저 시-비 리- 경 지 2.0 한민

는 아래 조건 르는 경 에 한하여 게

l 저 물 복제, 포, 전송, 전시, 공연 송할 수 습니다.

다 과 같 조건 라야 합니다:

l 하는, 저 물 나 포 경 , 저 물에 적 된 허락조건 명확하게 나타내어야 합니다.

l 저 터 허가를 면 러한 조건들 적 되지 않습니다.

저 에 른 리는 내 에 하여 향 지 않습니다.

것 허락규약(Legal Code) 해하 쉽게 약한 것 니다.

Disclaimer

저 시. 하는 원저 를 시하여야 합니다.

비 리. 하는 저 물 리 목적 할 수 없습니다.

경 지. 하는 저 물 개 , 형 또는 가공할 수 없습니다.

도시계획학 사학 논문

Land Ownership Types across

Countries

2015년 2월

울대학 환경대학원

환경계획학과 도시 지역계획 전공

민

Abstract

Thisstudyaimstoinvestigatethevariousformsofland

ownershipsystemsintheworld.Landownershipstatusissues

arebeingconsideredasoneofthebasicrequirementsforthe

countries’development;itisbecausethelandtenuresystemsare

thefundamentaleffortofhumanlifeconditionsonland.Secure

landownershipisfundamentaltoshelterandlivelihoodsaswell

astherealisationofhumanrights,povertyreduction,economic

prosperityandsustainabledevelopment.

Theobjectiveofthisresearchistoanalyzetheownership

systemsintheworldwherethegovernment,civilsociety,private

sector and development cooperation initiatives have been

implemented.Thustheproblem definitioncanbeformulatedasa

research question which is “How does the land ownership

systemsdifferintheworld?”

According to the literature surveys conducted for the

research,the land tenure ownership representcountries with

differentculture,socio-economic,legalaspectand land-related

histories.Itcantakevariousformsamong countries,including

statutory,customary,public,crown,communal,informaland

formalformsoflandtenure.

This thesis paper comprises five chapters. chapter 1

includestheintroductionofthestudy,Chapter2providesreviews

ofthetheoreticalbackgroundthroughthreekeyterminologiesof

the study:Land tenure,tenure security and land rights.It

illustratesdefinitionsandconceptsoftheterminologiesthatare

the background ofthe study.This chapteralso conducts an

extensiveliteraturereview,whichaddresstheimportanceofthis

researchandpointsoutthedifferencebetweenpreviousstudies

andthisthesis.Chapter3presentsgeneralcontextofexisting

tenuretypesacrosstheworld.Throughthischapter,analysisof

the land tenure systems and the categorization of existing

ownershipsystemsintoinstitutionalframes.Chapter4continues

withanalyzingstudyfindingsfrom thepreviouschapterandland

ownershiptypes.Itdemonstratesanalysisandidentifiesthekey

factorsofeachlandownershiptypology.Theanalysisisableto

delineatetheadvantageanddisadvantageofeachsystem.Asa

closingremark,thisthesisendswithprovidingconclusionwith

implicationsofthestudyandsuggestionsoffuturestudyagenda.

Throughthestudy,analysisofthelandownershipsystems

andcategorizingthem intoinstitutionalframes:‘Statutory-private

ownership’,‘Customary-privateownership’,‘Communalownership’,

‘Religiousownership’,‘Publicownership’and‘Informalownership’,

itwillprovide an overview ofexisting land tenure systems

acrosstheworldasaspectrum.Theanalysisisabletodelineate

theadvantageanddisadvantageofeachtype.

◆ Keywords Land tenure, Tenure security, Land right, Land

ownership type, Land ownership categorization

◆ Student number : 2013-22004

TABLEOFCONTENTS

Ⅰ. INTRODUCTION ·····················································1

1.1 Research Background and Objectives ······························1

1.1.1 Research Background ····················································1

1.1.2 Research Objectives ······················································7

1.2 Research Methodology and Organization of Study ·····9

1.2.1 Research Methodology ··················································9

1.2.2 Organization of the study ··········································10

Ⅱ. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND

LITERATURE REVIEW ···············································13

2.1 Theoretical Background ·····················································13

2.1.1 Land Tenure ··································································13

2.1.2 Tenure security ····························································15

2.1.3 Land rights ···································································18

2.2 Literature Review ·······························································21

Ⅲ. Land Tenure Categorization ································25

3.1 Current Land Tenure Systems ·······································25

3.2 Land Ownership Categorization ······································35

Ⅳ. The Characteristics of Land Ownership

Typology ··········································································39

4.1 Statutory-Private Ownership ··········································39

4.2 Customary-Private Ownership ·······································40

4.3 Public Ownership ································································46

4.4 Religious Ownership ···························································49

4.5 Communal Ownership ·······················································52

4.6 Informal Ownership ··························································57

Ⅴ. CONCLUSION ························································63

5.1 Summary of Major Findings and Implication of the

study ·····························································································63

5.2 Future Research Agendas ················································67

Reference ·········································································69

LIST OFTABLES

Table 1 Land Tenure Systems ··············································20

Table 2 Announced Land Tenure Systems ······················26

Table 3 Existing Land Tenure Systems ···························26

Table 4 Categorized Land Tenure Systems ······················27

LIST OFFIGURES

Figure 1 Research Framework ···············································9

Figure 2 Continuum of land rights ·····································15

Figure 3 Land Ownership Categorization ··························29

Figure 4 Urban Housing Units by Water and Toilet

Facilities ························································································45

Figure 5 Summary of informal settlement levels in the

Sub-Saharan region ·······································46

- 1 -

Ⅰ.INTRODUCTION

1.1ResearchBackgroundandObjectives

1.1.1ResearchBackground

Thelandhasbeen being increasingly recognizedasan

important governance issue.The world today faces many

complexchallenges,includingpoverty;rapidpopulationgrowth;

rapidurbanization;increaseddemandfornaturalresources;food,

water and energy insecurity;naturaldisasters;and violent

conflict.Manyofthesechallengeshaveaclearlanddimension:

unequalaccesstotheland;insecurityoftenure;unsustainable

landuse;weakinstitutionsfordisputeandconflictresolution

andetc.(Fricskaetal.,2009).

Inprincipal,suchatenuresystem isabletoshapethe

fundamentalconditionsofpeopleon theland.Leaseholdsare

basedonthenotionofrentalsforlongperiods,inpractice,the

issuingof99-yearsleasesisconsideredtobeassecureasan

ownershipsystem.Thelandbelongingtooneentityamongan

individual,collective or the state by contractualagreement,

leasedtoanotherentity.Theleaseagreementisthenregistered

againstthetitleofthatlandtocreatereallandrightsthatare

enforceable(EconomicCommission forAfrica,2004).Accessto

- 2 -

land and the associated security of land ownership has

significantimplicationsfordevelopmentandrealestatemarket.

Realestateisamajorsourceofvalueinmostofthecountries

intheworld.Forexample,householdsintheUnitedStateshave

$9.6trillionoftheirwealthinrealestate,whichisabout16

percentoftheirwealth,Peruvianhasabout70percentoftheir

wealthinrealestate,andtheWorldBankconfirmsthatinmost

economies,there are one-halfand three quarters ofwealth

exist(Dam,2006;Economic Research Service,2005;De Soto,

1993;WorldBank,2006).However,atenuresystem cannotbe

easilydefinedorderivedasthefollowinguniversalnormsbut

rather adjusting to localconditions by considering history,

culture,legal aspects and economic condition which may

influencehuman’sperceptionsandbehavior(Rudiarto,2006).

Securelandand property rightsarecriticalforreducing

numerous globalissues,such as poverty,enhancing economic

development,genderequalityandsocialstability.Secureaccess

tothelandprovidesavaluablesafetynetasasourceofshelter,

foodandincomeintimesofhardship.Securedlandownershipis

aprerequisiteforpovertyreduction,becausewhenthelandis

improperly managed,theproblemsoften leadtodisputes,land

degradation,and losteconomic and developmentopportunities.

Casesofpoorly managedlandsarefoundinmany developing

countries(UnitedNation,2013).An estimated700million urban

poorlivein conditionsofinsecuretenureandan estimated2

- 3 -

millionpeopleareforciblyevictedeachyear.According tothe

UN-Habitat,900millionpeopleliveininformalsettlements,which

isexpectedasincreasingto1.4billionby2020andto2billion

by 2030. Secure tenure promotes investment in homes,

neighborhoods, livelihoods and urban agriculture to urban

poor(Fricskaetal.,2009).Properdevelopmentalsystem ofthe

landownership should be established to reorganize,utilize and

conducttheunexploitedland.

Countries which havebeen subjectto colonialism have

particularly complex tenurearrangements.Sincenon colonized

countries also have very complex tenure as indigenous and

imposed tenurepatternsmay existatthesametimein the

samearea.Itisclearthatlandownershipsystemsarevery

diverse among countries and between the developed and

developing countries.The form ofsystems can be various,

includingthestatutory,customary,religiousandinformalforms

oflandownership(MendsandMeijere,2006).

Thelandtenuresystemsthathavebeen being evolved

overtime,including therangeofland rightsthatexist;the

operationofthelandmarkets,includingthemainconstraints;

andtheinstitutionsthatregulatetenureandmarket(Fricskaet

al.,2009).

Understandingthelandownershipsystem inacountryor

a group of countries are related aspects of the country’s

historicalbackground.Historicalfactofbeingcolonizedorstill

- 4 -

beingsemi-colonizedbyacountryorcommunityhasastrong

effectonthelegalsystem ofthecountryandcommunity.The

historydeterminestheshapeofinstitutionsinpresentday.Over

thetimeinthepast,differentformsofthelandtenurehave

been established.In an overview ofcontemporary history of

land tenure,itstarts with the system offeudalism.Feudal

tenureallowsthelordstohavefullcontrolovertheland.At

thattime,landownershipimpliedtheirstatusinsocialwealth.

Theconceptoffeudalexistedforalongperiodtimeofhuman

history;itissimilartostateowned property,which isalso

calledthepublictenuretoday.

Aftertheendofdynastyrulesthestates,politicalpower

by members of the aristocracy diminished.Then,the two

politicalview ofstatesappears,twodirectlyopposedconceptof

states: capitalistic states and socialist states. Transition

countriesseatsinbetweentherangeofthetwoconcepts,they

areinrevisingprocessfrom socialiststatetocapitalisticstate.

In capitalistic states,land,production and income are

mostlyorentirelyownedbyprivates.Alloftheownershipand

transactions on the lands are recorded,and restrictions and

written regulations exist.The tenure system in capitalistic

states have a similar characteristic with statutory tenure

system,whichisoperatedandcontrolledbywrittenregulations.

Statutorytenurehasfoundinmanycapitalisticcountriestoday.

Socialiststateshaveasocialeconomicsystem withsocial

- 5 -

ownership.Itischaracterizedwithproductionandco-operative

managementoftheeconomy.Insocialiststates,thereareno

landmarketandlandusedecisionsaremadeadministratively.

Landadministrationsystem insocialiststatearesimilartothe

public tenure system,where land is administered by the

governmentorlocalauthority.

Transition countries are known as the post-socialist

transitioncountriesfrom socialism tocapitalism.Thecountries

arelocatedin centralandEasternEuropeaswellasformer

SovietUnion,which includes the 27 transition countries in

Europe and North West Asia, such as China, Vietnam,

CambodiaandCubaareincluded.Inthosecountries,thepublic

land ownership remains significant,and those land is not

effectivelyprivatized.Lackinginmanagementofthelandlimits

growth ofnew businesses(Bezemer,2006).In thosecountries

marketinlandwereverylimitedorinsomedidnotexisted.In

some country like Poland,a marketin ruralland remained

throughoutthecommunistperiodbuturbanlandwassubjectto

strictStatecontrol.InBulgaria,urbanlandisabletopurchase

with a price dictated by the government,butruralland is

administeredbyacooperativesystem withnoownershiponthe

landforagriculturaluse(UnitedNation,1996).Inmanytransition

countries,‘cadasters’varyincharacterbuttendtoincorporatea

detailedclassificationofsoiltypeandpermittedlanduse.They

arefrequentlymaintainedinalaborintensivemannerfaithfully

- 6 -

preserving theoriginalcharacterofthedocument.Itisalso

generallythecasethattheusestowhichthecadastersareput

do not warrant the time and expense applied to their

maintenance.

The subject of land registration has received much

attentioninmosttransitioncountriesbutinmany,thesituation

remains less than completely satisfactory. Some of the

underlyingreasonsarerelevanttothedesignofpropertytax.

Good land managementwill promote economic and social

developmentinbothurbanandruralareas.

Even though the importance of the land ownership

securityiswidelyacknowledgedanditsurgencyisrecognized,

thishasnotledtoanyconsensusastowhatitexactlyentails

andinwhatwayitshouldberealized(Gelder,2010).Theland

security in countriesneedsto beaddressed atmany levels.

Land ownership security is important not only for urban

communitybutalsoruralcommunity.Itallowspeopleinthe

communitytodiversifytheirlivelihoodsbyusingtheirlandasa

realestate.Theycandealandinvestmoneyintheproperty

asset.Thereareseveralwayslikeusingtheirlandascollateral,

renting itoutorselling it.Tenure security also affectthe

everyday choices ofpoor ruralpeople on their agricultural

production,anditinfluencefarmerstoinvestintheirland.Land

ownershipsecurity isjustonestepon theroadtoreducing

globalissues like poverty(InternationalFund forAgricultural

- 7 -

Development,2012).

The aim ofthis study is to investigate the different

institutional frameworks of land tenure system in many

countries in the world.This study focuses specifically on

investigating the state and differentexisting forms ofland

ownershipatnationalandcitylevels.

1.1.2ResearchObjectives

Theobjectiveoftheresearchistoanalyzethelandtenure

system thataffects the land managementand development

statusintheworld.Analyzethetenuresystemsintheworld

where the government, civil society, private sector and

developmentcooperationinitiativeshavebeenimplemented.The

landtenuresystem isincreasinglyrecognizedasanimportant

governanceissue.Acknowledgingthelandtenuresystem isthe

wayofprovidingsecurelandright,whichisveryimportantfor

development and poverty reduction. Poverty issue is a

well-known globalproblem,as wellastheland governance

problem atthecountrylevelacrossallregions.Thoseproblems

haveasignificantrelationshipwiththelandtenuresystems.

