AN ASSESSMENT OF RURAL LAND REGISTRATION AND LAND INFORMATION SYSTEM IN AMHARA REGION, ETHIOPIA: A LAND ADMINISTRATION PERSPECTIVE

ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (KTH)

AN ASSESSMENT OF RURAL LAND REGISTRATION AND LANDINFORMATION SYSTEM IN AMHARA REGION, ETHIOPIA:

A LAND ADMINISTRATION PERSPECTIVE

Thesis submitted to Department of Real estatePlanning and Land Law in partial fulfillment of

the requirement

for the degree of

Master of Science with a major in the BuiltEnvironment Specialized in Land Management

by

Shewakena Aytenfisu Abab

Supervisor: Hans Mattsson (Prof.)

March, 2007Stockholm, Sweden

ABSTRACT

In Ethiopia land is a major socio-economic asset. Nearly89 percent of the population in Amhara region resides inthe rural areas and predominately engaged in small scaleand subsistence agriculture which accounts 55.8 percentof the Regional GDP. Natural factors coupled with humanfactors resulted in an alarming land and other naturalresource degradation in the region. These problems arethought to be exacerbated by tenure insecurity and lackof proper land administration system which deals withthis issue. With a strong conviction of the existence ofalarming natural resource degradation, the AmharaNational Regional State (ANRS) asserts the tenuresecurity argument as an important incentive and policyprinciple for designing a sound land management and landadministration system. To this commitment, the Regionalgovernment has under taken policy, institutional, andlegal reforms since 2000. The rural land registration andcertification exercise is, therefore, dedicated to assuretenure security of user rights of rural land holders.This operation has combined with endeavours in combatingthe alarming land degradation problem through proper landmanagement and environmental protection for sustainabledevelopment all over the Region.

The aim of this paper is to assess and evaluate the ruralland registration and land information system in Amhararegion from land administration point of view. Wherebythe paper has attempted to show what are the goodpractices and performance gaps and suggests as to how the

II

system could be more efficient, reliable and adaptable tonew circumstances. A descriptive approach is mainlyemployed to attain the study objectives. Both primary andsecondary data are used as sources of information.Primary data are generated through focus groupdiscussions with members of Kebele Land Administrationcommittee (KLAC), interview with farmers and Woreda landadministration staffs in the field. Reviews of differentpolicy documents, relevant legislations, systemdevelopment and implementation reports are used togenerate secondary data. Besides, conceptual evaluationmodel is also employed to identify the good practices andperformance gaps of the system. The study has addressedpolicy issues, institutional arrangements,responsibilities and coordination, legal frameworks andenforceability, technical issues like data acquisition,maintenance and updating, safety and security, andinformation dissemination.

The research has concluded that the development of thisnew system is a welcome operation among differentpotential stakeholders in the region. EPLAUA’s strategyto address tenure insecurity problem through aninnovative and pro-poor approach has significantlyconsidered as good practice of the system. Besides, theprocess of reviewing and amending the previous landadministration law is timely done, though some basic by-laws are not enacted to date. This shows that theiterative nature of the system by which it attempted toaccommodate new demands of potential stakeholders.However, some of the principles of effective legalframeworks stated in the legislations and the reality onthe ground did not match. On the other hand, the researchhas shown that there is a serious lack of coordinationand communication among the responsible organs at alllevel though at the lower is worsening. Even ifsuccessful land registration and LIS would require theassumption of a very heavy, and often thankless,coordination of responsibilities between differentstakeholders, EPLAUA was seemed either hesitant to takethe lead to establish a smooth coordination andcommunication among different stakeholders or unable to

III

do so. Besides, the land policy and land registrationobjectives and principle of LIS, the responsibilities ofeach separate entity which deals with rural land is notwell publicized for the general public, closelymonitored, and followed up.

As a recommendation the following particulars shall begiven due consideration by the concerned body so that thesystem could be more efficient, reliable and adaptable tonew circumstances. Stakeholders’ participation in policyformulation should be encouraged since this enables tostrengthen the dialogue and mutual trust among thevarious actors and between the actors and theinstitution. The decentralised organizational arrangementof EPLAUA should be strengthened by giving ultimateautonomy and adequate financial support at all level.EPLAUA shall take the lead and organize an independentforum at Regional level so as to encourage dialogue anddevelop mutual trust and cooperation between differentpotential stakeholders. The process of legal reformrelated to rural land would consider and reflect the fourbasic principles of effective legal framework on onehand, and the coordination and consideration of effectson provisions on other related laws on the other hand. Itshould also be respected and implemented accordingly.Last but not least, the land policy, land registrationobjectives and principle of LIS, and the responsibilitiesof each separate entity which deals with rural landshould be well publicized for the general public, closelymonitored, and followed up. EPLAUA shall give dueattention and do the necessary measure regarding themaintaining and updating of the registry.

IV

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost I awe my heartiest gratitude to mysupervisor Professor Hans Mattsson for his enduring andultimate support throughout this study with whom thispaper would not be real. Hans your expertise advice,enthusiasm, encouragement and sustained commitment to mystudy are greatly appreciated. Special thanks also goesto all LM-program administrative staffs, Andres Grad,Marie Androve, and Karina Umander for theirencouragements, taking care of every thing, and making mystudy as smooth as possible.

I would like to direct my gratitude to Dr Zerfu Hailu,Dr. Taddesse Amsalu, Ato Bayeh Tiruneh, and Ato GebeyehuBelaye and other colleagues at EPLAUA for easingadministrative issues and helping in technical matters.My special gratitude also extends to Lars Palm, technicaladvisor of EPLAUA, for delivering his car for datacollection in the field and other necessary technical andfinancial support obtained from him. I awe also AtoTaddsse who driving all the way safely to and from datacollection sites. Thanks also go to EPLAUA, SARDP, andURGUT Consultant AB for their financial support andfacilitating every thing necessary for this study.

V

This study was conducted primarily with the cooperationof Wogera and Gozamen District farmers, especiallyfarmers in Amba Georgies Zuria, Kossoye and AddissnaGulit Kebeles respectively. Without their acceptance,hospitality, and eagerness to share their precious timeand invaluable ideas, data collection would not have beenpossible. I thank them deep heartedly for freelyproviding information and answering my questions honestlyand patiently. My gratitude also extends to thoseKebeles’ land administration committee members who weremost helpful and cooperative. Above all, thanks also goto Adane Mehari at Gozamen and Ato Denekew Taye, MerihunAsfaw, Habitamu Zelalem and Gashaw at Wogera Districtsfor facilitating and arraning time to get the KLACmembers, the study subjects and providing the necessaryinformation as well.

I would like to awe my best gratitude from the bottom ofmy heart to my brother Dereje Mekonnen for sharing meall the necessary precious and invaluable knowledge hehas. Dere your expertise in scientific researchmethodology, enthusiasm and encouragement was immense tomake this paper true in time. Thanks also extend to myfriend Birhanue Simegne to your language proofing of thepaper and encouragement. Special thanks to Menen Zelekewho executed all the necessary routines related to mywork and her honesty to receive and deliver my halfsalary on monthly basis to me throughout my study.

Thanks also to my beloved parents who show me love,faith, endurance and encouragement throughout my study.Oh Daddy now your name is written on an intellectuals’name database of internationally reputed academicinstitution (KTH), and I promise you that the better willcoming soon. Friends who don’t lose faith are the bestones to have. Parents and friends-thanks for havingfaith. To every one mentioned here, my sincere thanks.

ACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY

VI

ANRS Amhara National Regional StateBOARD Bureau of Agriculture and Rural DevelopmentBOFED Bureau of Finance and Economic DevelopmentCLIS Cadastral Land Information SystemECS Ethiopian Conservation StrategyEPLAUA Environmental Protection Land Administration and Use AuthorityEPLAUT Environmental Protection Land Administration and Use TeamGIS Geographic Information SystemGPS Global Positioning SystemHHs HouseholdsKebele The lower and grass root administrative organ in Amhara RegionKLAC Kebele Land Administration CommitteeKTH Royal Institute of TechnologyISLA Information System for Land AdministrationLAS Land Administration System LIS Land Information SystemsMOARD Ministry of Rural and Agricultural DevelopmentORDA Office of Rural Development and Agriculture RCS Regional Conservation StrategySARDP SIDA – Amhara Rural Development ProgrammeSDPRP Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Program SKLAC Sub-Kebele Land Administration CommitteeSIDA Sweden International Development AgencyWoreda District

VII

TABLE OF CONTENT

TITLES PAGESABSTRACT...........................................................IIACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...................................................IVACRONYMS AND GLOSSARY...............................................VTABLE OF CONTENT...................................................VILISTS OF TABLES..................................................VIIILISTS OF DIAGRAMS..................................................IXSUMMARY.............................................................X1. INTRODUCTION.................................................- 1 -1.1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM................................- 1 -1.2 OBJECTIVES................................................- 4 -

1.2.1GENERAL OBJECTIVE..................................................................................................... - 4 -1.2.2 IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVES.............................................................................................. - 4 -

1.2 GENERAL RESEARCH QUESTIONS..............................- 4 -1.3 THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY AND ITS LIMITATIONS..............- 4 -1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY.................................- 5 -1.6 METHODOLOGY...............................................- 5 -

1.6.1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES, STUDY AREA, AND TARGET POPULATION........................- 5 -1.6.2 PREPARATORY ACTIVITIES........................................................................................... - 6 -1.6.3 DATA SOURCE, DATA COLLECTION AND MATERIAL ANALYSIS..................................- 6 -1.6.4 DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION.........................................................................- 7 -

1.7 OVER VIEW OF THE PAPER STRUCTURE..........................- 7 -2. REVIEW LITERATURES...........................................- 8 -2.1 WHY RECOGNIZING PROPERTY RIGHTS THROUGH REGISTRATION?.....- 8 -2.1 LAND REGISTRATION FUNCTIONS..............................- 11 -2.2 LEGAL POWERS OF LAND REGISTRATION........................- 11 -2.3 FROM STAND ALONE TO INTEGRATED LAND INFORMATION SYSTEMS..- 12 -2.4 ROBUST AND ENFORCEABLE INSTITUTIONS FOR LAND MANAGEMENT..- 14 -2.5 FINANCING LAND REGISTRATION AND LAND INFORMATION SYSTEMS.- 15 -2.6 IDENTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE CRITERIA AND DEVELOPING EVALUATION FRAMEWORK....................................................- 16 -

VIII

3. GENERAL BACKGROUND OF LAND REGISTRATION AND LIS IN AMHARA REGION233.1 STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION.......................................233.2 TENURAL HISTORY AND LAND POLICY CHANGE IN ETHIOPIA...........243.3 LEGAL BASES..................................................263.4 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES...............283.5 CADASTRAL LAND REGISTRATION IN AMHARA REGION.................293.6 THE LAND REGISTRY COMPONENTS.................................323.7 COMPUTERIZATION..............................................32

3.7.1 THE PILOT IMPLEMENTATION.......................................................................................333.7.2 ARCHITECTURE...............................................................................................................333.7.3 BACKUP AND DATA TRANSFER......................................................................................33

4. SURVEY RESULTS..................................................354.1 SURVEY RESULT OF FARMER’S INTERVIEW..........................35

4.1.1 FARMERS PRACTICES DURING AND AFTER FIRST REGISTRATION...............................354.1.2 FARMERS REALIZATION AFTER FIRST REGISTRATION CONDUCTED............................38

4.2 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION SURVEY RESULT OF KEBELE LAC...........434.3 INTERVIEW RESULT WITH WOREDA EXPERTS.........................44

5. EVALUATING THE SYSTEM...........................................475.1 INSTITUTIONAL EVALUATION AREA................................47

5.1.1 Aspects of land policy principles..................................................................................475.1.2 Aspects of land tenure principles.................................................................................485.1.3 Structural definition, Institutional and organizational arrangement and cooperation between institutions..........................................................................................495.1.4 Involvement of private sector.......................................................................................495.1.5 System accessibility.......................................................................................................505.1.6 Freedom and accountability.........................................................................................505.1.7 Legality and legitimacy.................................................................................................515.1.8 Human resource and technological development.....................................................51

5.2 LEGAL EVALUATION AREA........................................525.2.1 Transparency and predictability..................................................................................525.2.2 Equal and fair treatment..............................................................................................535.2.3 Rapid Adjudication and Enforceability........................................................................545.2.4 Consistency with customs, norms, and level of development...................................55

5.3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION AREA....................................555.3.1 Data acquisition............................................................................................................555.3.2 Maintenance and updating..........................................................................................565.3.3 Safety and security........................................................................................................575.3.4 Information dissemination...........................................................................................58

6. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION...................................596.1 CONCLUSSION..................................................596.2 RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................60

IX

REFERENCES.........................................................62APPENDIX I.........................................................67APPENDIX II........................................................69APPENDIX III.......................................................71

LISTS OF TABLES

Table 1 Evaluation framework with possible aspects,indicators and good practice for each area asdeveloped by Stuedler, et al

Table 2 Conceptual framework to evaluate theperformance of Amhara rural land registrationand LIS

Table 3 Farmers who registered their holdings andreceived book of holdings.Table 4 Farmer’s participations/roles duringregistrationTable 5 Farmers executing responsibilities according tothe lawTable 6 Farmers who made transfer and reported after

first registration conductedTable 7 Willingness to report changes in the nearfuture

X

Table 8 Benefits being registeredTable 9 Level of enforceability and legitimacy of

Kebele LAC and Farmers satisfactionTable 10 Sources of information for farmers regardingtheir holdingsTable 11 Willingness to pay for the serviceTable 12 Farmer’s main reason for willing to pay forservicesTable 13 Types of transfer and procedures to registerTable 14 EPLAUA personnel profile for Amhara Regionalstate at all levels

LISTS OF DIAGRAMS

XI

Diagram 1 Management framework for developing cadastre &land registration in Nepal as developed byTuladhar.

Diagram 2 Data consolidation between Woreda and EPLAUA

Diagram 3 Farmers benefited being registered in respect to reducing border conflicts by Kebele

XII

SUMMARY

The study was mainly aim at to assess and evaluate therural land registration and land information system inAmhara region from land administration point of view.Therefore, key findings are summarised as follows:

The research has shown that the development of this newsystem is a welcome operation among different potentialstakeholders especially among the farming community.Currently, land policy is enshrined both in the Federaland Regional constitutions. In addition to this, theregistration of immovable property is stipulated in the1960 Civil code of the country which is still applicableexcept parts dealing with private ownership. It is alsodictated in the ECS and RCS documents which were thebasis for the establishment of land administration lawsespecially at Regional level.

The land administration laws are objectively designed toaddress tenure insecurity problem. The rural landregistration and certification process is combined withand considered as mean strategy to combating the alarmingland degradation problem through proper land managementand environmental protection by assuring tenure securityof user rights of rural land holders. However, theexistence of stakeholder’s participation in land policyformulation at all levels was seemed not duly consultedparticularly farmers who are considered as the primarybeneficiary of the rural land registration in the region.In addition to this, the study has shown that the policyobjectives and legislations related to registration andprinciples of LIS were not adequately publicized and wellunderstood among the general public. On the other hand,formal recognition of land tenure rights, restrictionsand responsibilities were well stipulated comprehensivelyin the land administration law. However, the result ofthis study shows that the adequacy of formal tenureprotection for right holders in practices is in question.It was reported farmers were evicted from their holdingswithout proper compensation.

XIII

EPLAUA is organized in the decentralized principle whichis found to be suitable to the local circumstances. Itspotential benefits were seemed well understood andappreciable by the local community. However, theaccountable and EPLAUA affiliated team at Woreda level isorganized with the Woreda ORDA which hinders to exercisethe responsibilities vested on it. This is because theWoreda ORDA and the local government management body areunder estimating the complexity nature and work load ofthe team. As the result they give less emphasises inbudget and other resource allocation. Though EPLAUA has aroom to develop its own operation especially at regionallevel, it is not ultimately free from politicalmanipulation. The result of this study has shown that therecent structural readjustment created significant burdenon EPLAUA’s rural land registration operation especiallyat Woreda level. Not only has this but also there existedrole confusion between Woreda EPLAUT and Woreda regularcourt. This problem is more complicated when we go downto the lower administrative organ. In short, from themove of the Amhara rural land registration proceedingsone can draw that there is a serious lack of coordinationand communication among the responsible organs at alllevel though at the lower is worsening. This seemed thatthe mandate of each separate entity which deals withrural land is not well publicized for all potentialstakeholders, closely monitored, and followed up.

With regard to human resource, there exist criticalshortage of skilled man power both in quality andquantity. However, the establishment of landadministration department to train students at Bahir DarUniversity (BDU) may alleviate this problem in the longrun. On top of this, there is a hope that students whotrained at Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) wouldcontribute a great deal in disseminating knowledge andskill in the subject through academics, research anddevelopment practices. On the other hand, despite theendeavours to upgrade and update knowledge of differentactors through short term training, members of Kebele andSub-Kebele land administration committees who areconsidered as the implementation engine of the system on

XIV

one hand, and the Woreda experts on the other hand, haveno proper knowledge especially with regard to updatingand maintenance of the register.

Financially, EPLAUA is limited to buy and introducetechnological surveying instruments and IT software andhardware. The budgetary support is erratic and too low toexecute its mandate at all level. The study has shownthat EPLAUA has no funding plan and the concept of costrecovery through service provision to potential end usershas not considered to date. However, the research hasshown that farmers were willing to pay fee for theservice they have received. But this shall be deeply andproperly investigated.

The transparency and predictability of the law was notfound well understood by the general public eitherbecause the legal consequences were not well publicizedor not implemented accordingly against offensive actions.This was logically evidenced by informal selling of landsand using rural lands without registering it like thecase in Wogera Woreda. In short, with this regard thelegislation in theory and the reality on the ground didnot match. On the other hand, the study result has shownthat all citizens have equal, impartial, and unrestrictedaccess to present claims and complaints at all ladders ofEPLAUA structures regarding land issues irrespective oftheir private position and public connection. Despitethis, the study result shows that inefficient and longbureaucratic procedure was the main reason for farmers’partial satisfaction by the KLAC (38%). However, lack ofappropriate knowledge on the part of the interested partyas to how present their claims with supporting documentswas indicated as source of inefficiency and makesbureaucratic procedure a bit longer, as it was reported.On the other hand, the research result has shown that thelegitimacy of EPLAUA at all level is significantly goodamong the general public, though enforceability of itsbinding decisions is less credible (21.6%) due to lack ofcompetence on the part of enforcing organs, i.e. KebeleAdministrative body and the civil police.

XV

In Amhara region two systematic model of registration hasemployed side by side. The study result has shown thatthough, it is relatively costly, the pilot registrationmodel with its innovative approach has significantlyserve as developing a ‘way of working’ and methods to befollowed during up scaling the registration model toregion wide at later stage. On the other hand, though thenon- conventional model of registration was simple, cheapand pro-poor approach, the data quality and theinformation in the register and its usefulness, especially,in time of boundary dispute resolution, land transfer, etcwould be limited. This was because lack of sketch maps ofparcels in the non- conventional model of registrationmakes updating practically difficult at later stage.

The quality of the titles and its enforceability ishighly dependent on the extent to which all dealings andchanges in rights to land actually are recorded. Insystems where there is no genuine interest from end usersto keep data accurate and up to date, seldom fulfil theexpectations on the system. It is, therefore, essentialthat updating the property register is driven from therequirements of the legal right holders. Of course, thelegislation which governs the property register of Amhararegion demands changes in rights to land shall keepupdated. Despite this fact, the research result has shownthat farmers were willing to report changes made throughtransfer (87 %) and were willing to report futuretransfers (97 %). However, the study also has shown thatlack of clearly defined and well articulated proceduresand established working guidelines as to how transfercould be reported and have critical lack of clarity on itamong the staffs, the committee members and the affectedparties has costs unnecessary expenses. Without clearlydefined legislation which deals with updating andmaintenance of the register, there is a fear that theinformation in the land register may deteriorate in ashort time and become immediately less important.

The study has shown that archives were poorly managed andhighly susceptible for damage. Surprisingly in bothWoredas the investigator observed that there were fuel

XVI

and Gasoline containers in the archives room which canfacilitate fire hazardous and susceptible for insects.The rooms were found in poor conditions especially thiswas true in Wogera Woreda. Even if it was reported thatthe book of register and the field sheets were kept indifferent rooms and buildings; in reality, both archiveswere kept in the same building and even in the same room.

On the other hand, the research also has shown that inAmhara region there is an endeavour to make the propertyregister computerized called ISLA. The system hasdeveloped and implemented in two pilot Woredas by EPLAUAwith joint venture of international expert in 2004.However, the system was not well functioning until May2006 due to lack of follow up from EPLAUA and shortage ofskilled staffs at Woreda level. The study shows that itis only resumed after May 2006. Basically the system isnow working as standalone on a single PC. Nevertheless,there is an aspiration to establish a network betweenWoreda and regional EPLAUA. But data consolidation andnetworking were not started to date. However, with closefollow up and monitoring from EPLAUA the system testenvironment result has shown that ISLA is promising anduser friendly to upscale region wide even if it has minorerrors. Despite this fact, the research result has shownthat there was a critical problem of personnel planning.Some of the staffs who were trained for this purpose werenot totally involved in the operation. Reportedly, eventhose who have involved in the system operation wereinterrupted with other accidental and mobilization fieldworks. In addition, system follows up and support on thepart of EPLAUA was not found adequate. Since the systemis developed by international experts there exists a fearthat this might create a burden to EPLAUA for furthersystem development and follow up in the foreseeablefuture. Despite the endeavours in disseminating informationthrough different media, lack of awareness in allpotential stakeholders about the objectives and potentialbenefits of land registration and LIS found to beinadequate and it has to be done more.

XVII

To sum up, EPLAUA’s strategy to address tenure insecurityproblem through an innovative and pro-poor approach hassignificantly considered as good practice of the system.Besides, the process of reviewing and amending theprevious land administration law and other relatedlegislation has shown that the iterative nature of thesystem by which it attempted to adjust itself andaccommodate new demands of potential stakeholders. On theother hand, though successful land registration and LISwould require the assumption of a very heavy, and oftenthankless, coordination of responsibilities betweendifferent stakeholders, EPLAUA was seemed hesitant totake the lead to establish a smooth coordination andcommunication among different stakeholders.

