IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i2p199-d500275.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decentralization as a Strategy to Scale Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration: An Indian Perspective on Institutional Challenges

Author

Listed:
  • Serene Ho

    (School of Science, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia)

  • Pranab R. Choudhury

    (NRMC Centre for Land Governance, Bhubaneshwar, Odisha 751003, India)

  • Nivedita Haran

    (Ente Bhoomi Trust, Thiruvananthapuram 695005, India)

  • Rebecca Leshinsky

    (School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia)

Abstract

Many countries grapple with the intractable problem of formalizing tenure security. The concept of ‘fit-for-purpose land administration’ (FFPLA) offers a way forward by advocating a shift towards a more flexible, pragmatic and inclusive approach for land rights recording. Inherently, the process and outcome of implementing FFPLA will have significant socio-political ramifications but these have not received much attention in the literature; additionally, few papers have considered this in the context of decentralization, an endorsed strategy for implementing FFPLA. This paper contributes to this gap by critically analyzing three land formalization initiatives in India which have employed flexible recording approaches and where decentralization is used to scale implementation. The cases show how quickly decentralization can kickstart implementation at scale via collaborations with local governing bodies and partnerships with non-state actors. An institutionalist approach highlights ensuing political contests between new and traditional land actors that inhibit political authority, and the challenges of coordinating a network of public and private actors without clear formal collaborative governance structures to ensure democratic outcomes. In doing so, we contribute to governance knowledge around FFPLA implementation so that it is ‘fit-for-people’ and better able to support policies and processes to secure land rights at scale.