Un-HabitatandGLTN definetheterminology‘Typology

ofTenure’asdominantlandtenureprevailingeitherformallyor

informally. Country specific classification that is public

ownership/ use,private ownership/use and indigenous and

non-indigenouscommunitytenure.Inthisthesis,thetypologyof

- 8 -

tenureisfocusedonlandownershipstatus.Landownershipis

thekeycomponentintermsofdevelopmentandmanagement.

Withouttheownershipinformationonaproperty,noactionscan

betakenontheproperty.

Thelandownershipsystemsareverycomplicatedsoone

cannotpredicta country’s land system withoutan in-depth

researchofit.Allthelandsareunderdifferentstatusofthe

landtenuresystem,thereforeunderstandingthecurrentstatusis

thekeypointtodecidewaysinmanagingtheland.Thusthe

problem definition ofthe research can be formulated as a

research question of“How doestheland ownership systems

differintheworld?”

Theobjectivesoftheresearchisbasedontheassumption

ofnumberofdifferentlandownershiptypesoftenuresystems

exists in the world:statutory,customary,public,religious,

communalandinformaltenure.Thisstudywouldserve,ona

worldwidelevel,asananalysisofownershipsystem typologies

whichprovideanoverview ofexistinglandownershipsystems

acrosstheworldasaspectrum.Moreover,thisstudypresents

characteristicsofeachtypeindetail,itisabletodelineatethe

advantageanddisadvantageofeachsystem.

- 9 -

1.2ResearchMethodologyandOrganizationof

Study

1.2.1ResearchMethodology

Thisthesisaddressesthelandtenureissuesintheworld,

particularly land ownership status.To address the research

objectiveofthestudy,thisthesisisexaminedthroughliterature

surveyanalysismethodology,qualitativeinnature.Thepurpose

oftheliteraturesurvey forthisstudy istocollectalotof

numberofpublicationsandpapersrelatedtothestudytopic.

Collectionoftheliteratureresearchwasdonethroughvarietyof

resourcesincluding thearticlesofjournals,published papers,

thesispapersandpublishedbooks.

A searchhasbeenconductedontheterms‘landtenure’,

‘tenuresecurity’,‘landright’,‘landlaw’,‘customaryownership’,

‘statutory ownership’,‘communalownership’,‘religious tenure’

and ‘property ownership’,in numerous database sources to

completereview ofliteraturefortheproposedstudy,including

one-journalsweb-sites.

The information from literature survey research is

illustrated in chaptertwo,three and fourin this thesis,to

review and collectinformation ofthestudy topic.With the

informationfrom theliteraturesurvey,Chaptertwoclarifiesthe

previousstudiesinsimilartopictothethesis,andillustratesthe

- 10 -

criticalissuesofthisstudythatdifferentiateitfrom previous

research.In chapterthree,through the literature survey,it

provide the listofcurrentexisting land tenure systems to

classifythelandownershiptypesintheworld.Thisisbased

onthesystemsthatarealreadypublishedbyotherinternational

organizations.Inchapterfour,itanalyzethecharacteristicsof

eachlandownershiptypes.

1.2.2Organizationofthestudy

Thisthesiscomprisesfive(5)chapters(Figure1).Following

Chapteroneistheintroduction,onthebackground,objectives

and methodologies ofthis thesis.The introduction discuses

generaldescriptionsoftheresearchoutline,background,purpose,

methodologyandstructureofthestudy.

Chapter two provides reviews of the theoretical

backgroundthroughthreekeyterminologiesofthestudy:Land

tenure,tenuresecurityandlandrights.Itillustratesdefinitions

andconceptsoftheterminologies.Thischapteralsoconductsan

extensiveliteraturereview,whichaddresstheimportanceofthis

researchandpointsoutthedifferencebetweenpreviousstudies

andthisthesis.

Chapterthreeconductanalysisofthelandtenuresystems

withtwoparts.Firstpart,overview ofthegeneralcontextof

thelandtenuresystem typologyandtenuresystem formation

withanalyticalframework,andthesecondpartiscategorizing

- 11 -

the ownership systems into six types. There are global

organizationsworkson land issuesin theworld.Thisthesis

studyonthelandtenuresystemsthatthoseorganizationshave

announced.UN-Habitat,WorldBank,andGLTN havereported

differentlandtenuresystems. From thepublishedreportsby

theorganizations,listoftenuresystemsarecollected:freehold,

delayed freehold,registered leasehold,public rental,private

rental,shared equity,customary ownership,religious tenure

systems- islamic, non-formal tenure systems, squatters,

pavement dwellers, easements, sharecropping, community

ownershipandetc.Thoselandownershipsystemsintheworld

canbeclassifiedintotheframe. Throughthischapter,analysis

ofthelandtenuresystemsandthecategorizationofexisting

tenuresystemsintoinstitutionalframes.

Chapter four continues with analyzing the research

findingsfrom thepreviouschapters.Itdemonstratesanalysisof

the each land tenure system types,and identifies the key

factorsofeachlandownershiptypes.Theanalysisisableto

delineatetheadvantageand disadvantageofeach system in

development.As a closing remark,this thesis ends with

providing conclusionofimplicationsofthestudy and future

studyagenda.

- 12 -

Figure 2 Research Framework

- 13 -

Ⅱ.THEORETICALBACKGROUND

ANDLITERATUREREVIEW

2.1TheoreticalBackground

2.1.1LandTenure

Thelandtenurestructuresarecomplexandvarybetween

andwithincountries,therearedifferentdefinitionsandconcepts

ofit.Thelandtenureisderivativeoftheconceptofnatural

resource tenure,which in essence refers to the terms and

conditions under which natural resources are held and

use(Bruce,1986;Moyo,1995;Shivjietal.,1998).Theconceptof

theland tenurelieson asocialconstructwhich definesthe

relationshipbetweenindividualsandgroupsofindividuals.The

land tenure consists ofthe socialrelations and institutions

governingaccesstoandownershipofthelandnatureresources.

Itisrightsandobligationsdefinedwithrespecttocontroland

useoftheland(Costa,2013).

In fundamentalnature oftheissues in human society,

therearemany definitionsof‘land tenure’exist.UN-Habitat

reportsin2008;definesitasthewaylandisheldorownedby

individuals and groups,or set of relationships legally or

customarily defined amongstpeople with respectto land.In

- 14 -

otherwords,tenurereflectsrelationshipsbetween peopleand

landdirectly,andbetweenindividualsandgroupsofpeoplein

theirdealingsontheland.TheGlobalLandToolNetworkat

UN-Habitat defines it more concisely as the relationship,

whether legally or customarily defined, among people,as

individualsorgroupswith respecttotheland.Definition of

‘Landtenure‘istherelationship,whetherlegallyorcustomarily

defined,amongpeople,asindividualsorgroups,withrespectto

land(The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United

Nation,2002).Rulesoftenuredefinehow property rightsto

landaretobeallocatedwithinsocieties.Therulesoftenure

definehow rightstolandareassignedwithinsocieties.They

define how access is granted to rights to use,controland

transfer land, as well as associated responsibilities and

restrictions.Insimpleterms,thelandtenuresystemsdetermine

who can usewhatresourcesforhow long and underwhat

conditions(FAO,2002).Thelandtenuremaybedefinedasthe

terms and conditions on which the land is held,used and

transacted(Adamsetal.,1999).Inbrief,tenuredetermineswho

canusewhatlandandhow(Lastarria-Cornhiel,1995).

AccordingtoFAO reportin1995,thelandtenureisoften

categorizedasprivate,communal,openaccessandstateland

tenures.Privateistheassignmentofrightstoaprivateparty,

aswithinacommunity,individualfamiliesorgroupofpeople

mayhaveexclusiverightstoresidentialoragriculturalparcels.

- 15 -

Othermembersofthecommunitycanbeexcludedaccessingthe

resourceswithouttheconsentofthosewhohold therights.

Communal is a right of commons may exist within a

community,asmembersofacommunitymayhavetherightto

useindependentlytheholdingsofthecommunity.Openaccess

isspecificrightsthatarenotassignedtoanyoneandno-one

canbeexcluded.Itusuallyincludesnaturalresourcessuchas

marine,rangelandsandforeststhatarefreetoaccess.State

land tenure is property rights that are assigned to some

authorityinthepublicsector.

The concepts and definitions of the land tenure are

presented by various institutions and scholars overin-depth

studies.Theimportanceofthelandtenureisacknowledgedas

thelandtenuresystem encompassesincommunityandcountry

level.Understandingandaddressingissuesofsecurelandtenure

iscriticalelementsinanydevelopmentalstrategy.

2.1.2Tenuresecurity

Tenuresecurityisameansofrecognizingtherightsof

thepoorbyextendingasenseofpermanenceandstabilityto

previouslymarginalizedpeople,allowingthem todesignshelter

andsurvivalstrategiesonthebasisoftheirprotectedhuman

rights(UnitedNation,2004).Providingsecurityoftenurefora

widerangeofthelandrightshasprovedsurprisinglyresistant

toresolution.Forexample,thereareanestimated700million

- 16 -

people living in informal settlements without security of

tenure(UN-Habitat,2003).Itimpliesthattherightofaccessto

anduseofthelandandthepropertyisunderwrittenbyaset

ofjustifiablerules.

Inboththeoryandpolicy,theideaoftenuresecurityfor

low-incomesettlementdwellersisencounteredinthreedistinct

forms:tenuresecurityasperceivedbydwellers,tenuresecurity

asalegalconstructanddefactotenuresecurity(VanGelder,

2009).Thisisfrom the‘tripartiteview’:conceptualization of

tenuresecurity.Inalllegalapproaches,tenuresecurityrefersto

thelegalstatusoftenureanditsprotectionbackedupbystate

authority.Thedefactoview oftenuresecurityisbasedonthe

actualcontrolofproperty,regardless ofthe legalstatus in

whichitisheld.Defactotenuresecuritycanbestbedefined

bytheelementsthatcomposeitorcontributetoit,suchasthe

lengthoftimeofoccupation,theolderasettlement,thehigher

theleveloflegitimacyandprotection,thesizeofthesettlement,

andthelevelandcohesionofcommunityorganizationasthe

bettertheorganization,thehighertheprobabilityofasuccessful

strategyofnon-compliance(Durand-Lasserve,2006;Payne,1997,

2001; Varley, 1987). The third form of tenure security

encounteredintheliteratureregardssecurityasitisperceived

bydwellers.Generally,thistakestheform ofahouseholdlevel

chanceestimatetowardstheperceivedprobabilityofevictionby

thestateorthelandownersometimescomplementedwithother

- 17 -

factorsthatmay causeinvoluntaryrelocationsuchasthreats

from and land conflicts with neighbors,gangs or family

members(VanGelder,2007,2009).

Differentcommunitiesexperiencedifferentlevelsoftenure

security,and the importance of tenure security is widely

acknowledged.According to Fricska(2009),The benefits of

tenuresecurityinclude:increasedinvestmentbypeopleintheir

homes,farms,villagesandneighborhoods;increasedagricultural

productivity,foodsecurityandmoresustainableuseofnatural

resources;improvedlivelihoodsfortheurbanpoor,particularly

forwomen,throughhome-basedenterpriseandlesstimespent

protecting theirasset(home);increased incentives forinward

investmentinbothruralandurbanareas;moreefficientland

markets;improved health and quality oflife,particularly in

informal settlements; increased Government revenue from

land-based taxesthatcan bereinvested in improved service

delivery;andimprovedsocialsolidarity.Inadditiontoitsrolein

protecting the fundamentalrightto land and houses,tenure

securityprovidesnumerousadditionalbenefits.Mostimportantly,

assecurityincreases,familiesinvestmoresavingsandsweat

equity to improve their housing.Increased security is also

associatedwithgreaterpoliticalstrengthandabilitytodemand

services(Ehrenberg,2006).

Without secured tenure,residents’sense of insecurity

preventsthem from investingsignificantlyintheirownshelter,

- 18 -

in consenting topay therelatively largeconnection feesfor

water,sanitation,andelectricity,andfrom contributinglaboror

money to upgrading or maintaining minimally adequate

environmentalconditionsandequipmentwithinthecommunity.

Insecurity of tenure also serves to make residents more

vulnerable to exploitation by criminals,politicians,or local

bosses.Moneythatmightotherwisebeinvestedinhousingor

landaform ofsavingisinsteadspentonobtainingpromisesof

protectionfrom eviction(Wstendorff,2009).

2.1.3Landrights

Thelandisacriticalasset,becauseitprovidesameans

oflivelihoodthroughtheproductionandsaleofcropandother

products.Inanycountry,thetypesoftenurecanbeexpressed

asa‘continuum oftenure’orasarangeofthelandrights.

Theserightsvarygreatlywithregardtowhatapersonholding

sucharightcandowiththeland(Fricskaetal.,2009).The

landrightisalsocalledaspropertyright.Thenatureofthe

propertyrightshasbeenshowntohaveanobservableimpact

onawiderangeofeconomicoutcomes.Thus,enforcementof

property rights through legal or social structures is a

prerequisite forproduction,investmentand exchange in the

economy.Propertyrightsrequiregovernanceinstitutionsstrong

enoughtoenforcethem,butatthesametimethesegovernance

institutions have to be constrained enough to limit

- 19 -

expropriation(Levine,2005;RiedingerandYadav,2011).

Therightsrelatedtothelandandpropertyincluderights

topossess,use,manage,alienate,transferandgainincomefrom

property.Inbrief,therearethreerightsapplyonthelands:use

rights,controlrightsand transferrights.Therightsarean

instrumentofsocietyandderivetheirsignificancefrom thefact

thatthey helpaman form thoseexpectationswhich hecan

reasonablyholdinhisdealingswithothers(Demsetz,1967).

Userightisarighttousethelandforgrazing,growing

subsistencecrops,gatheringminorforestryproducts,etc(FAO,

2002).Everyrightsrequiredtoberegistered,tohavetheforce

ofthelaw.NationalassemblyofSocialistRepublicofVietnam

states that registration of the land use right means the

recordingofthelawfullanduserightwithrespecttoadefined

parceloflandinthecadastralfileaimedatcreatingtherights

andobligationsofthelanduser.Thisissimilartomostofthe

socialistcountries.

