Can Land Registration Serve Poor and Marginalised Groups? Summary Report

Can Land Registration Serve Poor and Marginalised Groups? Summary Report draws on case studies in Ethiopia, Ghana and Mozambique. This research has shown that land registration is not inherently anti-poor in its impacts and that the distributional consequences of land registration depend on the design of the process and on the institutions responsible for its management. Land registration systems can be designed so as to address the risk of bias against poorer and marginalised groups. To protect and secure the land rights of these groups, attention needs to be paid to registration processes with regard to language used, registration fees, geographical accessibility; to recognising and recording “secondary” land rights; to establishing effective accountability and oversight mechanisms for the institutions implementing registration programmes; as well as to inclusive dispute settlement institutions. The study shows the need to avoid “one-size-fits-all” solutions and documents considerable experience from which to learn.