaches, and interventions to improve land governance on a broader scale (e.g. by strengthening land rights and improving their enforcement); and (iii) criteria to assess the effectiveness of these measures. This report presents the result for Zambia.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Design Thinking for Social Innovation(2010-07)Designers have traditionally focused on enchancing the look and functionality of products.Publication Government Matters III : Governance Indicators for 1996-2002(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2003-08)The authors present estimates of six dimensions of governance covering 199 countries and territories for four time periods: 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. These indicators are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 25 separate data sources constructed by 18 different organizations. The authors assign these individual measures of governance to categories capturing key dimensions of governance and use an unobserved components model to construct six aggregate governance indicators in each of the four periods. They present the point estimates of the dimensions of governance as well as the margins of errors for each country for the four periods. The governance indicators reported here are an update and expansion of previous research work on indicators initiated in 1998 (Kaufmann, Kraay, and Zoido-Lobat 1999a,b and 2002). The authors also address various methodological issues, including the interpretation and use of the data given the estimated margins of errors.Publication Breaking the Conflict Trap : Civil War and Development Policy(Washington, DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2003)Most wars are now civil wars. Even though international wars attract enormous global attention, they have become infrequent and brief. Civil wars usually attract less attention, but they have become increasingly common and typically go on for years. This report argues that civil war is now an important issue for development. War retards development, but conversely, development retards war. This double causation gives rise to virtuous and vicious circles. Where development succeeds, countries become progressively safer from violent conflict, making subsequent development easier. Where development fails, countries are at high risk of becoming caught in a conflict trap in which war wrecks the economy and increases the risk of further war. The global incidence of civil war is high because the international community has done little to avert it. Inertia is rooted in two beliefs: that we can safely 'let them fight it out among themselves' and that 'nothing can be done' because civil war is driven by ancestral ethnic and religious hatreds. The purpose of this report is to challenge these beliefs.Publication Governance Matters IV : Governance Indicators for 1996-2004(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2005-06)The authors present the latest update of their aggregate governance indicators, together with new analysis of several issues related to the use of these measures. The governance indicators measure the following six dimensions of governance: (1) voice and accountability; (2) political instability and violence; (3) government effectiveness; (4) regulatory quality; (5) rule of law, and (6) control of corruption. They cover 209 countries and territories for 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004. They are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 37 separate data sources constructed by 31 organizations. The authors present estimates of the six dimensions of governance for each period, as well as margins of error capturing the range of likely values for each country. These margins of error are not unique to perceptions-based measures of governance, but are an important feature of all efforts to measure governance, including objective indicators. In fact, the authors give examples of how individual objective measures provide an incomplete picture of even the quite particular dimensions of governance that they are intended to measure. The authors also analyze in detail changes over time in their estimates of governance; provide a framework for assessing the statistical significance of changes in governance; and suggest a simple rule of thumb for identifying statistically significant changes in country governance over time. The ability to identify significant changes in governance over time is much higher for aggregate indicators than for any individual indicator. While the authors find that the quality of governance in a number of countries has changed significantly (in both directions), they also provide evidence suggesting that there are no trends, for better or worse, in global averages of governance. Finally, they interpret the strong observed correlation between income and governance, and argue against recent efforts to apply a discount to governance performance in low-income countries.Publication Governance Matters VIII : Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2008(2009-06-01)This paper reports on the 2009 update of the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) research project, covering 212 countries and territories and measuring six dimensions of governance between 1996 and 2008: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption. These aggregate indicators are based on hundreds of specific and disaggregated individual variables measuring various dimensions of governance, taken from 35 data sources provided by 33 different organizations. The data reflect the views on governance of public sector, private sector and NGO experts, as well as thousands of citizen and firm survey respondents worldwide. The authors also explicitly report the margins of error accompanying each country estimate. These reflect the inherent difficulties in measuring governance using any kind of data. They find that even after taking margins of error into account, the WGI permit meaningful cross-country comparisons as well as monitoring progress over time. The aggregate indicators, together with the disaggregated underlying indicators, are available at www.govindicators.org.