Control right is the components of ownership that

comprise personal control and consumption of a

resource(Christman,1991).Itistomakedecisionshow theland

shouldbeusedincludingdecidingwhatcropsshouldbeplanted,

and to benefitfinancially from the sale ofcrops and etc.

Chsistman(1991)also have mentioned thatthe grantoffull

controlrightstoindividualswilldirectlyaffectthewell-beingof

surroundingindividuals.

- 20 -

Figure 3 continuum of land rights

(source: UN-Habitat,2008)

Transferrightisarighttosellormortgagetheland,to

conveythelandtoothersthroughintra-communityreallocations,

to transmit the land to heirs through inheritance,and to

reallocate use and controlrights(FAO,2002).Tribal,feudal,

colonial,capitalist,socialist and religious societies have all

evolved distinctiveconceptsconcerning theuseright,control

rightandtransferrightofland.

The Figure above illustrates the land rightsituations

foundinmanycountriesintheworld.Itclearlydemonstrates

thedegreeoftenuretypesandtherangeoflandrightsinthe

world.UN-Habitat(2008)expresstherangeofpossibleformsof

tenureasa continuum,and each ofthem providesdifferent

degreesofsecuritywithdifferentsetsofrights.However,there

arelimitationsinthislinearpresentation,asitdespitethatthere

aremanyothercategoriesofothertenuresystems.Thereare

- 21 -

systemsofferequally high levelsofsecurity and legality as

registeredfreeholdorequallylow levelsofsecurityandlegality

asperceivedtenureapproaches.Alsoitimpliesthatcustomary

tenuresystem isrelativelyinformal,butitvarydependonthe

landandtenuresituation.

2.2LiteratureReview

Thisanalysis ofthe land tenuresystem typespresents

relevantinformationthatcanbenefitfuturelandpractices.The

purposeofthisthesisistoprovideaframeworkfortheland

ownershiptypesintheworldandtodescribethecharacteristics

ofthem.Thepurposeofthisstudyisoutliningtypologyofthe

landownershipsystemsthroughtheprocessofliteraturesurvey.

This research is importantfrom an academic pointofview.

Muchhasbeenpublishedonthelandtenure,butnoneofthe

previousstudiespresentthelandtenuresystemsonlyfocuson

ownership status.Meaning,they arelargely executed without

understanding thecriticalrelationship oftheland development

andthelandownershipsystem.Therearefew previousefforts

to analyze the land tenure systems,as numberofpublished

documentsprovidegeneralinformationofthelandtenure.There

aremanypublicationsrelatedtothelandtenurethatfocuseson

aspecificcountry,groupofcountrieswithsimilarbackgrounds,

developingcountries,orreligiouspointofview.

- 22 -

Therearepreviousstudiestrytoidentifyandemphasisthe

importance of each country’s land tenure system,property

security and itsrelated policy and laws(2004;2011;Abdulahi,

2007;AfridiandBaryalay,2010;Aliet al., 2014;Anderson,2006;

Arko-Adjei,2011;Aumann,1974;Barryetal., 2007;Besley,1995;

Boggs,2007;Chevalier,1967;congress,2007;Cotula,2006;De

VanyandSanchez,1979;Development,2010b,c,e,a,d;Dixon,

2009;Durand-Lasserve,2012;Ensminger,1997;Firman,1997;

Gebeyehu,2013;Gil,2000;HanstadandDuncan,2001;Institute,

2004;Kong,2012;Brandtetal., 1998;LusuggaKironde,2000;

Grosjeanetal., 2011;Ampadubetal., 2011;Ollennu,1962;Place

andOtsuka,2001;Programme,2012;Renger,1995;Rudiarto,2006;

Salerno,2011;Savant-Mohit,2004;Thirkell,1996;UN-Habitat,

2005a,b,c,d,2014;Wily,2011;Wily,2003;ChoiandJung,2008).

Thereareliteraturereviewsonthelandtenurewhichpays

attentionsonaspecificcountry,groupofcountrieswithsimilar

cultural,socio-economical,religious backgrounds ordeveloping

countriespointofview(Baranyietal., 2004;Bertaudetal., 1995;

Boydelletal., 2008;ChauveauandCotula,2007;Cousinsand

Claassens,2004;Crais,2006;Dam,2006;Development,2012;

Doebele,1987;ECE,1996;Fernandes,2011;Franzsen,2002;

Hofstee,1972; Kajoba,2002; Kasper,2007; Khamaisi,1995;

Menezes,1988;Napier,2002;Okoth-Ogendo,2000;Payne,1997;

Programme,2010;Quizon,2013;RakodiandLeduka,2004;Roth

and Haase,1998;Saitand Lim,2006;saitand Peters,2011;

- 23 -

Tannous,1951;UN-Habitat,2005,2010;WienerBravo,2011;

Zimmermann,2011).

Therearealsoexistingstudiesthattriedtoconductways

ofthelandreform instudyingcountries(BarracloughandReform,

1999;Besley and Burgess,2000;Brown,2004;Bruce,2006;

Coldham,1995;DeiningerandFeder,2009;Fairley,2013;Johnson,

1998;Kalabamu,2000;Lee,2000;Marsh and MacAulay,2002;

ThompsonandWilson,1994;Lee,2001).

Therehavebeennumerousresearchesonthelandtenure

system andthelandownershiptodeductimplicationsforthe

reunificationofcountrieslikeNorthandSouthKorea,problem of

poverty,orissuesrelated to urbanization aswell(Alchian and

Demsetz,1973; ALIYU,2009; Augustinus,2003; Bell,2006;

Bezemer,2006;Bruce,1998;Christman,1991;Claassens,2014;

Cohen,2006;Congressi,2009;Cotula etal.,2004;Creekmore,

2000;Cymet,1992;Deininger,2003;Demsetz,1967;Development,

2012;Dunning,1990;Durand-Lasserve,2006;Durand-Lasserve

andRoyston,2002;Durand-LasserveandSelod,2009;ehrenberg,

2006;Ellickson,1993;Engels,1999;Enterprise,2009;Evans,1921;

Evers,1984;Federand Noronha,1987;Firman,2004;Greene,

2005;Grindle,2004;Ho,2001;Huffman,1998;Jimenez,1984;

Johnson,1972;Kameri-Mbote,2005;Kehoe,1976;Khemroand

Payne,2004;KivellandMcKay,1988;KombeandKreibich,2000;

Loynsetal.,2000;Kameri-Mboteetal.,2007;Mennen,2012;

MontalvoandRavallion,2010;Nations,2014;NorfolkandTanner,

- 24 -

2007; Fricska et al.,2009; Payne,2001,2004; Payne and

Durand-Lasserve,2012;Pottier,2005;Powell,1998;Programme,

2012;Report,2013;RuralDevelopmentandLandReform,2013;

Houseetal.,2005;Secretariat,2008;Sietchiping etal.,2012;

UN-Habitat,2008,2012;Van Gelder,2010;Westendorff,2009;

WhiteandMartin,2002;Wright,1989;Yiri,2006;LeeandLee,

2004;ChoiandLee,1998).

Inbrief,therearepreviousstudiesfocusononespecific

country,groups ofthem with similar culturalor historical

backgrounds.Therearealsostudiestogiveimplicationsona

landrelatedglobalissues.Allofthesefactorssuggestthegreat

importanceofthisthesis,aswellastheneedfordocumenting

theland tenuresecurity system acrossthecountriesin the

world.Therefore,thisthesiscanstimulatediscussionandfuture

effortstoresearchthelandsystems.Categorizationoftheland

tenuresystem intheworld,descriptionofeachsystem type’s

characteristic, and qualitative analysis of advantage and

disadvantageofeachtypearethecriticalissueofthisstudy

whichdifferentiateitfrom previousresearches.

- 25 -

Ⅲ.LandTenureCategorization

3.1CurrentLandTenureSystems

There are numerous international organizations and

institutionsthatstudy onglobalconcernsrelatedtotheland

issues.UN-Habitat,WorldBankandGLTN arethewell-known

globalorganizationsthatworksonthelandtenuresecurityin

the world. The global organizations have announced the

numbersofdifferentlandtenuresystems.

The United Nations Human Settlements Programme,

UN-Habitat,istheUnitedNationagencyforhumansettlements

andamemberoftheUnitedNationsDevelopmentGroup.Itis

mandatedbytheUnitedNationsGeneralAssemblytopromote

socially andenvironmentally sustainablelandsandsustainable

urbandevelopment.Ithasagoalofprovidingadequateshelter

forall.UN-Habitatworksinmorethan70countriesin five

continentsfocusingonsevenareas:UrbanLegislation,Landand

Governance; Urban Planning and Design; Urban Economy;

Urban Basic Services;Housing and Slum Upgrading;Risk

Reduction and Rehabilitation;Urban Research and Capacity

Development.

UN-Habitat(2008)hasanalyzedthelandtenuresystems:

- 26 -

Tenure

systemCharacteristics Advantages Limitations

FreeholdOwnership in

perpetuiry

High degree

of security.

Freedom to

dispose, or

use

as collateral

for loans.

Maximises

commercial

value,

potential for

Costs of

access

generally high.

Collateral

value may not

be

relevant if

incomes are

low or

financial

institutions are

Table 1 Land Tenure Systems

freehold,delayed freehold,registered leasehold,public rental,

private rental,shared equity,co-operative tenure,customary

ownership,religioustenuresystems,intermediateortemporary

tenuresystemsandnon-formaltenuresystems.Thetablebelow

(table1)isfrom UN-Habitatreportin2008,showseachform

oftenuresystem,itscharacteristics,benefitsandlimitationsin

differentcontexts.Itprovides an overview ofsome ofthe

distinguishingfeaturesofthedifferentapproaches.Therangeof

tenure system categories include a wide range of legal,

semi-legal and non-legal categories, and serves different

demandandneedsofvarioussocioeconomicgroups.Asshown

inthetable,somesystemsareoftennotdocumentedandcan

varyindegreeofsecurity.

- 27 -

increases in

asset

values.

weak.

Property

values can go

down as

well as up.

Delayed

freehold

Conditional

ownership.

Title

is granted on

payment or

when

developments

have been

completed.

Same high

degree of

security

as freehold

when

payments

are made on

schedule or

developments

are completed.

Freedom to

dispose, or

use as

collateral for

loans.

Maximises

commercial

value,

potential for

increases in

asset

values.

Default in

payments or

developments

may result in

eviction and

loss of funds

invested.

Collateral

value may

not be

relevant if

incomes are

low. Property

values can go

down as well

as up.

Expectations

of increased

values

can divert

investments

from

more

productive

- 28 -

sectors.

Registered

Leasehold

Ownership for

a specified

period from a

few months to

999 years.

As secure as

freehold, but

only

for the period

specified in

the

lease.

Requires legal

framework.

Costs of

access

generally high.

Public rental

Rental

occupation of

Stateowned

land or house

Provides a

high degree of

security,

providing

terms and

conditions of

occupation are

met.

Limited supply

may restrict

access. Often

badly located

for

access to

livelihoods.

Terms

often

restrictive.

Deterioration

may result if

maintenance

costs

not met.

Private rental

Rental of

privately

owned land

or property.

Good security

if protected

by

legally

enforceable

contract.

Open to abuse

by

disreputable

owners.

Deterioration

may

- 29 -

Provides

tenants with

flexibility

of movement.

result if

maintenance

costs not

met.

Shared equity

Combination of

delayed

freehold and

rental in which

residents

purchase a

stake in

their property

(often 50%)

and

pay rent on

the remainder

to

the other

stakeholder.

Combines the

security and

potential

increase in

asset value

of delayed

freehold and

the

flexibility of

rental.

Residents can

increase their

stake over

time,

ultimately

leading to full

ownership.

Requires a

proper legal

framework

and efficient

management.

Co-operative

tenure

Ownership is

vested in the

cooperative

or group of

which

residents are

co-owners

Good security.

Maintains

social

cohesion.

Requires a

proper legal

framework.

Restrictions

may reduce

incentives to

invest.

Requires

double

- 30 -

registration

first of land

and of

association

Customary

ownership

Ownership is

vested in the

tribe, group,

community or

family. Land is

allocated by

customary

authorities such

as

chiefs.

Widely

accepted.

Simple to

administer.

Maintains

social

cohesion.

May lose its

legal status in

urban areas.

Vulnerable to

abuse under

pressure of

urban

and market

development.

Poor

customary

leadership

may

weaken its

legitimacy.

Religious

tenure

systems

(e.g. Islamic)

Islamic tenure

has four main

categories:

‘Waqf ’ is

religious

trust land and

addresses

landlessness;

`mulk’, is full

individual

ownership;

Facilitates

family/group

tenures

and accessible

and affordable

land

management

procedures

Because they

are outside

the

commercial

land market,

waqf

lands are

often

inefficiently

managed.

Inheritance

- 31 -

`miri’,

is state

owned/controlle

d land

which carries

usufruct rights,

whilst

`musha/mushta

rak’, is

collective/tribal

ownership.

disputes

can cause

land conflicts

Intermediate,

or

temporary,

tenure

systems

There are

many pragmatic

arrangements,

including land

certification,

‘Certificates

of Comfort’,

Temporary

Occupation

Licenses, etc.

These provide

reasonable

security for

households to

invest, whilst

protecting

long

term public

interest

options for

change.

Costs may be

incurred by

authorities or

residents if

relocation is

required. If

these

prove

excessive,

redevelopment

can be

inhibited.

Non-formal

tenure

systems

These include

many

categories

with varying

degrees of

legality

or illegality.

Some of these

non-formal

categories,

such as

squatting,

started as a

response to

As demand

has

intensified,

even

these informal

tenure

categories

- 32 -

They include

regularised and

un-regularised

squatting,

unauthorised

subdivisions on

legally owned

land and

various forms

of

unofficial rental

arrangements.

In some cases,

several forms

of tenure may

co-exist on the

same plot, (e.g.

tenants and

sub-tenants),

with each party

entitled to

certain rights.

the

inability of

public

allocation

systems or

formal

commercial

markets to

provide for

the

needs of the

poor and

operated

on a socially

determined

basis.

have become

commercialize

d,

so that access

by lower

income groups

is increasingly

constrained.

