1. Does Stronger Land Tenure Security Incentivize Smallholder Climate-smart Agriculture? Initial Evidence from Zambia’s Eastern Province Lauren Persha 1, M. Mercedes Stickler 2, Heather Huntington 3 1 Department of Geography, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 2 Land Tenure and Resource Management Office, USAID 3 The Cloudburst Consulting Group, Inc

2. Motivation Resurgence in promoting agroforestry in SSA: to meet food security challenges and CC adaptation objectives for poor rural farmers Many small-scale studies show a range of benefits to smallholders from agroforestry: –Improved soil fertility & crop yields –Risk smoothing via crop diversification; increased or more reliable income –Increased availability of wood products for HH use (e.g., fuelwood, fodder) Yet, uptake in SSA has been persistently low –Cash, resource and inputs constraints e.g., Labor & credit availability; Farm size –Insufficient technical knowledge –Incompatible land management practices within villages e.g., Communal livestock browsing during past-harvest season –Broader cultural, demographic, institutional factors –Insecurity over rights to land

3. Motivation To what extent does land tenure insecurity serve as a barrier to agroforestry uptake, and wider implementation of other climate-smart agricultural practices? –Widely hypothesized, but few studies show a definitive link –Difficult to rigorously test at scale (challenges of piloting tenure interventions; introducing experiments) –Empirical studies have substantial endogeneity challenges to overcome Widely varying results across existing empirical work Methods challenges also contribute to equivocal knowledge base –Different definitions & measures of tenure security –Different empirical strategies for analysis –Generally, small-N studies: few villages, couple hundred HHs –Household level rather than field level data –No clear consensus; little understanding of how this relationship might vary across different country, socio-cultural, policy contexts

4. USAID’s Tenure and Global Climate Change (TGCC) Project 2-year RCT in 5 chiefdoms of Chipata District, Eastern Province Cross-cutting tenure and agroforestry interventions aimed at increasing the adoption of CSA Opportunity to test relative contributions of strengthening customary land governance and agroforestry extension support on HH tenure security and CSA adoption –IE focuses on identifying effects of village and household level interventions Tenure intervention focuses on: –Establishing Village Land Committees –Participatory mapping to aid land allocation –Support dissemination of land management rules agreed at chief level –Capacity building to headmen, indunas, VLCs, around land administration processes, including land dispute resolution and administration of customary land certificates –Facilitate implementation of customary land certificates (at chief’s consent) –HH-level paralegal extension support around land rights, certification and dispute resolution Agroforestry intervention focuses on: –Extension support around establishment of 3 agroforestry species: Faidherbia albida (msangu); Gliricidia sepium; Cajanus cajan (Pigeon pea)

5. TGCC Project: A Randomized Control Trial of Land Tenure Strengthening and Agroforestry Extension Impacts on Smallholder Adoption of Climate-Smart Agriculture Eligible Chiefdoms TGCC Chiefdoms Control Villages Agroforestry Villages Land Tenure Villages Agroforestry + Land Tenure Villages Control Agroforestry Land Tenure Agroforestry and Land Tenure Randomization Step

6. Chipata District Baseline Data Collection Baseline completed Aug 2014; Endline expected Aug 2017; True panel survey Qualitative & Quantitative: –3,500 households surveyed across 294 villages in Chipata District –Headperson survey –Key informant interviews: agricultural extension officers; individuals involved in local land issues (e.g., Indunas, village elders) –Focus groups with women, youth, land-constrained HHs (45 villages) –Nested data collection across fields, HHs, villages

7. Baseline Analyses: Research Questions 1.How secure are the rights of Eastern Province smallholders over the land they use, under Zambia’s prevailing dual customary and state tenure system? 2.What are household level determinants of stronger tenure security? 3.What role does tenure security play in shaping household land use strategies and CSA investments (and particularly with respect to agroforestry uptake)? 4.Heterogeneous outcomes: How do these results differ for female-headed and poorer households? To what extent does land tenure insecurity serve as a barrier to agroforestry uptake, and wider implementation of other climate-smart agricultural practices?

