Inaugural Conference on Land Policy in Africa Held in Addis Ababa

The inaugural Conference on Land Policy inAfrica concluded on Friday 14 November 2014 after three full days of presentations and discussions at African Union (AU) headquarters in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Themed "The next decade of land policy in Africa: ensuring agricultural development and inclusive growth," the Conference brought together parliamentarians, ministers, practitioners, academics, community representatives and other stakeholders to discuss the issue of land in Africa. The Conference was organized by the Land Policy Initiative, which is a joint programme of the African Union Commission (AUC), the African Development Bank (AfDB) and United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA). Natural Justice attended the Conference with the support of the Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies.

While numerous issues were discussed, from global initiatives to national land policy reform to customary tenure systems, three key themes were raised throughout the Conference: implementation of guidelines and policies; customary tenure; and information dissemination.

Implementation is Crucial

The opening session of the Conference featured representatives of the European Union, the FAO, UN Habitat, the AfDB and the Ethiopian government, among others. Speakers made reference to numerous guidelines and declarations, including the Framework and Guidelines on Land Policy in Africa (link), the Nairobi Action Plan to Promote Land-Based Investments that Benefit Africa (link), and the AU Declaration on Land Issues and Challenges in Africa (link).  The Conference also served as a forum to launch the AU Guiding Principles on Large Scale Land Based Investments in Africa (link). Throughout the Conference, presenters also provided information on new or existing land laws and policies in numerous African countries. There are also global guidelines relevant to land, such as the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure (link). However, again and again, questions were raised by both presenters and participants regarding implementation of guidelines and national policies. Moving from paper to practice is one of the critical issues facing African countries with regard to land.

Customary Systems Must Be Considered in Land Policies

While some countries such as Tanzania have done away entirely with customary systems of land tenure, in many countries such as Ghana, Zambia and Uganda, customary tenure remains an integral part of the land system. Often these customary tenure systems are administered through a Chief system that operates in conjunction with the national system. As countries in Africa draft new policies and revise existing ones, the manner in which customary tenure systems are taken into account will need to be carefully considered.

Information Dissemination is Needed

Throughout the Conference, another recurring theme was the need to disseminate information on various frameworks, guidelines, and national laws to communities. Participants noted that often communities are unaware of relevant national policies and regional frameworks. Many methods are available to raise awareness, and Burkina Faso provided one example. After a new land registration code was drafted in 2004, community theater was used in 696 communities to provide information on using the registration law, with women playing a key role in the process. Community protocols are particularly relevant in this regard, as part of their development involves providing information on relevant guidelines and national laws in the context of the issues that communities face.

Many other issues exist of course, including intra-community conflicts, multiple claims to registered land (for example, in Uganda, 90% of court cases are related to disputes over land), women's land rights, and internally displaced persons. Some issues were also barely discussed, such as the effect of investment treaties on the development of national land policies. If the Conference becomes an annual event, perhaps some of these issues could be taken up next year in more detail.

Natural Justice Assists in Drafting Submission to AfDB on its Independent Review Mechanism

Africa is experiencing an economic boom, and the African Development Bank (AfDB) is an important institution financing development on the continent. It is one of the leading institutions in the recently launched Program for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA), which was created to increase intra-regional trade in Africa. The AfDB Group (consisting of the AfDB and the African Development Fund) also provides hundreds of millions of dollars of official development assistance (ODA) to Sub-Saharan African countries each year. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), in 2012 the AfDB disbursed USD 1.7 billion in ODA, or approximately 10% of multilateral ODA disbursed that year (link to statistics,  Table 29).

Like the World Bank and all other multilateral development banks, the AfDB has a dispute resolution mechanism to handle disputes involving communities affected by AfDB financed projects. This mechanisms, known as the Independent Review Mechanism (IRM) was established in 2004, and undergoes periodic reviews by the AfDB Boards of Directors. In 2014, the AfDB began its second review of the IRM. As part of the process, the AfDB commissioned a report by a consultant to review the performance of the IRM. It then invited comments from civil society on that report between 1 July 2014 to 30 August, 2014.

Natural Justice worked with a small coalition of civil society organizations to provide substantive comments to the AfDB regarding the IRM. The submission first notes concerns with the consultation process during the review, a process that limited opportunities for civil society to engage with the AfDB on the IRM. It then analyzes the policies of the IRM and the consultant’s report using four main factors: Independence, Transparency, Effectiveness, and Accessibility. Of particular concern with regard to accessibility is that despite being operational since 2006, the IRM has only received a total of 16 complaints, with 8 of those actually being registered. Indeed, the consultant noted that AfDB management and staff have a tendency to tell communities that projects are going to be implemented rather than engaging in a meaningful dialogue with communities. Meaningful dialogue could make communities aware of the fact that the IRM exists so that they can access it if they are concerned about impacts on their territories and livelihoods.

Ultimately a total of 67 mostly African civil society organizations signed on to the submission (available here in English and French), demonstrating the engagement and interest on the continent in AfDB issues. It is hoped that the AfDB takes the suggestions in the submission on board in order to improve the effectiveness of the IRM and ensure that communities can obtain effective remedy when they are impacted by AfDB projects.