(source: UN-Habitat,2008)

TheWorldBankandGLTN alsohaveannouncedthe

numberofdifferentlandtenuresystems.TheWorldBankisan

United Nations international financial institution that is

- 33 -

componentoftheWorldBank Group,alsoamemberofthe

UnitedNationsDevelopmentGroup.Thisorganizationprovides

loanstodevelopingcountriesforcapitalprograms,withagoals

to achieve by 2030 which is ending extreme poverty by

decreasingthepercentageofpeoplelivingonlessthan$1.25a

daytonomorethan3percent(WorldBank,2008;2011).There

hadbeen voluminousstudiesandreportspublishedby World

Bankrelatedtopovertytoimprovethelandusage.

TheGlobalLandToolNetwork(GLTN)isanalliance

organizationofglobalregionalandnationalpartnerfacilitatedby

UN-Habitat.Itcontributestopovertyalleviation,improvedthe

landmanagementandsecurityoftenure.Itsmainobjectiveis

to contributeto poverty alleviation through theland reform,

improved theland managementand security oftenure,with

principlesin thedevelopmentofthelandtoolsthatare;pro

poor, good governance, equity, subsidiarity, sustainability,

affordability,systematiclargescaleandgendersensitiveness.

The table below (table 2)is the listofthe tenure

systemswhich theorganizationshasannounced.Thelistof

existingtenuresystemsbyUN-Habitatincludesbothleasehold

andownershipincountries,wherethelistbyWorldBankis

morefocusedonleaseholdsystem and GLTN presentsmore

connoted listoftenure systems.The hierarchy ofthe land

tenuresystemsaredifferentbetween theorganizations.Each

servesdifferentsectionsofdemandsandneedsofdifferent

- 34 -

UN-Habitat WorldBank GLTN

1.Freehold

2.Delayedfreehold

3.Registered

Leasehold

4.Publicrental

5.Privaterental

6.Sharedequity

7.Co-operative

tenure

8.Customary

ownership

9.Religioustenure

systems

-Islamic

10.Intermediate,or

temporary,

tenuresystem

11.Non-formal

tenuresystems

1.Squatters

2.Pavement

dwellers

3.Occupantsin

unauthorizedland

subdivisions

4.Holdersof

temporary

permitstooccupy

5.Holdersof

long-term or

renewable

permitstooccupy

6.Leaseholderswith

nocontract

7.Leaseholderswith

formalcontract

8.Long-term

leaseholders

9.Freeholders

1.Statutory/formal

tenure

2.Customarytenure

3.Informaltenure

4.Rental,Easements

5.Sharecropping

6.Communityor

groupowner-ship

Table 2 Announced Land Tenure Systems

society groups.Some systems exist under different tenure

systems.Forexample,publicrental,privaterentalandregistered

leaseholdarerestoredtotenuresystems.Also,differentlength

ofleasehold systems can be suggested into concise tenure

systems.Thetable3isthelistofthelandtenuresystemsafter

- 35 -

eliminating theduplicates.Thecombined listofthesystems

announcedbytheorganizations.

ExistingLandTenureSystems

1.Freehold

2.Delayedfreehold

3.Leaseholder(Registeredleasehold,tenantwithcontract)

4.Rental(public,private)

5.Sharedequity

6.Co-operativetenure

7.Statutorytenure

8.Customarytenure(formaltenure)

9.Religioustenuresystem (Islamic)

10.Communaltenure(communityorgroupownership)

11.Publictenure

12.Intermediateortemporarytenuresystem

13.Non-formal(informal)/squattertenant/extralegaltenure

Table 3 Existing Land Tenure Systems

3.2LandOwnershipCategorization

Thelandsystemsfrom thelistofexistinglandtenure

systems can be re classified into fourcategories:rental(use

right),uncertain ownership,collectiveownership and individual

ownership.Table4showseachtenuresystem withitsuseright

statusandownershipstatusclearly.Thisthesisistoinvestigate

- 36 -

Rental

(useright)

Uncertain

ownership

Collective

ownership

Individual

ownership

Freehold InformaltenureReligious

tenuresystemStatutorytenure

Delayed

freehold

Communal

tenure

Customary

tenure

Leaseholder Publictenure

Rental(public,

private)

Sharedequity

Co-operative

tenureIntermediate,

temporary

tenure

Table 4 Categorized Land Tenure Systems

andanalyzetheexisting landownershipsystem in theworld,

acknowledgingtheimportanceofthelandownershipinreducing

globalissueslikepoverty,developmentandimprovingrealestate

market.Focusing on the ownership status,those published

existingtenuresystemscanbedifferentiatebetweenrentaland

ownership.

Thefigure3illustratesthelandownershipcategorization

processinflow.Throughtheanalysisofthepilotstudiesonthe

land tenure systems,the systems could be categorized into

institutional frames: Statutory-private ownership,

Customary-private ownership, Public ownership, Religious

- 37 -

ownership,CommunalownershipandInformalownership.Each

ownershipsystem differin radicalfacts,such aswhetherthe

land has cadaster or not,to whom and how the land is

registeredandmanaged,andwhohastheownershiptotheland.

Thetenuresystemslandscapeinbothindustrializedand

developingcountriesconsistsofapatchworkofgovernment/state,

communal/private and individual/private property rights

arrangements(Bruce,1986).Dualormultiplelandtenuresystems

may co-existin many countries depends on severalfactors:

statutory law alongsideinformal,customary practices,religious

law and etc.A range of customary,statutory and hybrid

institutionsandregulationshavingdejureordefactoauthority

overthelandrightsco-existinthesameterritory,aphenomenon

referred to as legalpluralism(Cotula et al.,2004,2).The

ownershiptypology providesan overview oftheexisting land

tenure systems, which may improve the accessibility of

developmentprocess.Approachestolanddevelopmentdiffercase

bycase,buthavingtheknowledgeofthelandownershipstatus

ofthelandallowseasieraccessfordecisionmaking.

- 38 -

Figure 3 Land Ownership Categorization

- 39 -

Ⅳ.TheCharacteristicsofLandOwnership

Typology

4.1Statutory-PrivateOwnership

Theconceptofprivatepropertyrightsisanintegralpart

ofthelegalstructureofEuropeansociety(UnitedNations,1973).

The ‘Statutory-Private ownership’ system prioritizes

individualizationofthelandownership.Itistheofficialsystem

ofpeople’s relationship to the land,embedded within legal

documentationandupheldthroughanadministrativesystem for

creating and maintaining the land rights.Itis enforced by

writtencertificatesandformallykeptlandregistries.

AccordingtoFoodandAgricultureOrganizationofthe

UnitedNations(2002),statutory-privatesystem assignsrightsto

aprivatepartywhomaybeanindividual,amarriedcouple,a

group ofpeople,oracorporatebody such asa commercial

entity or non-profit organization. For example, within a

community,individualfamilies may have exclusive rights to

residentialparcels,agriculturalparcelsandcertaintrees.Other

membersofthecommunitycanbeexcludedfrom usingthese

resourceswithouttheconsentofthosewhoholdtherights.

Thestatutory-privateownershipsystem canbeillustrated

as a synonym with the formalwritten law.Administration

- 40 -

system ofstatutorytenuresystem prioritizesindividualizationof

thelandownershipthatisassignedtosomeauthority in the

public sector.The land is protected by legally enforceable

contract.Withalegalframeworkandefficientmanagement,the

system hasgoodsecurity.

The statutory-private ownership system forthe land

managementusually operatewith considerablepossibilitiesfor

negotiation(Chauveau and Jean-Pierre, 2007). The system

providesahighdegreeofsecurity,aswellasafreedom to

dispose or use as collateralfor loans.It can maximizes

commercialvalue,enablingpeopletorealizesubstantialincrease

inassetvalues.

4.2Customary-PrivateOwnership

Customary-privateownershipsystemshasitsuseand

allocationofthelandareundercontrolofacommunity;itmay

bedeterminedbythetriballeadersorbytraditionandrestricts

whatoccupantsofthelandmay dowith it.Thecustomary

systems are usually managed by a land or village chief,

traditionalrulerorcouncilofelders.The customary-private

landownershipsystem ischaracterizedbyitslargelyunwritten

nature,as itis generally connoted with the informalland

arrangements.The system is based on localpractices and

norms,and is flexible,negotiable and location specific.Its

- 41 -

principlesstem from rightsestablishedthroughfirstclearanceof

the land or conquest.This tenure type is notstatic,but

continuallyevolvingasaresultofdiversefactorslikecultural

interactions,socio-economicchangeand politicalprocesses.It

reflectstheparticularneedsofthelocalcommunity,mirrorsthe

culturalandsocialvaluesofthegroup.

AsFisher(1993),hasnoted,themajorcharacteristicof

customarytenureisthatthelandisregardedasbelongingnot

totheindividualbuttothewholesocialgroup.Thecustomary

landisnotsubjecttopersonalownership,althoughuse-rights

arealienablewithinandbetweenmembersofthecommunity.

Thereisabirthrighttosubsistenceopportunityforeachfamily

head;each family is granted use-rights of habitation and

cultivationaccordingtotheirneed.

The customary-private land ownership type evolved

from largely agriculturalsocieties in which there was little

competitionfortheland,andthereforethelandhadnoeconomic

valueinitself.Inthesystem,thelandisregardedassacred,

and man’s role is considered to be one ofstewardship,to

protectthe interests offuture generations.A single person

usuallyadministersthelandonbehalfofthegrouporcountry

member. Allocation, use, transfer and other land related

activitiesaredeterminedbyleadersofthecommunityaccording

to itsneeds,ratherthan through paymentwith token,beer,

moneyorcattle(Payne,2001).A recentreportsfrom FAO and

- 42 -

UN-Habitatcallsthesecustomarychiefsa‘livingcadaster’and

customarysystems‘themostenduringandflexiblemechanisms

forthemajority ofpeopletosecureaccesstotheland and

resolveconflicts’.Yiri(2006)hasdefinedthecustomarylandsas

comprisingoflandsownedbystools,skins,clansandfamilies.

Thelandsfollow traditionalrulerswhoaretheoccupantsof

stoolsandskins.Underthechieftaincyallcitizensofthestate

haveaccesstotheland.

ThetenuretypeisfoundinmostpartsofAfrica,Middle

East,Melanesia and once upon a time in North America.

Customary formsoftenurearealsorecognized in Indonesia,

Thailand,severalPacific Island states,including Papua New

Guinea,and in severalCentraland Latin American countries

includingBrazil,Ecuador,HondurasandMexico(Fricskaetal.,

2009).InRwanda,thecustomaryownershipsystemsarewell

suitedtoresolvingconflictswithinacommunitybutfacemuch

greaterdifficulty inreducing conflictacrossgroups,ethnicity,

and type of land use such as pastoralist and sedentary

agriculturalists(GershonandKlaus,2013).

Inthiscontext,traditionsarecontinuouslyreinventedto

backconflictingclaimsofdifferentsocialgroups(Cotula,2006).

Undercustomarylaw,therightsofindividualstoplotsofthe

land wereusufructuary only,though individualfarmerscould

passthelandontotheirheirs.Ownershipwasgenerallyvested

inalineageorclan,andachieforagroupofelderscontrolled

- 43 -

thelandsheldbysuchgroups(Dunning,1990).

InMalawi,thepowersofcustomaryauthoritiesoverthe

landcease.Inaddition,exceptwiththeconsentinwritingof

the Allocation Officer,no person or customary owner can

proceedwithortakecognizanceofanydisputeconcerningland.

Then,atthesecondstateoftheprocess,ademarcationofficer

entertainsclaimsonthelands,allocatedpursuanttotheterms

oftheallocationstatutes.Form oflaw andgovernment(Dunning,

1990).

CountrieslikeBotswanaand Nambiahassimilarland

ownershipsystem.Thecustomarylandrightforresidentialand

arablepurposesaresecuredbyanAct,Customarylandgrant

certificate.UndertheAct,thecustomary land rightmay be

cancelled with board approval,in severalcasessuch asfor

failuretoobservethelanduserestrictions,whenthelandis

required for public use,to ensure fair and equitable land

distributions,when the use ofland in contravention ofthe

customarylandlaw,andforfailuretocultivateordevelopthe

land within aspecificperiod.Underthecustomary law,the

governmentoperatewithin each tribalterritory allocating the

land forresidential,arable,industrial,commercialand other

purposes.In both Botswana and Nambia,they require the

written consentofthetraditionalauthority when transferring

thecustomarylandrights(USAID,2008).

InKenya,thecollectivelandholdingsystemsexistover

- 44 -

sixty-fivepercentofthecountry.Lack oflegally enforceable

rights to trustland caused generalland problems,such as

vulnerabilitytointerferenceorsettingapartofcustomaryrights

by the government,difficulty in securing creditand other

development finances using the land as collateral,lack of

administrativesupportforthecustomarysystem oflandrights,

makingthepositionoftheoccupantsofthevulnerable,andlack

ofenforceablecustomarylandrightstograntcommunitylandin

exchangeformoneyortobolstertheirpersonalpower.Legal

insecuritymakesitdifficultforpeopletoprotecttheirland.The

demandforaregimeofcommunity landtenurehasresulted

from whether from setting apart,or any other form of

compulsoryacquisition

There have been recognitions of the need of

documenting and mapping the existing customary land

ownership systems to derive broad policy principles that

facilitatethecustomarylaw.Itwillestablishaclearlegislative

framework,protection ofthe customary rights to land and

land-basedresources.NationalLandPolicyFormulationProcess,

NLPFP,istoestablishframeworktooperatethelandmarket

moreefficientlyandeffectively.Themostimportantofproviding

framework for the management and administration of the

community land ofthe customary land law has significant

implicationsforsecurityofthelandownershipofthemajority

ofKenyanswhoderivelivelihoodsfrom communityheldland

- 45 -

andtheland-basednaturalresources(TheConstitutionofKenya,

2007).

InMozambique,formalizationofcustomaryownershipis

onlyavailableatthecommunitylevel,nottheindividuallevel.