8. Empirical Strategy: Baseline Data Multi-level mixed effects models to identify determinants of: –Tenure security –Longer return, Intensive land investments –Shorter return, less intensive land investments –Agroforestry uptake specifically Tenure security measured at the field level, as expropriation risk: HH expectation of losing access to the field over (1) the next 1-3 years, and (2) beyond 3 years from now. Two tenure security measures: 1.Index of HH perceived risk of expropriation for each field; responses across 6 different groups: »Extended family; »Other HHs in village; »HHs in neighboring villages; »Village headperson; »Chief; »Elites from outside the village. 2.Number of seasons a HH felt they could let the field lie fallow without worrying about it being reallocated to another HH or for other use

9. Descriptive Statistics

11. Results: Determinants of Tenure Security

12. Results: Longer Return Land Investments

13. Findings: Tenure Security, Land Disputes, Land Documentation Land expropriation, documentation and tenure security: Relatively high tenure security across the surveyed chiefdoms Land expropriation events are uncommon (experienced by < 2% HHs) But, household concern over this is high (15-25% of fields surveyed). Two main sources of concern: –dispossession by chiefs for investment purposes; and –boundary disputes with other HHs in village HHs commonly experience land-related disputes, despite fairly high overall tenure security: –26% of households (N=707) experienced a land conflict on at least one field in past 3 years; –prior disputes recorded on 10% of fields surveyed (N = 1007 fields) 91% of HHs would like to obtain documentation over customary land they use (current holders of documentation are very uncommon; < 1% of households) Little evidence of strong marginalization around land issues for female-headed or poorer households Land disputes and links with household tenure security over land: Clear indication of dampening effect of land disputes on household perception of security over land Clear indication of concern over emergent challenges to land rights, such as expropriation by chiefs for investments Links to strong household-level interest in land documentation

14. Key Messages: Factors Associated With Tenure Insecurity Strong role of prior land disputes Other key factors: –Field acquisition by allocation rather than inheritance –Poor quality land: steeply sloped; poorer soils Little evidence of greater insecurity across traditionally vulnerable groups Little evidence of a moderating role for village-level governance factors Role of elite networks: Some indication that HH ties to chief is associated with lower insecurity, but not for headperson

15. Role of prior field-level disputes

17. Findings: Agricultural Investments & Agroforestry Agroforestry uptake currently very low (11% of HHs (N=383); 5% of fields (N=404)) Other upfront costly field investments also uncommon: Planting basins: 10% of fields Live fencing: 1% of fields Drip irrigation: < 1% of fields Less costly CSA investments somewhat more common: Zero tillage: 8% of fields Manuring: 18% of fields Fallowing: 7% of fields Ridging (85% of fields) and crop rotation (82% of fields) very common

18. Key Messages: Factors Associated With Agricultural Investment HHs strongly preference their largest field for such investments Greater HH labor availability and education level have small but significant effects Small but significant negative effect of tenure insecurity on HH likelihood to undertake costly upfront land investments (but not agroforestry specifically) Significant factors for likelihood of agroforestry uptake: Field size (+) HH labor availability (+) Head age (+) Education level of HH (+) Land-constrained (-) –Indication these HHs are significantly less likely to engage in agroforestry No evidence of a significant role for several factors often hypothesized in the literature: Quality of village-level land governance HH exposure to agricultural extension Ties to elite networks Wealth status Female-headedness

19. Preliminary Overall Conclusions Overall, relatively high tenure security across the surveyed chiefdoms Collective understanding of cultural norms around customary land access, allocation and inheritance appear to be strong overall and well-functioning, including mediating equitable access to land for traditionally vulnerable groups (also strongly supported by qualitative data) Traditional informal and customary norms over land access, allocation, inheritance appear to be strong Little evidence of strong marginalization around land issues for female-headed or poorer households. However Clear indication of dampening effect of land disputes on household perception of security over land Clear indication of concern over emergent challenges to land rights, such as expropriation by chiefs for investments Links to strong household-level interest in land documentation. Role of stronger tenure security in promoting agroforestry? –Some indication of its effect on broader costly land investments –Currently very low uptake constrains the baseline analyses; –A need for more nuanced work (e.g., instrumenting as a next step)

20. Thank you.