As a recommendation the following particulars shall begiven due consideration by the concerned body so that thesystem could be more efficient, reliable and adaptable tonew circumstances. Stakeholders’ participation in policyformulation should be encouraged since this enables tostrengthen the dialogue and mutual trust among thevarious actors and between the actors and theinstitution. The decentralised organizational arrangementof EPLAUA should be strengthened by giving ultimateautonomy and adequate financial support at all level. Tocreate strong bondage and cooperation between differentpotential stakeholders, EPLAUA shall take the lead andorganize a forum at Regional level. The process of legalreform related to rural land would consider and reflectthe four basic principles of effective legal framework,on one hand and the coordination and consideration ofeffects on provisions on other related laws on the otherhand. It should be also respected and implementedaccordingly. Last but not least, the land policy and landregistration objectives and principle of LIS, and theresponsibilities of each separate entity which deals withrural land should be well publicized for the generalpublic, closely monitored, and followed up. EPLAUA shallgive due attention and do the necessary measure regardingthe maintaining and updating of the registry. Besides, it

XVIII

would better to look for local company for further systemdevelopment and follow up of ISLA.

XIX

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

In the rural areas of most developing countries, land isnot only the primary means for generating a livelihoodbut often the main vehicle for investing, accumulatingwealth, and transferring it between generations. Thus theways in which access to land is regulated, propertyrights are defined, and ownership conflicts are resolvedhave broad implications beyond the sphere of agriculturalproduction1.

Today all over the world especially in developingcountries where their economy is relied on agriculturefaced a multi-facade development problems related toland. Some of the common problems are tenure insecurity,excessive fragmentation, land use disputes, poor and/orabsence of land market, inefficient and/or lack of legaland institutional framework. These affect directly orindirectly the livelihood of the society and forced thepeople to live under poverty level.

On the other hand, after being relegated for decades tothe margins of development debates, land policy has movedrapidly up into the international agenda in recent years.Such Global Campaign involves a huge task with a varietymenu of options of land policy. Some of them arepromoting greater tenure security and access, from legaland institutional reforms to liberalize markets, toredistributive land reforms2. Therefore, policies andprogrammes to increase land tenure security for localresource users are, therefore, crucial to improving rurallivelihoods and promoting pro-poor growth as well assustainable land use and peaceful coexistence3.

The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE)states, operation of good land administration system hasvital economic development implications. It caters tenuresecurity, facilitates land market, provides security for

1 Deininger, K. and Binswanger, H. P. 1999, pp. 247–2762 Baranyi, S., Deere, C., Morales, M. 2004, P. 5.3 Quan, 2001; Bevan & Pankhurst, 1996, p.

1

credit, reduces litigation and conflicting interest inland, helps better land use planning and monitoring,enhances better land management, to name a few4. The samedocument further elaborates that the need andcontribution of a comprehensive and multi purpose LandInformation System (LIS), which is a core component ofland administration, for legal, administrative, andeconomic decision making has paramount significance.

However, it should be also clear that land administrationis not an end by itself rather it is a means to an end.Therefore, it aims at serving society, when implementingland policy through land management activities5. Landadministration as a system is governed by some sort oflegal and institutional arrangement. However, thesearrangements differ from country to country based ontheir respective political ideology, and socio-economicpolicy. It is also clear that, the foundation of anysystem of social order is the framework of laws whichreflect the Constitution of the country. This governs theadministrative process and expresses the rights, dutiesand obligations of the citizen. This also holds truepertinent to land laws in relation to land registrationand LIS.

While institutional principles should be dependent onpolicy principles and legal developments, it is generallyrecognised that inappropriate institutional arrangementsare often the biggest bottleneck in undertaking landadministration reform. Therefore, institutionalprinciples should be concerned with government structuresincluding ministerial responsibilities, departmentalstructures and decentralisation principles, as well asgovernment-private sector relationships and partnerships,and the operation of professional organisations6.

On the other hand, maintaining and updating authoritativeinformation on land use and the attributes of land forall individual land parcels is an important feature ofland administration systems, not just as a basis forassessing the value of land but in the wider spheres of4 UNECE, 2005, P. 8.5 Van der Molen, P. 2006, P.6 UNECE, 1996, P. 60. van der Molen, P. 2006, P.

2

land policy and land management particularly foragriculture and the environment. Therefore, associatingownership or other rights to land, land use and valuationinformation with other components of an integrated andaccessible land administration system contributes tosound decision making for the benefit of all.

As part of the least developing countries in the world,over the last half century, rural society in Ethiopia hasbeen experiencing those land related problems whichaffect its livelihood capabilities. This is evidenced bygrowing poverty and destitution, frequent famines andfood crises, and the deterioration of environmentalresources on a large scale7.

Currently, there is a heated debate about land policyissues in Ethiopia among researchers, practitioners,academicians, and politicians too. This menu of policydebates ranges from arguments that propagate exclusivelystate ownership via a combination of freehold andcommunity ownership, to complete privatization of land.

Given the present policy in which exclusive stateownership of land stipulated and dictated in the policydocuments of the country, the government launches a landadministration system which is a new paradigm in thecountry’s context since 2000. This system is primarilydesigned to alleviate tenure insecurity by registeringand certifying the use rights of holders to land. Asstated in the country’s Sustainable Development andPoverty Reduction Program (SDPRP) document, protection ofproperty rights is one area of reform towards povertyreduction8.

In order to protect the users rights of farmers, their land holdingshould be registered and provided with certificate of user rights. In thisresult a guarantee may be given to the effect that land will not bedivided for a period ranging from 20-30 years.

Slightly but surely, land administration is considered asa tool and synergy to alleviate poverty. Catering accessand control over land rights for the rural poor enhances

7 Rahmato, D. 2003, P. 7.8 FDRE, 2002, P.

3

transformation of agriculture led economy, and bringsabout sustainable development in all over the nation.

Likewise, the Amhara National Regional State (ANRS) putsthe land issue as its first top development agenda. TheRegion, with a strong conviction of the existence ofalarming natural resource degradation, asserts the tenuresecurity argument as an important incentive and policyprinciple for designing a sound land management and landadministration system. Hence, by virtue of its authority,which is vested on it by the constitution, the RegionalGovernment has under taken many activities pertinent toland. Such as:

issuing regional conservation strategy documentwhich has important recommendation about rural land,

adopting the regional land administration and landuse policy,

adopting the regional rural land administrationproclamation number 46/2000,

establishing executing organization by declaringproclamation number 47/2000, that is TheEnvironmental Protection Land Administration and Useauthority (EPLAUA),

Amending proclamation number 46/2000 and replaced byproclamation number 133/2006.

It was on this background that the EnvironmentalProtection Land Administration and Use authority (EPLAUA)was emerged and is responsible for the implementation ofproclamation number 46/2000 and other land related legaldocuments in Amhara region. It is EPLAUA that is believedto solve this old-aged problem and relegated issue inAmhara region, i.e. establishing a new landadministration system and assuring tenure security forthe rural farmers, investors, and potential rightfulrural land holders and users.

Since 2003, at its infant stage, EPLAUA carried outtremendous activities. Among other things, the ongoingfirst systematic rural land and users’ rightsregistration throughout the region is a credible andparamount step in this prototype system in the country’scontext.

4

The property register, as it is called Information Systemfor Land Administration (ISLA), in EPLAUA is developedand implemented since 2004 in two pilot Woredas. Thenotion is after successful implementation and correctivemeasures the system will be scaled up region wide in stepby step bases.

With the same analogy to Global trends, registration ofrural land and users’ rights in Amhara region is expectedto contribute a great deal to bring about tenure securitywhich can lead to long term investment, reduce litigationand conflicting interests in land, enhance better landmanagement and many more. Of course, it is evident thatland registration per se cannot guarantee development;rather it serves as a tool and synergy to alleviatepoverty and bring about economic development.

Therefore, to this end, the rural land registration andISLA has to be efficient, well maintained, updated andreliable, and above all should reflect the currentrealities and meet the needs of the society. The initialinvestment, inter alia, to establish and well functioningof the system involves quite complicated process and iscostly. On top of this, if the information that theregister contains is obsolete, the investment will becomea sunk cost and the predetermined objectives of theorganization will be in vain. By and large, a fullfledged land information system is not only a matter offinance and techniques but also a matter of clearlydefined legal framework & procedures and operationalinstitutional arrangements as well as decisive andsustainable commitment from decision makers.

1.2 OBJECTIVES

1.2.1GENERAL OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to assess and evaluate the ruralland registration and land information system in Amhararegion from land administration point of view.

5

1.2.2 IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVES

More specifically, this study intends to:

a) assess the functionality of the rural landregistration operation and ISLA implementationin light of institutional, legal, and technicalissues

b) study attitudes and practice of the farmers onthe rural land registration exercise and ISLAproceedings who are considered as the primarybeneficiaries of the system

c) investigate integration and cooperation ofstakeholders to the rural land registration andISLA exercise which deal with land issue

d) evaluate the good practices and the performancegaps in the on going operations of landregistration and land information systemthroughout the region.

1.2 GENERAL RESEARCH QUESTIONS

This research paper has attempted to answer the followingbroad but comprehensive research questions:

1. How the rural land registration and ISLA isorganized and in what legal bases is being operated?

2. How the rural farming society is reacting to therural land registration and land information systemproceedings?

3. What are the contributions of other organs whichdeal with land issue to rural land registration andland information system proceedings?

4. What are the good practices and the gaps in therural land registration and land information systemproceedings?

1.3 THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY AND ITS LIMITATIONS

The study has tried to cover the functionality of therural land registration and land information systemthroughout the region by taking two sample representativeWoredas. Though, the scope of the study seems too broadthe investigator’s intention is not to assess andevaluate the whole land administration system of theregion in detail. Rather, it is focused on the rural land

6

registration and land information system which is a corecomponent of land administration system.

To this end, the study has attempted mainly to focus onthe legal and institutional set up of the system fromland administration perspective. On top of this, thestudy has tried to address and carried out thoroughanalysis of the technical aspects of the system.

Since the rural land registration and land informationsystem exercise is a new phenomenon and development inthe region and even in the country as well, relevantworks were either not exist or difficult to get. Thus,the review literature part of the study may notadequately indicate contemporary and modern landadministration system of Ethiopia. Besides, though thefour functions of land administration contributes toattain tenure security, the study is limited to addressthe fiscal and regulatory functions rather it focuses onjuridical and LIS operations The absence of localadvisor, inaccessibility of some of the study subjects,and poor internet facility also made greater obstacle toinvestigate every thing on time. Even money and timeconstraints were part and parcels of the work throughoutthe study.

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

Bearing the aforementioned problems in mind, it seemedvery essential to assess and evaluate the functionalityof the rural land registration and land informationsystem proceedings and this study has attempted to showwhat are the good practices and the performance gaps inthe system. As a result, the paper could help to givehints to the concerned bodies as to how the system couldbe more efficient, reliable and adaptable to newcircumstances. The paper would also help to bridge theknowledge gap in the field and serve as source of systemdocumentation of this new development at least in thecountry context. Further more, this study could serve asa spring board for those interested parties to furtherand detail studies in this area.

7

1.6 METHODOLOGY

1.6.1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES, STUDY AREA, AND TARGET POPULATION

In order to attain the objectives of the study, differenttechniques were employed. The first step was selectingand defining the study area. To this end, theinvestigator selected the Amhara regional statepurposefully. The rationale behind this was Amhara Regionwas found the pioneer in establishing a system like thisone and other Regions in Ethiopia are following the footstep of the region and trying to establish their own inlight of good practices and experiences from this region.Therefore, if one can talk about Amhara region landregistration and LIS, it is deemed that you are talkingabout the whole parts of the country perhaps with minorlocality differences. The other rationale regarding thisstudy area was partly because the investigator has beenworking as land administration expert in this region. Sothis made things relatively easy and gets readilyavailable on time like logistics and transportation.

Two representative Woredas and three Kebeles were alsoselected with judgment sampling methods to have clearpictures of the situation at grass root level. The reasonbehind this fact was partly because the ongoing title andland registration in the Region are two types:conventional cadastral land registration and non-conventional measurement method. On the other hand, theongoing registration and LIS was found uniform in termsof institutional and legal arrangements and way ofworking as well. The former is carried out in two Woredasof the region as pilot which is supported by SARDP. Andthe later is carried out by non-conventional measurementmethod throughout the rest part of the region. Therefore;provided that time and money constraints on the part ofthe investigator, it is logically reasonable to selectone from pilot Woreda and the other one from the secondgroup. This also gives chance to the investigator forcomparative approach. In addition to this, 68 householdfamilies were randomly selected from those three Kebeles.On the other hand, the regional EPLUAU was also treated

8

to show vertical and horizontal institutional linkage andinformation flow.

1.6.2 PREPARATORY ACTIVITIES

Before conducting the actual primary data collection inthe field, in the sample Woredas, a pilot surveying ofquestionnaire was conducted from 27/8/06 to 03/09/06 intwo Woredas. This was done partly because it is veryimportant to know how far the questionnaires were simple,and easily understandable to the interviewee to collectreliable information. It was done partly because itenabled the investigator as to how the actual primarydata collection could be conducted. This is to mean,planning time schedule, logistics and transportations waspart of the work. Based, on the feedback from thispreliminary survey the investigator tried to adjust someambiguity in some parts of the questionnaires anddeveloped a schedule as to how to proceed the actual datacollection.

In the questionnaire issues like the role andresponsibilities of farmers, members of KLAC and Woredaexperts, potential benefits of being registeredrecognized by the farmers, and challenges and experienceduring the first registration operation were covered.Besides, evaluating the maintenance and updating of theregister was one area of interest in the questionnaire.Inter-departmental and intra-departmental as well asbetween potential stakeholders coordination were alsocovered in the questionnaire. In short, issues related toinstitutional, legal and technical aspects were addressedin the questionnaire, interview and in the focus groupdiscussion sessions.

The other important issue regarding this study duringplanning stage was developing a suitable conceptualevaluation model. Since, there is no single andinternationally accepted evaluation model for such systemin one hand and models that are developed by otherauthors, on the other hand, were not found to beappropriate and best suit in light of the objectives ofthis study. Therefore, the investigator was obliged todevelop an evaluation model which assumed to be best suit

9

to the study objectives and its end results. This waspartly done based on related works. This is to mean,identifying the most critical system attributes andadapting to develop conceptual evaluation model toevaluate the performance or achievement of landregistration and land information system operations inEthiopia’s context. On the other hand, the developedconceptual evaluation model has attempted to fitstandardized procedures and attributes in light ofinternational good practices and experiences. This wasachieved by exhaustive examinations of the relevantliteratures, interviewing national and internationalproject implementers, consultants and professionals inthe field, and drawing on the investigator’s ownexperiences backlogged in Ethiopia.

1.6.3 DATA SOURCE, DATA COLLECTION AND MATERIAL ANALYSIS

For the purpose of this study, both the primary andsecondary sources of data were addressed to generatereliable information on which the assessment andevaluation on the rural land registration and landinformation system could carry out. Legal documents suchas Federal and Regional Constitutions, the Civil code,land administration law, and related regulation anddirectives were thoroughly reviewed. In addition, reviewsof the book of register, the book of possession, andsystem development and implementation reports were themajor sources of information to describe what the systemlooks like and how it is operating. Interviews were alsoconducted to 68 randomly selected farmers at Kebelelevel. Besides, interviews were also conducted for fourWoreda experts in the sample Woredas. On the other hand,focus group discussions were also conducted for threeKebele LACs of each sample Kebeles in different occasionsto obtain first hand/primary information.

1.6.4 DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION

The survey data was computed quantitatively by SPSScomputer programme and results are presented in tablesand diagrams that show the frequency and percentiledistribution of particulars. On the other hand, outstanding and relevant issues raised during focus group

10

discussion session were summarized and presentedqualitatively. Interview results drawn from experts alsopresented in descriptive form. In addition, diagrams wereused to show interesting difference in some particularsbetween the two study Woredas. General speaking,qualitative approach was the major way of presentingresults and findings of the research.

In evaluating the system with conceptual framework, eachaspect were briefly discussed and evaluated (with goodpractices in mind) and with support of concert evidencesand results which is drawn from farmers’ interviews,focus group discussions from Kebele LAC members, Woredaland administration staffs, senior experts andinternational consultants at EPLAUA. With regard to thisrelevant legal provision and sections are also presentedas evidences. It is also assumed that a comment onperformance gaps of the on going operations of the systemare presented when felt necessary.

1.7 OVER VIEW OF THE PAPER STRUCTURE

The paper is structured and presented into six chapters.Chapter one, deals with statement of the problem withrationale of the study, objective, and methods usedthroughout the study. Chapter two describes relevant andrelated works comprising the significance of formalrecognition of property right through registration, therole of formal and robust land management institutions,importance of clearly defined rights, restrictions, andresponsibilities to land as well as the role ofintegrated LIS. The same chapter talks more about whattechnical modalities and administrative procedures arevital in the operation of enforceable title to land andmaintenance of the register and disseminating informationto its end user. In Chapter three, the general backgroundof the study area in terms of demographic trend andsettlement, climate, land use pattern, institutionalsetup and legal frameworks for first registration and LISoperation as well as registry components are presented .Chapter four, deals about survey result of differentgroups. Chapter five reads about the details and criticalsystem evaluation and performance gaps in each evaluation

11

area. The last chapter, Chapter six, devotes onconclusion and recommendations.

2. REVIEW LITERATURES

2.1 WHY RECOGNIZING PROPERTY RIGHTS THROUGH REGISTRATION?

As the words of Simpson (1976) land is an ultimate andindispensable natural resource of human kind9:

Land is the source of all material wealth. From it we geteverything that we use or value, whether it be food, clothing,fuel, shelter, metal, or precious stones. We live on the land andfrom the land, and to the land our bodies or our ashes arecommitted when we die.

Deininger and Binswanger have supported Simpson’sgeneralization about land resource indispensability forhumankind existence in general. They emphasized morespecifically, how land is a very curtail asset for therural population livelihoods. They stated that in therural areas of most developing countries, land is notonly the primary means for generating a livelihood butoften the main vehicle for investing, accumulatingwealth, and transferring it between generations10. Thesame document further illustrates that the ways in whichaccess to land is regulated, property rights are defined,and ownership conflicts are resolved has broadimplications beyond the sphere of agriculturalproduction.

Enemark has, on the other hand, briefed what land policydeals about. Land policy is part of the national policyon promoting objectives including economic development,9 Simpson, S.R. 1976, p. 310 Deininger, K. and Binswanger, H. P. 1999, pp. 247–276

12

social justice and equity, and political stability. Landpolicy may be associated with security of tenure, realproperty taxation, sustainable development and control ofland use, natural resource and the environment; theprovision of land for the poor, ethnic minorities andwomen, and measures to prevent land speculation and tomanage land disputes11. In short, sound land management isthen the operational processes of implementing landpolicies in a comprehensive and sustainable way.

According to Simpson understanding the strong bondagebetween security of property right and development andthe way in which those rights has administered hasprofound implications. He stated that we must rememberthat proper development depends on ‘security of tenure’rather than on ownership which can be ‘empty’ of theright to use land, and even of the power to control thatuse12. He further elaborated that a person has security oftenure if he is secure or safe in his holding of land, butwhen the ordinary man speaks of ‘security of tenure’ heis always certainly thinking more of security of‘possession’ or ‘occupation’ than strictly of ‘tenure’.To be adequate to encourage or even permit development,security of tenure need not amount to ownership, nor needit last for all time. For the security to be adequate, itmust, of course, last for a period long enough to servethe purpose for which the land is to be used.

While land management can have many social andenvironmental objectives, most developing nations mustgive priority to immediate economic objectives bydesigning proper mechanisms of access to and publicrecognition of property rights in land13. Thus, the mainmechanisms for formalizing and recognising of rights toland have been obtained through land registries and titledocuments14.

Given this reality at hand, formalizing and providingsecurity for property rights in land is today consideredto be a primary component of a free market economy and an

11 Enemark, S. 2005, p. 3.12 Simpson, S.R. 1976, p. 4.13 FIG, 1995, p. 214 World Bank, 2003, p. 33.

13

essential step in moving towards improved standards ofliving15. In addition to this, the famous professorHernando De Soto stresses that, “the reason capitalismtriumphed in the West and faltered in the rest of theworld is because most of the assets in Western nationshave been integrated into one formal representationalsystem16” Therefore, the farming of land policy, and itsexecution, may in large measure depend on theeffectiveness of ‘land registration’ and formal titling17.The potential of land registration to contribute totenure security and agricultural development in turndepends, among others, on the nature of claims it ispresumed to secure18. In general, a critical successfactor for land registry and cadastre as a consequence isthe extent to which the needs of society are beingsatisfied19.

However, it should also be remembered that provision oftitles does not by itself automatically translate intoincreased tenure security. Without fair, transparent, andeasily accessible mechanisms to enforce the land rightsspecified by titles, titles will provide few benefits20.With this respect recent publications like the World Bankpolicy research report has also shown that compared withtraditional formal titling less formal measures can oftensignificantly enhances tenure security at much lowercosts; with a number of empirical examples whereinnovative practice allow for gradual upgrading overtime, and make it possible not only to improve securityof tenure, but also strengthen local governmentinstitutions21. Therefore, for the vast majority ofpeople, cheaper, simpler, locally grounded systems ofregistration can better meet their need for securetenure22. Land registration must, therefore, be kept inperspective23.

15 FIG, 1995, p. 2.16 De Soto, H. 2000, p. 5017 Simpson, S.R. 1976, p. 3.18 Sikor, T. 2005, p. 2.19 van der Molen, P. 2006, P. 3. 20 Pagiola, S. 1999, P. 6.21 World Bank, 2003, P. 33.22 Toulmin, C. 2006, p. 3.23 Simpson, S. R. 1976, P. 3.

14

On the other hand, one component of land administrationis the management of land and land related data. The dataor records collected regarding object, subject, andrights to land through title registration has profoundsources of land information24. The construction of suchsystems for storing information of the static and dynamicnature of rights to land is very important in anysociety’s livelihood irrespective of their economicdevelopment. Hence, one way of publicizing propertyconditions is by registering the data or using registersfor tracing relevant particulars in archives25. Such dataor information may be held in manual or digital formalthough, increasingly, all land related records now daysare being computerized for ease of storage andretrieval26. For instance, as Okpala (1992) and UNCHS(1991) works cited by Fourie and Nino, cadastral andland registration in most parts of Sub Saharan Africa aregenerally in manual form, and with incomplete coverage,are supplying most of the available land information forland management27.