Thecommunitiesarefreeto abideby theirown customary

rulesandgovernancestructureswithintheircollectiveholding

andadaptthem asneeded.Thereareonlysingleform ofthe

landrightestablishedbythelandlaw inMozambique,referred

toasa‘DUAT’,DireitodeUsoeAproveitamentodeTerra,

whichistherightofuseandbenefittotheland.Inthesystem

ofDUAT,thereisarecognition oflong-standing occupancy,

whichisthecustomaryoccupation.Itistheoccupationofthe

landby individualpersonsorby localcommunitieswith the

accordance of customary norms(Norfolk,2009).The DUAT

system affordscommunitiesandgoodfaithoccupier’sperpetual

useandexploitationrights.Withthesystem,rightholdersare

abletotransfertheirrightstothelandtoothers.Therightto

theland are vested in alladultmemberofthecommunity

whichcanbeestablishedbydocumentaryproofandthroughthe

oraltestimony ofcommunity members(Norfolk,2009;USAID,

2008).

Incustomary-privateownershipsystem type,alltheland

areallocatedbycustomaryauthoritieslikechiefs.Peopleliving

undercustomaryownershipsystems,placemoreimportanceon

equity and respect for cultural traditions.The benefit of

- 46 -

customary ownership isminimization ofthetransaction costs

anditissimpletoadminister(boydelletal.,2008).Itmaintain

theirtraditionalpowerandsocialresponsibilitiestoallocatethe

rights to use, resolve conflicts and carry out overall

managementofthe customary land.Itresults vulnerable to

abuse under pressure of urban development. Also, poor

customaryleadershipmayweakenitslegitimacy.Thecustomary

ownership also has vulnerability in markets,as customary

ownershipexistmostly in rurallandofcountries,ruralland

markets are highly limiter,the customary landowners are

asset-rich,cash poorandhavevery littleinformation onthe

real opportunity cost value of their land(Anderson, 2006;

Anthony,2010).

4.3PublicOwnership

Publicownershipisasystem appliesonthepublicland,

inthecustodianshipofstate,municipalityorlocalauthority.It

is known as the outcome ofsocialistideology.In socialist

countries,allrightsarevested in thestate.Theconceptof

publiclandownershipenableallsectionsofsocietytoobtain

accesstotheland(Payne,2001).Thepublicorprivatedomainof

thestateand oflocalgovernment(LasserveandSelod,2007).

Virtually allsocietiesacknowledgetheconceptofpublicland

ownership to some degree.Buildings for public institution,

- 47 -

governmentoffice,andnationalparksinanycountriesvestin

publicownership.Initsextremeform,somecountrieslikein

Africa,thestatemay own alloftheland and alsoallocate

rights to access, use, development and transfer, a

situation(DuncanandHanstad,2001).

PublicOwnershipmaybereservedforareasofstrategic

importanceorbenefitforcommunity.Italsomaybereservedin

case of future need.Public ownership reduce the inequity

betweenthelandownerswhodoordonotreceivedevelopment

permission,and forensuring thatthe community gains the

overallfinancialbenefit(KivellandMckay,1987).

Ontheotherhand,theconcepthavelimitationsofthe

demandswhichitplacesuponthecapabilityandintegrityof

administrativesystemsandtheirabilitytorespondefficientlyto

changes in demand.Ithas rarely achieved high levels of

efficiencyduetobureaucraticinefficiency.Difficultiesinpractice

haveraisedthecostsoflandmanagementandconstrainedlevel

ofinvestmentand developmentwhich would have benefited

lowerincomegroups(Payne,1996;2001).

ThelandsinsocialistcountrieslikeChinaandVietnam

areunderpubliclandownershipsystems.InVietnam,seventy

percentofthepopulationlivesinruralareas,primarilyworking

in agriculture,and aboutone-third ofthe land area is in

agriculturaluse.ThelandinVietnam belongstothepopulation

asawhole,andisadministeredbythestateonthepublic’s

- 48 -

behalf.Citizensandorganizationsrelyupontheland-userights,

butdo notown the land.They only have usufructrights,

meaningrightholdersmayusetheland,butlandownershipis

notallowed.Theuserightsincludetherighttoastate-issued

land-userightcertificate,calledLURC.Itentitlesholderstosell,

rent,exchange,mortgageandbequeaththeiruserights,andto

excludeothersfrom theland.Thecertificateisforsecured

tenure,formalland transactions,accessto formalcreditand

legalprotection ofthe land use right(United States Agency

International,2010).The land law governs the powers and

responsibilitiesoftheStateasrepresentativeoftheownership

ofthelandbytheentirepeopleforuniform administrationof

thelandandtheregimeforadministrationanduseoftheland;

and therightsand obligationsoftheland users.Chinahas

achievedagreatsuccessinreducingpovertythrougheconomic

growth since the economic reforms thatstarted in the late

1970s.Localadministrativeallocationofthelandtherefore,cases

oflandlessnessisveryrareinChina(Montalvoetal.,2010).The

land belongs to the entire people with the State as the

representativeowner.

The State shallexercise the rightofdisposalwith

respecttothelandwhendecidinglandusepurposesbypassing

decisionsandbyconsideringandapprovingthelandusezoning

andthelanduseplans,decidingthequotasonallocationofland

andondurationoflanduse,decidingallocationofland,leaseof

- 49 -

land,landrecoveryandpermissionforconversionoflanduse

purposeanddetermininglandprices.Statecarriesoutuniform

stateadministrationofthelandasrepresentativeofownership

of the land by the entire people.The State shallissue

certificates ofthe land use rightto the people when they

allocating landbyorleasing landfrom theState,exceptfor

leasesofagriculturallandtouseforcommunitypurposesofa

commune,ward ortownship (SocialistRepublic ofVietnam,

2004).

4.4ReligiousOwnership

Many literatureshavebeen studiedon religioustenure,

whichisdifferentfrom the‘religiousownership’inthisthesis.

Thereligiousownership which thisthesisdefinesistheland

belongstotheking,emir,royallineagesorsultans.Inmostof

thecountries,theroyalregimehasbeeneliminated,butcountries

likeSaudiArabia,Bhutan,Brunei,UnitedArabEmirates,andetc.

stillremains some degrees ofthe monarchy and theirland

ownershipsystem.KingofMorocco,SultanQuaboosofOman,

KingAbdullahofJordan,theEmirofKuwaitandSheikhHamad

ofQatararethecasesoftheroyallineages.Theprevalenceof

therulerastheultimateownerofthelandistypicalinthose

countries.Thoserulersarethelargestindividualland owner.

Withamonarchatitshead,thestatethatclaimsownershipof

- 50 -

all land and is feudal in its conception and often

totalitarian(Cahill,2011).Thecentralleveldecisionsoftenoverride

theirlocalmanagementfunctions,itbases on the normative

frameworkwhichhasinconsistencies.Morethan3/4ofallland

is public land in the countries,and those land remains not

completed.Being partialinterestorsecondary land rightsare

neither registered nor robust, results issues of

insecurity(Zommermann,2011).

UAE is a federation ofseven emirates:Abu Dhabi,

Ajman,AlFujayrah,Dubai,RasalKhaymah,Sharjah,andUmm

alQaywayn.Eachhasitsowngovernment,whichfunctionsin

tandem withthefederalgovernment.Thelargestemirate,Abu

Dhabi,has its own centralgoverning body,the Executive

Council,chairedbythecrownprince.Similartootheremirates

the NationalConsultative Councilfunctions like the Federal

National Council, and local departments carry out various

administrativefunctions(libraryofcongress,2007).

UAE hasaveryrapid growthintermsofpopulation

andeconomy.Forexample,fiftyyearsago,thestatusofDubai

wasaninsignificant,poverty-riddensettlementof30,000.Today

itis a city-state of1.4 million people expanding its global

outreachandundertakingarangeofhigh-profileinvestmentsand

acquisitions.Thereligiousownershipfunctionsasthekeyfactor

ofinsuccessoftherapiddevelopment.UAEhasaveryunique

developmentrecord.Ithas been government-led development,

- 51 -

whichmeansthegovernment,nottheprivatesector,takesthe

leadinthedevelopment.

The decision-making structure in UAE is extremely

centralized.Althoughnotademocraticideal,centralizationallows

for fast decision making and significant coordination of

developmentactivitiesandinvestments.Indecisionmakingandin

implementation,speedhasbecomeatrademarkofDubai,andit

allows much tighter integration and easier decision making.

Centralizedapproachisoneofthedefiningcharacteristicsofthe

developmentalstateparadigm inDubai-hasbeenreinforcedby

the traditional tribal(patrimonial) leadership style. This has

enabled the city-state to carefully build a portfolio of

complementary assets that possess significantbackward and

forward linkages in the economy and thus secures a high

developmentalimpactforDubai(Hvidt,2009).

Theknownreligiouslandtenuresystem isaconceptof

dualownership.Withitsreligiousterms,allpropertyandland

vest in God,but are temporally enjoyed by human with

responsibility.LiteraturesreferthereligioustenureasanIslamic

landtenuresystem.UnderIslamictheory,thestate’sroleinland

managementisseenassupervisinglandultimatelybelongingto

God. Lim(2006) defines, Islamic property rights framework

conceives ofland as a sacred trustbutpromotes individual

ownershipwitharedistributiveethos.

Both ofthereligiousownershipand thereligiousland

- 52 -

tenureshareacommoncharacterofIslam,themonotheisticand

AbrahamicreligionarticulatedbytheQur’an.Islam istheworld’s

secondlargestreligion.Over1.6billionorabout23.4% ofthe

worldpopulationareMuslims,anditisdominantreligioninthe

Middle East,Africa,and some countries ofAsia.Religious

Propertyrightsacrossthe57Muslim majoritycountries.Cannot

begeneralizedaboutortooeasilyattributedtoreligiousinfluence

or history alone.It is conditionalon the requirement that

propertynotbeusedwastefullyorexploitatively,orinaway

thatwilldepriveothersofheirjustlyacquiredproperty.Religious

ownershiplandsareoutsideofthecommerciallandmarket,sois

ofteninefficientlymanaged.

4.5CommunalOwnership

What ‘communal’ generally means is a degree of

communitycontroloverwhoisallowedintothegroup,thereby

qualifyingforanallocationoflandforresidenceandcropping,

aswellasrightsofaccesstothecommonpropertyresources

usedbythegroup(Claassensetal.,2004).Withthemeansof

communal,communallandownershipsystem ischaracterizedas

aterritoryinpossessionofthatunderacommunalsystem.The

communalencompassrightofcommons may existwithin a

communitywithrighttouseindependentlytheholdingsofthe

community.

- 53 -

The generalcharacteristic of communalland tenure

system typeisthatrightstothelandandnaturalresourcesare

sharedandrelative.Therightshaveflexibleboundariesbetween

avariety ofsocialunits,anditexistwithin ahierarchy of

sociallevels.Thecommunallandrightsandthecommunalland

regimesrefertothetenurepatternsamongstcommunalgroups

ofpeople(Ostrom,2001).The communalland tenure system

referstomultiplelevelsofcommunitydecisionmakingaround

locallandissuessuchasthelandrightsandaccess,spatial

arrangements, the land use management and governance

practices(UN-Habitat,2010).

Underthe system ofcommunalownership,traditional

leaderssuch as chiefs,family headsand community leaders

controlindividualeconomics.Theleadersarewhodecide,asa

whole,how thevillagelandwillbemanaged.Thelandtenure

in the community is heavily influenced by the traditional

precedents, and its management determined by communal

decision making conducted in a traditionalframework(Powell,

1997).Asthetribalchiefsandheadmenplaykeyrolesinthe

landadministration,thelandisallocatedandadministeredby

traditionalauthorities.Mostsouthern African countries have

communalland managementsystem wherelocalcommunities

participate in managementactivities.Communaltenure deny

publicinvestmentin infrastructure,industrialand agricultural

development.Thishasresultedconcentrationareasofthepoor

- 54 -

and underdeveloped communities, highest levels of

unemployment,andlowestlevelofliteracy.

In thecommunalownership areas,reformshavebeen

bogged down by an uneasy balanceofpowerbetween local

governmentandtraditionalauthorities,limitedindependentcivil

society organization,and a continuing lack ofcertainty by

governmentonwhichapproachtoadopt.Thecommunalland

rightsareincreasinglycircumscribedandlimitedbygovernment

regulations.A distortedandlegallyinsecureform ofcommunal

tenureresulted(Claassensetal.,2004).Communaltenureand

theirAfricancommunalethicof‘universalaccess’totheland

have resulted constrained emerging between rich and poor

peasants,peasantsandproletarians.

In brief,on one hand,the retention ofa form of

communal tenure facilitated cheap labor policies and

cost-effectivecontrolofruralpopulationsfrom above;onthe

other, systems of the communal land rights underpinned

independentland-basedlivelihoods,andfacilitatedresistanceto

policiesofexploitationandexternalcontrol,andweretherefore

often actively defendedby ruralcommunities.Ruralstruggles

sometimesshowedthe‘emancipatorypossibilities’ofinvocations

of custom and community(Mamdani,1996).The communal

tenurepracticestendtodiscouragetheexistenceofanactive

urban land marketwhich help corporatesand institutionsto

developtheurbanlandandindividualstogainaccesstothe

- 55 -

urbanland(UN-Habitat,2010).

Between1994and1998,tenurereform havebeencreated

byDepartmentofLandAffairs,tosecuretherightsoflabor

tenantsandfarm workers,alsotocreatenew form oflegal

entityforholdinglandrightsincommon.In1996,Communal

PropertyAssociationAct28wasestablished,whichintendedas

atemporarymeasuretosecuretherightsofpeopleoccupying

the land without formal documentary rights, pending the

introductionofmorecomprehensivereform.Intheabsenceof

such legislation,the Act has been extended annually and

remainsinforce.

Most controversial remains the issue of traditional

authority and its role in communaltenure regimes.Political

dealsmayhaveinformedtherapidprogressoftheCommunal

Land Rights Bill through Parliament, but the long-term

prospectsforchiefsandheadmenarenotatallclear(Claassens

etal.,2004).Thishasresultedinwideracceptanceofthecore

featuresofcommunaltenure:rightsto theland and natural

resources are shared and relative,flexible boundaries exist

betweenavarietyofsocialunits,andrightsarenestedwithina

hierarchy of social and administrative units or

levels(Okoth-Ogendo,2002).