Suggested Citation

  • Serene Ho & Pranab R. Choudhury & Nivedita Haran & Rebecca Leshinsky, 2021. "Decentralization as a Strategy to Scale Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration: An Indian Perspective on Institutional Challenges," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-18, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:2:p:199-:d:500275
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/2/199/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/2/199/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rahmatizadeh, Shima & Rajabifard, Abbas & Kalantari, Mohsen & Ho, Serene, 2018. "A framework for selecting a fit-for-purpose data collection method in land administration," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 162-171.
    2. Abhijit Banerjee & Lakshmi Iyer, 2005. "History, Institutions, and Economic Performance: The Legacy of Colonial Land Tenure Systems in India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1190-1213, September.
    3. Besley, Timothy & Leight, Jessica & Pande, Rohini & Rao, Vijayendra, 2016. "Long-run impacts of land regulation: Evidence from tenancy reform in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 72-87.
    4. Kumar, Kundan & Singh, Neera M. & Kerr, John M., 2015. "Decentralisation and democratic forest reforms in India: Moving to a rights-based approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-8.
    5. Kim, Aehyung, 2008. "Decentralization and the provision of public services : framework and implementation," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4503, The World Bank.
    6. Kapur Mehta, Aasha & Shah, Amita, 2003. "Chronic Poverty in India: Incidence, Causes and Policies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 491-511, March.
    7. Mearns, Robin & Sinha, Saurabh, 1999. "Social exclusion and land administration in Orissa, India," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2124, The World Bank.
    8. Klaus Deininger, 2008. "A Strategy for Improving Land Administration in India," World Bank Publications - Reports 9534, The World Bank Group.
    9. Trias Aditya & Eva Maria-Unger & Christelle vd Berg & Rohan Bennett & Paul Saers & Han Lukman Syahid & Doni Erwan & Tjeerd Wits & Nurrohmat Widjajanti & Purnama Budi Santosa & Dedi Atunggal & Imam Han, 2020. "Participatory Land Administration in Indonesia: Quality and Usability Assessment," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-27, March.
    10. Hall, Peter A. & Taylor, Rosemary C. R., 1996. "Political science and the three new institutionalisms," MPIfG Discussion Paper 96/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    11. Bidhan Kanti Das, 2019. "Denial of Rights Continues: How Legislation for ‘Democratic Decentralisation’ of Forest Governance was Subverted in the Implementation Process of the Forest Rights Act in India," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(4), pages 957-983, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dimo Todorovski & Rodolfo Salazar & Ginella Jacome, 2021. "Assessment of Land Administration in Ecuador Based on the Fit-for-Purpose Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Stig Enemark & Robin McLaren & Christiaan Lemmen, 2021. "Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration—Providing Secure Land Rights at Scale," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-12, September.
    3. Evert Waeterloos, 2021. "Introducing Collaborative Governance in Decentralized Land Administration and Management in South Africa: District Land Reform Committees Viewed through a ‘System of Innovation’ Lens," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Ana García-Morán & Simon Ulvund & Eva-Maria Unger & Rohan Mark Bennett, 2021. "Exploring PPPs in Support of Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration: A Case Study from Côte d’Ivoire," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, August.
    5. Uma Shankar Panday & Raja Ram Chhatkuli & Janak Raj Joshi & Jagat Deuja & Danilo Antonio & Stig Enemark, 2021. "Securing Land Rights for All through Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration Approach: The Case of Nepal," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-24, July.
    6. Charisse Griffith-Charles, 2021. "Application of FFPLA to Achieve Economically Beneficial Outcomes Post Disaster in the Caribbean," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marijn A. Bolhuis & Swapnika R. Rachapalli & Diego Restuccia, 2021. "Misallocation in Indian Agriculture," NBER Working Papers 29363, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Albertus, Michael & Espinoza, Mauricio & Fort, Ricardo, 2020. "Land reform and human capital development: Evidence from Peru," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    3. Dwi Budi Martono & Trias Aditya & Subaryono Subaryono & Prijono Nugroho, 2021. "The Legal Element of Fixing the Boundary for Indonesian Complete Cadastre," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-24, January.
    4. Magessa, Kajenje & Wynne-Jones, Sophie & Hockley, Neal, 2020. "Does Tanzanian participatory forest management policy achieve its governance objectives?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    5. Fitz, Dylan, 2018. "Evaluating the impact of market-assisted land reform in Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 255-267.
    6. Michael A. Clemens, 2017. "The Meaning Of Failed Replications: A Review And Proposal," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 326-342, February.
    7. Karla Hoff & Mayuresh Kshetramade & Ernst Fehr, 2011. "Caste and Punishment: the Legacy of Caste Culture in Norm Enforcement," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(556), pages 449-475, November.
    8. Dostie, Benoit & Jayaraman, Rajshri, 2006. "Determinants of School Enrollment in Indian Villages," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(2), pages 405-421, January.
    9. Yefimov, Vladimir, 2009. "Comparative historical institutional analysis of German, English and American economics," MPRA Paper 48173, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Rabah Arezki & Klaus Deininger & Harris Selod, 2015. "What Drives the Global "Land Rush"?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 29(2), pages 207-233.
    11. Fernando M. Aragon, 2014. "Do better property rights improve local income?: Evidence from First Nations' treaties," Discussion Papers dp14-02, Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University.
    12. Chaoran Chen, 2017. "Untitled Land, Occupational Choice, and Agricultural Productivity," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 91-121, October.
    13. Fenske, James, 2014. "Trees, tenure and conflict: Rubber in colonial Benin," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 226-238.
    14. Maarten Hillebrandt, 2017. "Transparency as a Platform for Institutional Politics: The Case of the Council of the European Union," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 62-74.
    15. B Kelsey Jack, "undated". "Market Inefficiencies and the Adoption of Agricultural Technologies in Developing Countries," CID Working Papers 50, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    16. Broich, Tobias, 2017. "Do authoritarian regimes receive more Chinese development finance than democratic ones? Empirical evidence for Africa," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 180-207.
    17. Chaudhary, Latika & Rubin, Jared, 2011. "Reading, writing, and religion: Institutions and human capital formation," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 17-33, March.
    18. Bartels, Charlotte & Jäger, Simon & Obergruber, Natalie, 2020. "Long-Term Effects of Equal Sharing: Evidence from Inheritance Rules for Land," IZA Discussion Papers 13665, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Raitio, Kaisa, 2013. "Discursive institutionalist approach to conflict management analysis — The case of old-growth forest conflicts on state-owned land in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 97-103.
    20. Falkinger, Josef & Grossmann, Volker, 2013. "Oligarchic land ownership, entrepreneurship, and economic development," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 206-215.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:2:p:199-:d:500275. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.