Different literatures show that existing cadastre/landregistration and land information systems in developingcountries are unable to provide sufficient informationfor their end users. As a result, decision makersespecially in Sub-Saharan Africa are unable to takeinformed decision. This is because as UNCHS (1990) citedby Fourie and Nino there is no documentary evidence oftitle for up to 90 percent of parcels in developingcountries with an estimated less than 1 percent of SubSaharan Africa being covered by any of cadastralsurveying28. In the West African region as a whole only 2to 3 percent of land is held by written title, this beinglargely confined to a few major cities and developmentareas, such as irrigation schemes. In Burundi it isestimated less than one percent. Of course, much higherin Eastern Africa given that the longstanding occupationof land by large commercial farmers29. In addition, LIS

24 Dale, P. F. and McLaughlin, J. D. 1999, P. 92.25 Mattsson, H. 2004, PP. 147-148. 26 Dale, P. F. and McLaughlin, J. D. 1999, P. 92.27 Fourie, C. and Nino, O. F. 1999, PP. 2-4.28 Fourie, C. and Nino, O. F.1999, PP. 2-7.29 Toulmin, C. 2006, P. 8.

15

and GIS systems either do not exist, or have lapsed, orare seen as too expensive30. On top of this, the systemsare under-resourced and most of them are out of date,expensive to maintain and inefficient. This restricts theamount and type of information that can be acquired,stored and disseminated for use by its end users. Despitenumerous initiatives and endeavours during the lastdecades in Sub Saharan Africa to set up new LIS or tomodernize existing ones, limited results have beenachieved31.

Numerous authors and literatures shows the curtailimportance and implications of a complete multi purposeLIS. The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe(UNECE) stresses that appropriate land information is ofvital importance for land management, whether for thedevelopment of sustainable agriculture, managing therapid growth of cities, or for the protection of theenvironment. On top of this, GIS are useful tools forhandling information on the current land use as well asfor monitoring changes. Thus such information systemsshould combine data from different sources, includingtopographic maps and satellite images. Data aboutownership and parcel boundaries are always of fundamentalimportance in land information systems32.

Nevertheless, in principle the way of managing LIS andmaintaining the register has to be designed to operateand to exist in an easy and a floating or dynamicenvironment instead of what some consider a welldeveloped and relatively stable environment33. This isbecause land tenure is dynamic in nature. Therefore, itis imperative for LIS to recognise this and toincorporate efficient, reliable, easy and user friendlymechanisms for the acquisition of new data. If not, thesystem will become a snapshot of a brief moment in acountry’s tenurial history with little real relevance tocurrent informational needs34.

30 Fourie, C. and Nino, O. F.1999, P. 12.31 Ezigbalike, I. C. 1996, P. 10. Okpala, Don C. I. 1992, p. 19.32 UNECE, 2005, P. 13.33 Tran, T. N. and Grant, D. 2005, P. 4.34 Barnes, G. 1990, P. 27. Larsson, G. 2000, P. 153.

16

2.1 LAND REGISTRATION FUNCTIONS

In general, there are two major broader functions of landand title registrations: Public and private. The formerrelates to the welfare of the State or community as awhole, while the latter to the advantages of theindividual citizen.

From public point of view, it provides information onland holders and size of properties which lays foundationfor fiscal inventory or tax assessment. It is alsoimportant for proper planning and management of statelands in particular and individual properties in general.It also provides information for land valuation35.

From private point of view, land registration providesbetter security of tenure for individual owners andcreates social stability as well. This in turn ensuresthe rightful owner of land to conduct a safe, cheap, andquick transaction. It also provides security for creditand enables him/her to invest more and improve way oflife to name a few36.

2.2 LEGAL POWERS OF LAND REGISTRATION

Data recorded in a land administration system have asocial and legal meaning, and is based on accepted socialconcepts. That concerns both to owners (subject), rightsand objects (land)37. As a rule of law and principle,there are some fundamental characteristics shared foreffective legal frameworks in market economy tofacilitate economic development. These characteristicincludes transparency and predictability, equal and fairtreatment, rapid adjudication and enforceability as wellas consistency with customs, norms and level ofdevelopment38. These fundamental principles should also betaken into consideration in drafting land laws. The legalsystem should state clearly and in a simple way, theprocedure necessary for enforcement of legally protectedrights and interests to land. In short, those principles

35 Simpson, S. R. 1976, P. 4. 36 UNECE, 2005, P. 9.37 van der Molen, P. 2006, P. 7.38 Bengt, A. 2005, PP. 9-10

17

should be reflected comprehensively in the cadastral andland registration laws.

The most important characteristics to uphold tenuresecurity is perhaps transparency and predictability. Forinstance, parties who have some sort of interest to land(ownership, use rights or other secondary rights) must beable to foresee the legal consequences of their action39.With this respect land registration primarily investslegal powers in the rights inscribed. The law should, asfar as possible, also explicitly define to what extentregistration will provide legal guarantees for titles aswell as for boundaries. In addition to this such issuesalso addressed as what are the role of maps andsurveying? What processes are there for formalizingtitles? Are rights of minorities and disadvantaged groupsprotected? What intellectual property rights exist?However, in many countries land rights are ambiguous andpoorly define which leads to confusion and difficult toimplement. Therefore, registration and cadastral lawsshould clarify this situation so as to enforce andimplement the law accordingly40.

Throughout the world different organizations of cadastralsystems are apparent, especially with regard to landregistration components. Basically two types of systemscan be identified: the deed and title systems. Thedifference between the two concepts relate to the extentof involvement of the state, and the cultural developmentand judicial setting of the country41. Many deedregistration systems provide no other guarantees than toserve as evidence in case of double transfer or otherdisputes. On the other hand, strict title registrationsystems formally guarantee all titles inscribed andconfer the right to indemnity if a bona fide partysuffers a loss because of errors in the register.However, the quality of the titles is highly dependent onthe extent to which all dealings in rights actually arerecorded in the register42.

39 Bengt, A. 2005, P. 10.40 Bengt, A. 2005, PP. 50-52. Larsson, G. 2000, PP. 85-86.41 Enemark, S. 2005, P. 8. 42 Enemark, S. 2005, P. 8. Larsson, G. 2000, P. 86. Simpson, S.R. 1976, P. 4.

18

Nonetheless, according to Mattsson, the efficiency of aproperty law system can be analysed in terms of the threecomponents subject, right, and object together with theirthree functions of change. How cohesive is the system andwhat transactional cost does it give rise to43? Mattssonfarther elaborates that, but analysing a system with theaid of these components and functions is not enough,because rights in real property may be assigned to aperson other than the owner, and these assignments haveto be secure (static). The static rights, again, may bechanged in response to social development and dynamismand so does the system. Hence, static rights must beseparately changeable but also changeable in connectionwith one of more of the three basic function of changebeing used, i.e. when a property is transferred, when thelegal substance changes, and/or when there is a change inthe extent of the property44. Therefore, the mostimportant part of the legal framework in landregistration and land information systems that makes itmore efficient is dealing with rules about maintenanceand updating. If these are not efficient andcomprehensive, the land register may deteriorate in ashort time and become immediately less important. 45

2.3 FROM STAND ALONE TO INTEGRATED LAND INFORMATION SYSTEMS

Traditional surveying, mapping and land registrationfocus has moved away from being primarily provider –driven to now being clearly user – driven. This is theresult of the world trend changes with increasinginfluence of globalization, technological sophistication,and the concept of sustainable development with itsdemand for comprehensive and multifunctional informationsystem about social, economic and environmentalobjectives46. These trends recognised that landadministration and cadastral systems can no longer relyon manual processes or traditional structures thatsupported individual economic or taxation imperatives in

43 Mattsson, H. 2004, P. 147.44 Mattsson, H. 2004, P. 147, van der Molen, P. 2006, P. 7.45 Larsson, G. 2000, P. 87.46 Enemark, S. 2005, P. 6.

19

the past. Stand alone or isolated approaches thatsupported individual purposes where data and processeswere maintained separately, such as land valuation andland titling, are not sustainable. They are beingreplaced by multipurpose cadastral systems whereinformation about natural resources, planning, land use,land value and land titles, including Western andindigenous interests and common property rights, can beintegrated for a range of business purposes47. As statedby De Soto (2000), as a result of integration, citizensin advanced nations can obtain descriptions of theeconomic and social qualities of nay available assetswithout having to see the asset itself physically.Consequently, an asset’s potential has become easier toevaluate and exchange, enhancing the productioncapability of capital48.

According to De Soto, this integration did not happencasually. Over decades in the nineteenth century,politicians, legislators, judges pulled together thescattered facts and rules that has governed propertythroughout cities, villages, buildings and farms andintegrated them into one system. This ‘pulling together’of property representations deposited all the informationand rules governing the accumulated wealth of theircitizens into one knowledge base49. With regard to this,experience from Australia show, while much has beenachieved, the vision of complete integration is stilllargely unrealized: the vast improvements in data,standards and access regimes that comprise landinformation infrastructures have not produced substantialintegration between land administration functions.Furthermore, disparities between the four core landadministration functions and their information is onlyone part of a much bigger integration problem;administrating the large amounts of new land relatedlegislation and information that has emerged over thelast 50 years is a much greater challenge50.

47 Williamson, I. P. and Ting, L. 1999, P. 5.48 De Soto, H. 2000, p. 53.49 De Soto, H. 2000, p. 51.50 Bennett, R. Wallance, J. Williamsson, I. P. 2005, P.

20

Traditionally, the natural behaviour of a governmentaldepartment is to work more or less independently withinits own field of responsibility and jurisdiction, andthis also applies to information. Government initiativesand endeavour towards integration of different standalone land related databases has been achieved much lessas it would have been in developing countries compared tothe developed world. This is so among others it includeslack of integrated National Spatial Data Infrastructures(NSDI) and land information system (LIS) policy,financial scarcity, and lack of skilled man power are thecommonest.

Successful land administration will require; therefore,the assumption of a very heavy, and often thankless,coordination of responsibility51. To this end the effortsof Governments for integration and coordination shouldnot be limited to the framework and technical shape ofthe systems. Governments must also determine theirfunctions: which department ought to be responsible forcertain databases; how the exchange of information amongdifferent departments should be organized; and how caninformation best be made available for planning andmanagement. Government support and action are alsonecessary with regard to standardization of proceduresand terminologies52.

With this regard, for instance, government of Ugandadecentralized land administration at various levels.Furthermore, the 20 years Land Sector Strategic Plan(LSSP) was developed to guide government, the privatesector, civil society and other stakeholders in theadministration and optimal use of land resources53.General speaking, to be successful with this respectGovernments must formulate a well articulated NSDI/LISpolicy, publicized through different Medias and establishan independent board to follow up and monitor theimplementation of their policy.

2.4 ROBUST AND ENFORCEABLE INSTITUTIONS FOR LAND MANAGEMENT

51 FIG, 1999, P. 19.52 Larsson, G. 2000, p.31.53 Oput, R. 2003, P. 3

21

Formal rights imply an ability to draw on the state’senforcement institutions, but the institutions toimplement these rights need to combine legality,legitimacy, and accountability54. Cotula and hiscolleagues in their work also clarify the existence andperceived legitimacy of many customary/local institutionsand norms, and the great diversity of the nature of landrelations even within the same country have majorimplications for legislators55. The same document furtherstates that while clearly affirming the fundamentalinderogable principles of human rights and democraticgovernance in land management institutions, landlegislation should seek to bridge legality and legitimacyand to provide an enabling framework for effective,equitable and sustainable local practice, rather thanseeking to impose a standardized, an rigid, ultimatelyunenforceable, body of norms.

In any given situation, the ability to enforce rightsdepends on the ease with which rights holders can accessthe required institutions and obtain legally bindingdecisions from them and whether such decisions enjoylocal legitimacy. What the poor lack is easy access tothose property institution and mechanisms that couldlegally fix the economic potential of their assets sothat they could be produce, secure or grantee greatervalue in the expanded market56. Where institutions toenforce formal property rights are either not availableor don’t enjoy broad legitimacy, the expected advantagesare unlikely materialize57.

However, as FOA’s (2000) work cited by van der Molen inmany parts of the world, formal land administrationprocedures are time consuming, bureaucraticallycumbersome and expensive, and frequently non transparent,inaccessible for too much of the rural population, andhandled in languages and forms that people don’tunderstand. In such cases high transaction costs may

54 Sevatdal, H. 2002, P. 7. World Bank, 2003, P. 32.55 Cotula, L. Toulmin, C. Hesse, C. 2004, P. 3656 De Soto, H. 2000, P. 51. World Bank, 2003, P. 3357 World Bank, 2003, P. 33.

22

result in transfers and other dealings taking place offthe recording or informally58.

Many countries, for instance, in Sub-Saharan Africa havelong and difficult bureaucratic procedures, which slowproperty transactions and encourage corruption. In Ghana,registering a land purchase involves multiple visits tofive different government offices. Even for those withexcellent contacts in government and judiciary reportthat the process can take more than 18 months. For manyother people, the process may take much longer, costly,and effectively inaccessible59. This is even moredifficult and takes longer time in Egypt. The person whowants to acquire land and legally register a lot onstate-owned desert land must went his way through atleast 77 bureaucratic procedures and at least 31 publicand private agencies. This can take anywhere from 5 to14years60.

The World bank report in ‘Doing Business’ rated theefficiency of land administration in terms of the numberof procedures necessary to register a property right, thecost as a percentage of the value of the property, andthe time it takes for completion of all the necessarysteps. Accordingly, one must went, 1 in Norway (most), 2in Sweden, 21 in Nigeria (least), 15 bureaucraticprocedures in Ethiopia to register a property; regardingcost, 0% in Saudi Arabia (least) and 34% in Senegal(most) are rated, and time wise, 1 day in Norway (most),2 days in Sweden, 956 days in Croatia (least) and notless than 56 days in Ethiopia61. Similarly, according toTransparency International report in the same yearEthiopia ranks 140th with respect to easiest way ofregistration property with Corruption Perception Index(CPI) 2.2 while Nigeria records 1.9 (least), New Zealandwith 9.6 CPI (most), and Sweden with 9.2 CPI. Accordingto the same report the smaller the CPI the highercorruption practices would be62.

58 Van der Molen, P. 5.59 Toulmin, C. 2006, P. 16.60 De Soto, H. 2000, PP. 18-2461 www.doingbusiness.org62 http://www.transparency.org/index.html

23

As FAO’s (2002) approach to land tenure cited by van derMolen, efficient procedures allow transactions to becompleted quickly, inexpensively, and transparently63.With regard to this, Governments has a fundamental rolein managing or facilitating the process of checking andvalidating claims, either handling it centrally, ordevolving or decentralizing it into local institutions.Given the range of diverse contexts and settings, thereare strong arguments for developing locally appropriateinitiatives and actions rather than a single standardblueprint “solution”64. With this respect particularly inmost “underdeveloped” countries all the facts aboutindividual and communal rights in land are usually wellknown and understood by the local people. Therefore,especially during first registration proceedings, to haveefficient and enforceable property institution whatmatters is eliciting these facts and empowering the localcommunity in an organized and institutionalized way65.

2.5 FINANCING LAND REGISTRATION AND LAND INFORMATION SYSTEMS

One aim of any functioning land registration system isthat it should be self financing. This is so becauseregistered titles are the bankable assets of the countrywhich progressively draw in investment and build theconfidence of businesses and individuals to participatein the development and economy of the country.

With this regard Dale and McLaughlin suggest that atleast there are three different ways of financing suchsystem, namely from taxes, fees, and by commission66. Theauthors farther indicate that a single or mixture ofthese approaches may be used within any givenjurisdiction. In Sweden, for instance, activity wherethere exist direct applicant is generally subject to afee or commission, while activities that are moreconnected to the rule of law or the over all public goodhave been financed by grant.

63 Van der Molen, P. 2006, P. 5.64 Toulmin, C. 2006, P. 3.65 Rajabifard, A. Stuedler, D. and Williamson, I. P. 2002, P. 55.66 Dale, P. F. and McLaughlin, J. D. 1999, P. 139.

24

On the other hand, the United Nations Economic Commissionfor Europe (UNECE) indicate that the continuinginvestment and running costs of maintaining the landregistration system and providing services should bewholly covered by fees paid by those who use thoseservices. However, this cannot always be realisticallyachieved in the early years of development of a newsystem67. UNECE farther state that it is important herethat governments developing land registration systemsaccept that such funding during these early years is areal investment in the development of the wider economy.

2.6 IDENTIFICATION OF POSSIBLE CRITERIA AND DEVELOPING EVALUATION FRAMEWORK

Currently, there are no internationally acceptedmethodologies and criteria to evaluate and compare theperformance of Land Administration System (LAS) and itscore components, i.e. cadastral land registration andland information systems. This is partly because LAS andits core components are in a constant reform, andprobably more importantly, they represent societies’different perceptions of land. This is to mean, itreflects the cultural and social context of the countryin which they are operating, making them distinctlydifferent and difficult to compare to each other68.

Regarding this, based on their professional backgroundand experience, a number of scholars and professionals inthe field have suggested various types of conceptualevaluation model to evaluate LAS and its core components.For instance, as Bernstein (1985) and Dunkerley (1985)works cited by Barnes with regard to design of landregistration and LIS in developing countries they advisedthe following: The first one, is the system must besimple and labour intensive, and easily understood byland owners and other users. Secondly, low cost solutionneed to be found. Thirdly, a more integrated approach isrequired. Last but not least, greater flexibility isneeded in both the standards of precision and thecomprehensiveness of information69. Therefore, based on

67 UNECE, 2005, P. 14.68 Stuedler, D. Rajabifard, A. and Williamson, 2002, PP. 376-379.69 Barnes, G. 1990, P. 27.

25

these presumptions, Barnes identified six attributes andevaluation criteria with respective indicators toevaluate CLIS in developing nations. Hence, based onthese criteria he evaluated the CLIS in Honduras,Ecuador, and St. Lucia.

According to Barnes the first criteria is maintainabilitywith three indicators namely availability of equipmentmaintenance services, currency of the information base,and mechanisms provided for the capture of new landtenure data and the extent to which these are used. Thesecond one is efficiency which means the rate ofproduction of information “units” processed per field-team month. The identified indicators in this areainclude delineated parcels, mapped parcels, andregistered parcels. With regard to quality he identifiedsuch indicators as accuracy, precision and completeness.On top of this the cost of production of a singleinformation unit such as a cadastral map sheet or titleis identified as the fourth indicator. The extent towhich the breadth of the user community and theirinteraction to the system is considered as utilitycriterion. Last but not least, the complexity of thesystem given that the institutional, environmental, andtenure circumstances existed in most developing countriesis identified as the sixth criterion70.On the other hand, Stuedler, Rajabifard, and Williamsonhave developed a spectacular and valuable evaluationmodel to evaluate LAS in a holistic approach. They comeup with such kind of evaluation framework by reviewingdifferent approaches of system evaluation and drawingtheir own experience and professional background in thefield. They have developed the model by considering thethree organizational levels (policy, management andoperational level) plus the review process and otherexternal factors. In addition to this, to identify theaspect and possible indicators they have used the toolboxprinciples as well as Good practices and come up with thefollowing magnificent conceptual evaluation framework forLAS71.

Evaluati Possible Aspects Possible Indicators Good Practice

70 Barnes, G. 1990, P. 29.71 Stuedler, D. Rajabifard, A. and Williamson, 2002, P. 376-379.

26

onArea

Policy Level

• objectives andtasks of thesystem• historic, legal,social, culturalbackground• equity in socialand economic terms• viability ofsystem(economical,social)

• list of objectivesand tasks• historic and legalindicators• social indicators• economicindicators(expenses, incomes,fees, costs)

• system is welldefined byobjectives andtasks• system respondsto needs ofsociety• system isequitable for all• system iseconomicallyviable

Management Level

• structuraldefinition ofsystem• strategictargets• institutionaland organizationalarrangements• cooperation andcommunicationbetweeninstitutions• involvement ofprivate sector

• definitions andcharacteristics ofsystem• list of strategictargets• list ofinstitutions andtheirresponsibilities andstrategies• links betweeninstitutions (legal,organizational,technical)• no. of contractswith privatesector

• structure ofsystem is usefuland clearlydefined• strategies areappropriate toreach and satisfyobjectives• involvedinstitutions haveeach clearlydefined tasks andcooperate andcommunicatewell with eachother• private sectoris involved

Operational

Level

• outcomes• technicalspecifications• implementation

• products forclients• technicalindicators• implementationfactors

• products areappropriate torespond toobjectives• technicalspecifications andimplementationare appropriate tostrategic needs

27

External

Factors

• Human Resources(personnel,training)• capacitybuilding• professionalassociation• technicaldevelopments

number of personnel,education• Continuingeducation (seminars,etc.)• no. ofuniversities andstudents• is there aprofessionalassociation (y/n)• new technologieson the market

• appropriate no.of personnel inrelation totask and totalpopulation• continuingeducation on aregular basis• appropriate no.of universitiesand studentsin relation tototal population• professionalassociation takesan active role• new technologiesare evaluated on acontinuingBasis

Review process

• review ofobjectives andstrategies• performance andreliability ofsystem• customersatisfaction

• review ofobjectives andstrategies (y/n)• turnover, time todeliver, no. oferrors• review of customersatisfaction(y/n)

• regular reviewprocess• system isefficient andeffective• system deliversin time and withfew errors• appropriate,fast and reliableservice to clients

Table 1: Evaluation framework with possible aspects, indicators and good practice for each area as developed by Stuedler, et al.72

Tuladhar, on the other hand, has also developed a modelto evaluate the cadastre and LIS in Nepal. According toTuladhar a simplified system of property rights in Nepalneeds to be reinforced by developing a good LIS in whichstrategic development and modelling of business processesand data models are also most critical phase. To come upwith such conclusion he has developed and used thefollowing model73.

72 Adopted from Land Use Policy 21 (2004) 371-38073 Tuladhar, 2002, P.

28

Diagram 1. Management framework for developing cadastre &land registration in Nepal as developed by Tuladhar74.

Nevertheless, Dale and McLaughlin have also suggestedimportant ideas with regard to evaluation of LIS. Theyemphasised that in many cadastral systems, productivityis often low and the total time and cost spent onindividual cadastral surveys from initial request tofinal acceptance is high. Therefore, significantimprovements in the field of land registration and LISare often possible through improved management andadministration of the system. Before such improvementscan be brought about, the manner in which the presentsystem operates needs to be analysed. Overall, any studyof existing land information systems should examine suchmatters as institutional, legal, technical, fiscal andfinancial75.

Regarding computer and information security, differentliteratures suggested general evaluation criteria andpossible indicators. Here the investigator tried topresent some important points which are more related withthese study objectives. Any computerized information

74 FIG, 2002, P.75 Dale, P. F. and McLaughlin, D. J. 1988, P. 241.

Environmental factor- Land policies- Land laws- Customers need- IT-policy- Price policy- Price policy- Copy rights- Economic conditions- Political factors- Industry competitiveness- Technological innovation

Geo-Information Technology- RS, GIS, DBMS- Other IT software- Modelling tools- Hardware and networking

Data models-production- Master data- Supply data- Financial data- Archiving data

Strategy- Vision- objective- plan

Management- Style- System- Measures- Risks- Property

Business process- Intra-functional- Cross functional- Inter- organizational

Organization- Formal - Informal- Team/working group- Coordination- Control- Jobs

People- Educational skills- Behaviour- Culture- Value

Product service & performance- Cost, equality- Customer satisfaction- Flexibility- Shareholder values

29

system should develop in the way that can be adaptable tothe intended objective and activity and reasonably inrelation to risks. It shall be adjusted to legislation,acceptance, with established policy/ guidelines as wellas organisation76. The same source further elaborates thatthere should be clear and defined responsibilities ofusers, technicians, and manager, classification ofinformation, methods used, and IT-security tools (accesscontrol system etc.) to name some.