In mostofthe ruralAfrican communities are under

communaltenuresystem,communitiesoperateto expressan

order,ownership,possession and accessto regulateuseand

- 56 -

transferofthelandunderthecommunallandtenurepolicy.

InEthiopiapastoralism isextensivelypracticed,asmore

than60percentofthetotallandmassofthecountryandare

home to pastoralcommunities.The pastoralist communities

under socio-economic and cultural systems are based on

communality.Pastoralism is,oneofthemany socio-economic

strategiesbasedonherding domesticatedlivestockongrazing

lands communally owned and used by the communities and

theirmembers.Thelandisheldtraditionallyunderthecollective

possessionandownershipoftheircommunity.Theircommunal

landtenurearrangementshavetraditionalrulesandregulations

thataim atharmonizingecological,economicandsocialbenefits.

Traditionaleldersareatthecoreofcommunalnaturalresources

management,asthelandforpastoralistcommunitiesarealso

communallyownedandadministeredbytraditionalelders.Thus,

communalpropertyrightsaresimplygrouppropertyrights,but

sometimes,common property is logically extended to public

property or state property-with the community being the

countryasawhole(Abdulahi,2007).

Dam(2006)pointsthatalthoughthelandsystemstoday

unquestionably differgreatly from country to country,even

withinareasonsuchasinSub-SaharanAfrica,allcommunal

ownershipissoinefficientthatitisanobstacletoeconomic

development.

- 57 -

4.6InformalOwnership

Informal ownership applies on the land remaining

unregistered,whicharenotundertheofficiallandmanagement

system,therefore there are no oronly little information in

settlements.Informalsettlements are synonym forunofficial,

unceremonious, intimate, irregular, unplanned, spontaneous,

unpretentious, squatting and unauthorized settlements. The

conceptof‘informalownership’isanumbrellaterm whichis

usedtocapturevarietysituationsoftheinsecurelandtenure.

Within acategory ofinformality therearevarioussituations,

including numerous tenure types such as owners without

registered titles, “squatting, unauthorized subdivisions, and

unofficialrentalarrangement.”Informaltenure exists without

officialapproval,itcan bedescribed asunwritten customary

tenuresystem(Lamba,2005;Sliuzas,2004p.3;UNHSP,2002).

Therearevarietyofwaystodefineinformalsettlements,

on one hand there is general agreement on their core

characteristics such as most houses are self-built by the

families occupying them using initially temporary building

materials, the settlements are illegal in some way, the

settlementslackinbasiclivingservices,andtheyaremostly

occupiedby peopleliving insituationsofpoverty(Gilbertand

Gugler,1992;Napier2002).

Informaltenuresystem hasvarioussituationssuchas

- 58 -

ownerswithorwithoutregisteredtitles,possessorswithwritten

proof of purchase,possessors who bought an irregular or

clandestineplotthroughacontractthatisnotvalidtotransfer

theproperty,thelandoccupierswhoareconvertedintoowners

when thetimeforprescription oftherightsoftheoriginal

owners have elapsed,buyers ofplots orpublic housing by

meansofthetransferofadocumentofproofofpurchasenot

recognized by the state, and informal owners who use

front-personstoregistertheirproperties(UN-Habitat,2005).

Informalsettlements and slums are both under the

informalownershipsystem,buttheyareslightlydifferentina

way.AccordingtotheOECD,informalsettlementsareinthe

areas where groups of housing units which have been

constructedonthelandthattheoccupantshavenolegalclaim

tooroccupyillegally;theyareunplannedsettlementsandareas

wherehousingisnotincompliancewithcurrentplanningand

building regulations.Informal ownership has very insecure

tenure characteristic which induce problems such as urban

poverty,lacking basichousing services and health problems.

UN-Habitatdefinesslum asanareainacitycharacterizedby

substandardhousingandsqualorandlackingintenuresecurity.

The characteristics of slum area vary between geographic

regions, they are inhabited by poor people and socially

disadvantagedpeople.Similartoinformalsettlementsmostof

theslumslackincleanwater,electricity,sanitationandother

- 59 -

basiclivingservices.Slum dwellershavenochoicebuttorely

oninformalserviceproviders.Theservicesareprovidedata

cost that is much higher than that which other urban

householdspay,althoughtheinformalsettlementshasnochoice

ofrelyingontheservices(AlainDurand-Lasserve,2006).

Poorpeoplewholivesininformaltenuresettlementsare

oftenlocatedonmarginalland,includingriverbanks,steepgullies

andmangroveswamps,and/oronlandwithdisputedownership.

Thosesettlementsin such locationsareatagreaterrisk of

being affected by naturaldisasterssuch as flooding.Poverty

induces insecure tenure,which itselfworsens the poverty in

slums.Ithasstructuralnegativeimpactonthesituationofthe

poorinnumerouswayssuchasprecariousness,vulnerabilityto

harassment,pooraccesstobasicservicesandhealthproblems.

Insecure tenure also has a negative impact from the

governments’pointofview,itinfluences on therate oftax

recovery through localtaxation on property and on economic

activities.Governmenthasdifficultyincostrecoveryforservices

andinfrastructureswithoutproperidentificationofurbanservices

beneficiaries(Chandetal.,2008).

UN-Habitat(2006) has announced that in 2005, an

estimated 934 million people lived withoutsecure tenure in

informalsettlementsintheurbanareasofdevelopingcountries.

Toimprovelandownershipsecurity,informalsettlementsmust

beregisteredandregulated.Informalsettlementissueshasbeen

- 60 -

observedinmanydevelopingcountriesandAfrica.Thesecurity

oflandownershipisoneofthemostimportantlandissues,as

itis the key factor ofthe rightfor quality ofavailable

infrastructure,developthelandandprovidesocialandphysical

basicservicestotheland.

Urbangrowthanddevelopmentincreasethepressureon

suchsocialinstitutions.Theyweakenandbreakdown,andlead

toincreasedtenureinsecurity.Toimprovethesecuritythrough

policyandpractice,abetterunderstandingisneededofhow the

informalsystemsthroughwhichhalformoreoftheresidential

landincitiesisdeliveredoperate,areevolvingandinteractwith

the formalland administration systems(Leduka and Rakodi,

2004).

Figure 4 Urban Housing Units by Water and Toilet Facilities

(source: Napier, 2002; UNCHS, 2001)

- 61 -

Itisclearthatresidentsareregularly exposedtothe

harshrealitiesofspatialandenvironmentalmarginalizationthat

accompanylivingininformalsettlements.Alsointhecontextof

rapidurbanization,growingincomepovertyandhumanpoverty

andalackofappropriateresponsesbygovernmentsarefactors

drivenbyurbanexpansion.TheAfricancontinenthasrangeof

formsofinformalsettlement.Especiallysub-SaharanAfricais

knowntohaveahighestpercentageofpeoplelivinginpoverty

andinsecuresettlementsthathavevulnerabilitytoawiderange

ofenvironmentalhazards(Fourie,1999;Napier,2002;UNCHS,

2001).

Figure 5 Summary of informal settlement levels in the

sub-Saharan region

(source: Napier, 2002)

- 62 -

Morethan 50percentoftheperi-urban population in

Africa live underinformalownership system.also about40

percentin Asia live in informalsettlements,and around 70

percentofKampala’sresidentsinUgandaliveinslums(Dam,

2006;Deininger,2003).In Jamaica has a large number of

squatters,20% of the population,lives below the national

povertyline.USAID announcedthatthelandtenureinJamaica

can be classified into legal,extralegal,and customary.The

informal land delivery processes have provided a high

percentageofallresidentiallandinBeninCity.Theinformal

sectorhasdominatedthelandmarket,anditappearstooperate

unfetteredforaverylongtime(Justin,2012).

Inhabitantsliveunderinformalownershipsystems,their

occupationofthelandandhousingisillegal.Undertheinformal

ownership,thereareslum settlementswhichisthegenericterm

used to classify informal, illegal or unplanned

settlements(UN-Habitat,2006).

- 63 -

Ⅴ.CONCLUSION

5.1 Summary of Major Findings and

Implicationofthestudy

Accesstothesecurelandandhousingisaprerequisite

forreducingthegloballandissuessuchaspoverty.Thereare

millionsofpeopleliving withoutsufficientsecurityandunder

threatofeviction.They sufferfrom theinsecurelandtenure

andarelimitedtothebasiclivingservicesontheirland.The

securelandownershipisfundamentaltoshelterandlivelihoods

aswellastherealizationofhumanrights,povertyreduction,

economicprosperityandsustainabledevelopment.

Theobjectiveofthisresearch istoanalyzetheland

ownership systems in the world where government,civil

society, the private sector and development cooperation

initiativeshavebeenimplemented.Thelandownershipsystem

isverycomplicatedsoonecannotpredictacountry’ssystem

withoutanin-depthstudying.Theproblem definitionformulates

aresearch question:“How doestheland ownership systems

differintheworld?”

Manyorganizationsandinstitutionshavebeenreported

aboutthelandtenuresystemsinmanyaspects,butnostudies

- 64 -

havefocusedonalloftheexistingownershipsystemsinthe

world.Therearepreviousstudiestrytoidentifyandemphasis

theimportanceofeachcountry’slandtenuresystem,property

security,anditsrelatedpolicyandlaws.Thereareliterature

reviewsonthelandtenuresystemswhichpaysattentionsona

specific country,group of countries with similar cultural,

socio-economical,religiousbackgroundsordevelopingcountries

pointofview.Therewerealsoexisting studiesthattriedto

conductwaysofthelandreform intheirstudying countries.

Therehadbeennumerousresearchesonthelandtenuresystem

and the land ownership to deduct implications for the

reunificationofcountrieslikeNorthandSouthKorea,problem

of poverty, or issues related to urbanization as well.

Categorization of the land ownership system with an

institutionalframes and describing each types’characteristics

arethecriticalissueofthisstudy thatdifferentiateitfrom

previousresearch.

According to the literature surveys have conducted,

manydifferenttypesofthelandtenuresystem werefound,as

many nationalorganizations and institutions have published

voluminousliteraturesonthelandtenure.Thoseexistingtenure

typesarecondensedthroughthisthesis.Thelandownership

andthelandrightsvarywithincitiesandcountriesundertheir

tenure system.Each ownership types have advantages and

limitationswiththeircharacteristicsandbackgroundofthem.

- 65 -

Toclassifythelandownership,asthisthesisfocuseson

thelandownershipstatusissues,firsttheexistinglandtenure

systems can be divided into two groups of rental and

ownership.The ownership group can be classify into small

groupsaccording towhohastheland ownership:individual,

collectiveandnoownership.Then,sortsthem intominorgroups

dependsonitsstatus,whetherthelandisregulatedornotand

who controls the land.Through the classification,the land

tenure systems have been categorized into six types:

‘Statutory-private ownership’, ‘Customary-private ownership’,

‘Publicownership’,‘Religiousownership’,‘Communalownership’

and ‘Informalownership’.Thisstudy serveson a worldwide

level,asthecategorizedownershipsystemsprovideanoverview

ofthelandtenuresystemsacrosstheworldasaspectrum.

The statutory-private ownership system is the basic

system thatappliesonwesternpreoccupationswiththerights

of the individual. The land ownership system prioritizes

individualizationofthelandownership.Itistheofficialsystem

ofpeople’s relationship to the land,embedded within legal

documentationandupheldthroughanadministrativesystem for

creating and maintaining the land rights.Itis enforced by

writtencertificatesandformallykeptlandregistries.

Thecustomary-privateownershipsystemshasitsuse

andallocationofthelandareundercontrolofacommunity;it

may bedeterminedby thetriballeadersorby traditionand

- 66 -

restricts whatoccupants ofthe land may do with it.The

customaryownershipsystemsareusuallymanagedbyalandor

village chief, traditional ruler or council of elders. The

customarylandtenureischaracterizedbyitslargelyunwritten

nature, as it is generally connoted with informal land

arrangements.The system is based on localpractices and

norms,andisflexible,negotiableandlocationspecific.

Publicownershipisasystem appliesonthepublicland,

in thecustodianshipofstate,municipality,orlocalauthority.

Public Ownership may be reserved for areas of strategic

importanceorbenefitforcommunity.Italsomaybereservedin

case of future need.Public ownership reduce the inequity

betweenthelandownerswhodoordonotreceivedevelopment

permission,and forensuring thatthe community gains the

overallfinancialbenefit(KivellandMckay,1987).

Thegeneralcharacteristicofthecommunallandtenure

system typeisthatrightstolandandnaturalresourcesare

sharedandrelative.Therightshaveflexibleboundariesbetween

avariety ofsocialunits,anditexistwithin ahierarchy of

sociallevels.Undera system ofthecommunalland tenure,

traditionalleaderssuchaschiefs,familyheadsandcommunity

leaders controlindividualeconomics.The leaders are who

decide,asawhole,how villagelandwillbemanaged.Theland

tenureinthecommunityisheavilyinfluencedbythetraditional

precedents, and its management determined by communal

- 67 -

decisionmakingconductedinatraditionalframework(Powell,

1997).

There are variety of ways to define Informal

settlements,but there is generalagreement on their core

characteristics such as most houses are self-built by the

families occupying them using initially temporary building

materials, the settlements are illegal in some way, the

settlementslackinbasiclivingservices,andtheyaremostly

occupiedby peopleliving insituationsofpoverty(Gilbertand

Gugler,1992;Napier,2002).

Therehasbeengrowingtrendtoaffordlegalrecognition

to governing the land tenure.Access to the land and the

associatedsecurity oftenurehavesignificantimplicationsfor

developmentand realestate market.Realestate is a major

sourceofvalueinmostofthecountriesintheworld.

5.2FutureResearchAgendas

Therearenumberofresearchlimitationsinthisthesis.

Toaddresstheresearch objectiveofthestudy,thisthesisis

examined through literature survey analysis methodology,

qualitativeinnaturetocollectalotofnumberofpublications

and papers related to the study topic.The collection ofthe

literaturereviewshavebeendonethroughvarietyofresources

includingthearticlesofjournals,publishedpapers,thesispapers

- 68 -

andpublishedbooks.

