Reconciling Informal and Formal Land Management

Habitat International 24 (2000) 231}240

Reconciling informal and formal land management:an agenda for improving tenure security and urban

governance in poor countries

Wilbard J. Kombe!, Volker Kreibich",*

!University College of Lands and Architectural Studies (UCLAS), University of Dar es Salaam, P.O. Box 35176, Tanzania"Fachgebiet Geographische Grundlagen, Fakultat Raumplanung, University of Dormund, D-44221 Dortmund, Germany

Abstract

This paper is concerned with the agenda for reconciling informal and formal institutions and procedures ofurban land management in developing countries. It argues that progress can be made in overcoming thede"cits of the formal system by gradual integration of the informal sector into decision-making concernedwith housing land supply, security of tenure rights, lay-out regulation and land servicing. Studies of informalhousing land development in Tanzania o!er ample evidence about the close linkages between the twosectors. Success in this area would require the recognition of existing informal institutions, the decentralisa-tion of land management responsibilities and the extension of current urban planning legislation to coversuch situations. The paper concludes that if the potential of the informal sector is tapped in land regularisa-tion, then the legal framework for property and land management must provide a clear separation ofownership rights and land-use prescriptions. The public sector should retain the right to de"ne the principlesand concepts for the distribution and assignment of land use, while the individual entitlement to privateproperty ownership should be guaranteed and protected. ( 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Urban land management; Informal sector; Informal institutions; Local governance

Introduction

Urban governance in most developing countries, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, is facing twomajor challenges: the increasing need for land management and the provision of infrastructureresulting from rapid urban growth, and the decreasing "nancial and administrative resources of the

*Corresponding author.E-mail addresses: [email protected] (W.J. Kombe), [email protected] (V. Kreibich)

0197-3975/00/$ - see front matter ( 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.PII: S 0 1 9 7 - 3 9 7 5 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 4 1 - 7

public sector as a consequence of declining economic performance, political instability and institu-tional decadence. The high rate of urbanisation has thus already outgrown the capacity of municipal-ities to plan and control urban growth and to provide housing land and services (Stren, 1989).

The growing gap between the need for urban governance and the available administrativeservices cannot be closed in the foreseeable future by continuing the conventional practice of highlycentralised, top-down urban management with unrealistic legal norms and unachievable stan-dards. The only way out of this structural dilemma is to take cognisance of the potential of sociallyregularised1 land management at the grass-roots level which has built up as a reaction to unreliableand ine$cient public sector interventions in many of the so-called informal settlements.

This paper sketches out an agenda for reconciling informal and formal institutions and proced-ures of urban land management in developing countries. It starts from the proposition that thede"cits of the formal system can be partially overcome by a stepwise integration of the actors,institutions and procedures which are being deployed in informal or socially regulated localdecision making for housing land supply, security of tenure rights, lay-out regulation and landservicing. This assumption corresponds with the new perception of informal or socially regulatedland management in the international planning literature and by governments. Initially, theattitude and response of national governments toward the self-initiative of urban low-incomehouseholds consisted of active hostility or benign neglect (Zaghloul, 1994) and governmentmeasures ranged from passing tough, stringent regulations to exclude such settlements from anyinfrastructure extension plans to outright demolition (Cheema, 1993). Eventually, however, govern-ments have been forced to acknowledge that &informal' settlements exist because of or in responseto public policies (Dowall, 1991). Government attitudes are now shifting from initial hostilitytoward viewing low-income groups as the real builders and designers of large parts of cities(Cheema, 1993) and providers of a!ordable housing, sometimes making up the majority of allhousing units built (Brennan, 1993). The &informality' or &illegality' of their settlements is increasing-ly considered as an externally imposed residual category (Tarver, 1994; Glenn & Wolfe, 1996) andtheir potentials and limitations are becoming subjects of much urgent research and policydeliberation.

This agenda has been taken up with an empirical investigation into the performance of localinstitutions regulating tenure security, housing land development and settlement growth inTanzania (Kombe & Kreibich, 1999)2. It has substantiated and complemented former research

1The term &social regularisation' is preferred to &informal' or &self-regularisation' because it denotes the communitycontext of decision making and control of the grass-roots.

2The study on the potentials of informal housing land regularisation was undertaken over a period of two years inthree cities in Tanzania. The "eld work has been based on an appraisal of the settlement structure with air photographs inorder to develop a typology of informal settlements. A survey of formal and informal institutions involved in landmanagement in 29 selected Wards of the three cities provided information about the performance of the public sector inland management and the extent of informal institutions. Based on this information and the settlement typology onesaturated settlement and three settlements undergoing consolidation have been selected for in-depth study.