The objective of this study is not developing conceptualevaluation framework; however, those models were notfound to be appropriate and best suit in light of theobjectives of this study. This is because as can be seenabove the models are either it covers more details androutines which are out of the interest and scope of thestudy or else as it developed for business processreengineering to redesign and implement land registrationand land information systems or LAS in specific projectareas in different countries irrespective of theirdevelopment.

Therefore, the investigator is obliged to develop anevaluation model which assumed to be best suit to thestudy. For the purpose of this study three majorevaluation areas are identified, namely, institutional,legal and technical. For each evaluation area specificaspects that should be dealt with detailed possibleindicators and respective good practises are identified.

With regard to institutional evaluation area suchspecific aspects as land policy principles, land tenureprinciples, structural definition of system,institutional and organizational arrangements, etc areidentified. Besides, the involvement of private sectorsin the rural land registration move of the region is alsoconsidered as one aspect. On top of this, the issue ofaccessibility, freedom, accountability, legality andlegitimacy, human resource and technological developmentare also identified as aspects in relation toinstitutional evaluation area. For instance, in relation76 Adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_security and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_security

30

to land policy principles, lists of objectives and tasksfor LR and LIS are identified as possible indicators withidentified good practices of presence of well definedlists of objectives and tasks for the system.

Regarding legal evaluation area, four major aspects areidentified. These include transparency andpredictability, equal and fair treatment, rapidadjudication and enforceability (not only for propertydefinition but also other aspects like making finaldecision of claims and complaints in a given time span).Last but not least, the consistency with customs, norms,& level of development is also one aspect in respect tolegal evaluation area. The ability to foresee legalconsequence of different actions by different actors isidentified as possible indicator for transparency andpredictability aspect. With respective good practice ofdifferent actors can easily forecast what will happen oftheir actions.

In the technical evaluation area, such aspects as dataacquisition, maintenance and updating, safety andsecurity as well as information dissemination areidentified. For example, regarding maintenance andupdating aspects the connection between textual data andmaps are identified as possible indicator. A system inthis respect should have a well designed bondage andconnection between textual dataset and maps as goodpractice of the system. This is to mean that no system ofregistration would be successful with out the support ofan adequate series of cadastral maps. This is only toshow how the conceptual evaluation model is adapted. Inshort, it is with these presumptions that the followingmodel is developed.

Table 2. Conceptual framework to evaluate the performanceof Amhara rural land registration and LIS.Area Aspects Possible Indicators Good practiceInstituti

onalLand policyprinciples

Existence of land policy

Existence of a well articulated land administration and use policy

Existence of long term strategic plan(5-20 years)

System has a SMART long term strategic plan having a well defined

31

vision and objectives, publicized and followed-up

Lists of objectivesand tasks for LR and LIS

Well defined objectives and tasks of LR and LIS

Existence of stakeholders participation in land policy formulation

Active participation of stakeholders in policy formulation at all level

Historical, socio- political

Good awareness of land administration policy among stakeholders and policy is adaptable to social circumstances

Financial and economic aspects

Budgetary support is quite fair for efficient operation of LR and LIS.

Funding and investment structure

System has funding plan and investment structure to be self financed

Environmental sustainability

LR and LIS respects and supports environmental sustainability

Land tenureprinciples

Existence of formalrecognition and legal definition ofland tenure

Well documented and comprehensive recognitionof land tenure rights, restrictions, and responsibilities

Security of tenure (no. and solution of disputes)

The system has a well designed and formal conflict resolution mechanisms and gives adequate protection

Social and economical equity

System respond to societyand equitable for all

Structuraldefinition of

system

Definitions and characteristics of systems

System structure and characteristics is well defined

Institutionaland

organizational

arrangements

Lists of institutions and their responsibilities and strategies

The institutional arrangement is suitable to circumstances having clear medium term strategic implications (1-5 years)

Cooperationand

communicationbetween

institutions

Links between institutions (legal, organizational, technical)

A well functioning cooperation and communication between different institution forcommon benefit

Involvement No. of contracts A considerable number of

32

of privatesector

with private sector contracts and involvementof private sectors in theLR and LIS system

Accessibilityto localpeople

Central versus decentralisation

The public can have access to the system locally

Freedom

Freedom & room to manoeuvre and initiate to developits operation

EPLAUA is free from political manipulation and has a room to develop its own operationat all level

Accountability

Accountability to its responsibility

EPLAUA is accountable within its own jurisdiction at all level

Legality and legitimacy

Delivering binding decisions and acceptance by the community

EPLAUA has ultimate powerto deliver binding decisions and accepted bythe community at all level

Human resource

No. of personnel (public/private) , education

Sufficient number of welltrained man power

Continuing education (seminars, workshops, etc)

Giving seminars, workshops and in service training to personnel sand other stakeholders

No. of universitiesand students enrolment

Suitable no. of universities and studentsenrolment supporting the system

Existence ofprofessionalAssociation

There is a professional Association dealing with LAS

Technologicaldevelopment

Types of new technologies on themarket

Availability and capacityto buy new technology on the market

Legal

Transparency & predictability

The ability to foresee legal consequence of different actions by different actors

Different actors can easily predict the consequence of their action as of today

Equal and fair treatment

Equality of all citizens and unrestricted accessto present claims and complaints to both public authorities and civil courts

All citizens have impartial and unrestricted access to present claims and complaints to both publicauthorities and civil courts regarding land issue in the system

Rapid adjudication

Simple but effective administrative

Simple and efficient formal administrative procedure but not affect

33

procedures negatively the standard of fairness.

Consistency with customs,norms, & level of development

The extent to whichLR & LIS laws reflect the socio-economic and political structural reform

The land administration law and its enforcement procedures should be considered to be fair, legitimate and familiar with the people to serve

Enforceability

Existence of enforceable institution and mechanisms

Competent and enforceableinstitution and operational mechanisms tomaterialise and implementbinding decisions in time

Technical

Dataacquisition

Systematic versus sporadic

Comprehensive and complete coverage

Conventional versusinnovative

Simple and cost effectiveway of registration

Type, content and quality of data

Object-oriented, reliableand relatively have good precision

Community participation

Active community participation in registration proceedings

Maintenance and updating

Connection between textual data and maps

Textual dataset and maps are well connected with PUI

Compulsory versus voluntary registration of mutations

User-driven and positive impact mechanisms to register changes in rights to land

Initiation to register mutation

Mutation registration shall be initiated by affected parties

Complete and indefeasibility

Legally registered titlesshall be absolute if a bona fide party suffers aloss because of errors inthe register.

Manual versus computerized system

Well archived and easy toretrieve

Ease to adapt changes

Maintenance and updating systems can easily accommodate future changes

Established policy /guide line

Simple, clear and well articulated procedures, standardize formats and working guidelines to maintenance and updating

Safety and security

Clear & defined responsibility

Well specified and designated role of

34

(users, technicians, managers)

different users to logging of access & events, monitoring and following-up of logging, and authorized approval of entered data

Classification of information

information zoning and classification in the system of service provision

Asset protection Admittance, fire alarm, security archives, and inventory of software andhardware

Function protection Follow up of operations, service contracts, backuproutines, user manuals, system documentation, personnel planning

Data protection Access control system/users role, privileges/logging & administer and users identity/ user names & creation of passwords/ reconstruction, backup routines

Data integrity protection

check in updating programs, methodology forsystem development & maintenance, test environment and documentation

Disaster management& contingency planning

Documented contingency plan based on backup procedures and proceduresfor handling minor interruptions

Informationdissemination

Open public accessibility

Immediate access and timelines access to the information in the register

Fee and pricing of services

Reasonable and fair service discharge

Number of leaflets distributed

Adequate number of leaflets distributed to stakeholders and system users

Radio & TV programsbroadcasted

Sufficient number of radio programs broadcasted having a widegeographical coverage

35

Other way of information dissemination

Rights and responsibilities written on the book of holdings

Source: adapted by the investigator

36

3. GENERAL BACKGROUND OF LAND REGISTRATION AND LIS INAMHARA REGION

3.1 STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION

The Amhara national regional state is one of the largestregions next to the Oromia regional state in Ethiopia.The region extends from 90 to 130 45 N to 400 30” E. It isbounded by Tigray in the north, Oromia in the south,Benshangul and Sudan in the west, and Afar in the east.It covers approximately 170,152 KM2 areas and has compactshape. Amhara region comprises 10 administrative zones,106 districts, and more than 2850 Kebeles (the loweradministrative organ).

According to the Regional BOFED the demographic situationof the region shows an annual growth rate of 2.73 percentwhich leads the total population size to 18.65 millionsas of 200577. The same document further states that thepopulation of the Region accounts for roughly 25.5percent of the total population of the country while interms of area, the region contributes only 15.4 percent.Hence, given this demographic trend, the populationnumbers will double itself in a quarter of a century.

With regard to population settlement and economicactivity, nearly 89 percent of the population resides inthe rural areas and predominately engaged in small scaleand subsistence agriculture, which accounts 55.8 percentof the regional GDP. On the other hand, livestockpopulation covers 29 percent of the country and itcontributes 22 percent from the agriculture; 12.5 percentfrom the total GDP in the region78.

Lake Tana, which is found in the capital of the Region,is the largest lake in the country and covers an area of3600 km2. It has an average depth of 9 meters and surfacelevel of 1840 meters asl. The lake has numerous islands,the largest of which is Deq. It is the source of Blue

77 ANRS, 2005, PP. 15-26.78 ANRS, 2005, PP. 15-26.

37

Nile which is the biggest river in the world and isfamous for ancient churches.

The Region has climatic zone ranging from hot drytropical (800-1500m), sub tropical (1500-2300m),temperate(2300-3000m), and alpine(over 3000m).Thehighlands above an altitude of 1500m experiencerelatively cool temperature conditions in contrast to thelowlands. The highest pick of the country, Mount RasDashen (4620m above sea level) is also found in thisregion79.

According to BOFED report 1.1 billion tonnes whichaccounts 58 percent of the country’s total soil erosionlosses are erodes from the Amhara region that occupiesonly one-six of the region’s total landmass. The soilloss in the region, some 42 percents from only 10 percentof the regional area with very high erosion hazard whichrepresent nearly 39 percent of the total soil mass moved,and 40 percent of the region’s land mass suffers fromhigh soil erosion80. The annual loss of cultivated land isestimated to be about 6,365 ha in the year 2000 and wouldreach to 62,716 ha by the year 2025. Ethiopian forestryaction program estimates that in the country’s highlandsthis level of erosion is caused 20,000 to 30,000 ha ofcrop land to be abandoned annually, and 2.4 to 2.8million people would be badly affected by the loss ofsoil by the year 2000.

Land degradation is, therefore, an alarming challenge inthe region. Natural factors coupled with the effects of along history of settlement, prevailing poor farmingmethods and increasing population pressure force peopleto cultivate even steeper slopes have exacerbated thedevastating land and resource degradation in the region.To a large extent, these problems are thought to beaggravated by inadequate property rights. It is believedthat in the absence of secure property rights, land andnatural resource degradation will accelerated81.

79 ANRS, 1999, PP. 4-11.80 ANRS, 2005, PP. 15-26.81 Brihanu, A. and Feyra, A. 2005, P. 10.

38

3.2 TENURAL HISTORY AND LAND POLICY CHANGE IN ETHIOPIA

In Ethiopia land is a major socio-economic asset. The wayland rights are defined influences how land resources areused and, hence, economic growth. The struggle over whocontrols the land which is the same with question ofcontrolling power has played a significant role in thehistory of Ethiopia and could continues to do so. Threeperiods can be distinguished in relation to land tenurepolicy and changes: the pre-1975 land tenure system, therule of the Derg until 1991, and the period since 199182.

The pre-1975 land tenure system which is some timescalled the Imperial regime was divers in nature. Thenature of the land tenure arrangement comprises private,state, church land, kinship and other forms. The emperor,like his predecessor, emperor Menelik the II, madeextensive land grants to members of the royal family, theloyal members of the nobility, members of the armedforces and the police, top government officials and civilservants, and notable businessmen83. The then immediatethree most important consequences of land privatizationwere the eviction of a large number of peasants, thespread of tenancy, emergence of absentee landlordism84,and the displacement of pastoralists85.

In addition, the most typical problems in this regimeinclude institutional inadequacy (lack of appropriatelegal framework and enforcing organ) and the land ownedby the absentee land lords was under utilized86. Thesewere made the most important obstacles to the country’sdevelopment in general. The privatization of land in thesouth which was continued at renewed great speed andforce in the period of three-and-half decades madeimportant cause of political grievances and leading tothe 1974 revolution that resulted in the overthrow of theregime for ones and for all87.

82 Brihanu, A. and Feyra, A. 2005, P. 5.83 Mersha and wa Gĩthĩnji, 2005, P.84 Markakis, 1974, PP. 125-127.85 Markakis and Ayele, 1976, PP. 56-59.86 Action Aid Ethiopia, 2006, PP. 10-12. Rahmato, D. 2003, P. 8. 87 Markakis and Ayele, 1976, PP. 56-59.

39

The Derg, in its land reform in 1975 all land wasappropriated by the state and abolished the diversetenure arrangements in the imperial regime. Landlordslost their land rights and land was distributed toindividual households, with household System size beingthe main criterion for land allocation88. But how did thispolicy affect tenure insecurity? And has the land reformin Ethiopia eliminated the influence and power of thelocal elites? Or do the relatively land rich have thepower to retain their land and therefore do not feel moretenure insecure89?

Of course, the “land to tiller” has provided land to thepeasants and has done away with some of the land tenureproblems like avoided the land- lord tenant relations90.But Derg policies did not result in improving rurallivelihoods and growth of agricultural production91.However, in addition to making all lands state owned, theDerg land policy prohibited land transfers through landsales, mortgage, and exchange92. As household sizes changeover time and new households appear, there was also aneed to redistribute land at later stages to improve ormaintain the egalitarian distribution and to provide landto new landless households93. Frequent administrative landredistributions, constrained access, tenure insecurity,diminution of sizes of holdings and fragmentation ofplots, inefficient allocation of land, discouragingrural-urban peasant movement, and inappropriate landadministration were among important features of the ruralland policy from 1975 – 199194.

The present government’s land policy is for the most partsimilar to that of the Derg's but what is significant inthe present case is that land policy is now enshrined in

88 Rahmato, D. 1994a, Ege, S. 1990, Pausewang, S. 1988, Alemu, T. 1999, Admassie, Y. 1995.89 Holden, S. and Yohannes, H. 2002, P. 1.90 Action Aid Ethiopia, 2006, PP. 10-12.91 Brihanu, A. and Feyra, A. 2005, P. 6.92 Action Aid Ethiopia, 2006, P. 11.93 Holden and Yohannes, 2002, P.94 Action Aid Ethiopia, 2006, P. 10.

40

the Constitution95. However, since 1991 some policychanges have been introduced. Fore instance, reducing thefrequency of land redistribution which is considered ascauses of tenure insecurity is the one. Some regionsdeclared that they would not make any more administrativeland redistribution while others restricted the scope forredistribution to irrigated land. The Amhara regionalstate was an exception and here sudden landredistribution took place in 199796. Other land policyimprovements comprises land transfer through (with somerestriction) rental arrangements were allowed and privatecommercial farms with possible mortgaging the use rightas collateral are also allowed. After 1997 some policyinitiatives are also made towards establishing sound landmanagement and land administration system through ruralland registration and certification at least in Oromia,Amhara, Tigray and Southern Nation Nationalities Peopleregional states97.

Despite the above policy measures, land related problemsstill prevail such as tenure insecurity, restrictions ontransfer, lack of adequate land administration system.Landlessness particularly young peasants, land scarcepeasants, pastoralists, women and re-settlers and otherdisplaced people are among those who have problemsrelated to having adequate access to and control overrural land98.

3.3 LEGAL BASES

It is universally true that, the foundation of any systemof social order is the framework of the rule of lawswhich reflect and derived from the Constitution of thecountry. This governs the administrative process andexpresses the rights, duties and obligations of citizens.“In principle, through laws enacted by a democratically95 Rahmato, D. 2003, P. 5.96 Brihanu, A. and Feyra, A. 2005, P. 6.97 Action Aid Ethiopia, 2006, P. 11.98 Action Aid Ethiopia, 2006, P. 11. Rahmato, D. 2003, P. 7.

41

elected legislature, the people determine the behaviourof those who occupy the seats of power. The rule of lawholds that it dissipates if its official addressees-judges and officials- fail to obey the law. Without that,democracy’s promises have small currency99” With the sameanalogy rights, obligations, and restrictions pertinentto land law are also details and derivatives ofconstitutional basic rights and obligations of a countryand shall be respected and exercised accordingly by everyone.

According to the Ethiopian constitution Article 40 theright to ownership of rural and urban land, as well asall natural resource is exclusively vested in the stateand the peoples of Ethiopia (Sub-Article 3). And itshall not be subject to sale or other means of exchange.Sub Article 4 of the same stipulates Ethiopian peasantshave the right to obtain land with out payment andguaranteed the right to protection against eviction fromtheir possession.

In accordance with Article 55(1) of the FederalConstitution, the Government of Ethiopia proclaimed theFederal Rural Land Administration proclamation no.89/1997. On top of this, the Federal Government recentlyenacted the Federal Rural Land Administration and LandUse proclamation no. 456/2005 by repealing the formerone. This law is generally directed towards addressingland tenure problems.

More specifically, the need to establish a conducivesystem of rural land administration that promotes theconservation of natural resource is considered as a meansto solve the later. In addition, putting legal conditionsin place which are conducive to enhance and strengthenthe land use rights of farmers, pastoralists and privateinvestors are stipulated as objectives in the sameprovision. Above all, the necessity to establish aninformation database that enables to identify the size,direction and use rights of the different types of landholdings in the country also one area of interest to

99 Siedman, et al, 2001, PP. 255-256.

42

the Federal Government. In the official document of theFederal Government called SDPRP stated that the users’rights of farmers shall be protected through registrationand provided with certificate of user rights100.

In addition, the Federal Government five years strategicplan document explains some action to be taken pertinentto land administration and land management issues.According to the same document, it is believed that “todevelop and strengthen the natural resource informationsystem the establishment of database at Woreda level willbe conducted101. The plan encompasses the establishmentof natural resource database in 550 Woredas that arefound in the country. The same source further statesthat, in the next five years around 6.7 millionshouseholds will receive first level certificate. Besideto this, studies and research will be conducted in thenext 5 years in pastorals and Agro-pastoralist area ofthe country which focus on the identification of theproperty rights and the development of methodology torecord these rights.

The Federal constitution Article 52 (2) (d) empowersRegional states to Administer land and natural resources.However, member States of the Federal Government land andnatural resources crafted laws shall be implemented inaccordance with the law enacted by the FederalGovernment.

On the other hand, regional governments are also arguingand following the same approach. Accordingly, ANRS, asMember State of the country has endorsed its own land lawproclamation no. 46/ 2000. This proclamation enables thestate to determine the administration and use of therural land. Article 6(3) of the same states that, “solong as the land users utilize the land according to theestablished rules, this proclamation assures and securestheir holding and use rights” It further states that “Theobjectives of the rural land administration and usepolicy and proclamation are directed towards enabling thepeasant to work for sustainable development and making100 FDRE, 2002, P. 101 FDRE, 2006, P. 29.

43

the same the beneficiary of such development by ensuringtenure security102” To implement the objectives of thislaw the state enacted proclamation no. 47/2000 that laidthe foundation of authoritative institution hereaftercalled EPLAUA.

The Regional council of ANRS found that there is a needto revise the existing Rural Land Administration and UseProclamation no. 46/2000. The rationale for the amendmentof the existed one among other things includesincorporating, the basic rights of farmers, and ensuringthe implementation and inclusion of the new laws of theFederal Government in details are the one. As a result itrecently issued proclamation no. 133/2006 by revokingproclamation no. 46/2000.

However, the new law also supports the implementation ofother enactments which are related to the use of landresource one way or another. Hence, notwithstanding theprovision stated under sub Article 1 of Article 2“special laws shall continue on application, as thefields they had been stipulated, concerning thedelineated lands for forestry, wild life protection, bio-diversity resources, natural resource and environmentalprotection, mines developments and the likes103”

It further dictates that, “any Rural Land given to theright users shall be measured and the cadastral maps getprepared by the authority in traditional way or moderntool. Hence, a system of unique identifier shall bedesigned and implemented to clearly understand eachparcel of land. The demarcation that indicates theboundary shall, also, be made on the land104”

On the other hand, Article 23 of the same is dealingabout rural land registration and data maintaining. Sub-Article 1 of this Article stipulates that any landmeasured by the authority shall, pursuant to thisproclamation registered in rural land registration book.To implement the provision indicated under sub-Article 1102 ANRS, 46/ 2000, A. 6(3).103 ANRS, 133/2006, A. 2(2).104 ANRS, 133/2006, A. 22(1).

44

of this Article the land registration shall be carriedout including the information explaining the full name ofthe land holder, the means of holding acquired,boundaries of the land, the fertility status, the landuse type and the obligation of the land holder.

On top of this, Article 24 sub-Article 1 of the samestates that any person, granted rural land shall be giventhe land holding certificate in which the details of theland is registered by the authority prepared by his nameand his photograph fixed thereon. Accordingly, theholding certification is deemed to be legal certificateof the holder.

In addition to this, there is the directive issued forthe implementation of rural land administration and useproclamation no. 46/2000 which is under use since itsissuance throughout the region. There is also a draftregulation for the implementation of proclamation no.133/2006 which is not yet ratified by the RegionalCouncil.

The other official document which is issued by the ANRSis the Regional Conservation Strategy document which hasimportant recommendation about rural land and naturalresource tenure and access rights. According to thisdocument “to provide security of tenure for land andother natural resources users by clearly defining andstrengthening land and other natural resource tenurerights and responsibilities, so as support sustainableagricultural, pastoral, forestry and fishery productionand sustainable urban development105”

There is also an aspiration and objective to create anenvironmental information system to collect, analyse,store and disseminate on a continuous basis, reliableinformation relating to resource and environment. To thisend the strategy is designed as to provide clearlegislation and guidelines on environmental data andinformation generation, collection and disseminationspecifying the nature of restrictions required106.105 ANRS, 1999, P. 15.106 ANRS, 1999, P. 15.