InqualitativeresearchtheInformationcollectedisinthe

form ofanalyticalnarratives ratherthan statistically treatable

data.Qualitative research method also requires training and

experience.Conducting the literature survey,there have been

limitationsintimeframe.Thequalitativeresearchgenerallytakes

moretimeto collectthedata when compared to quantitative

research,dataanalysisisoftentimeconsuming.Therearemany

previousstudiesrelatedtothethesistopicwhichhavenotbeen

reviewedandanalyzed.Therewerealsoissuesincollectingthe

literatures,duetothelanguagerestriction,thereareonlyEnglish

andKoreanliteraturesusedinthethesis.Havingaccesstomore

languages permits wider-ranging review of the collected

documents.Enhancing those limitations of the research will

improvethequalityofthestudyaswellasbeabletopresent

morein-depthstudy.

- 69 -

Reference

Abdulahi,Mohammud.2007."Thelegalstatusofthecommunalland

holdingsystem inEthiopia:thecaseofpastoralcommunities."

InternationalJournalonMinorityandGroupRights14(1):85.

Afridi,HaiderK,andHaroonBaryalay.2010."UnitedArabEmirates."

Alchian,Armen A,and Harold Demsetz.1973."The property right

paradigm."Thejournalofeconomichistory33(01):16-27.

Ali,DanielAyalew,Klaus Deininger,and Markus Goldstein.2014.

"Environmentalandgenderimpactsoflandtenureregularization

inAfrica:pilotevidencefrom Rwanda."JournalofDevelopment

Economics.

ALIYU,NUHU.2009."compulsory acquisitionofcommunallandand

compensationissues:TheCaseofMinnaMetropolis."

Anderson,Tim.2006."On theeconomicvalueofcustomary landin

PapuaNew Guinea."PacificEconomicBulletin21(1):138-152.

Arko-Adjei, Anthony. 2011. Adapting land administration to the

institutional framework of customary tenure: the case of

peri-urbanGhana:IOSPress.

Augustinus,Clarissa.2003.Handbook on bestpractices,security of

tenure,and access to land:implementation ofthe Habitat

Agenda:Un-habitat.

Aumann,Moshe.1974.LandownershipinPalestine,1880-1948:Israel

AcademicCommitteeontheMiddleEast.

AustralianGovernment,DepartmentofForeignAffairsandTrade.2008.

"Case studies on customary land and development in the

Pacific."

Baranyi,Stephen,CarmenDianaDeere,andManuelMorales.2004.land

and developmentin latin america:Internationaldevelopment

- 70 -

researchcentre.

Barraclough,SolonLovett,andUnitedNationsResearchInstitutefor

SocialDevelopment.Grassroots initiatives for Land Reform.

1999.Land Reform in developing countries:Theroleofthe

state and other actors.Vol.101:United Nations Research

InstituteforSocialDevelopmentGeneva.

Barry,MB,D Dewar,JF Whittal,and IF Muzondo.2007."Land

ConflictsinInformalSettlements:WallacedeneinCapeTown,

SouthAfrica."UrbanForum.

Bell,K.2006."Land Administration and Management:theNeed for

InnovativeApproachestoLandPolicyandTenureSecurityin

EastAsia."FIGCommission.

Bertaud,Alain,Bertrand Renaud,and Banco Mundial.1995.Cities

withoutlandmarkets:locationandlanduseinthesocialistcity:

World Bank,Transportation,Water,and Urban Development

Department, Transport Division and Financial Sector

DevelopmentDepartment.

Besley,Timothy.1995."Property rights and investmentincentives:

Theory and evidence from Ghana." journal of Political

Economy:903-937.

Besley,Timothy,and Robin Burgess.2000."Land reform,poverty

reduction,andgrowth:evidencefrom India."QuarterlyJournal

ofEconomics:389-430.

Bezemer,DirkJ.2006."Povertyintransitioncountries."JEconBus

9:11-35.

Boggs,Patton.2007."Propertylaw intheUAE".

Boydell,Spike,GarrickSmall,andCommissionerJohnSheehan 2008.

"Review ofFinancialManagementofCustomaryandOtherLand

inthePacific."

- 71 -

Brown,Jennifer.2004.Ejidosand comunidadesin Oaxaca,Mexico:

Impactofthe1992reforms:RuralDevelopmentInstitute.

Bruce,John W.1998.Review oftenure terminology:Land Tenure

Center,UniversityofWisconsin-Madison.

Bruce,JohnW.2006.Landlaw reform:Achievingdevelopmentpolicy

objectives:WorldBankPublications.

Cahill,Kevin.2001.“Whoownstheworld?:TheQueen,thefamilyof

theactressNicoleKidman,KingAbdullahofSaudiArabiaand

themediatyco.”NewStatesman.

Chand,Satish,andCharlesYala.2008."Informallandsystemswithin

urbansettlementsinHoniaraandPortMoresby."Makingland

work2:85-106.

Chauveau,Jean-Pierre,andLorenzoCotula.2007.Changesincustomary

landtenuresystemsinAfrica:Iied.

Chevalier,Francois.1967."TheejidoandpoliticalstabilityinMexico."

ThePoliticsofConformityinLatinAmerica:158-91.

Christman,John.1991."Self-ownership,equality,andthestructureof

propertyrights."PoliticalTheory:28-46.

Claassens,Aninka.2014."‘Communal Land’,Property Rights and

TraditionalLeadership."

Cohen,Barney.2006."Urbanization in developing countries:Current

trends,futureprojections,andkeychallengesforsustainability."

Technologyinsociety28(1):63-80.

Coldham,Simon.1995."Landtenurereform inTanzania:legalproblems

andperspectives."TheJournalofModernAfricanStudies33

(02):227-242.

Compact,Nambia's Millennium Challenge. 2011. "Communal Land

Support (CLS) Sub-activity: Communication Strategy &

ImplementationPlan."

- 72 -

company,Practicallaw.2011."countryQnA:UnitedArabEmirates."

congress,libraryof.2007."countryprofile:UNITEDARABEMIRATES."

Congressi,Kennedy.2009."<Thegrowingdemandforland.pdf>."

Cotula,Lorenzo.2006.Land and waterrightsin the Sahel:tenure

challengesofimproving accesstowaterforagriculture.Vol.

139:IIED.

Cotula,Lorenzo,CamillaToulmin,andCedHesse.2004.Landtenure

and administration in Africa: lessons of experience and

emerging issues:InternationalInstitute forEnvironmentand

DevelopmentLondon.

Cousins,Ben,and Aninka Claassens.2004."Communalland rights,

democracy and traditional leaders in post-apartheid South

Africa." Securing Land and Resource Rights in Africa:

Pan-AfricanPerspectives:139-54.

Crais,CliftonC.2006."Custom andthepoliticsofsovereigntyinSouth

Africa."journalofsocialhistory39(3):721-740.

Creekmore,Mitch.2000."EJIDO LAND VS.PRIVATE PROPERTY–

WHAT’STHEDIFFERENCE?"ARIZ.J.REALEST.& Bus.,

Mar:1,1-2.

Cymet,David.1992.From ejido to metropolis,another path:an

evaluation on ejido property rights and informal land

developmentinMexicoCity:P.Lang.

Dam,KennethW.2006."land,law andeconomicdevelopment."

DeVany,Arthur,andNicolasSanchez.1979."Landtenurestructures

and fertility in Mexico." The Review of Economics and

Statistics:67-72.

Deininger,K.,andG.Feder.2009."LandRegistration,Governance,and

Development:EvidenceandImplicationsforPolicy."TheWorld

Bank Research Observer 24 (2):233-266. doi:

- 73 -

10.1093/wbro/lkp007.

Deininger,Klaus W.2003.Land policies for growth and poverty

reduction:WorldBankPublications.

Demsetz,Harold.1967."Toward a theory ofproperty rights."The

Americaneconomicreview:347-359.

Development,InternationalFund forAgricultural.2012a."land tenure

securityandpovertyreduction."

Development,UnitedStatesAgencyInternational.2010a."LandTenure

IndonesiaProfile."

Development,UnitedStatesAgencyInternational.2010b."LandTenure

JamaicaProfile."

Development,UnitedStatesAgencyInternational.2010c."LandTenure

MongoliaProfile."

Development,UnitedStatesAgencyInternational.2010d."LandTenure

MoroccoProfile."

Development,UnitedStatesAgencyInternational.2010e."LandTenure

Vietnam Profile".

Development,United States Agency International.2012b."Integrating

customarylandtenureintostatutorylandlaw."

Dixon,Tim.2009."Urbanlandandpropertyownershippatternsinthe

UK: trends and forces for change." Land Use Policy

26:S43-S53.

Doebele,William A.1987."Theevolution ofconceptsofurban land

tenure in developing countries." Habitat International 11

(1):7-22.

Dunning,BrianC.1990."ComparativeStudyofLegalIdeology:African

LandTenureSystems,A."BCThirdWorldLJ10:297.

Durand-Lasserve,Alain.2006."InformalsettlementsandtheMillennium

DevelopmentGoals:globalpolicydebatesonpropertyownership

- 74 -

andsecurityoftenure."GlobalUrbanDevelopment2(1):1-15.

Durand-Lasserve,Alain,and Lauren Royston.2002.Holding their

ground:securelandtenurefortheurbanpoorindeveloping

countries:Earthscan.

Durand-Lasserve,Alain,andHarrisSelod.2009."Theformalizationof

urban land tenure in developing countries." In Urban Land

Markets,101-132.Springer.

Durand-Lasserve,Selod 2012. "Land Markets and Land Delivery

SystemsinrapidlyexpandingWestAfricancities.Thecaseof

Bamako."

ECE,UN.1996."Landadministrationguidelines."Withspecialreference

to countries in transition. Geneva, Switzerland, United

Nations/EconomicCommissionforEurope.

ehrenberg, david. 2006. "The importance and benefits of tenure

security."Propertyrightsandlandtenureissues13.

Ellickson, Robert C. 1993. "Property in land." Yale Law

Journal:1315-1400.

Engels,Benno.1999."Propertyownership,tenure,anddisplacement:in

search of the process of gentrification." Environment and

PlanningA31(8):1473-1496.

Ensminger,Jean.1997."Changing property rights:Reconciling formal

andinformalrightstolandinAfrica."Thefrontiersofthenew

institutionaleconomics:165-196.

Enterprise,HighlandsandIslands.2009."CommunityLandOwnership."

Evans,AlvinE.1921."OwnershipofCommunityProperty."Harv.L.

Rev.35:47.

Evers,Hans‐Dieter.1984."Urbanlandownership,ethnicityandclassin

southeastAsian cities†."InternationalJournalofUrbanand

RegionalResearch8(4):481-496.

- 75 -

Fairley,ElizabethC.2013."Upholding customary landrightsthrough

formalization? evidence from Tanzania‘s program of land

reform."UNIVERSITYOFMINNESOTA.

Feder,Gershon,andRaymondNoronha.1987."Landrightssystemsand

agriculturaldevelopmentin Sub-Saharan Africa."The World

BankResearchObserver2(2):143-169.

Fernandes,Edésio.2011.RegularizationofinformalsettlementsinLatin

America:LincolnInstituteofLandPolicyCambridge,MA,USA.

Firman,Tommy.1997."Landconversionandurbandevelopmentinthe

northern region ofWestJava,Indonesia."Urban Studies34

(7):1027-1046.

Firman, Tommy. 2004. "Major issues in Indonesia's urban land

development."LandUsePolicy21(4):347-355.

Franzsen,RielCD.2002."Propertyassessmentforratingpurposesin

SouthernandEastAfrica:presentstatusandfutureprospects."

8thAnnualConferenceofthePacificRim RealEstateSociety,

Christchurch.

Gebeyehu,ZEMEN HADDIS.2013."TowardsImprovedTransactionsof

LandUseRightsinEthiopia."AnnualWorldBankConference

onLandandPoverty.

Gil,F.Margarita.2000."securityoflandownershipinthedominican

republic:alegalandhistoricalanalysis."

Gilbert, A. J. Gugler (1992) Cities, poverty, and development:

urbanizationinthethirdworld.OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford.

Greene,Craig.2005."Land,Rights,Laws:IssuesofNativeTitle."

Grindle,MerileeS.2004."Goodenoughgovernance:povertyreduction

andreform indevelopingcountries."Governance17(4):525-548.

Hanstad,Timothy M,and Jennifer Duncan.2001.Land reform in

Mongolia: observations and recommendations: Rural

- 76 -

DevelopmentInstitute.

Ho,Peter.2001."WhoownsChina'sland?Policies,propertyrightsand

deliberate institutional ambiguity." The China Quarterly

166:394-421.

Hofstee,EW.1972."LAND OWNERSHIPIN DENSELY POPULATED

AND INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES1."SociologiaRuralis12

(1):6-36.

Huffman, James L. 1998. "Land Ownership and Environmental

Regulation."EcologyLQ25:591.

Hvidt,M.2007.TheDubaiModel:Anoutlineofkeycomponentsofthe

developmentprocessinDubai.CentreforContemporaryMiddle

EastStudies,UniversityofSouthernDanmark.

Institute,RuralDevelopment.2004."landpolicychallengesinIndonesia

-finalprojectreportofthelandlaw initiative."

Jimenez,Emmanuel.1984."Tenuresecurityandurbansquatting."The

reviewofeconomicsandstatistics:556-567.

Johnson,Nancy.1998."Landandcreditreform inMexico:Implications

forejidocredituse,investment,andproduction."International

Center for Tropical Agriculture, Latin American Studies

Association.http://168.96200.

Johnson,OmotundeEG.1972."Economicanalysis,thelegalframework

and land tenure systems." Journal of Law and

Economics:259-276.

Kajoba,GearM.2002.LandUseandLandTenureinAfrica:towards

an evolutionary conceptual framework: Council for the

DevelopmentofSocialScienceResearchinAfrica.

Kalabamu,FaustinT.2000."Landtenureandmanagementreformsin

EastandSouthern Africa–thecaseofBotswana."Land Use

- 77 -

Policy17(4):305-319.

Kameri-Mbote,Patricia.2005."Genderissues in land tenure under

customarylaw."

Kasper,Wolfgang.2007."MontPèlerinSociety,RegionalMeeting:The

InstitutionalFrameworkforFreedom inAfrica."