In these case-study areas 150 detailed household surveys have been conducted focusing on the role of house-owners inland transactions and property rights, spatial regularisation and land servicing. In addition, extensive interviews wereheld with key o$cials and committee members of the Ward administrations and of grass-root institutions in order tounderstand the relationship between formal and informal land management practices. Interviews with o$cials in thethree municipalities helped to validate the information obtained at the grass roots.

232 W.J. Kombe, V. Kreibich / Habitat International 24 (2000) 231}240

Fig. 1. Linkages between informal and formal land management in Tanzania.

of the authors (Kombe, 1994,1995; Kombe & Kreibich, 1997)3 and the international debate by pro-viding robust evidence that the potential of socially regulated land management is alreadycompensating major de"cits of the public sector.

The study of informal housing land development in Tanzania has also generated ampleevidence about the close interlinkages between the two sectors (Fig. 1). They can be negativeand con#icting, when communal needs are neglected or settlements intrude on marginal land,or positive and complementary, when the informal sector is developing an &appropriate' systemfor land registration to secure property rights and to arbitrate land disputes. In Tanzania,as in some other developing countries, disputes about land ownership or access to plots caneven be resolved by the courts of law irrespective of the illegal status of the land concerned. Theinformal sector has even imitated and adopted a number of normative values cherished by theformal sector.

The contribution of the socially regulated land management sector to Secure Tenure and UrbanGovernance } the new global campaigns of the UN Agency for Cities, HABITAT } will beconsiderably stabilised and improved if certain institutional reforms and a strategic reorientationin the use of scarce "nancial and administrative resources can be achieved. They are presented inthe following main section of this paper as an agenda for reconciling informal and formal landmanagement in poor countries.

3See also the article by W. J. Kombe in this issue.

W.J. Kombe, V. Kreibich / Habitat International 24 (2000) 231}240 233

Policy review areas: institutional framework for change

In the light of the foregoing it is mandatory that the limited public resources available (technical,"nancial, equipment, etc.) be strategically deployed to support the incremental formalisation of theinformal land management and housing development sectors. Overnight overhaul is, from theresources point of view, neither feasible nor socially admissible. The strategic combination of theinformal and formal land management systems is considered an unavoidable compromise and thesingle most important policy area which requires un#agging state statutory support. The challengeis, therefore, to "nd the proper balance between the state and private actors in the management andplanning of urban land.

Recognise existing informal institutions

The social regularisation process and its institutions have } unlike the formal sector institutions} tried to cope with the changing social, economic and political situation and even adapted some ofthe prevailing normative values. Ensconcing the potential for social regularisation implies adoptinga progressive policy stance that includes identi"cation with and backing of neighbourhoodinstitutions which have been accepted and which regularise land management fairly well in theinformal housing areas. This, however, requires simpler land registers, including adopting in-cremental tenure arrangements and systems of guaranteeing individual property rights. The ideahere is not to do away with the formal system, but to bring the informal sector to the mainstream ofthe land management system. Admittedly, these are reforms which challenge the attitudes andstatus of bureaucrats who have so far favoured a control approach. In this regard, re-orienting theplanning bureaucracy would appear equally important.

Decentralise land management functions

Decentralised operation is one of the main factors that have made informal housing landdevelopment e$cient in terms of prompt housing land supply. In the absence of up-to-datecadastrals amidst intensifying informal land markets, most local governments do not have su$-cient information about the extent and nature of land development, on-going land transactions anddevelopment, day-to-day con#icts which emerge from con#icting interests in land and, mostimportantly, on land ownership in the local communities.

It is, therefore, logical that neighbourhood organisations be supported or revitalised and giventhe mandate to regularise the management of informal land in their areas. Decentralised landmanagement is perceived as a necessary strategy in order to sustain the social regularisation ofinformal housing land development. This is also a measure to build on the local actors and theirexperience including neighbourhood leaders, committees and organisations as well as privatepersons who have accumulated rich experience in regularising land development.

Institutionalising decentralised land management and empowering neighbourhood communitieswould also facilitate other important roles such as ensuring property tax collection and mobilisingresources for infrastructure provision. In this case, assisting neighbourhood organisations toestablish and maintain up-to-date property registers would be a multifunctional strategy.


