Publication: Issues and Options for Improved Land Sector Governance in Ukraine
Loading...
Date
2014
ISSN
Published
2014
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 Ukraine.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Muliar, Oleksandr; Kaliberda, Oleksandr; Kulynych, Pavlo; Egiashvili, David. 2014. Issues and Options for Improved Land Sector Governance in Ukraine. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/28519 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 Improving Land Sector Governance in Vietnam(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2013-12)The Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF) was designed to address these challenges by the World Bank, based on a comprehensive review of available conceptual and empirical materials regarding experience in land governance. The objective of LGAF is was developed as a diagnostic tool for a systematic evaluating and benchmarking legal framework, policies and practices regarding land and land use. This document represents the country report for Vietnam’s national LGAF Study. This important exercise was undertaken by team of national experts, with support from the World Bank, and in collaboration with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MoNRE) in 2013. The Study’s objective was to provide the means for better understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the Vietnamese land sector; establish a consensus on the status of land governance in the country and identify priority actions for regulatory and institutional changes and the piloting of new approaches to improve land governance on a broader scale.The Study’s Report describes the process for LGAF implementation and the country context. The assessment of land governance is also presented, as well as the policy analysis, conclusions and recommendations. The report is intended to serve as a reference guide for policy makers and land practitioners in the government and non-government organizations such as private sector, academe and other groups to help shape the direction, focus and support for the land sector, and how progress in improving governance can be effectively monitored.Publication Improving Land Sector Governance in Nigeria(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2011-11-26)Nigeria is covered by two major types of vegetation: (i) the forest types consisting of mangrove swamp, freshwater swamp, and the tropical rainforest dominantly found in the south; and (ii) the savanna types consisting of Guinea, derived, Sudan, and Sahel savanna covering the middle belt and northern part of Nigeria. In spite of the rich endowments, Nigeria is still facing a lot of development challenges. The basic legal framework on land, the land use act (a federal enactment attached to the Constitution) has prescribed that all land in Nigeria within the territory of each state of the federation is vested in the control and management of the state governor in question. The inclusion of Nigeria as one of the six countries benefiting from the World Bank and International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and other partner organizations in this land governance assessment framework (LGAF) pilot study at this point in time is one of the best things to happen to Nigeria and especially, to the Presidential Technical Committee on Land Reforms (PTCLR). Designed as a diagnostic instrument for rapid national evaluation of various aspects of land governance, the LGAF is to be implemented by in-country experts. The LGAF study started in February 2011 in Nigeria. The Nigerian study included a complementary module on large scale land acquisition (LSLA) with 16 dimensions.Publication Improving Land Sector Governance in Ghana(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012-02)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 Ghana.Publication Improving Land Sector Governance in Georgia(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2011-08)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 Georgia.Publication Improving Land Governance in West Bengal(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2014-08)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 West Bengal.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
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 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 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.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.