45

Generally, these are some of the major legal bases andofficial documents for rural land registration and landinformation system in Amhara region.

3.4 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Since institutional principles depend on policyprinciples and legal developments, nowadays, it isgenerally recognised that inappropriate institutionalarrangements are often the biggest bottleneck inundertaking land administration reform.

With this scenario governments must play the major rolein formulating the land policy and the principles oftheir land administration systems, including the landlegislation and land-related regulations. To this end,governments must address a number of major issuesincluding government structures and ministerialresponsibilities, inter-governmental coordination,departmental structures and decentralisation principles.In addition to this, they must also clearly definepublic-private sector relationships and partnerships, andthe operation of Professional organisations pertinent toland administration107.

Since systematic land administration is a recentphenomenon in Ethiopia, there are a number of issues atstake pertinent to formal and robust institution of thissystem. According to the federal land administration anduse proclamation no. 456/2005 part 4 Article 16(1-3) theresponsible organ for the implementation of the same andother land related legislation is the Ministry ofAgriculture and Rural Development (MOARD) at nationallevel. There is one department within MOARD which followup and monitor all aspects of land administrationdevelopment throughout the nation.

On the other hand, as the Federal Member State ofEthiopia, ANRS is a pioneer in building up a system likethis one. The Region, with a strong conviction of theexistence of alarming natural resource degradation,asserts the tenure security argument as an important107 UNECE, 1996, P. 61.

46

incentive and policy principle for designing a sound landmanagement and land administration system108. Hence,building up a competent and an authoritativedecentralized organ is considered as a sign of commitmentto this end.

As stated earlier, EPLAUA is founded and responsible forsetting up the formal land administration system andassuring the expected benefits out of it throughout theregion since 5 August 2000 (proclamation no. 47/2000).Currently EPLAUA is organized having three technicaldepartments, two technical service departments and oneadministrative subordinate department. Among the threefundamental technical departments the land administrationand registration department is the one which has profoundrole to attain the goal and objectives of EPLAUA. Underthis department there were only five expert postsinitially but currently there are eight expert posts andnine surveyors at regional level. Currently, at Zonalbranch offices of EPLAUA there are ten experts throughoutthe region.

There are 106 teams which are supposed to have 19 EPLAUA-related staffs each and organized under the Woreda ORDAall over the Region. Most of the teams are nowadays understaffed. During the first registration there was abudgetary support to hire high school complete studentsto assist the registration and recording data at Woreda,Kebele and Sub Keble level for six months. The structureof EPLAUA is also extended to Kebele and Sub Keble levelwhich is the lower and grass root administrativestructure. There are 2927 KLAC which are affiliated toEPLAUA’s objectives. The members of the SKLAC whichcomprises 5 to 7 person each out of them at least twoshall be women are elected from the community for thecommunity based on free and democratic electionprinciples. The chair person and secretary of the SKLACare in effect or by default form the KLAC. On average oneKebele has three Sub Kebeles. The members of thecommittee are giving service having less than one weektraining form the Woreda experts for the purpose of the

108 Action Aid Ethiopia, 2006, P. 25.

47

first registration. They are delivering the service without any payment or incentives.

3.5 CADASTRAL LAND REGISTRATION IN AMHARA REGION

As it is stated earlier, Amhara region is one of theregions that have been taking measures and reform on itsland legislation. The legislation primarily is aiming atsolving tenure insecurity in an innovative way of landregistration and certification which is quite differentfrom the traditional way of land registration andcadastral survey. Currently, there are two ways of landregistration in use in the region namely non-conventional measurement of registration and conventionalcadastral land registration. Both of them are implementedside by side as systematic way of registration andinvolve various stakeholders in large scales.

The non-conventional measurement is the way of parcelboundary demarcation and definition merely in non-geometric methods. The boundaries are marked by leaving asmall strip of land unused and letting weeds grow there.Measuring area and registering parcels details in a loosesheet of papers called field sheets is the way ofworking. With this approach, determining the extent ofrights would just be a task left for rightful holders andthe assumed committee members of the SKLAC and KLAClocally with little assistance from the Woreda landadministration experts and surveyors.

Parcels are registered by naming the bordering parcelholder name. The measurement instruments are highlyvaried from Woreda to Woreda throughout the region basedon the resource and availability of personnelirrespective of their professional background. SomeWoredas used tape metres and graduated ropes, others usedcompass, and still other simply used the local areameasurements what is called Timad or Gemed or Gezim or Eka,etc which is equivalent to one fourth of a hectare.

The type of data collected include property attributedata (identification of parcels, area, bordering names,fertility status, means of acquisitions, and locality of

48

the parcel situated), land holder information and legalrights and encumbrances. According to the legal documentsthe benchmark for the registration is the recentredistribution. This redistribution is carried outspontaneously in 1997 in Amhara region only as a means ofcreating equity among rural community109.

During the data collection, each holder should be on hisplot when the land administration committee (LAC) and theWoreda expert(s) arrive. If one is not there, datacollection will proceed based on local information (LAC-members, neighbours who are around). During hard time inadjudication the rightful holder of a particular parcelshould present either written paper what the farmerscalled it locally Eta or Matsigna which is received from therecent administrative redistribution or else those peoplewho executed the then redistribution in person calledlocally Delday meaning redistributors as evidence. There isalso another chance to present claim and complaints onthe public hearing meetings. If one is not there, onemight run risk of others claiming your land. It ispossible that changes are made compared to collected databefore the certificates are finalized. In this methodthere is no mapping or even sketch maps. Currently, theinformation is kept manually at Woreda level. Therefore,based on these mechanisms the data quality and theinformation in the register are attempted to be in goodquality. However, in comparison with the conventionalmethods, this is a labour intensive, cheap and quickapproach that would entail considerable savings in moneyand time in the expense of the local community. It is ofcourse source of a huge amount of land relatedinformation in the foreseeable future of any potentialusers.

According to annual official report of EPLAUA, sinceregistration started about 95% of households (HHs)registered from which 54.52% have received provisional

109 In his research report entitled “The Promised Land”, Ege Svein (1997) provided a detailed and first hand account of the motive, nature and consequences of the Amhara land redistribution that suddenly took place in 1997.

49

certificate. In addition to this, 26.81% have receivedfirst level book of holdings, 0.07% have received secondlevel book of holdings with parcel maps by the end ofJune 2006. Reportedly, 3.5 million copies of book ofholdings and 30,000 copies of book of register have beenprinted and distributed to Woreda EPLAUTs through Zonalofficers of EPLAUA.

On the other hand, the second type of land registrationis carried out conventionally with support of modernsurveying instruments like total station and GlobalPositioning System (GPS) in two pilot areas. The systemis objectively designed to develop “a way of working”with innovative approach to the new envisaged landadministration system throughout the region in particularand to the nation at large.

Surveying, mapping and registration in this way iscarried out mainly in the two pilot kebeles of theregion. Data collected in the field were converted intoa map showing the boundaries for the properties in thepilot project areas. The maps were then used as a basisfor registration of properties, each with its respectivedesignation number. The activity is basically done bySARDP budgetary support. Field activities includinginformation, demarcation, surveying and mapping of Kebeleand Sub-Kebele boundaries, individual holdings, commonlands and religious institutes have done precisely.According to the report obtained from EPLAUA, 8557parcels which comprise about 4334 hectares of land havebeen registered in these pilot areas in two years.

In this system of registration both spatial and attributedata are collected. In the attribute dataset suchinformation as details of possessors, legal obligationand encumbrances, and production value of the property isincluded. However, in the spatial datasets we can findthe boundary coordinate points of each parcel which canbe used as a benchmark for establishment of spatialreference framework in the long run. Top cad surveyingapplication software is in use to manipulate maps. Inthis case the data is kept both manually and incomputerized way. The reason behind this fact is firstly

50

the data is transferred from the field sheets in topermanent books of register. Then now the way oftransferring these data in to computer database calledISLA is under implementation. However, connecting thecadastral maps with textual dataset is not yet started.This is the assignment for EPLAUA upfront.

Compared to the first way of registration the dataquality is better, though, relatively costly and requireswell trained personnel in cadastral surveying. Accordingto the final report document of the pilot implementationthe way of working has shown that with participation offarmers combined with free election by the farmers ofmembers to the Land Administration Committees, theimplementation can be made in a fast and cost effectiveway110.

These registrations leads to a double level of landholding certification namely, first level book ofholdings and second level book of holdings. Thedifference between this two are the former contains alldetails but with local are measurement for area ofparcels and lacks production value of parcels, centralcoordinates and maps as well. However, both have equallegal acceptance in any case.

3.6 THE LAND REGISTRY COMPONENTS

Basically, there are three components of the registry ofproperty register in Amhara Region namely, the landregister book, the archived documents and the cadastralindex maps. Each and every component has its own details.

The land register book in the manual form and the samedocument but in computerized system called ISLA is keptseparately for each kebele. One book of register contains300 Sheets of paper and 600 pages and prepared in twocopies manually. Mostly one sheet contains one property

110 Bäckstromland, L. 2005, P. 9.

51

in both the manual and computerized system. But sometimes one property may be registered in two sheets if theparcels are too many and unable to register all in onesheet. One copy of the book of register is kept at Woredalevel and the other one at kebele level. In thecomputerized system, ISLA consists of a sheet for eachproperty/database and contains the compiled account ofall land holdings within each Kebele.

On the other hand, the archive consists of all fieldsheets from the first registration that contains all thenecessary data collected in the field. The other types ofdocuments that are found in the archives are thesubsequent application and supporting documents to anychange on the holding. Those documents are archived afterthe change has been registered. Archiving is made case bycase in a sequential number series starting with one atthe beginning of each year, e.g. 1998/1.

The third component of the registry is the cadastralindex map. This is a sketch map showing the relativelocation of each property and its parcels in relation toother property. It is only up dated when there is achange in the extent of the property physically throughproperty formation measures like subdivision by whichparts of a parcel is transferred to another property.

3.7 COMPUTERIZATION

The property register in Amhara region is attempted tobecome automation. This is to mean computerized landinformation system is part and parcels of the cadastralland registration system in the pilot areas and to scaleup at regional level in step by step bases. Therefore,ISLA is application software developed by EPLAUA jointlywith international expert and designed to operatethroughout Amhara region. ISLA attempt to support thebasic processes of property and possession registrationand registration of changes when a property istransferred, when the legal substance changes, and/orwhen there is a change in the extent of the propertythrough property formation. In addition to this it

52

supports registration of secondary rights (leases,easements/servitudes), and produces statistical report.

The system is developed for data capturing, processing,analyzing and dissemination. The core data for the abovementioned purpose is real property in Amhara region inspatial and attribute data form. In the context of thelegal setting of Amhara region one property cannot beregistered in two Kebeles. This means all the parcels ofthe properties have to be located with in a Kebelejurisdiction. A property is composed of one or severalparcels. The meaning of property is the possession rightsof land by individuals, groups or organizations forunlimited period of time. It is a collection of subject,rights, and object, such as possessor, easements,belongings and rental agreements, and parcels/property.In other words, the basic components of ISLA areproperty, possession and possessor. Property is the basicelement. If the possession is changed in the mean time itdoes not affect the property, and vice versa. On theother hand, a parcel is a continuous piece of land thatcan be used for one or several land use types. In short,the system can provide detailed reports at propertylevel, which can be used as a supplement to the book ofholding.

The system has developed having security and auditfunctionality which makes it possible to trace when andby whom data was entered or modified. There is a clearand defined responsibility for ISLA users namely, “readonly”, “data entry” or “desk officer”. The latter has anauthority to approve the entered data.

Currently, the system can provide such print outs asproperty print out with current information on property,property history that stipulate all previous parcels andpossessors or holders history, a document for each leasethat can be delivered to the lessee, and statisticalreport.

3.7.1 THE PILOT IMPLEMENTATION

53

ISLA was implemented in two Woredas in Amhara region in2004. The Woreda staffs were given a thorough trainingbut the system was not fully operational for severalreasons. Among others lack of close follow up on the partof EPLAUA and lack of detailed knowledge and commitmentfrom the trained personnel in the pilot Woredas were theone.

Instead of registration in ISLA the Woredas have beencapturing data in excel files. There is also anaspiration to build an important interface which enablesthe personnel to transfer the data in excel file intoISLA database. Reportedly this will allow the Woredas touse or maintain their captured data in the next versionof ISLA. In such a way data will be imported “once only”,after it has been imported, it is also possible to enteradditional data which is captured directly through ISLA.

3.7.2 ARCHITECTURE

Even though ISLA is currently is set up as standalonesystem on the single PC it is developed having in mindthat it shall be operate in a networked environment. Ifin the future the need to scale up the system it will bepossible to run ISLA as a traditional client/serversystem on a local area network.

ISLA stores data in a relational database and thisprovides flexibility and possibility to adapt futureneeds that might arise. Microsoft SQL server is used asthe database engine. This is currently a leading databaseengine. There will be no limitation on the amount of datathat the database can handle, though it may be requiredto upgrade hardware and software licenses. The softwareis developed using Microsoft.NET Enterprise Architect2003 Visual Basic and compatible to Windows 2003 andabove features. This is a leading development tool.

3.7.3 BACKUP AND DATA TRANSFER

Back up is absolutely essential to ensure that data isnot lost in case of a disk crash, fire, theft, etc. Inthe pilot Woredas staffs were introduced to take a back

54

Regional EPLAUA

up at least once a week. But in reality staffs weretaking backups even daily. This is the basic solution nowimplemented as disaster management mechanism. If thedatabase crashes there will be no way to retrieve dataentered since the last back up was taken. The staff wherealso instructed to keep back ups in other and separatebuilding.

There was a plan to consolidate data at regional perhapsFederal level. Therefore, data transfer through differentmedia is part and parcels of the system development.Three basic methods of transferring data from Woredas toEPLAUA have been identified, namely, physical transportof back up tapes, dial up, and e-mails.

The initial intention was to physically transfer thebackup tapes on a regular and frequent basis to theAmhara EPLAUA and restore a copy of the database there.EPLAUA copy would be read only as all updating is done atthe Woreda level. To maintain this database /back upshould be the responsibility of the IT unit at EPLAUA.The team should also have the responsibility to returnthe back up tapes to the Woreda.

A dial up solution was never considered first. Asexperience has shown that it usually is too difficult toimplement. On the other hand, E-mail is an option thatwas not originally considered, but it is a possiblesolution. An empty and compressed database file is lessthan 300kb. There is no estimation of the growth of theback up file as data are captured, but the file growth isnot anticipated to be drastic. The file could be e-mailedfrom any internet connection at the Woreda or elsewhere,assuming the Woreda is in a more developed town.

By transferring backups to the regional or federalcentres it will be possible to query data collected atthe Woredas in a regional or federal office, and alsocompile information from several Woredas for statisticalor planning purposes.

Regional aggregate data

55

Diagram 2. Data consolidation between Woreda and EPLAUA

4. SURVEY RESULTS

4.1 SURVEY RESULT OF FARMER’S INTERVIEW

From both Woredas about 68 farmers were interviewed.Among these 25 farmers were from the pilot Woreda(Gozamen) and the rest were from the other Woreda(Wogera). Around 82.35 percent of the respondents weremale headed households (HHs) and the rest 17.65 percentwere female headed HHs.

Farmers who registered their holdings and received bookof holdings

As can be seen from Table 3 all interviewed HHs haveholdings and registered in both Woredas. On the otherhand, from the total, around 82.40 percent of the sampleHHs have received book of holdings and the remaining,17.60 percent reported that they didn’t receive book ofholdings for different reasons.

Table 3. Farmers who registered their holdings andreceived book of holdings.

Copy woreda database

Copy woreda database

Copy woreda database

Woreda database

Woreda database

Woreda database

56

Frequency

Percent

ValidPercent

CumulativePercent

57

Whetherregistered ornot?

Yes 68 100.0 100.0 100.0No 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Whetherreceived bookof holding?

No 12 17.6 17.6 17.6Yes 56 82.4 82.4 100.0

Source: Field Survey data

4.1.1 FARMERS PRACTICES DURING AND AFTER FIRST REGISTRATION

4.1.1.1 Farmer’s roles during registration

As can be seen from Table 4 farmers were participated andinvolved in different activities with different degreesof participation in the first registration proceedings.About 69 percent of the HHs reported that they haveapplied for first registration and 89.7 percentparticipated in boundary adjudication and demarcation. Ontop of this, about 68 percent of the HHs said that theyhave made agreement with the neighbouring holder ofparcels borders and around 87 percent said that they haveapproved whether their holdings were registered correctlyor not.

Table 4. Farmer’s participations/roles during registrationYour roles during registration

Frequency

Percent

Valid%

Cumulative%

Application

No 21 30.9 30.9 30.9Yes 47 69.1 69.1 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

58

Demarcation

No 7 10.3 10.3 10.3Yes 61 89.7 89.7 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

Agreement No 23 33.8 33.8 33.8Yes 45 66.2 66.2 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

Approval No 9 13.2 13.2 13.2Yes 59 86.8 86.8 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

Others No 62 91.2 91.2 91.2Yes 6 8.8 8.8 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

Source: Field survey data

4.1.1.2 Whether Farmers executing responsibilities according to the law after first registration

The survey results show that all the respondents thoughtthat they are carrying out their responsibilitiesaccording to the law (Table 5). Around 81 percent of therespondents reported that they were taking care ofboundary marks from damage or being lost and theremaining 19 percent did not. Almost all of therespondents reported that they were properly managing andutilizing their holdings as of the first registrationsince as they feel sense of ownership. On the other hand,around 90 percent of the respondents reported that theywere properly handling their book of holdings from beinglost or damaged.

Table 5. Farmers executing responsibilities according to the law

Responsibilities doneFrequency %

Valid%

Cumulative%

Whether executing responsibilities accordingly?

Yes68

100.0 100.0 100.0

No 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Take care of boundary marks

No 13 19.1 19.1 19.1Yes 55 80.9 80.9 100.0Total 68 100.

0 100.0

Proper management & use Yes 68 100. 100.0 100.0

59

of holding

0No 0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total 68

100.0 100.0 100.0

Proper handling of Book of Holding

No 6 8.8 8.8 8.8Yes 62 91.2 91.2 100.0Total 68 100.

0 100.0

Others No 66 97.1 97.1 97.1Yes 2 2.9 2.9 100.0Total 68 100.

0 100.0

Source: Field survey data

4.1.1.3 Farmers who made transfer and reported after first registration

About 44 percent of households reported that they havemade transfer in one way or the other after the firstregistration (Table 6). From this, about 87 percent ofthe HHs responds that they have already reported thetransfer and the remaining 13 percent have did not. Ontop of this, around 50 percent of the transfers made arereported from respondents of the pilot kebele residentsand it is only 3.3 percent of the HHs who did not reportthe change. However, 30 percent have made transfer andout of it (23.3%) of the HHs have reported the transferand only 6.7 percent in Kossoye did not reported. On theother hand, 20 percent of the transfer is reported fromAmbagiorgies Zuria Kebeles and 16.7 have reported thechange.

Table 6. Farmers who made transfer and reported afterfirst registration conducted

KebeleCode

Have you made any transfer afterfirst registration

YesWhether reported the transfer

No YesCount Table N Count Table N %

60

%2 2 6.7% 7 23.3%4 1 3.3% 14 46.7%24 1 3.3% 5 16.7%Total 4 13.3% 26 86.7%

Source: Field survey data

4.1.1.4 Willingness to report changes in the near future

In case of future change reporting, almost 97 percent ofthe respondents reported that they are willing to reportany changes made through any transfer for differentreasons (Table 7). It was only 3 percent of the totalrespondents who thought not to report even if they willmake a change in the near future. The main reason thatwas mentioned by the respondents to report future changeswas to acquire legal protection and tenure security fortheir holdings. Of course, a considerable number ofrespondents also reported that they are willing to reportbecause registering changes can also facilitate futuretransactions and future transfer through well anddonation.

Table 7. Willingness to report changes in the near future

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

No 2 2.9 2.9 2.9

Yes 66 97.1 97.1 100.0

61

Total 68 100.0 100.0

Source: Field survey data

4.1.2 FARMERS REALIZATION AFTER FIRST REGISTRATION CONDUCTED

4.1.2.1 Farmers’ realization of benefits being registered

The survey result shows that farmers have realized thepotential benefits of registration since its inception intheir locality (Table 8). Around 90 percent of therespondents in both Woreda reported that they havesecured and get protection for their holdings. About 82percent of the respondents also recognized that theborder conflicts were reducing since the firstregistration conducted in their Kebele.

Table 8. Benefits being registered

Benefits being registered

Frequency

Percent

ValidPercent

CumulativePercent

HoldingSecured

No 7 10.3 10.3 10.3Yes 61 89.7 89.7 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

Reduceborderconflict

No 12 17.6 17.6 17.6Yes 56 82.4 82.4 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

Facilitate

transfer

No 30 44.1 44.1 44.1Yes 38 55.9 55.9 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

OthersNo 56 82.4 82.4 82.4Yes 12 17.6 17.6 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

Notbenefite

d

No 67 98.5 98.5 98.5Yes 1 1.5 1.5 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

Source: Field survey data

However, this recognition is varying geographically inthe sampled Woredas (Diagram 1). In Adisna guilt Kebele

62

of Gozamen Woreda all the respondents thought that theborder conflicts were totally reduced among the communityin their kebele since first registration was conducted.Where as, in Kossoye Kebele (36%) and Ambagiorgies ZuriaKebele (33%) of Wogera Woreda realized that the borderconflicts were not reduced of being registered. On theother hand 55 percent of the respondents reported thatthey have recognized the potential benefit of

registration in facilitating transfers in different formsand the remaining 45 percent did not yet.

Diagram 3. Farmers benefited being registered in respect to reducing border conflicts by Kebele

4.1.2.2 Level of enforceability and legitimacy of Kebele LAC and Farmers satisfaction

The survey result shows 78.4 percent of the totalrespondents reported that the level of legitimacy and

2442

Kebele Code

25

20

15

10

5

0

Coun

t

Bar Chart

YesNo

Benefits being registered:Reduce border confilict

Key2 Amba Georgies4 Kossoye24 Addisna Gulit

63

decision enforceability of the Kebele LAC is high withintheir own jurisdictions (Table 9). On top of this, 16.2percent of the respondents said that moderately and theremaining reported that there is low level of legitimacyand enforceability of LAC among the Kebeles inhabitants.On the other hand, from the 78.4 percent who feel highlegality and enforceability of the Kebele LAC around 68percent reported that they have satisfied with the KebeleLAC service provision to the local community and about 10percent satisfied to some extent. On the contrary, it wasonly 4.4 percent of the respondents reported that thereis low level of legitimacy and enforceability of LACamong the Kebeles inhabitants and the same amount offigure was reported that they were not totally satisfiedwith the Kebele LAC services.

