World Bank Conference on Land and Poverty. Linking land Tenure and Use for Shared Prosperity Washington DC, March Reforming land administration for shared prosperity in Western African cities. Can corruption in land administration be overcome? Alain Durand-Lasserve CNRS

1.LEGAL, ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL BACKGROUNDS 1.1. Specificities of land and tenure regimes and administration in Western African countries Tenure regimes in the sub-region: characterized by coexistence of statutory, customary and informal tenure status and rights. Land originally supplied either by: - The state & local governments; - Customary landholders; - Private individual landowners and land development companies.

1.2. Market price of land tightly related to: - Tenure status of the land - Legality of the land transfer / transaction Only land administrations are in a position to: - Decide the conditions of the allocation and sale of public lands. - Allocate land at a preferential administrative price. - Issue the documents necessary for land transactions. - Upgrade the tenure status of the land, which translates into a sharp increase in the market value of the land up to 5 to 10 times, when ownership title (titre foncier) is issued on land held informally or under customary regime. This opens the door to massive frauds and corruption within land administrations.

2. WIDESPREAD CORRUPTION IN LAND ADMINISTRATION 2.1. Wide range of stakeholders exposed to – or involved in – corruption practices - Land administrations at central and local levels. - Institutions and professionals essential to the functioning of land administrations. - Customary institutions and landholders. - Public, para-public and private institutions. - Households and individuals.

2.2. Corruption practices commonly observed in following steps (i) Registration of customary land; subdivisions; allocation and sale of land by the state or local governments. Registration and transactions on customary land without the consent of customary communities Land subdivisions and allocation of plots Preferential allocation of land plots in resettlements schemes. Land administrations complicity with surveyors and intermediaries (ii) Registration of land transactions and changes in land tenure status Land transfers and transactions Land tenure upgrading Production of false backdated property titles or evidence (iii) Land use conversion From rural land to urban land suitable for housing

3. MAIN CONSEQUENCES OF CORRUPTION IN LAND ADMINISTRATION - Reduces access to land for the poor - Contributes to weakening the resources and social cohesion of low-income communities - Hampers initiatives for improving the functioning of land administration

4. CAN CORRUPTION IN LAND ADMINISTRATON BE OVERCOME? Last two decades: many attempts to limit corruption in land administration in West African cities To date, emphasis has been put on repressive responses Limited achievements 4.2. Responses based on the reform of land administration framework and procedures. Simplification of procedures and land titling attempts Poor results attributed to resistance within land administrations They managed to prevent any new statutory institution to implement alternative simplified land administration procedures that would threaten their monopoly regarding tenure formalisation, land transfers and registration of land rights. (i.e. attempts made in Benin & in Senegal)

Limiting the decisional power of central government land administrations Few impact, given administrative practices and the diversity of procedures that allow most stakeholders involved in land transfers to circumvent laws and regulations. Improving transparency in land management and administration by cadastres and land information system - LIS No example of sustainable urban cadastre or land registry in West Africa Decentralizing land management and administration at local / municipal levels Results uneven depending on countries. Resistance of land administration at central government levels want to keep their land prerogatives. Corruption and clientelism also at the local level

4.3. Vested interest within land administrations at all levels of the hierarchy makes it difficult to reform land administration from inside. Corruption is a self-feeding process and an overheating process. Corruption impacts on land values and affordability, thus creating a scarcity of land with secure tenure, which in turn encourages corruption in land administration. This cycle is reinforced by the limited processing capacity of the land administrations that deliver land titles. Coexistence of statutory and customary tenure systems and the predominance of tenure informality in urban and peri-urban areas is perpetuating corruption practices to which they are tightly related.

5. SOME GUIDELINES TO ADDRESS CORRUPTION IN LAND ADMINISTRATIONS Corruption cannot be addressed only in technical, legal and administrative terms Priorities Improving knowledge - Improving our understanding about how land corruption in land administrations works (procedures, mechanisms, financial circuits, institutions and stakeholder involved). - Understanding of how land delivery systems and subsequent land markets work in urban and peri-urban areas. - Identifying, in local situations, all actors that can benefit from – or are exposed to – corruption in the land sector. Defining strategy objectives and priorities - To “eradicate corruption”: fully justified but it can be seen as a long-term goal. - In the short and medium-terms the objective is to limit the expansion of corruption practices and minimize its impact on access to land, price of land and speculative strategy.

5.3. Addressing the structural causes of corruption in land administration, not only their consequences Corruption in land administration is the result of the conjunction of the five main sets of factors or situations: (i) presumption of eminent domain rights; (ii) state intervention in land allocation and tenure upgrading and the delivery of land titles; (iii) diversity of land tenure and land prices; (iv) ownership rights as defined in national Land codes; (v) liberalisation of land markets. Considered separately, none of these factors could explain the high level of corruption in land administration. However their conjunction is a major driver of corruption in la administration.

THANK YOU