Mabogunje (1992, p. 20), discussing the need for a new urban development paradigm, argues thatit is critical for the states in Sub-Saharan Africa to devolve powers to the local governments andneighbourhoods or Wards. The use of neighbourhood communities to supplement municipalcapacities to provide services is not a new phenomenon; it is said to have been practised in GreatBritain already in the 19th century (Mabogunje, 1992, p. 20). Dowall (1996 :iv) adds that with thedevolution of power to the grassroots, reform measures can be better adjusted and structured toblend with the local land market conditions.

Provide a supportive legal and xscal framework and incentives

Urban planning legislation in most countries (viz. The Town and Country Planning Ordinancecap 378 section 24 in Tanzania) allows occupiers of land that has been declared a planning area toprepare their plan and submit the same to the planning authority. It also provides for landpooling in areas where land has been irregularly developed (section 27 of the Third Schedule ofthe Ordinance in Tanzania). In such cases individual parcels of land are pooled together,planned (essentially to secure land for community facilities and services) and redistributed to theowners.

The two legal provisions appear ideal for regularising land development in informal areas, quitein consonance with the spirit of supporting informal land development, particularly empoweringneighbourhood communities to take up more responsibilities in regularising housing land develop-ment. It is, however, interesting to note that these provisions are hardly practised (Nnyka, 1997).Worse, the statutory rights conferred to landowners to prepare a plan are not a commonknowledge to many. Land use planning has been traditionally considered too technocratic to behandled by a lay person making planning a prerogative of planners. The reforms would, therefore,require a reorientation of the urban land management bureaucracy so as to renew their know-howand be ready to learn from those who are steering land-use changes at the grass-roots.

It is also worth noting that even if some plans were to be prepared by the local communities theprovisions require that they be in compliance with o$cial government procedures. In principle,plans made by a community or by an individual have to pass through the planning scrutiny to getthe necessary approvals before they are implemented. Under such an approach a plan would takeat least a year and a half before it is ready for implementation. Surely this would neither augur wellwith the impetus with which informal settlements are presently growing nor match the simplicityand expeditious nature of the self-regularised land development operations.

It is necessary to review the legislation and to de"ne speci"c clauses so as to legitimisesemi-regularised informal housing land as an integral part of the urban land-development process.Concurrent with the legitimisation is the need to de"ne a simpli"ed statutory framework whichactors in the informal housing neighbourhoods have to comply with.

Local government holds a key position in community or neighbourhood-led land regularisation.For instance, it will be directly involved in overseeing the proper interpretation of the city ormunicipal structure plan at the local community level, setting minimum land parcelling (lot) sizes,preparing and establishing community land registers, de"ning "scal measures for mobilising localresources for land servicing and making the decentralised land management system sustainable. Inshort, the state is responsible for putting the institutional structure in place for steering the informalland regularisation process and de"ning a mechanism for sharing costs and bene"ts.


The issue here is not to transfer the formal standards and procedures into the informal areas, butto bring the informal sector from the periphery to the centre of the urban land management system.It is necessary to remove the present stigma about land use planning as a public process throughwhich individual land is appropriated followed by the superimposition of regular plot sizes andforms in an area. Land use planning does not have to be a threat to private interests on land, thus itshould not necessarily lead to an appropriation or loss of legitimate rights of owners. On thecontrary, it should be positively looked at as a process which confers value to land.

The need for establishing a mechanism for creating competition among neighbourhood commu-nities is an important consideration which has to be institutionalised in the neighbourhood-basedland regularisation process. For instance, in order to check irregular housing land developmentand reduce problems associated with future land servicing, local community organisations wouldhave to be empowered to take to task or sue those who violate community regulations. In short,there is a need for putting in place a mechanism for threatening the rights of those who do notcomply with community norms including building local resistance against violators. On the otherhand, local governments should be advised to adopt a preferential policy treatment which tiespriorities for issuing ( junior) titles and providing trunk services in the informal settlementsconditional to the local communities providing for adequate areas for communal facilities andservices.

Reorientation towards strategic intervention

The limited resources available to the public sector for land management and service deliveryrequire a reorientation of urban planning concepts and measures towards strategic "elds ofintervention. Short-term e$ciency and long-term sustainability should provide the decisive criteriafor deploying the limited and, in the future, even more restricted "nancial and administrativeresources.