64

Table 9. Level of enforceability and legitimacy of Kebele LAC and Farmers satisfaction

Source: Field survey data

KebeleCode

Level of enforceability and legitimacy of KLAC and its decisionLow Moderate High

Whether satisfied by KLACservices

Whether satisfied by KLACservices

Whether satisfied by KLACservices

Notsatisfi

ed

Tosomeextent

Satisfied

Don’tknow

Notsatisfied

Tosome

extentSatisfied

Don’tknow

Notsatisfied

Tosome

extentSatisfied

Don’tknow

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %2 2 2.9% 0 .0% 0 .0

% 0 .0% 1 1.5

% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0

% 3 4.4%

12

17.6% 0 .0%

4 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0

% 0 .0% 1 1.5

% 2 2.9% 1 1.5

% 0 .0% 0 .0

% 1 1.5%

19

27.9% 1 1.5

% 24 1 1.5% 0 .0% 0 .0

% 0 .0% 1 1.5

% 5 7.4% 0 .0% 0 .0

% 0 .0% 3 4.4

%15

22.1% 0 .0%

Total

3 4.4% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0

% 3 4.4% 7 10.

3% 1 1.5% 0 .0

% 0 .0% 7 10.

3%46

67.6% 1 1.5

%

65

4.1.2.3 Sources of information for farmers regarding their holdings

With this regard the result of the survey shows asignificance differences and varying hieratically atdifferent levels of EPLAUA (Table 10). The respondentsreported that 7 percent from regional EPLAUA, 23.5percent reported form Woreda EPLAUT, 58.8 said fromKebele LAC, and the same amount from the Sub Kebele LAChave had access as sources of information about theirholdings. On the other hand, about 22 percent of therespondents recognized that the book of holding which isfound in their hands was considered as other sources ofinformation about their holdings.

Table 10. Sources of information for farmers regardingtheir holdings

Sources of information Frequency

Percent

ValidPercent

CumulativePercent

EPLAUA No 62 91.2 92.5 92.5Yes 5 7.4 7.5 100.0Total 67 98.5 100.0

Missing User 1 1.5Total 68 100.0

KLAC

No 27 39.7 40.3 40.3Yes 40 58.8 59.7 100.0Total 67 98.5 100.0

Missing User 1 1.5Total 68 100.0

WEPLAUT

No 52 76.5 76.5 76.5Yes 16 23.5 23.5 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

SKLAC

No 29 42.6 42.6 42.6Yes 39 57.4 57.4 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

Others No 53 77.9 77.9 77.9

66

Yes 15 22.1 22.1 100.0Total 68 100.0 100.0

Source: Field survey data

4.1.2.4 Farmers’ willingness to pay for the services at different levels of EPLAUA

The survey result shows that 64.7 percent of therespondents reported that they were willing to pay thefee fully for the service obtained from EPLAUA at alllevels and 27.9 percent of the respondents reported thatthey were willing to pay if necessary. Where as, around 8percent of the total respondents replied that they werewilling to pay partially (Table 11).

Table 11. Willingness to pay for the service

Frequency

Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid

Yes fully 44 64.7 64.7 64.7

Yes partially 5 7.4 7.4 72.1

If necessary 19 27.9 27.9 100.0

Total 68 100.0 100.0 Source: Field survey data

4.1.2.5 Main reason for willing to pay

Main reason for willing to pay Frequen

cyPercent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Fully

If it is an order from the government

21 30.9 35.0 35.0

To get tenure 7 10.3 11.7 46.7

67

securityTo get legal certificate 13 19.1 21.7 68.3

For my miss I should have to pay e.g. If I lost my book of holding

9 13.2 15.0 83.3

My holding is mylife so I will pay any cost

10 14.7 16.7 100.0

Total 60 88.2 100.0Missing User 8 11.8Total 68 100.0Partially

I don’t have financial capacity

5 7.4 100.0 100.0

Missing User 63 92.6Total 68 100.0Totally not

Yes 0 0

Missing User 68 100.0Those farmers who reported to pay fully for the serviceshave reflected different reasons for their thought (Table12). About 31 percent of the total in this group reportedthat they were willing to pay fully if it is an orderfrom the government and about 19 percent reported thatthey could pay to get legal certificates and 14.7 justifythat being their land is their livelihoods they could payany cost for it. On the other hand, 13 percent of therespondents reported that they were willing to pay fullyfor services like to replace lost documents about theirholdings (if it was their miss). Surprisingly, it wasonly 7 percent reported that they were willing to payfully to acquire tenure security. In contrary to this,those who reported to pay partial payment for theservices (7.4) mentioned that being they don’t haveenough money they could only pay partially. On the otherhand, no one reported not to pay totally for the servicesobtained from EPLAUA.

68

Table 12. Farmer’s main reason for willing to pay forservices

Source: field survey data

4.2 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION SURVEY RESULT OF KEBELE LAC

Focus group discussion was carried out on the 28 ofSeptember 2006 in Addisna Gulit Kebele with four LACmembers. The same discussion was cried out on the 13 and14 October 2006 in Kossoye and Ambagiorgies Zuria Kebelesof Wogera Woreda with 6 and 5 Kebele LAC membersrespectively. The relevant and curtail issues drawn fromthe discussion are presented in brief as follows.

The first question which was posed to the LAC members wasto mention their major role and responsibilities startingfrom first registration onwards. Participants werementioned the following issues as major role andresponsibilities:

Raising the knowledge of the local community aboutland registration and its potential benefits

Adjudicating and delineating Kebele boundaries andcommunal lands together with Kebele administrationbodies

Hearing and give solution for boundary disputes andother land related conflicts

Registering and keeping documents of all holdings inthe Kebele jurisdiction

Distributing book of holdings and certificates torightful holders

Represent the Kebele community with regard to theimplementation of land administration and use issuesin general within their respective Kebele.

Concerning how to entertain claims and complaintspresented from farmers, the participants reported thatthey were entertaining claims and complaints based on theseriousness of the case in question in line with theunderlying land administration law. Cases might be

69

presented orally or in written forms. But mostly theywere encouraging the farmers to present their interestand claims in written form as the legislation demands.The case is first started at SKLAC level and to KLAC.Those who are not satisfied with the committee’s decisioncould contest the decision by appealing to the WoredaEPLAUT.

The third question was on how the KLAC cooperate with theKebele Administration and social court with regard toadministering the rural land. The participants reactedthe question by appreciating it and they said that thiswas the basic problem during first registration. Thereason behind this fact was formerly the land wasadministered by the kebele administration on one hand andthe social court regarding border conflicts and otherrural holding related problems on the other hand.However, this mandate specially the Kebele administrationwas completely transferred to the KLAC since 2000. Butthe mandate of the social court was neither amended noradjusted in line with the transferred responsibilities tothe newly established committee. The social court wasdeciding the same case which was presented and decided bythe committee in opposite way. Of course, this was sometime unintentional and the other time purposeful.Therefore, it was difficult to enforce one over the otherand this created a problem and lacked confidence amongthe community regarding the roles and responsibilities ofthose different organs. Reportedly, though now a dayssuch kind of confusions are becoming decreasing throughdialogue and short term trainings given by the WoredaEPLAUT and regular court, the problem is still appearsnow and then. On the other hand, some KebeleAdministrations were very welcome but most weredisturbing of these newly developing registrationexercises. Above all, committee members were complainingthat they don’t have strong legal protection againstoffence and terrors from illegal rural land possessors.This was especially underlined in Wogera Woreda.

The other interesting issue which was appreciable bycommittee member was their voluntary service as committeemembers. Participants were reacting that they were

70

farmers just like others and have private farmingactivities. Even if the land registration operation was awelcome operation, it makes their life andresponsibilities complex. Reportedly they have receivedshort term training for less than a week. According totheir words it is only on those days they have got smallmoney. Never, and ever after that. This was speciallyreported in Wogera Woreda. On the contrary, the landregistration operation was very complex, tiresome, andtime consuming. On the other, hand some farmers obligedcommittee members to register illegal holdings in theirname. In short, without any payment involving in the landregistration operation as KLAC member makes life verycomplex and difficult.

4.3 INTERVIEW RESULT WITH WOREDA EXPERTS

With regard to differentiating special/legal form froma forgery one the Woreda experts reported that for thetime being the book of possession is prepared having asecrete notes written into every pages. On top of this,the book of register also prepared with special paper andmade up of around 600 pages compiled as one book.Therefore, it is hard to prepare it easily. On the otherhand, the field sheets are simple loose papers which canbe prepared either by type writer or computer machines.In fact, to prepare these sheets which are quite similarto the official one is very easy. However, what makes itdifficult is the legal flied sheets are filled by eitherthe Kebele land administration committee or the cadastralsurveyor and shall signed by either of those parties.Later on, for further care the field sheets are presentedfor public hearing and after approval of the public itshould be sealed by the Kebele administration legal stampand sent to the Woreda EPLAUT office.

As to the registration procedures, experts reported thatit depends on the nature of the case. If it is firstregistration, the bench mark is the recent landdistribution executed pursuant to proclamation no.89/1997, and if it is necessary oral evidence also

71

accepted. During first registration the following majorsteps were followed.

Application by the rightful holder(s) of the land shallbe submitted to the SKLAC. The application shall containdetails like number of parcels to be registered, area inlocal measurement, bordering neighbours` names of eachparcel, date and sign of applicant(s). Then the SKLACshall approve details of the application and transfer itinto the field sheet. Then adjudication of boundarieswill carried out together with the applicant(s) andneighbouring holders and boundary marks manumitted at themajor corners of the parcel. The field sheets are kept atthe KLAC till all registration is completed in thatparticular Kebele. Then notify the public for hearingsand read details of all the field sheets at hand. Afterpublic approval all the KLAC members shall sign up andsealed by the legal Kebele administration stamp. Then allKLAC members and the Kebele Administration bodies agreedup on the correctness of the registration and mademinutes by three copies. Two copies of minutes will sentto the Woreda EPLAUT office attached to the field sheets.One copy of the minutes filed and kept at the Woredalevel and the other one will attached to application forthe Zonal EPLAUA officer as a request for book ofregister and book of holdings. Finally all the necessarydetails shall be executed at Woreda level. This includesentering data from field sheets into book of register andthe book of holdings are get ready and sent to the KLACto deliver them to the rightful holder of the land. Onthe other hand, if it is transfer after firstregistration, initiation shall be taken by either of oneparty or both based on the nature of the transfer (Table,13).

Table 13. Types of transfer and procedures toregister

Activities

Types of transferDonation

inheritance Voluntaryexchange/consolidation

Rent

Initia Donee heir Both Rentee

72

tionApproval

SKLAC EPLAUT SKLAC SKLAC

Decision

EPLAUT Regularcivil court

EPLAUT EPLAUT

Period Morethan 30days

Depends onwork loadof civilcourt

More than 30days

One day

Remark 30contestingdays

One day iflegalprerequisitesfulfilled

30 days forreconsiderationof theirdecisionsbefore approval

Shall be3 yearsand aboveto beregistered intotheregistry

Source: Field survey

As to the maintenance and replacement of lost documents,the experts reported that each and every property isdesignated by unique identifier and any details of theproperty are filled according to the official andstandardized formats. If any change can be happen in themean time, it is up to the registrar/land administrationofficer to approve the change that has already madeavailable. Of course, the way of maintaining data is alittle bit different but quite similar procedurally inmanual and computerized system. On the other hand,reportedly since the Woreda EPLAUT inception as anofficial and competent institution, they didn’t face anykind of such damages or lost documents for till theinterview was conducted. But in case of any damagedocuments can be replaced and maintained from the copiesof the original one in the manual system and from thelatest back ups in the computerised system.

On the other hand, for the purpose of safety aspects,books of registers are prepared in two copies and asmentioned above kept in different places. The room ofarchives is as much as possible keep clean and dry. Inthe case of computerized system the computer centre isset up in different buildings than the archive room is

73

found. Daily back ups also kept at different room wherethe archive building is found in. The book of registerand field sheets are kept in different rooms too.

With regard to informal selling practices of land andmechanisms of formalizing those illegal holdings reportedthat as a matter of fact the system doesn’t have anylegal readymade procedure to formalize such kind ofinformal/illegal holdings at a moment. The experts addedthat right now it is undetermined but for such kind ofcomplex and illegal practices either the Regional Councilor EPLAUA shall decide.

As to payment for the KLAC, it is clear that the Kebeleland administration committee is working without anyremuneration for their services for at least 3 years. Itwas discussed that how far this arrangement is workingproperly specially from sustainable point of view.Reportedly, for the time being in both sampled Woredasand Kebeles there was no re-election of KLAC membersconducted. According to the words of the Gozamen Woredaexperts, members of the KLAC were not complaining aboutpayment since their election rather they were very fondof the position and exercising their responsibilitiesvoluntarily. However, it was reported in contrary to thisin Wogera Woreda pertinent to remuneration for theirservices. Even if it was reported such complains in bothWoredas members of KLAC were and are executing theirresponsibility according to the law stipulates. The onlyassistance that they were need is some budgetary supportfor papers and writing stuffs. Of course, supporting themwith short term training about the law and workingprocedures was also reported as incentive for them. Onthe other hand, even if the legislation clearlystipulated only 3 years is one term for the electedcommittee members, there might be re-election asreplacement for those who are unable to discharge theirmandates according to the law before the term lapse. Butit is up to the community to do so. From sustainabilitypoint of views, the Woreda experts were and are trying tokeep update the committee members’ knowledge timelythrough discussions and dialogues.

74

As to the institutional set up, it was reported thatbeing Woreda EPLAUTs are now organized under the ORDA,they have faced a problem of not exercising theirmandates as it would have been. According to the words ofthe experts this is because the office undermines thecomplexity and work load of the team. Therefore, itallocates any resource less than it should have been.However, the legitimacy of the teams’ responsibilitiesand decisions’ made by same is great within the localcommunity. With regard to the legislation, it isenforceable some how. This is to say that they don’t havethe regulation at hand for a moment and they were understaffed. Therefore, they couldn’t implement and enforcethe land administration and use law as it would havebeen. This is especially evidenced by the land useprovisions which stipulate measures to accomplish likeregulatory or restrictive provisions such as conservationorders and zoning and planning provisions. However, tohave a better success the team shall be institutionalizedseparately like other offices. There should be also aproper number of personnel, budgetary support, andlogistics allocation as it was reported.

Finally, it was reported that the following were themajor problems since EPLAUT established. These includedependency of the team on the good will of the ORDA,scarcity of proper resources like transportationfacilities and logistics, under staffed and improperskills, under estimation of the team responsibilities byother stakeholders, and lack of incentives to theemployee, as there is a need of education at leastcertificates for good performance of such new systemimplementation.

5. EVALUATING THE SYSTEM

75

This chapter deals with the actual evaluation of thedifferent aspects of the three evaluation areas, namely,institutional, legal, and technical. Each aspects arebriefly discussed and evaluated (with good practices inmind) and with support of concert evidences and resultswhich is drawn from farmer’s interviews, focus groupdiscussions from Kebele LAC members, Woreda landadministration staffs, senior experts and internationalconsultants at EPLAUA. With regard to this relevant legalprovision and sections are also presented as evidences.It is also assumed that a comment on performance gaps ofthe on going operations of the system are presented whenfelt necessary.

5.1 INSTITUTIONAL EVALUATION AREA

5.1.1 Aspects of land policy principles

There is a comprehensive set of provisions regardingregisters of immovable property in the Civil code of 1960still applicable for the whole parts of Ethiopia exceptin the parts dealing with private ownership rights toland. Currently, the land policy issue is enshrined inthe 1997 Constitution of the country. As stated in theprevious chapter the ECS comprises the land policyprinciples in a comprehensive way. The overall objectivein the Ethiopia Conservation Strategy (ECS) is to improvethe environment of human settlements, to satisfy thephysical, social, economic, cultural and other needs ofthe inhabitants on a sustainable basis111. It ensuresempowerment of the people and their organizations at alllevels in environmental management activities. On topthis, raising awareness and promote understanding of theessential linkages between environmental development byproviding tenure security to land and access to naturalresources for users are stated as cross sectoralobjectives112.

On the other hand, the land policy principles are wellstated in the Regional Conservation Strategy (RCS) which

111 FDRE. 1997, P. 20.112 FDRE. 1997, P. 21.

76

is the bases for the enactment of the regional landadministration and use policy and proclamation 46/2000 inAmhara region. Section 2.1 of the same stipulates theland policy principle in a comprehensive way. However,this law was repealed by the recent proclamation no.133/2006 and the later didn’t include the policy part.The other important possible indicator with this regardis lists of objectives and tasks for land registrationand land information system. Article 22 sub-Article 1 of133/2006 states the measurement and the making ofcadastral maps for rural land given to the right users.On the other hand, Article 23 of the same is dealing onrural land registration and data maintaining113. Inaddition to this, the principle pertinent to landregistration and land information system respects andsupports the concept of environmental sustainabilitythrough proper land use management and utilization114.Section three of the directive deals with theimplementation procedure of surveying and registration.Some details and routines included in the books ofholdings and summary document of books of holdings arepresented115.

Performance gap: First and foremost the centralGovernment didn’t take any clear stand on land policyexcept making it a dead issue and instead transferredresponsibility to regional Governments. In addition, thesystem has no long term strategic plan (5-20 years).Despite the Constitution declare the peoples right to beconsulted during policy formulation (92/3), the existenceof stakeholder’s participation in land policy formulationat all levels is seemed not duly consulted particularlyfarmers who are considered as the primary beneficiary ofthe rural land registration in the region. It wasreported and understood from the KLAC members’ focusgroup discussions that there was complain and requestsfor last round redistribution before the firstregistration took place. According to the same sourcethis was especially reflected from landless youths and

113 ANRS, 133/2006, A. 22-23.114 ANRS, 133/2006, A. 13.115 EPLAUA, 2003, s.3.

77

those who considered the 1997 sudden land redistributionin the region was unjustly done.

On the other hand, according to the words of the Woredaland administration staff members budgetary support forthe first region wide registration was totally emanatedfrom local government with small budgetary support fromEPLAUA which was very low and inconsistence year afteryear for efficient operation of land registration andLIS. On top of this, the system has no funding plan andinvestment structure to be self financed in a sustainableway right now. Despite the fact that salaries for theland administration staffs rose from Woredaadministrations in all 106 Woredas of the region, the twopilot Woredas was better off the others being they weresupported by SARDP in respect to training for personnel,buying surveying equipments, computer and accessories,and public advocacy on the registration and surveyingproceedings. Though the directive for first registration stipulatesprocedures to be followed and types of data to becollected, there are no further provisions concerningland registration and cadastral surveying proceedings inthe maintenance phase. Reportedly EPLAUA is now on themove of drafting regulation on registration of rural landand regulations on cadastral survey of Amhara region thatwill feel the gap in maintaining and up dating phase.

5.1.2 Aspects of land tenure principles

As it is stated repeatedly, the concept of land tenure isenshrined in the Region’s Constitution too and formalrecognition of land tenure rights, restrictions andresponsibilities are well stipulated comprehensively inthe land administration law. The system also relativelygives adequate protection for right holders and hasformal dispute resolution mechanisms. On top of this, thesystem is responding equally for all citizens. However,from the field survey those who were not satisfied withthe KLAC service (4.4%) rationalized that some KLAC

78

members are impartial especially for the poor and womenheaded HHs.

Performance gap: The adequacy of formal tenure securityand protection of rights stated in the legal frameworkfor right holders in practices is in question. Thoseinterviewed land administration experts from both sampledWoredas complained that this can be evidenced byexpropriation and compensation operations. Farmers wereevicted from and alienated their holdings with outappropriate, fair, and reasonable compensation payment infavour of public purpose. According to the same source,what “public purpose” means was ill defined inproclamation no. 46/2000. Though the phrase is clarifiedin better way in proclamation no. 133/2006 its directiveis not yet readily available116. Therefore, it was and iscontinuing to be difficult to interpret and so does toimplement and to give proper protection for the rightfulholders practically.

5.1.3 Structural definition, Institutional and organizational arrangement and cooperation between institutions

The system structure and characteristics of EPLAUA andvarious responsible institutions are defined in acomprehensive way in proclamation no. 133/2006 part fivearticle 25, 26 and 27117. EPLAUA has also developed thesecond 5 years medium term strategic plan. On the otherhand, the accountable and EPLAUA affiliated team atWoreda level is organized under the Woreda ORDA whichhinders to exercise the power and responsibilities vestedon it. This is because the Woreda ORDA and the localgovernment management body are under estimating thecomplexity nature and work load of the team. As theresult they give less emphasises in budget and otherresource allocation. Not only has this but also thereexisted role confusion between Woreda EPLAUT and Woredaregular court. This problem is more complicated when wego down to the lower administrative organ.

116 ANRS, 133/2006, A. 28.117 ANRS, 133/2006, A. 25-27.

79

For instance, in the regional judiciary system socialcourt is the lower level organ of the system which isfound in both the rural and urban settings. It is a partof the Kebele administration, but shall exercise theirjudicial functions in complete independence. It has fivelaymen judges in all of each three are to preside incases before the court. The material jurisdiction of thesocial court is presented in article 14 of proclamation20/1997. According to this provision the powers andresponsibilities of the social court among othersincludes dealing about disputes involving claims of landpossessions within the rural kebeles of the region118. Onthe other hand, the KLAC also has similarresponsibilities like administering the land found in thekebele jurisdiction, register and keeps documents of theland holder, and even dealing about land acquisitionissues119.

Performance gap: from the move of the Amhara rural landregistration proceedings one can draw that there is aserious lack of coordination and communication among theresponsible organs at all level though at the lower isworsening. The mandate of each separate entity whichdeals with rural land is not well publicized for allpotential stakeholders, closely monitored, and followedup. It could also possible to conclude that thecontribution of potential stakeholders except the farmersto the system was found to be minimal and insignificantrather their impact was immense negatively.

5.1.4 Involvement of private sector

With regard to this issue, since the private sector isunder developed pertinent to surveying and cadastre,their involvement in the Amhara rural land registrationis null.

5.1.5 System accessibility

Regarding accessibility of the system to the localpeople, the survey and interview results have shown that118 ANRS, 20/1997, A. 14.119 ANRS, 133/2006, A. 27.

