IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/wbecrv/v39y2025i2p341-361..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chiefs, Courts, and Upholding Property Rights: Quasi-Experimental Evidence from Sierra Leone

Author

Listed:
  • Henry Musa Kpaka

Abstract

Land disputes are unavoidable and costly to resolve in the formal courts in contexts with weak property rights and low state capacity. In order to relax the pressure on strained formal courts, many countries permit parallel informal dispute-resolution forums. This paper studies the extent to which one such forum—Chiefdom Land Committees (CLCs)—in Sierra Leone is able to resolve land disputes. This paper constructs a data set of ligated cases at local courts across the country and implements a difference-in-difference design to estimate the effect of the CLCs on land caseload in the formal courts. Contrary to the policy goals, this paper finds that on average, chiefdoms with CLCs have higher land caseload in the formal courts three years on. By adopting the CLCs, chiefdoms plausibly made land issues more salient, but, instead of providing final resolutions, CLCs are conduits for the formalization of land disputes.

Suggested Citation

  • Henry Musa Kpaka, 2025. "Chiefs, Courts, and Upholding Property Rights: Quasi-Experimental Evidence from Sierra Leone," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 39(2), pages 341-361.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:wbecrv:v:39:y:2025:i:2:p:341-361.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/wber/lhae026
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:wbecrv:v:39:y:2025:i:2:p:341-361.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wrldbus.html .

    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.