The “Tenure Gap” & its influence on socio-ecological conditions Margaret b. Holland, Assistant professor, geography & environmental Systems, UMBC World bank land & poverty conference, march 2017 Co-authors: Allison Kelly (U Washington), Yuta Masuda (TNC), Brian Robinson (McGill U), & Tenure/Conservation Working Group

Tenure Gap goes both ways Need better/additional measures of tenure security Land community looking for more ways to quantitatively assess difference between statutory & customary Measuring tenure gap specifically through bundle of rights The concept of the tenure gap was explained in detail by enumerators and then experts were asked if it existed for a specific subpopulation. Experts were first asked which land tenure forms existed for a subpopulation. Within each tenure form, experts were then asked which rights the subpopulation had under that tenure form, once for legally defined rights and once for socially defined rights. As of Oct 17, 2016, 69 of 80 subpopulations are reported to have a tenure gap

In-depth surveys & mapping with land tenure experts How do land tenure experts define tenure security in the context of their work? Where and how severe are the tenure gaps? (both formal/statutory vs. socially-defined and “on-paper” and “on-the-ground” components of tenure gaps) What are the priority approaches for closing tenure gaps? 10 initial countries of focus: Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Liberia, Peru, Tanzania, Uganda

Tenure GAP Survey Methods 7 enumerators (English, Spanish, & Mandarin speakers) Interviews from July – December 2016 Online mapping tool, amigocloud Standardized recruitment and reminder emails included concept note and amigocloud/skype instructions Average interview length: 2 hours to explore 1 case study location

Whom did we interview? 60 completed interviews as of now: # experts/country highest for Guatemala, India, Colombia, and Indonesia Average 15 years of experience working on land tenure (range: 3-45) Most hold a post-graduate degree (n=44) Most common role was as executive director (n=26), followed by manager, and analyst. Most common sector = conservation (n=28) and economic development (n=27), and with a focus on indigenous groups (n=24) and agriculture (n=23). Experts often filled more than one role and worked in more than one sector.

What might we expect for the nature of the gap according to tenure form? Communal &/or customary: more (& stronger) locally- & socially-realized rights vs. statutory rights * Communal gap < customary gap Protected areas & public lands: more statutory rights vs. fewer locally-upheld & socially-defined rights Private: smallest gap of the forms subpopulations are communal tenure, private tenure and customary or traditional tenure.

Due process & compensation Alienation Bundle of rights: Access Withdrawal Management Exclusion Due process & compensation Alienation four histograms that visualize the tenure gap within each tenure form and right. Rights include access, withdrawal, management, exclusion, due process and compensation and alienation. The n for each tenure form is the total number of subpoulations which have that form. Panel a. shows the proportion of subpopulations with each socially-defined right by form. Panel b. shows the proportion of subpopulations with each legally-defined right by form. Panel c. shows where social rights exist but corresponding legally-defined rights do not while Panel d. shows where legal rights exist but corresponding socially-defined rights do not

What is the effect of the tenure gap on people?

What is the effect of the tenure gap on ecosystems?

The tenure gap & conservation outcomes? Land titling doesn’t necessarily secure environmental conservation Exploring more nuanced strategies for how the gap can be closed might help buffer against negative outcomes for people & ecosystems Characterizing both socially-defined and statutory rights (and tenure gap) = important step in a conservation intervention

Thank you! Working Group Membership With this goal in mind, the Land Tenure Security, Conservation and Human Well-Being Working Group was formed. The working group is composed of senior members from diverse organizations, including development and conservation NGOs and as well as academic institutions. Email: mholland@umbc.edu