80

the public can have access to the system locally. Asmentioned in the survey result section, about 58 percentof the respondents are considering the SKLA and KLAC aretheir primary sources of information about theirholdings. This figure is goes down to 23 percent to theWoreda EPLAUT and even more down to7 percent to EPLAUA assource of information. Surprisingly, around 22 percent ofthe respondents reported that the book of holdings whichis found in their hands is considered as source ofinformation. Besides, the local community has free accessto all EPLAUA’s structure irrespective of their socialstatus and public connection, as it was reported. Fromthis one can deduce that the principle ofdecentralization is suitable to the local circumstancesand its potential benefits are well understood andappreciable by the local community.

Performance gap: Even if the system is arranged andaccessible to the local community pertinent to physicalproximity, the members of KLAC who execute EPLAUA’sresponsibility at this level was seemed inaccessible.This is to mean that members of this organ aredischarging this complex and big responsibility freely.No fee is delivered to compensate their public duties.This discourages the committee members to serve thecommunity regularly and makes them inaccessible. On theother hand, there is a fear that this might cause andsources of corruption.

5.1.6 Freedom and accountability

As stated earlier, according to proclamation no. 47/2000part two Article 3(1-2) EPLAUA is established as anautonomous body having its juridical personality underthis proclamation and shall accountable to the executivecommittee of the region and the president. The recentstructural adjustment shows EPLAUA is accountable to theregional Cabinet which was accountable to BOARD of theregion formerly.

On the other hand, just like the other organizationalsystem of the region EPLAUA is not ultimately free frompolitical manipulation though it has power to deliver

81

binding decisions within its own jurisdiction which canbe contested with limited appeal to the judiciary system.Despite this fact EPLAUA has also relatively a room todevelop its own operation especially at regional level.

Performance gap: the regional government’s managementbody of the institutions were seemed leaving very littleroom for the internal management of the institutions.This also holds true in EPLAUA at all level. This couldbe evidenced by decisions regarding the structure of anorganization like EPLAUA and staffing is made by theregional Bureau of Capacity Building (BOCB), which has noor little knowledge about the concept of landadministration system. This is specially happened duringthe recent region wide structural adjustments thatresulted in reshuffling civil servants from oneinstitution to another one with little consideration tocompetence and experience lost in that particularorganization. This restructuring was created a big burdenon newly established institutions like EPLAUA.

5.1.7 Legality and legitimacy

As stated in the review literature part, formal rightsimply an ability to draw on the state’s enforcementinstitutions. However, the institutions to implementthese rights need to combine among others it includeslegality and legitimacy. To this end, land legislationshould seek to bridge legality and legitimacy and toprovide an enabling framework for effective, equitableand sustainable local practice. Hence, with this regard,EPLAUA is established as legal entity to execute itsmandate vested in it by proclamation no. 47/2000.According to the words of the Woreda land administrationstaffs, the legality and legitimacy of this newly formedinstitution is tremendous and appreciable among the localcommunity. Besides, the survey result has shown that thelevel of legitimacy and decision enforceability of theKebele LAC is high within its own jurisdictions (78.4percent). On top of this, 16.2 percent of the respondentssaid that moderately and the remaining 5.4 percent

82

reported that there is low level of legitimacy andenforceability of LAC among the Kebeles inhabitants.

Performance gap: even if the legality and legitimacy ofthis formal system among the general public is promising,there is a fear that this might be degraded shortlyunless the necessary measures have taken. This is becauselack of some basic enforcing legal instruments likecadastral registration and land use regulation on onehand, and delaines or inability to implement and enforceits decisions timely and accordingly on the other hand,could minimize the community’s confidence relaying on itas legal and competent institution and so does itslegitimacy.

5.1.8 Human resource and technological development

EPLAUA has started to implement its mandate withoutproper and sufficient number of personnel irrespective oftheir professional background and experiences. No one hashad land administration system background. According tothe planning department of EPLAUA, from more than 2100posts in EPLAUA, only 882 positions are occupied as of2005. The major professional actors who were and areinvolving in the system includes Foresters, Geographers,Agricultural extensionists, Soil conservation experts,and General agriculturalists, etc. But since itsfoundation through ‘learning by doing’ EPLAUA hasdeveloped a way of working that can be taken as a rolemodel for those who didn’t start and/or has alreadystarted such a system having similar socio-economicdevelopment. This is achieved through short term on thejob training, seminars and workshops for the personnel atall level though the endeavour with this regard is notsatisfactory.

Table 14. EPLAUA personnel profile for Amhara Regionalstate at all levels

StaffIdentity

Education TotalPHD MSc BSc Diploma Certifi

cateRegional 1 19 18 44 32 114

83

staffZonalstaff

- 4 4 2 - 10

Woredastaff

- 4 55 368 331 758

Total 1 27 79 412 363 882Source: Environmental Protection land administration anduse authority (2005)

Nowadays, about 23 students were and are trained in landmanagement and 2 in Geodesy at masters’ level in KTHSweden with SIDA budgetary support. In the 2006/2007academic year the Bahir Dar University (BDU) which isfound at the capital of the region has opened a landadministration department under law faculty and admitted60 students for the first time. The department curriculumis objectively designed to be centre of excellence inland administration and trained students who acquaintedwith skills of land administration system that can be aninput to the building up of the system in the regionparticularly and in the nation at large. The curriculumhas four main tracks, namely, Land administration,Geodesy, Law and Economics with total credit hours of 143to be accomplished in four years study. With regard totechnology and development EPLAUA has started tointroduce new surveying instruments like GPS-receiver,handle and deferential GPS, Total station, and Topo-cad,Auto-cad and ArcView- GIS soft wares. It has alsodeveloped home made application software called ISLA toaid the computerized register system.

Performance gap: Despite these endeavours there is stilla critical shortage of skilled Staff in EPLAUA at alllevels this is specially evidenced at Woreda level. Fromthe field observation and interview of the Woredaexperts, it was reported that both the sampled Woredas inthis study were understaffed; even those who are workingcurrently have no proper educational background andexperiences. This problem was worsening with frequentstructural adjustment and instability of personnel insearch of better salary and benefits. On the other hand,members of Kebele and Sub-Kebele land administrationcommittees who are considered as the implementation

84

engine of the system have no the required knowledgeespecially with regard to updating and maintenance of theregister and not remunerated as well. In short, the onthe job training and seminars for different potentialstakeholders including its own personnel was not foundadequate. On the other hand, EPLAUA is financiallylimited to buy and introduce new surveying technologicalinstruments and IT hardware and software.

5.2 LEGAL EVALUATION AREA

5.2.1 Transparency and predictability

As it is clearly stated in the review literature part ofthis study, the most important characteristics to upholdtenure security is perhaps transparency andpredictability of the system. For instance, parties whohave some sort of interest to land (ownership, use rightsor other secondary rights) must be able to foresee thelegal consequences of their action. This fundamentalprinciple is stated in the regional constitution article12. With this regard, the proclamation no. 133/2006stated that with out sufficient and legal reason, it isforbidden to use the rural land without registering andtaking the necessary rural land holding certificate120. Onthe directives for the implementation of the firstregistration it stipulated that those who, without havinga book of holding, are found using the rural land afterone year since the expire of the time limit for theissuance of book of holding shall be deemed to haverelinquished their holding voluntarily121. Or else it isconsidered as offence to the law and will lead to takenoff the holding.

On the other hand, from the field survey we canunderstand that most of the respondents seemed tounderstand the consequences of not registering theirholdings. From the total respondents who made anytransfer since first registration conducted about 87percent of the HHs reported that they have alreadyreported the change and the remaining did not. Their main

120 ANRS, 133/2006, A. 24.121 EPLAUA, 2003, s.2(7.2).

85

justification to do so was to acquire legal protectionand tenure security for their holdings. A considerablenumber of respondents also reported that they werewilling to report because registering changes can alsofacilitate future transactions and transfer through welland donation. However, there were respondents who madetransfer and not reported because they don’t know whatthe legal consequences of their action (13%).

From the Gozamen Woreda land administration expertsinterview we can understand that the transparency of theland registration proceedings is publicly known andassured by their active participation in the operation.Without their active participation it was difficult toregister even one Kebele. However, the predictability ofthe law is not well understood as it would have beenamong the community. The experts reported the followingwhat will be the legal consequences of informal practicesof land sale in their Woreda.

First, as any bodies of ordinary people, they heardrumours of such practices especially in the periphery ofurban centres and pre-urban areas. However, there is noeven one case reported officially with respect to thisissue. The reason behind this was the farmers knew theconstitution as well as the regional land administrationlaw that prohibited selling of land and if they did so,they knew that they will be penalized. Therefore, even ifthey did it, they were not willing to bring and reportthe case officially to the team. On the other hand, it was reported from Wogera Woredaland administration staffs that from the total 38 ruralKebeles that are found in the Woreda 5 Kebeles were notyet registered. The main reason for not registered wasthere were a huge number of underground/illegal landsales which was against the law since the recent officialadministrative land redistribution in the region.According to the same source this problem was beyond thecapacity and mandate of the Woreda EPLAUT. The samesource remarked that as a matter of fact the systemdoesn’t have any legal readymade procedure to formalizesuch kind of informal/illegal holdings at a moment. The

86

case was reported even to EPLAUA and the local governmentbut no solution or corrective measures have been takenuntil the interview was conducted. This circumstance hasnegative impact on the neighbouring Kebeles and creatinghindrance for better implementation of the operation allover the Woreda.

Performance gap: Here the impression is that thelegislation on paper and the practice on the ground didnot match. This can be clearly evidenced by the casestated above in Wogera Woreda. The registration programfor those Kebeles was scheduled for three consecutiveyears but the team neither conduct the expectedregistration in those Kebeles nor took the stated counteroffensive actions in the legislation.

5.2.2 Equal and fair treatment

The right to equality and access to justice are grantedto all citizens as stated both on the Federal (Article 25and 37) and regional constitutions (Article 27 and 38).As presented in the result section of this study it wasreported that all citizens have equal, impartial, andunrestricted access to present claims and complaints toboth EPLAUA structures and the civil court systemregarding land issues irrespective of their privateposition and public connection. Despite the fact that theregional legislation provides special care for womenheaded HHs families, and other disadvantaged groups thesurvey result shows those who were not totally satisfied(4.4% from the total) by the KLAC services while somemembers of the KLAC were impartial especially for thepoor, disabled and women headed HH families.

5.2.3 Rapid Adjudication and Enforceability

In the preamble of the re-organization the executiveorgans of the ANRS and the determination of their powersand duties proclamation no. 60/2001 the issue of rapidadjudication has stated as follows122:

Direct and manage over the development activities of the RegionalState in a coordinated and systematized way and to that effect, ensure

122 ANRS, 60/2001

87

that high-quality and efficient public service mechanisms are put inplace throughout the region.

Developing and implementing simple and efficient formaladministrative procedure facilitates rapid adjudicationof tenure security problems. However, the simplicity ofthe formal procedure do not affecting the standard offairness negatively. As it is indicated in the surveyresult section among those who reported that they werepartially satisfied (38%) said that inefficient and longbureaucratic procedure is the reason for partialsatisfaction by the KLAC. On the contrary to this,members of the KLAC reported that unless the compliantrender the necessary information and supporting documentsthe procedure to provide services pertinent to landregistration and other complain is too short and simple.But what makes it difficult probably is lack ofappropriate knowledge on the part of the interested partyas to how present his or her demand with necessarydocuments. The same idea was reflected from theinterviewed Woreda land administration experts.

The legality of EPLAUA is significantly good within thelocal community though enforceability of its bindingdecisions is less worthy. According to the Woreda landadministration experts’ interview result with regard tothe legislation, it is reported that the landadministration law is somehow enforceable. The samesource further elaborates that there is no regulation athand to implement the law accordingly for a moment.Therefore, it is difficult to implement and enforce theland administration and use law as it would have been. Incontrary to this, from the farmer’s survey we observedthat 78.4 percent of the total respondents reported thatthe level of legitimacy and decision enforceability ofthe KLAC is high within their own jurisdictions. In theadministrative structure of the Region the KebeleAdministrative body in the rural kebeles and the civilpolice are responsible enforcing institutions for bothadministrative and judicial decisions.

Performance gap: Lack of clearly stated working guidelines, standardized formats, and absence of clarity on itboth on the part of service provider and the farmers

88

makes adjudication a bit lagging and demands extraexpenses on both parties. See concert evidences for thiscase under maintenance and up dating sub topic.

Lack of competence on the part of the KebeleAdministrative body to enforce decisions made by KLAC andWoreda EPLAUT makes its decisions less trusted andcredible by the local community (at least 21.6%).According to the members of the KLAC this was evidencedby the re-encroachment of communal lands after boundaryadjudication and registration have done. Lack of the landadministration law regulation also hinders theimplementation of the law accordingly. This is especiallyevidenced by the land use provisions which stipulatemeasures to be taken against offensive actions like notfollowing regulatory or restrictive provisions such asconservation orders and land use zoning and planningprovisions. This also holds true with regard to usingrural land without registering.

5.2.4 Consistency with customs, norms, and level of development

The land registration law and land information principlesas well as their enforcement procedures should beconsidered to be fair, legitimate and familiar among thepeople to serve. From the Woreda land administrationexperts interview we can understand that the legitimacyof the land administration law and its potential benefitstakes into account the social circumstances of the regionand the public some how understood it. Theresponsibilities and decisions’ made by EPLUAT and KLACare also consistent with the situation and level ofdevelopment.

Performance gap: There is no cadastral and landregistration law separately. The issue of landregistration is defined in a comprehensive way into theland administration law. This makes interpretation andimplementation a bit difficult and makes some confusionamong the staffs of EPLAUA, especially at Woreda andKebele level. This lack of clarity and confusion alsotraced to the local community and other potential

89

stakeholders especially in maintenance and updatingregister phases.

5.3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION AREA

5.3.1 Data acquisition

As it is stated in the previous chapter, data acquisitionin the field is cried out systematically which has acomplete coverage in a comprehensive way. In addition tothis, data collection is executed both in non-conventional and conventional registration models havinginnovative approach which means simple and costeffective. However, the conventional way of registrationwhich is supported by such surveying instruments as GPS-receiver, total station, Topo-cad surveying softer, andArcView GIS software to print maps is relatively costlyto scale up region wide. However, as shown in the resultchapter, the nature of defining and adjudicating parcelboundaries determine the potential benefit of landregistration in reducing border conflict. It was reportedthat 36 percent in Kossoye and 33 percent of therespondents in Amba Georgies Zuria Kebeles of WogeraWoreda were not benefited of being registered in reducingborder conflicts. However, contrary to this, all therespondents in the pilot Kebele of Gozamen Woredareported that they were totally benefited of beingregistered which reduced border conflicts drastically intheir Kebele. From this one can deduce that theconventional model of registration has greater power overthe non conventional one in developing confidence amongthe society to serve. This seems that the presence ofcadastral maps on one hand, and boundary marks fixedthereon at major corner of parcels on the other hand, hasgreat value and enhancing confidence among the society toserve.

On the other hand, according to both the KLAC members andWoreda land administration staffs the participation ofthe local community during the first registrationproceedings was significantly great. According to thesame source the type of data that were captured in thefirst registration was object-oriented and suits to the

90

purpose of the system with relatively good precision andreliability.

Performance gap: Though the non- conventional model ofregistration was simple and cheap, the data quality andthe information in the register and its usefulness,especially in time of boundary dispute resolution, landtransfer, etc would be limited.

5.3.2 Maintenance and updating

As mentioned in the review literature chapter, strict titleregistration systems formally guarantee all titlesinscribed, and confer the right to indemnity if a bonafide party suffers a loss because of errors in theregister. It is also said time and again that, thequality of the titles is highly dependent on the extentto which all dealings and changes in rights to landactually are recorded. In systems where there is nogenuine interest from end users to keep data accurate andup to date, seldom fulfil the expectations on the system.It is, therefore, essential that updating the propertyregister is driven from the requirements of the legalright holders.

With this notion in mind the law which govern theproperty register of Amhara region demands changes inrights to land shall keep updated. Even if it was alittle bit early to talk about the performance of thesystem with this regard, it is possible to say some thingabout it based on the recent move of the system on onehand, and the survey result on the other hand. Thelegislation demands the rightful holder of the land shallbring or initiate the transfer to the attention of theKLAC, who has to update its books of register and enterit in the certificate and pass it again this informationto the Woreda EPLAUT for similar purpose. So that theregister keeps updated and it attempted to reflect thereality on the ground. From the survey result, one canconclude that the system is user driven since thosefarmers who made transfers were reported the changes (87percent) and were willing to report future transfers (97percent).

91

Performance gap: Since there is no clearly defined andwell articulated procedures and established working guidelines as to how transfer can be reported, there is acritical lack of clarity with the staffs, the committeemembers and the affected parties too. On the other hand,lack of sketch maps of parcels in the non- conventionalmodel of registration makes updating practicallydifficult in a sense that it is practically impossible totrace and find out the name of the holder quickly; forinstance, if there is a change in parcels boundary due toproperty formation measures. Therefore, With this trendat hand and with out the most important part of the legalframework in land registration and land informationsystems i.e. comprehensive legal framework of maintenanceand updating, there is a fear that the information in theland register may deteriorate in a short time and becomeimmediately less important. Hence this is the burningissue and an urgent assignment that should be done byEPLAUA right now.

5.3.3 Safety and security

As it is shown in the background section of the studythere is an endeavour to make the system computerizedcalled ISLA. The system is implemented in two pilotWoredas since 2004. However, it was not functioning asplanned till May 2006. Reportedly, the main reasons werelack of trained personnel at the Woreda level and lack ofclose follow up from EPLAUA. Since the soft ware is homemade, and is found at infant stage, still we can say itis on system testing environment. Since May 2006 thefunction and operation of the system was resumed in thesame Woredas by giving proper training for the landadministration staff members. Since then two follow uptrip of the system operation are carried out by EPLAUA.In addition, ISLA was introduced in one additional Woredain September 2006, and reportedly, the system isoperating well with minor errors. On top of this, therewas a plan to introduce into six more Woredas in the samefiscal year.

92

Basically, the system has three main users with clear anddefined responsibilities, i.e. read only, technicians(data encoder/entry), and system administrator(authorizing and approving the entered data in thedatabase) with their own user name and pass word to login. There is a developed manual for users,administrators, and system development documentation atEPLAUA. There is no information zoning and classificationin the system for the time being. As safety and securitymeasure the system administrators shall approve theentered data and take daily backups. Backups arecurrently taken by flash memory and keeps in differentbuilding. However, backups were not sent to EPLAUA fordata consolidation in regular bases. On the other hand,while the investigator was in the field in both the pilotWoredas, it was observed and understood from theinterview that the staffs who were involved in ISLAoperation have great motive and are very enthusiastic ofthe system. With close follow up and monitoring fromEPLAUA, the system test environment result shows ISLA ispromising and user friendly to upscale region wide, andeven to country level.

On the other hand, in the manual archive system for thepurpose of safety aspects books of registers wereprepared in two copies and as mentioned above kept indifferent places. The room of archives is as much aspossible should be kept clean and dry.

Performance gap: It may be too early to comment on theperformance of the ISLA software and its operation.However, it is also possible to say about what wasobserved since its implementation at pilot level. Tobegin, there was a critical problem of personnelplanning. Some of the staffs who were trained for thispurpose were not totally involved in the operation.Reportedly, even those who have involved in the systemoperation were interrupted with other accidental andmobilization field works.

On the other hand, the data consolidation practices andestablishment of network were not started. The networkingsystem let alone to connecting the Woreda database with

93

the EPLAUA (WAN), there was no Local Area Net work (LAN)within the different departments of EPLAUA. The mainchallenge here is also to establish routines that allowdata to be transferred manually, or by e-mail, or otherpossible means. The receiving end, such as EPLAUA, willhave to ensure that Woredas backups are transferred, andthat Woreda is given resources to facilitate thetransfer. In addition, the system development is carriedout with international organization and foreign expert.This might not have a problem at the initial stage ofsystem development, however, in the long run; it could bea burden to EPLAUA for further system development andfollow up in the foreseeable future. Above all, currentlythere is no any established law for integrated landinformation system in the Region.

With regard to archive maintenance and safety in manualforms archives were poorly managed and maintained.Surprisingly in both Woredas the investigator observedthat there were fuel and Gasoline containers in thearchives room which can facilitate fire hazardous. Therooms were found in poor conditions especially this wastrue in Wogera Woreda. Archives were susceptible forinsects. Even if it was reported that the book ofregister and the field sheets were kept in differentrooms and buildings; in reality, the investigatorobserved that both archives were kept in the samebuilding and even in the same room.

5.3.4 Information dissemination

Information in the register is immediately accessible forthose potential end users in any office hour at Woredalevel where book of registers and other archives arereadily available currently. Reportedly there is no feeor commission for information services render at alllevel of EPLAUA. The environmental education preparationand dissemination service head of EPLAUA reported thathis department disseminates information related toenvironmental protection, land administration, and useissues that raise the knowledge, awareness, skill, andpublic participation among the community. According to

94

the same source 15,000 copies of bulletin, 14,490pamphlets, 12,340 posters, 10,000 leaflets, 6,000 copesof farmer’s manuals, 3,000 copies of brochures, 5,800copies of calendars, were distributed to the communityand potential stakeholders. On top of this, continuingradio programs were broadcasted for 520 minutes throughthe regional radio and 30 minutes occasional sponsorshipadvertising was broadcasted. In addition to thisresponsibilities of rightful holders of rural land areprinted on the book of holdings that serve as other meansof information dissemination. According to the surveyresult about 22% of the total respondents were recognizedthat the book of holding is serving as their primarysources of information about their holdings. In additionto this, the Woreda experts reported that a number ofeducational meetings were carried out in differentoccasions to raise community awareness in the firstregistration proceedings.

Performance gap: Despite this awareness raisingendeavours of EPLAUA at all level the community as wellas other actors level of awareness especially with regardto reporting changes occurred after first registrationseemed less understood. This was because EPLAUA seemedfocusing and advocating only for the purpose of firstregistration operations.

6. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

6.1 CONCLUSSION

The study has attempted to answer the following research questions:

95

How the rural land registration and landinformation system is organized and in whatlegal bases is being operated?

How the rural farming society is reacting tothe rural land registration and landinformation system proceedings?

What are the contributions of other organswhich deal with land issue to rural landregistration and land information systemproceedings?

What are the good practices and the gaps in therural land registration and land informationsystem proceedings?

From the move of Amhara rural land registration and landinformation exercise one could conclude that this newsystem is a welcome operation among different potentialstakeholders especially within the rural farmingcommunity. In addition EPLAUA’s decentralizedorganizational arrangement is found to be suitable to thelocal circumstances and its potential benefits are wellunderstood and appreciable by the local community.

