1 THE POLITICS OF REFORM IN INSTITUTIONS OF LAND ADMINISTRATION IN GHANA:  Land Politics,  Institutions &  Institutional Change Daniel Appiah, MPhil/PhD (University of York) Supervisor: Dr Adrian Leftwich

2 UNDERSTANDING LAND POLITICS  Defining Land: Two Conceptions of Land (Dale and McLaughlin, 1999)  Physical earth  Abstract set of formal or informal rights over a physical portion of the earth  Defining Land Administration: 4 Components (Dale and McLaughlin, 1999; Steudler et al, 2004; Williamson et al 2008)  Juridical (land tenure or ownership)  Fiscal (land valuation)  Regulatory (land use) &  Information management o The Primacy of Politics in Land Administration  Conflict among diverse interests over scarce land resources  Power and control over people and land resources

3 AN OVERVIEW OF LAND ADMINISTRATION IN GHANA  The State vs. ‘Customary’ Land Tenure Administration o State Land Tenure Administration: 20% (Kasanga and Kotey, 2001; World Bank, 2003a) o ‘Customary’ Land Tenure Administration: 80%  Institutional Problems in Land Administration o State Institutions of Land Administration  Inter-organizational conflicts and lack of co-operation among agencies  Customary Institutions of Land Administration  Lack of transparency, accountability, and tenure security

4 THE PROBLEM FOR RESEARCH ANALYSIS  Institutional Reforms in State and Customary Land Administration in Ghana – The Land Administration Project (LAP).  The Diversity Of Interests In LAP (Toulmin, et. al., 2003; World Bank, 2003b; Quan, et. al., 2004). o International Development ‘Partners’ (World Bank, DFID, GTZ etc) o Market Interests o Customary Authorities o The State o Civil Society Actors o Public Sector Land Agencies (6/7?) o Land Tenants

5 HYPOTHESIS & RESEARCH QUESTION  Hypothesis  Institutions, whether formal or informal, matters for development in all human societies; they enable or constrain interests in the development process, and; ultimately shapes social outcomes.  Key Research Question  How, and to what extent, do state (formal) and customary (informal) institutions of land administration enable or constrain institutional reform, and; ultimately, shape reform outcomes?

6 SPECIFIC CASE STUDY RESEARCH QUESTIONS 1. What are the state (formal) institutions of land administration? 2. What are the customary (informal) institutions of land administration? 3. What are the power relations between the state and customary institutions of land administration? 4. How do the state and customary institutions of land administration impact on diverse interests (businesses, the state, customary authorities and tenants) in land administration? 5. What is the origin (interests involved) and nature of the reform in the state and customary institutions of land administration? 6. How have the state and customary institutions of land administration enable or constrain institutional reform?

7 AN HISTORICAL INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH AGENDA  Historical Institutionalism (Pierson and Skocpol, 2002; Leftwich, 2006; 2007) o Research Methodology  A Historical Analysis of the State and Customary Institutions of Land Administration  Analysis of the Politics of Reform in State (formal) Institutions of Land Administration  Analysis of the Politics of Reform in Customary (informal) Institutions of Land Administration  Methods for Data Collection (Searle, 2001; Creswell, 2007; Bryman, 2008)  Documentary Analysis  Purposive Interviews

8 ANALYTICAL PROPOSITIONS OF HISTORICAL INSTITUTIONALISM o Institutional formation and evolution involve political processes. o Political processes in human societies occur in given institutional contexts. o Path dependency commonly constrain or enable the interests involved in institutional formation and change. o The agents or interests involved in institutional reform bring to the political process diverse forms of power and resources embedded within formal or informal institutions. o Agents in uncertain, evolving or insecure institutional environments can have more effect than agents in contexts where the institutional architecture is well-established, secure and consolidated. o ‘Critical junctures’ often provide the ‘windows of opportunity’ or occasions when fundamental institutional reform can occur.

9 HOPED FOR CONTRIBUTION OF THE THESIS  Understanding of the origin and nature of state (formal) and customary (informal) institutions of land administration  Understanding of how formal and informal institutions matter in enabling or constraining development  Understanding of the problems of and prospects for institutional reform in land administration in Ghana  Highlight the advantages and limitations of historical institutional theory in political analysis

10 HOW IS THE STUDY GOING? A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON LAND ADMINISTRATION

11 LITERATURE REVIEW OF LAND ADMINISTRATION IN AFRICA  The State vs. ‘Customary’ Land Tenure Administration o State Land Tenure Administration: 1-10% (World Bank, 2003; Toulmin, 2008) o ‘Customary’ Land Tenure Administration: 90-99%  Controversy over definition of the ‘Customary’ (Leonard and Longbottom 2000; Quan, et. al., 2004; Cutola, et. al., 2007; Wily, 2008) Common property Indigenous/Traditional Customary  The need for critical analysis of the origin and nature of the institutions that govern ‘State’ and ‘Customary’ land tenure in Africa. o Emerging issues from the Land in Africa Conference, 2004, London (Quan, et. al., 2004:11-12); The State as ultimate owner of land resources Imported solutions of tenure individualisation and titling are not workable in the African context

12 LITERATURE REVIEW OF THE ORIGIN AND NATURE OF LAND ADMINISTRATION – Theory & Practice  Two Perspectives in The Literature a. The World Bank Perspective (World Bank Land Sector Policy Paper, 1975) b. The Rational-Technical Perspective (De soto, 2000; Williamson and Wallace, 2006; Williamson et al, 2008; Enemark, 2008)  My Perspective: A Political Approach – The Primacy of Politics ( Caneiro, 1970; Tilly, 1990; Gran, 2002)  The origin and nature of land administration is primarily shaped by political processes between powerful and less powerful interests.  Land administration is intricately embedded within the larger political process of state formation.  Political processes of conflicts, co-operation, negotiation between rulers and other interests in the concentration of coercion over land shapes the nature of the rules that govern land administration across states.

13 THANK YOU! Caution & Motivation; “It is not easy, to be sure. The whole terrain is an intellectual and political minefield, dotted with institutional jealousies and border police, with well-placed and often concealed booby-traps, diversions and dead ends. … But it has been done and can be done.” Adrian Leftwich (2004:117) DISCUSSION…