Kehoe,Dalton.1976.Publiclandownership:frameworksforevaluation:

arecordofideaanddebate:LexingtonBooks.

Khamaisi,Rassem.1995."Land ownership as a determinantin the

formationofresidentialareasinArablocalities."Geoforum 26

(2):211-224.

Khemro,Beng Hong Socheat,and Geoffrey Payne.2004."Improving

tenuresecurityfortheurbanpoorinPhnom Penh,Cambodia:an

analyticalcasestudy."HabitatInternational28(2):181-201.

Kivell,PT,and IMcKay.1988."Public ownership ofurban land."

TransactionsoftheInstituteofBritishGeographers:165-178.

Kombe,WilbardJ,andVolkerKreibich.2000."Reconcilinginformaland

formalland management::an agenda for improving tenure

security and urban governance in poor countries." Habitat

International24(2):231-240.

Kong, Taryn M. 2012. "Understanding Land Management and

Desertification in the South African Kalahari with Local

KnowledgeandPerspectives."

Löffler,Ulrich.1996.LandtenuredevelopmentsinIndonesia:Deutsche

GesellschaftfürTechnischeZusammenarbeit(GTZ).

Lee,James.2000."From welfare housing to home ownership:the

dilemma of China's housing reform." Housing Studies 15

(1):61-76.

Li,Guo,ScottRozelle,andLorenBrandt.1998."Tenure,landrights,

and farmer investment incentives in China." Agricultural

- 78 -

Economics19(1):63-71.

Libraryofcongress.2007.“Militery-Government”GlobalSecurity

Loyns,RMA,Ronald D Knutson,KarlDean Meilke,and Antonio

Yunez-Naude.2000.PolicyHarmonization and Adjustmentin

the North American Agriculturaland Food Industry:Texas

A&M University,University ofGuelph and ElColegio de

Mexico.

LusuggaKironde,JM.2000."Understanding land marketsin African

urbanareas::thecaseofDaresSalaam,Tanzania."Habitat

international24(2):151-165.

Marsh,SallyP,andT GordonMacAulay.2002."Landreform andthe

developmentofcommercialagricultureinVietnam:policy and

issues."AgribusinessReview10.

Meinzen-Dick,Ruth,PatriciaKameri-Mbote,andHelenMarkelova.2007.

"Propertyrightsforpovertyreduction?".

Menezes,LM.1988."UrbanlandpolicytrendsinAsia:anoverview."

Landusepolicy5(3):291-300.

Mennen,Tiernan.2012."customarylaw andlandrightsinsouthsudan."

Montalvo,JoseG,andMartinRavallion.2010."Thepatternofgrowth

and poverty reduction in China." Journal of Comparative

Economics38(1):2-16.

Mullan,Katrina,PaulineGrosjean,andAndreasKontoleon.2011."Land

tenure arrangements and rural–urban migration in China."

WorldDevelopment39(1):123-133.

Napier,Mark.2002."Informalsettlementintegration,theenvironment

andsustainablelivelihoodsinsub-SaharanAfrica."proceedings

of Improving Post-Disaster Reconstruction in Developing

Countries:23-25.

Nations,United.2014."LandTerritoriesandResources."

- 79 -

Norfolk,Simon,and Christopher Tanner.2007."Improving tenure

securityfortheruralpoor."Rome:FAO.

Nyasulua,Tapiwa Uchizi, and Richard Ameyaw Ampadub. 2011.

"CustomaryLandAccessandAccountabilityinGhana:Effects

ofLandAllocationPracticesonLocalLivelihoods."

Okoth-Ogendo,Hasting WO.2000."TheTragicAfricanCommons:a

centuryofexpropriation,suppressionandsubversion."University

ofNairobi& Fellow ofthe Kenya NationalAcademy of

Sciences.

Ollennu,NiiAmaa.1962."Principlesofcustomarylandlaw inGhana."

PrinciplesofcustomarylandlawinGhana.

Organization,Food and Agriculture.1995.FAO land tenure studies:

FAO.

Palmer,David,SzilardFricska,andBabetteWehrmann.2009."Towards

improvedlandgovernance."FoodandAgricultureOrganization

(FAO)–UnitedNationsHumanSettlementsProgramme.

Payne,Geoffrey.2001."Urban land tenure policy options:Titles or

rights?"HabitatInternational25(3):415-429.

Payne, Geoffrey. 2004. "Land tenure and property rights: an

introduction." Habitat International 28 (2):167-179. doi:

10.1016/s0197-3975(03)00066-3.

Payne,Geoffrey,and Alain Durand-Lasserve.2012."Holding On:

SecurityofTenure-Types,Policies,PracticesandChallenges."

PreparedfortheSpecialRapporteurontheRighttoAdequate

Housing.

Payne,Geoffrey K.1997."Urban landtenureandproperty rightsin

developingcountries."

Place,Frank,andKeijiroOtsuka.2001."Population,tenure,andnatural

resource management:The case ofcustomary land area in

- 80 -

Malawi."JournalofEnvironmentalEconomicsandManagement

41(1):13-32.

Pottier,Johan.2005."Customarylandtenureinsub-saharanafricatoday

meaningsandcontexts."

Powell,PhilipT.1998."Traditionalproduction,communallandtenure,

andpoliciesforenvironmentalpreservationintheSouthPacific."

EcologicalEconomics24(1):89-101.

Programme,UnitedNationsEnvironment."<UN-securitytenure.pdf>."

Programme,United Nations Human Settlements.2010."Urban Land

Markets,EconomicconceptsandtoolsforengaginginAfrica."

Programme,UnitedNationsHumanSettlements.2012a.Thechallengeof

slums:globalreporton human settlements 2003:Taylor&

Francis.

Programme,United Nations Human Settlements.2012b."Innovative

UrbanTenureinthePhilippines(SummaryReport)."

Quizon,AntonioB.2013."LandGovernanceinAsia:Understaindthe

debaeson landtenurerightsandlandreformsin theAsian

context."

Rakodi,Carole,and ClementLeduka.2004."Informalland delivery

processesandaccesstolandforthepoor:acomparativestudy

ofsixAfricancities."PolicyBrief6.

Renger, Johannes 1995. "institutional, communal, and individual

ownershporpossessionofarablelandinancientmesopotamia

from theendofthefourthtotheendofthefirstmillennium

B.C.".

report,Conference proceedings.2013."Community land law:Best

PracticesandApproachesfortheProtectionofCommunityLand

RightsinKenya."

Roth,Michael,and DwightHaase.1998.Land tenure security and

- 81 -

agriculturalperformanceinSouthernAfrica.USAID.

Rudiarto,Iwan.2006."StatusofLandTenureSecurityinIndonesia."

RuralDevelopment& Land Reform,RepublicofSouth Africa.2013.

"communallandtenurepolicy".

Sait,M Siraj,HilaryLim,andDuncanHouse.2005."Islam,Land&

PropertyResearchSeries."Paper3:3-11.

Sait,Siraj,andHilaryLim.2006.Land,law andIslam:propertyand

humanrightsintheMuslim world.Vol.1:ZedBooks.

sait,Siraj,and Britta Peters.2011.Islamic Principles and Land ,

Opportunities for Management:opportunities for engagement.

Originaledition,UN-Habitat.

Salerno,Tania.2011."transnatonallanddealsinmindanao- situating

ambivalentfarmer."

Savant-Mohit,Radhika.2004."Securityoftenureandthewayforward:

ThecaseofSamakeePattana,Bangkok."HabitatInternational

28(2):301-316.

Secretariat,PacificIslandsForum.2008."CustomaryLandManagement

andConflictMinimisation:GuidingPrinciplesandImplementation

Framework for Improving Access to Customary Land and

MaintainingSocialHarmonyinthePacific."

Settles,Burr.2010."Activelearning literaturesurvey."Universityof

Wisconsin,Madison52:55-66.

Sietchiping,Remy,A Dyfed,NefiseBazoglu,ClarissaAugustinus,and

M Gora.2012."Monitoringtenuresecuritywithinthecontinuum

ofland rights:Methods and practices."AnnualWorld Bank

ConferenceonLandandPoverty,WorldBank,Washington,DC.

Tannous,AfifI.1951."Land reform:key to the developmentand

stabilityoftheArabworld."MiddleEastJournal5(1):1-20.

Thirkell,AllysonJ.1996."Playersinurbaninformallandmarkets;who

- 82 -

wins?wholoses?AcasestudyofCebuCity."Environmentand

Urbanization8(2):71-90.

Thompson,GaryD,andPaulNWilson.1994."EjidoreformsinMexico:

Conceptual issues and potential outcomes." Land

Economics:448-465.

UN-HABITAT.2005a."IslamicLaw,LandandMethodologies."ISLAM,

LAND & PROPERTY3.

UN-HABITAT.2005b."Law,LandTenureandGenderReview:Latin

America(Brazil)."Landtenure,housingrightsandgender.

UN-HABITAT.2005c."Law,LandTenureandGenderReview:Latin

America(Colombia)."Landtenure,housingrightsandgender.

UN-HABITAT.2005d."Law,LandTenureandGenderReview:Latin

America(Mexico)."Landtenure,housingrightsandgender.

UN-HABITAT.2005e."Law,LandTenureandGenderReview:Latin

America(Nicaragua)."Landtenure,housingrightsandgender.

UN-HABITAT.2008."Securelandrightsforall."

UN-HABITAT.2010."A Training Course on Land,Property and

HousingRightsintheMuslim World."

UN-HABITAT.2012."Handling land ,Innovative Tools for Land

GovernanceandSecureTenure."

UN-Habitat.2014."LandTenureSecurityinSelectedCountries."

VanGelder,Jean-Louis.2010."Whattenuresecurity?Thecasefora

tripartiteview."LandUsePolicy27(2):449-456.

VIETNAM,SOCIALISTREPUBLICOF.2004."Law onland."

Westendorff,DavidGantt.2009."Threeessayson urban governance

andhabitatindevelopingcountries."CornellUniversity.

White,Andy,and Alejandra Martin.2002."Who owns the world’s

forests."ForestTrends,Washington,DC.

WienerBravo,E.2011."TheconcentrationoflandownershipinLatin

- 83 -

America: An approach to current problems." CISEPA

contribution to ILC Collaborative Research Project on

CommercialPressuresonLand(Rome:ILC).

Wily,Liz.2011.WhoseLandisIt?:TheStatusofCustomaryLand

TenureinCameroon:CentreforEnvironentandDevelopment.

Wily,LizAlden.2003.Landrightsincrisis:Restoringtenuresecurity

inAfghanistan:AREU.

Wright,BrettA;Cordell,H Ken;Brown,TommyL;Rowell,AllenL.

1989."Thenationalprivatelandownershipstudy:Establishing

thebenchmark."Outdoorrecreationbenchmark1988:proceedings

ofthenationaloutdoorrecreationforum.USDA ForestService,

Southeastern Forest Exp. Sta., Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-52.

Asheville,NC.

Yiri,Kumbun-Naa.2006."customary lands administration and good

governance-thestateandthetraditionalrulersinterface."

Zimmermann, Willi 2011. "land governance and land tenure

developmentsinthearabregion."

이상 .2001."체제 환국의 도시발 과 북한에 한 시사 :Urban

DevelopmentinTransition EconomiesanditsImplicationsfor

NorthKorea."

이상 ,and 이성수.2004."SpecialEconomic Zones in Transition

EconomiesanditsImplicationsforNorthKorea:Basedonthe

DemandandSupplyofSpecialEconomicZonesinPolandand

China-체제 환국의 경제특구 개발과북한 경제특구 개발에 한

시사 :폴란드와 국 경제특구 개발의 수요와 공 을 심으로."

정매화,and최막 .2008." 국 토지이용제도 특성에 한 연구."국토계

획 43(3):99-109.

최상철,and이 성.1998."논문:통일 후 북한지역에서의 토지소유 이

용에 한 연구."지역연구 14(2):1-33.

국문 록

세계 토지소유권 유형에 한

연구

이 유민

서울 학교 환경 학원

환경계획학과 도시 지역계획 공

각 나라의 토지이용형태는 그 도시의 역사 ,경제 ,사회

구조의 배경에 향을 받기 때문에 국가마다 토지이용형태 규

제는 매우 다양하다.토지는 삶의 터 이며,생산 요소 가운데 매

우 요한 부분으로 사회성,공공성이 강한 재화이므로 타재화에

비해 공 개입의 필요성이 특히 강조된다.

즉,토지는 이에 한 종합 인 리기반이 필요하고 이는 토

지 장의 필요를 뜻한다.토지 장은 토지의 황을 명확하게 하

기 한 공부로서,토지에 한 일체의 사항이 등기되어 있는

장이다.이는 상 토지의 소재,지번,지목,지 ,소유자,주소,

성명 는 명칭,지상권의 목 인 토지의 경우 지상권자의 주소,

성명 는 명칭 등의 내용을 포함하고 있다.

- 85 -

이 연구의 목 은 첫째,토지 장의 존재여부가 불분명함을

인식하고 세계의 토지법제를 악하는 것이다.둘째,세계의 제도

들의 비교를 통하여 토지소유권을 여섯 가지로 유형화하며,각

토지소유권이 어떠한 양상으로 나타나는지 분석하고자 한다.즉,

각 나라의 토지이용과 그 나라의 토지소유권이 제도화되어 있는

지를 문헌검토를 이용한 비교법 고찰을 통해 황을 악하고

세계의 토지소유권을 유형화하는 연구이다.

연구 결과,세계의 토지제도는 법 토지 소유권, 례 토

지 소유권,공동 토지 소유권,종교 토지 소유권,공공 토지 소

유권,불분명한 토지 소유권의 여섯 가지로 유형화할 수 있다.본

연구는 각 제도유형의 특징을 바탕으로 이루어진 비교분석을 통

하여 그 제도의 문제 과 시사 을 도출하여 추후 토지개발

련 연구에 기 자료를 제공하고,길잡이 역할을 할 수 있다는

에서 연구의 의의를 찾을 수 있다.

◆ 주요어 :토지 보유권,토지 권리,토지 소유권,토지 제도,토지

소유권 유형

◆ 학 번 : 2013-22004