It could also be possible to conclude that EPLAUA’sstrategy to address tenure insecurity problem through aninnovative and pro-poor approach has significantlyconsidered as good practice of the system. On top ofthis, the process of reviewing and amending the previousland administration law and other related legislation hasshown that the iterative nature of the system by which itattempted to adjust itself and accommodate new demands ofpotential stakeholders. On the other hand, thoughsuccessful land registration and LIS will require theassumption of a very heavy, and often thankless,coordination of responsibilities between differentstakeholders, EPLAUA seems hesitant to take the lead toestablish a smooth coordination and communication amongdifferent stakeholders.

96

6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

As a recommendation the following particulars shall begiven due consideration by the concerned body so that thesystem could be more efficient, reliable and adaptable tonew circumstances.

Participation in policy formulation: In any developmentendeavor the degree of participation of different actorsis the main success factor. Experience has shown that thehigher the actors’ participation in policy formulationthe greater the result of the predetermined objectiveswould be. Therefore, participation allows for anegotiated aggregation of local demands and providesinputs for an adaptation/ redefinition of national andlocal policies in order to meet diverse demands ofactors. This enables to strengthen the dialogue andmutual trust among the various actors and between theactors and the institution.

Aspects of land tenure principles: The promised anddefined rights, restrictions, and responsibilities torural land holders shall be respected and implemented inpractice as designed both by the Regional Government,EPLAUA, and the right holders too. Otherwise, thepromised tenure security will be jeopardized.

Institutional and organizational arrangement andcooperation between institutions: The decentralisedorganizational arrangement of EPLAUA should be

97

strengthened by giving autonomy and adequate financialsupport at all level. Such type of locally basedinstitutional arrangement represents the main entry pointin a collaborative attempt to influence social, cultural,and economical changes through recognition of formalproperty rights to rural land holders. Attention alsoshould be paid to create coordination and cooperationamong different potential stakeholders. To this end theresponsibilities of each potential stakeholders whichdeals with rural land shall be well publicized, closelymonitored, and followed up through different media. Tocreate strong bondage and cooperation EPLAUA shall takethe lead and organize a forum at Regional level. Thisforum should involve both local and regional governmentaloffices, NGOs, private sector, professional associations,and other civic societies and even national bodies. Humancapacity building and upgrading of staffs’ academicstatus should also be given urgent attention. This mightcreate stability of staffs within EPLAUA especially atWoreda level.

Legal Issue: The process of amending existed and underdrafting legislation related to rural land shouldconsider and reflect the four basic principles ofeffective legal framework, and shall be respect andimplement accordingly. In such practices attention shouldalso be paid to the coordination and consideration ofeffects on provisions in other related laws. In additionto this, both service provider and service users shouldhave a clear understanding of those legislations andprocedures. Experience in different countries has shownthat a well defined legal framework and administrativeprocedures reflects transparency and actors can easilypredict their action and so does to adjudicate andenforce.

Data Acquisition: to strengthen and upgrade theusefulness of the data quality and the information in theregister of the non- conventional model of registrationto boundary disputes and transfers, it would better toindicate the relative location of parcels at least ontopographic sketch maps. On top of this, upgrading andimproving into conventional model of registration at

98

later stage should also be rational and would not renderthe non-conventional work completely useless. This couldbe possible through introducing the ISLA into differentWoredas as quick as possible and as resources allowed todo so.

Maintenance and updating: the quality of the titles ishighly dependent on the extent to which all dealings andchanges in rights to land actually are recorded. Insystems where there is no genuine interest from end usersto keep data accurate and up to date, seldom fulfill theexpectations on the system. It would, therefore,essential to raise awareness among the landadministration staffs, members of KLAC and SKLAC, and thegeneral public at large about reporting changes, itspotential benefits, legal consequences of not registered,and the procedure as well. In addition, a legal frameworkwhich deals with maintenance and updating, i.e. the underdrafting registration and property formation regulationshould be ratified and put into place urgently. Besides,it would better to look for local company for furthersystem development and follow up of ISLA. This might givea chance for EPLAUA in minimizing cost and enables thesystem to be closely followed up in time.

Safety and security: Proper staffing and personnelplanning should be followed for ISLA. Data consolidationand networking should be started and tested now atEPLAUA. Otherwise, the system development process mightbe more complicated and costly later on. Attention shouldalso be paid to the adoption of legislation forintegrated land information system. On top of these,safety and security roles and procedures should befollowed strictly. Besides, to reduce damages on themanual archives, it would better to digitize byintroducing ISLA. Last but not least, back ups and copiesof books of register and field sheets should be kept indifferent buildings, even in different rooms.

99

REFERENCES

Abebe, S. and Mansberger, R. (2003) Land Policy, Urban-Rural Interaction and Land Administration Differentiationin Ethiopia. 2nd FIG Regional Conference held in Marrakech, Morocco, December 2-5.

Abebe, S. (2004) A Reality Check on the Quest for TenureSecurity and Land Administration in Ethiopia.2nd FIGRegional Conference held in Nairobi, Kenya, Dec.2-5. .http://www.fig.net/commission7/nairobi_2004/papers/ts_03_1_abebehaile.pdf

Action Aid Ethiopia. (2006) Policies and Practices forSecuring and Improving Access to and Control over Land inEthiopia. Paper presented at FAO International Conferenceon Agrarian Reform and Rural Development held in PortoAlegre, Brazil, March 7-10.

Admassie, Y. (1995) “Twenty Years to Nowhere: Property Rights, Landmanagement and Conservation in Ethiopia.” Department ofSociology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.

100

Alemu, T. (1999) “Land Tenure and Soil Conservation: Evidence fromEthiopia.” Ekonomiska Studier, Göteborgs Universitet(Kompendiet Göteborg), Sweden.

ANRS (1999) AMHARA NATIONAL REGIONAL STATE CONSERVATIONSTRATEGY DOCUMENT, BOARD, Bureau of Agriculture and Ruraldevelopment, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.

ANRS (2005) THE 2005 DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS OF AMHARAREGION. BOFED, Bureau of Finance and EconomicDevelopment, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.

Augustinus, C. (2004) An Overview of Land Tools in Sub Saharan Africa: Past, Present And Future. Land and Tenure Section, UN Habitat, Nairobi.

Backström, L. (2005) REPORT BY THE TECHNICAL ADVISOR FORDEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A LAND ADMINISTRATIONSYSTEM IN THE AMHARA NATIONAL REGIONAL STATE.ORGUT,BAHIR DAR, ETHIOPIA.

Baranyi, S., Deere, C., Morales, M. (2004) LAND &DEVELOPMENT IN LATIN AMERICA: Issues and Openings for Policy Research.North-South Institute/IDRC, Canada, ISBN 1-55250-153-1.

Barnes, G. (1990) A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK FORCADASTRE-BASED LAND INFORMATION SYSTEMS (CLIF) IN DEVELPINGCOUNTRIES, Land Tenure Centre University of Wisconsin,Madison.

Berhanu, A. and Feyera, A. (2005) Land Registration in Amhara Region, Ethiopia. Russell press, UK, ISBN 184369 5766.

Dale, P. and McLaughlin, J. (1988) Land InformationManagement: An Introduction with Special Reference to Cadastral Problemsin Third World Countries. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK. ISBN,0198584059.

Dale, P. and McLaughlin, J. (1996) Land Administration. OxfordUniversity press, UK, ISBN 0198233906.

101

Deininger, K. and Binswanger, H. (1999) The Evaluationof the World Bank’s Land Policy: Principles,Experiences, and Future Challenges, in The World BankResearch Observer, vol. 14, no. 2 pp. 247–76, The World Bank, NewYork and Geneva.

Enemark, S. (2005) Understanding the Land ManagementParadigm. Paper presented at FIG Commission 7 Symposiumon Innovative Technologies for Land Administration,Madison, Wisconsin, USA, June 19-25. Retrieved date March8 2006 fromhttp://www.fig.net/commission7/madison_2005/symposium_papers/ts01_03_enemark.pdf

Enemark, S. and Sevatdal, H. (1999) Cadastres, LandInformation Systems and Planning- is decentralisation asignificant key to sustainable development? Paperpresented at FIG conference on Land Tenure and CadastralInfrastructures for Sustainable Development held inMelbourne, Australia, October 24-27. Retrieved date May26 2006 fromhttp://www.fig.net/figun/sessions/session2/enemark.pdf

EPLAUA (2003) The Directive Issued for the implementation of Rural LandAdministration and Use Proclamation No. 46/2000. EPLAUA, Bahr Dar,Ethiopia, Environmental protection, land administrationand use investigatority.

Fourie, C. and Nino .O. F. (1999) Cadastre and LandInformation Systems for Decision-Makers in the DevelopingWorld. Paper Presented at the UN-FIG Conference on LandTenure and Cadastral Infrastructures for SustainableDevelopment, Melbourne, Australia, October 25-27.

Holden, S. and Yohannes, H. (2002) Land Redistribution,Tenure Insecurity, and Intensity of Production: A Studyof Farm Householdes in Southern Ethiopia.

Jensen, U., Kalbro, T., Kjellson, B., Larsson, G.,Mattsson, H., Millgard, O., Victorin, A., Widmark, J.(1997) Land Law in Action, The Swedish Ministry for foreignAffairs and KTH. Stockholm, ISBN 9174960989.

102

Kaufmann, J. (2000) Future Cadastre: Seminar onCadastral System, Land Administration and SustainableDevelopment. 3-5 May, Bogotá, Colombia. Retrieved dateDecember 04, 2005, fromhttp://www2.swisstopo.ch/fig-wg71/doc/bogota00/bogota.htm

Kaufmann, J. and Steudler, D. (1998) Cadastre 2014 - A Vision fora Future Cadastral System. FIG Commission 7, Switzerland.

Larsson, G. (1997) LAND MANAGEMENT PUBLIC POLICY, CONTROLANDPARTICIPATION. Byggforskningsradet, Stockholm. ISBN 19-540-5783-3.

Larsson, G. (2000) Land Registration and Cadastral Systems: Tools forLand Information and Management. KTH, Stockholm, Sweden, ISBN0582089522.

Mattsson, H. (2004) Property Rights and Registration in aPerspective of Change. In Real Estate Planning andDevelopment, KTH, Stockholm, Sweden.

Mattsson, H. and Osterberg, T. (2004) Swedish Land andCadastral Legislation. KTH and LMV, Stockholm, Sweden, ISSN0348-9469.

OBA (2002) Land Registration System Updated. in Ontario barAssociation, Vol. 29, No. 2, Canada. The Ontario BarAssociation. October 25-27.

ORGUT (2004) Implementation Report of Information System for LandAdministration System. ORGUT, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.

Quay, V. (2005) Ownership of Land Holdings in Rural Scotland. Scottish Executive Centre Research Unit, Edinburgh, ISBN 0755932560

Rahmato, D. (1984) Agrarian Reform in Ethiopia. Scandinavian Institute of African Studies, Uppsala, Sweden.

Rahmato, D. (1994a) Land Tenure and Land policy inEthiopia after the Derg. Proceedings of the SecondWorkshop of the Land Project, Working paper on EthiopianDevelopment No. 8. The Centre for Environment and

103

Development, University of Trondheim, Norway andInstitute of Development Research, Addis Abab University,Ethiopia.

Rahmato, D. (2003) Access to Resources and Livelihood Insecurity. Forumfor Social Studies, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Sarat, A., Douglas, L., Umphrey, M. (2003) The Place of Law.University of Michigan Press, Michigan ISBN 047211350X.

Siedman, A., Robert, S., and Abeyeskere, A. (2001)Legislative Drafting for Democratic Social Change a Manual for Drafters,Kluwer law International,

Sikor, T. (2005) Politics of rural land registration inpost-socialist societies: Contested titling in villagesof Northwest Vietnam. In Land Use Policy, Vol.22, Vietnam.

Simpson, S. R. (1976) Land Law and Registration. CambridgeUniversity press, London.

SOU (2002) Law and Information Technology Swedish View. SOU,Stockholm, Sweden. ISBN 9138218038.

Tuladhar, A. (2002) Developing Framework for Cadastre andLand Registration System in Land AdministrationOrganizations. Proceedings of a Symposium held by FIGJoint Commission 1 and 7, Washington DC. USA, April 19-26.

UNECA (1998) An integrated geo-information system withemphasis on cadastre and land information systems fordecision makers in Africa. Revised by the ad-hoc expertgroup meeting held at United Nations Economic Commissionfor Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

UNECE (1996) Land Administration Guidelines with Special Reference tocountries in Transition. UN publications, New York and Geneva,ISBN 9211166446. United Nation Economic Commission forEurope.

104

UNECE (2005) Land Administration in the UNECE Region: DevelopmentTrends and Main Principles. UN publications, New York andGeneva. United Nation Economic Commission for Europe.

UN-HABITAT (2003) Handbook on Best Practices, Security of Tenure andAccess to Land. UN-HABITAT, Nairobi, Kenya. ISBN 9211314461.United Nations Centre for Human Settlements program.

Van der Molen, P. (2006) Unconventional Approach: TheNeed for an International Research Agenda. Paperpresented at 5th FIG Regional Conference, Accra, Ghana,March 8-11. Retrieved date June 13 2006 fromhttp://www.oicrf.org/

Van der Molen, P. and Mishra, S. (2006) The Importance ofEnhancing Land Registration and cadastre: Some GeneralConsiderations. Background paper prepared to FIGConference, New Delhi, January 31- February 1. Retrieveddate June 13 2006 from http://www.oicrf.org/

Warnest, M., Rajabifard, A. and Williamson, I.P. () ACollaborative Approach to Building National SDI inFederated State Systems: Case Study of Australia.Retrieved date 03 June 2006 fromhttp://www.fig.net/pub/cairo/papers/ts_12/ts12_01_warnest_etal.pdf

WB (1999) Legal Impediments to Effective Rural Land Relations in EasternEurope and Central Asia. World Bank Publications, WashingtonDc. ISBN 082134501X. The World Bank.

Williamson, I. P. (2001) Land Administration “BestPractice” providing the infrastructure for land policy implementation.Retrieved date 26 May 2006 fromhttp://www.sli.unimelb.edu.au/research/publications/IPW/2_01Williamson_LUP.pdf

Williamson, I. P. and Ting, L. (1999) Land Administrationand Cadastral Trends –A Framework for Re-Engineering. Paper presented at FIG conference on Land Tenure and Cadastral Infrastructures for Sustainable Development

105

held in Melbourne, Australia, October 24-27. Retrieved date 26 May 2006 from http://www.sli.unimelb.edu.au/research/publications/IPW/LandAdminCadTrends.pdf

Zevenbergen, J. (2002) Systems of Land Registration Aspects andEffects. Netherlands Geodetic Commission, Delft,Netherlands. ISBN 9061322774.

Acts and Other Statutes

The Civil Code of 1960, Imperial Ethiopian Government.

Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia proclamation toprovide rural land administration and use, the House ofrepresentative, 456/2005.

Proclamation Issued to Determine Rural landadministration and use in Amhara National Region, theCouncil of the Amhara National Regional State, 46/2000.

Proclamation to provide for the Reallotement of thePossession of Rural Land in Amhara National Region, theCouncil of the Amhara National Regional State, 16/1996.

Proclamation to amend the Administration and Use of theRural Land in the Amhara National Region, the Council ofthe Amhara National Regional State, 133/2006.

Environmental protection, land administration and useauthority establishment proclamation, the Council of theAmhara National Regional State, 47/2000.

Electronics links

http://www.oicrf.orghttp://www.agrar.hu-berlin.de/wisola/ipw/plr/Dateien/sikabstr25.htmhttp://www.pgs.nlhttp://www.ibmws1.ipf.tuwien.ac.athttp://www2.swisstopo.ch/fig-wg71/doc/bogota00/bogota.htm

106

http://www.oas.org/osde/puplications/unit/oea53e/ch011.htmhttp://www.sli.unimelb.edu.au/research/publications/IPW/LandAdminCadTrends.pdf

Appendix I

This questionnaire is prepared for the EPLAUT of AmharaRegion. The objective of the questionnaire is to collectreflections of the staffs that are involved in the ruralland registration and land information system in theregion at Woreda level.

Woreda___________ Respondent Title _______________

1. What type of formats do you use from dataacquisition to certification?

2. In what language are they written?3. Do you think that the contents of each format are

quiet enough for its purpose and easy to use? Ifnot, point out the deficiencies?

107

4. How many copies are there? Where is each kept?5. How can we differentiate a special/legal form from a

forgery one?6. What registration or data acquisition procedures are

in use during first registration, transfer,subdivision? (Please answer separately for each). Isoral evidence also needed?

7. Is local terminology used to describe thearrangements that people have agreed?

8. Does the procedures you are using results inreliable information?

9. How data maintenance is carried out?10. How lost documents replaced or maintained?11. How maintenance of archives is done?12. How safe the maintenance of archives? 13. The land administration law stipulates that

selling is forbidden. Now you are trying toformalize rural land holding. It is also some howbelieved that there may be underground/illegalselling or buying of land. So what mechanism do youuse to formalize such kind of informal land holding?

14. If there are no managing mechanisms to this problem, what will be the fate of those holdings andholders?

15. Are there any reported requests from rightful land holders regarding changes in rights after firstregistration is carried out?

16. If yes, how many cases are reported? And how many of them are registered and how many are not registered?

17. Who initiate those requests and why? 18. Is there any updating procedure and guide line

while you are executing requests of changes inrights to land? If not, how can be the informationreliable?

19. How accessible are those official documents tothe general public?

20. It has been a while that you have started todistribute land holding certificates. Do thecertificates provide sufficient legal support andserve as primary evidence in claiming rights to landto the possessors, especially in court cases?

108

21. How other organizations are supporting the ongoing registration proceedings and establishment ofland information system in your Woreda?

22. It is clear that the Kebele land administrationcommittee is working with out any payment for atleast 3 years. Do you think that this arrangement isworking properly specially from sustainable point ofview?

23. What shall be done for better success with respect to the committee sustainable functionality?

24. How far the existing institutional set up(EPLAUT and KLAC) is legally accepted and decisionsmade by them are enforceable and implemented by thelocal community?

25. If the organs have no legitimacy and theirdecision is not enforceable by the local community,what are the reasons behind this fact and what doyou propose for better success?

26. How many possessors and possessions are registered in your Woreda (please specify by possession type and if possible by sex with respect to private possession)? How many first level certificate is distributed and how many book of possession?

27. Now you are trying to computerize the registry system. How many kebeles have you entered up to now?How long it takes to do so per kebele given that theexisting manpower? How many people are engaged in ISLA activities?

28. What are the advantages of computerized system over the manual registry system?

29. What difficulties that do you face in changing the manual system into computerized system?

30. How many workers are employed (by profession and by sex)? And how may of them get proper short term and long term training?

31. What difficulties do you face during dataacquisition, maintenance, updating, and informationdissemination as a whole?

Thank you very much!!!

109

110

Appendix II

Questionnaire for farmers’ interview.

1. Do you have land holdings?a) Yes b) No

2. If your answer for question no. 1 is “Yes” have youregistered your holdings?

a) Yes b) No3. If your answer for question no. 2 is “No” what is

your main reason? (Please specify)4. Who initiate the registration?

a) Government b) By my own self5. When do you register it? 6. Where do you register it?

a) At the Woreda b) At the Kebele c) Atthe sub-kebele d)Other

7. Who register it?a) Surveyor from Woreda b) The kebele

main LAUCc) Members of sub-kebele LAUC d) If any please

specify8. What were your responsibilities while your land

holding is registered?a. Applying for registrationb. Showing the correct boundaries of my land

holdingsc. Coming up with an agreement about

boundaries with neighboursd. Checking all my land holdings are

registered correctlye. If any please specify

9. Do you think that you are executing yourresponsibilities since registration conductedaccordingly? a) Yes b) No

10. If your answer is “Yes” what are the thingsthat you have done?

a) Take care of boundary marksb) Proper land management and utilizationc) Proper handling of book of holdingd) If any please mention

111

11. What benefits are you realized beingregistered?

a) get legal protection and security for mayholding

b) reduced border conflictsc) facilitate transferd) if any please mentione) I didn’t get any benefit

12. Have you made any change in your holdingthrough different means of transfer since firstregistration conducted? a) Yes b) No

13. If “Yes”, have you reported the change forregistration? a) Yes b) No

14. If your answer is “No” for Q 14, what was yourmain reason? (Please specify)

15. If you didn’t made any change in your holdingthrough different means of transfer since firstregistration conducted but if you will make, are youwilling to report it? A) Yes b) No

16. If “Yes” what is your main reason? (Pleasespecify)

17. If “No” Please mention your main reason?18. Have you received book of holdings? a) Yes b)

No19. If “No” what was the main reason not to

receive? (Please specify)

20. Are you willing to pay for registration andbook of land holding?

a) Yes fully b) Yes partially c) If the stateorder d) Not at all

21. If your answer for question no. 20 is “Yesfully”, what is your main reason? (Please specify).

22. If your answer for question no. 20 is “Yespartially”, what is your main justification? (Pleasespecify).

23. If your answer for question no. 20 is letter“C”, what is your main reason? (Please specify).

24. If your answer for question no. 20 is letter“D”, what is your mean reason? (Please specify)

25. How and where do you find access to yourholding related information and documents?

112

a) Apply to the Woreda EPLUAT officeb) Apply to the KLAC officec) Apply to the SKLACd) If any mention

26. How far the KLAC is legally accepted andenforceable of its decision among the community toserve? a) Low b) Moderate c) High

27. If “Low” please mention the mean reason?28. If “Moderate” Please mention the mean reason?29. Do you think that you are satisfied with the

service provided by KLAC?a) No b) Partially c) Satisfied d) I haven’t

experience it30. If “No”, please mention your mean reason?31. If “Partially”, please mention your mean

reason?32. How far The EPLUAT is legally accepted and

enforceable of its decision among the community toserve? a) Low b) Moderate c) High

33. If “Low” please mention the mean reason?34. If “Moderate” Please mention the mean reason?35. Do you think that you are satisfied with the

service provided by EPLAUT?a) No b) Partially c) Satisfied d) I haven’t

experience it36. If “No”, please mention your mean reason?37. If “Partially”, please mention your mean

reason?38. If you have any other ideas Please forward

Thank you very much!!!

113

Appendix III

Questions for focus group discussion with members of KLAC1. What were your responsibilities during

first registration and on wards ingeneral?

2. How do you entertaining farmers’ complain?3. How do you cooperate with the Kebele

Administration and Social court? 4. How do you compromise the complexity and

work load of land administration exercisesand your personal farming activities?

5. To what extent the KLAC is recognized bythe community to serve?

6. Are the committee decisions enforceableespecially with regard to adjudicated anddemarcated borders?

7. What were your main problems since firstregistration conducted?

8. What shall be done for better success inthe future?

114