Dexne areas of competence and accountability for the state and for the local communities

The essence of integrating informal land transactions and settlement development into formalland management is to pull together untapped resources of both the private and popular sectors.The paucity of resources, particularly in the public sector, demands, however, limiting roles andaction areas to strategic intervention "elds where the available resources including the competenceof the public sector can be optimally used. Indeed, one of the main objectives of widening the scopeof actors involved in the management of urban land is to build the public capacity needed tointervene in informal land transactions and development. At present, neither local nor centralgovernment is playing an active role in self-regularised land transactions and development. On theother hand, the informal land development system does not guarantee or provide for democraticparticipation of residents in the land development process nor mechanisms for ensuring thatlandowners and subdividers ful"l their obligations to the public. The case of public action istherefore both economically and politically legitimate.

Whilst the need for the public sector to cooperate with grass-root actors in the informal sector isindisputable, it is necessary to preserve the dynamism of the informal markets. This includes


maintaining the entrepreneurial capacity of the informal sector, e.g. by allowing the diverse actorsinvolved in land markets to continue playing their roles. Thus, the ultimate objective of the stateshould be to consolidate the functioning of land transactions and development by forging newassociations and complementarities of interests among the various actors, viz. landowners, buyers,the civic society (neighbourhood organisations) and utility agencies without sti#ing the markets.Speci"c areas which require public action can be derived from the following needs:

f establish a #exible framework for socially regularised land management;f legitimise and provide for junior titles speci"cally for socially regularised neighbourhoods;f prepare municipal or city strategic plans (&broad brush structure plans')4 including demarcation

of land for trunk services; andf check the construction of housing on hazardous lands and address environmental problems in

saturated informal settlements.

Limits for lot sizes which can be put into the market are crucial in this context. Plot sizes whichare only su$cient to accommodate a room or two do not allow for providing other essentialservices such as sanitation. It is, therefore, necessary for the public to de"ne minimum permissiblelot sizes, especially for land transactions in booming and saturated settlements.

Enhance the grass-roots capacity to manage land

The achievements observed in terms of spatial order and fairly regular plots in urban settlementsin Tanzania which have been former Ujamaa villages can be traced to the initiatives taken totrain &barefooted surveyors cum planners' and equipping key actors with basic skills related toparcelling and orderly siting plots and buildings (Kombe & Kreibich, 1999). In order to make localleaders and committee members responsive to and capable of handling increased roles in themanagement of land it is necessary to improve their technical capacity or competency. Thisincludes enhancing their awareness on matters pertaining to land servicing, imparting para-legalskills, parcelling and land-measuring standards, and land transaction and development controlprocedures.

Breeding barefooted surveyors and planners for assisting local communities is a task which candwell on existing resources because often there are quite a number of settlers in the localcommunities who are enlightened and have basic skills, for instance masons, carpenters,teachers, and even persons with a technical education background. Informal settlements witha socially mixed population like in Tanzania which o!er homes for low-, middle- and high-incomegroups provide many options for enhancing the local capacity for land management throughbuilding on a rich mixture of skills and potentials. Well-established administrative structureslike the Sub-Ward and Ten Cell leaders in Tanzania may have engendered social capital whichcan provide another viable entry point for building capacity for land management at thegrass-roots.

4For further details see Clarke (1991, p. 102).


Assist in institution building

Formalising informal land transactions and development is a daunting e!ort but technically,economically and politically inevitable if the transition from bureaucratic land delivery to market-led land supply is to be smooth, and most importantly, if the transformation process is to besupported from below. In other words, these reform processes have to be based on the realitiesexisting in the local environment. Needless to caution that the public intervention process has to bediligently administered lest the land markets go underground or fuel speculation in land.

Decentralised administrative units like the Ward and Sub-Ward administrations in Tanzania arethe most important structures for institution building at the neighbourhood level because theyhave and can play cross-cutting roles in the local communities. Even though the Sub-Ward leadersin Tanzania are not o$cially mandated to regulate land development in their localities, the landquestion seems to lie or at least cut across a number of the 13 main tasks which they areadministratively obliged to deal with:5

f to maintain residence registers,f to protect the welfare of the settlers and their properties,f to resolve disputes which do not have to be resolved by the Ward Committees or courts of law

andf to ensure a clean living-environment including deployment of measures to prevent infectious

diseases.

