Transforming Compulsory Purchase And Compensation Institutions In Tanzania

Conventional institutions governing compulsory purchase and compensation are probably the main cause of objections to land acquisition exercises. These were made, not from a contracting process (Libecap, 1989); rather they were and are still an imposition from higher levels of government. Institutions are the framework within which human interaction takes place (North, 1990). This study looks from different angles, actual losses that pastoral and agro-pastoral communities suffer as a result of compulsory land acquisition with a view to identifying institutional deficiencies, if any, which might be a source of proliferation of objections as regards compulsory land acquisitions. Existing institutional arrangements are rigid and tailored in such a way that compensation paid to the affected person in rural settings can never be full. Land legislation has identified items that out to be compensated for during compulsory purchase (Ndjovu, 2003), and any deviation from them might turn out to be an offense punishable by the law because even minor departures can be interpreted as corruption. Hands of the valuers are therefore tied and they are forced to act on the basis of business-as-usual, so to say. The area of focus is the acquisition of pastoral lands for designation and/or expansion of reserve areas. The issue is, pastoral and agro-pastoral communities are rarely adequately compensated when their land is acquired or rights to land are interfered with, especially communal rights. Therefore, the principle that compensation must be full, fair and prompt leaves a lot to be desired as far as Tanzania is concerned. The fullness being advocated for could only be true, if and only if, all losses suffered were compensated for.