Owing to the intricacy associated with land-management issues it might be necessary to set upa special committee at community level that is responsible for supervising and monitoring landmanagement and resolving land use con#icts. The main role of local governments will be to providetechnical support to the local committees and to ratify their resolutions. In order to be e$cient, thelocal governments will have to be entrusted with a certain degree of "nancial and technicalindependence from the central government, because the strength of the grass-root committees shalldepend on how enabling and supportive the respective local government is.

Conclusions

In many developing countries urban land development is increasingly operating outside theo$cial system under the in#uence of unfettered land markets. A growing number of land seekers"nd the informal sector more responsive to their demands for housing land while the public sector"nds it increasingly di$cult to manage urban growth according to its legal norms and the needs ofthe citizens.

Building upon the subsisting social regularisation mechanisms of land management can, how-ever, o!er an opportunity window for successful public intervention. The lessons from studyinginformal land management in typical urban settlements in Tanzania justify the recommendation ofa policy which can reconcile the informal with the formal system.

5According to the government notice number 3 of 7th January 1994.


Firstly, like other market systems, the subsisting informal land markets largely operate on theexchange of value against value. The initiatives undertaken by local communities to registerand protect individual property underline the important function of land markets for the accumu-lation of wealth in a society. In fact, the sustainability of land markets depends on security. Somesense of accepting the values owned by other individuals and the community is prevailing ininformal land markets. They are not anarchic suggesting the evolution of mechanisms for theexchange of values.

Secondly, optimal land management indispensably entails public guidance. Liberal economists,excited by the collapse of the state-controlled economies in Eastern Europe seem to increasinglybelieve in delimiting the role of the state in land management or eliminating it entirely. Thewholesale transplantation of this argument into Third World countries would, however, havesigni"cant e!ects on the monetary value of urban land and, subsequently, on social welfare andeconomic productivity. The external costs resulting from unfettered non-public participation inland transactions and development would, in the long run, outstrip the short-term privategains. The supervision and guidance of the developing urban land markets by providing policydirectives and a corresponding and reliable legal framework will remain an indispensable domainof the state.

Thirdly, the legal framework for property and land management has to provide a clearseparation of ownership rights and land-use prescriptions. This is considered a precondition todevelop the largely untapped potential of the informal sector in land regularisation. The publicsector should retain the right to de"ne the principles and concepts for the distribution andassignment of land use, while the individual entitlement to private property ownership should beguaranteed and protected.

References

Brennan, E. M. (1993). Urban land and housing issues facing the Third World. In J.D. Kasarda (ed.), Third world cities.Problems, policies and prospects. London: Sage.

Cheema, S. G. (Ed.). (1993). Urban management: Policies and innovations in developing countries. Westpoint: Praeger.Clarke, G. (1991). Urban management in developing countries: A critical role. Cities, 8, 93}107.Dowall, D. E. (1991) Less is more: The benexts of minimal land development regulation. University of California at Berkeley.

Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Planning.Dowall, D. E. (1996). A framework for transforming urban land policies in developing countries. Washington DC: World

Bank.Glenn, J. M., & Wolfe, J. M. (1996). The growth of the informal sector and regularization of informal develop-

ment } lessons from the Caribbean for planning law reform. Third World Planning Review, 18.Kombe, W. J. (1994). The demise of public urban land management and the emergence of informal land markets in

Tanzania. Cases of Dar es Salaam city. Habitat International, 18, 23}43.Kombe, W. J. (1995). Formal and informal land management in Tanzania. The case of Dar es Salaam. Dortmund, SPRING

Research Series, Vol. 13.Kombe, W. J., & Kreibich, V. (1997). Community based land regularisation } prospects for decentralised planning.

TRIALOG, 55, 27}31.Kombe, W. J. & Kreibich, V. (1999). Informal land management. Responses to public planning dexcits in Tanzania,

unpublished research report, Dortmund.Mabogunje, A. L. (1992). Perspective on urban land and urban management policies in Sub-Saharan Africa, World Bank

Technical Paper 196, Washington DC.


Nnyka, T. J. (1997). Planning practice and democracy in Tanzania. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Copenhagen.Stren, R. E., (Ed.). (1989) African cities in crisis: Managing rapid urban growth. Boulder, CO: Westview.Tarver, J. D. (1994). Urbanization in Africa: A handbook. West Port: Greenwood Press.Zaghloul, M. S. S. (1994). The structure and dynamics of informal urban growth: The Cairo urban region, 1976}1986, Egypt.

Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge.


Reconciling Informal and Formal Land Management

Documents

Transcript of Reconciling Informal and Formal Land Management