LAND POLICY-TENURE RIGHTS in DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION. CHALLENGES and OPPORTUNITIES

Transcription

1 Page 1 of 36 BMZ spezial No. 002/January '99 LAND POLICY-TENURE RIGHTS in DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION CHALLENGES and OPPORTUNITIES CONTENTS 1.1 Land Policy - Tenure Rights in Development Cooperation Challenges and Opportunities 1.2 "International Context and the Paradigm of Human Rights for Land- and Agrarian Reform -- A Civil Society Perspective Land Tenure in Development Cooperation Agrarian Reform in the Philippines: Where are we now, and where are we going? A seed not sown: Prospects for agrarian reform in South Africa Is there a going back? Attempts to restore customary tenure institutions in Niger The Popular Coalition to Eradicate Hunger and Poverty New Approaches To Land Reform (focus on Latinamerica) Land Policy - Tenure Rights in Development Cooperation Challenges and Opportunities: Summary and Recommendations Land Policy - Tenure Rights in Development Cooperation Challenges and Opportunities Positions and Perspectives of the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development by Ute Heinbuch (Note 1) The overall goal of German economic cooperation and development assistance is the improvement of the living conditions of poor people in developing countries. This means first and foremost the eradication of hunger and poverty. Poverty eradication, food security and the sustainable use of the resource base are prominent thematic issues in our development policy since many years now. Equally important for achieving this goal is the promotion of favorable framework conditions like among others - democracy, rule of the law, development oriented action by national governments and equality between men and women.

2 Page 2 of 36 The new German Government, which has taken over power after national election in September this year, is going to put more visible emphasis on human rights aspects as well as crisis and conflict prevention. This is the broad political context of the forum on Land Policy and Tenure Rights today. Why is German development policy interested in this topic? There are a number of good reasons to do so, among others the following: 1. Given the fact that in many developing countries agriculture is the backbone of the economy, land policy and tenure rights are determining to a large extent degree and direction of overall economic development and food security. Though in developed countries in France, the UK, or Belgium for example the size of a farm is positively related to efficient production, experience especially in developing countries shows that the concentration of land in the hands of a relatively small number of huge landowners does often not result in the most efficient use of the agricultural potential. Hence, it does not contribute as much to economic not development and food security as possible. Rather land concentration does contribute to such power structures which in many cases are not to the benefit of the local populations, to the poor parts of the communities in particular. 2. Land policy and tenure rights determine the ecological impact of farming. We learned from a number of German bilateral technical assistance projects aiming at resource and environment protection that small farmers not having identifiable and secure tenure rights for the plots they farm, do not pay much attention to conservation and protection measures. Given their limited resources time and labor as well as money they can simply not risk to invest in efforts if they cannot be sure to receiving the returns on their investments later. The currently most likely consequence is the continuation of ecologically destructive farming practices resulting from insecurity and poverty. 3. Land policy and tenure rights determine the productivity of agriculture. Efficient and productive agriculture requires a range of inputs like seeds, fertilizers, mechanical tools and the like. Secure tenure rights are a strong encouragement for the small farmer to invest in such inputs in order to increase production and productivity. Secure tenure rights are (even more) of vital importance for small farmers to gain access to credit facilities. Even for smallholders agricultural credit becomes more and more crucial when shifting from subsistence to market production. However, credit providers ask for collateral, in most cases land. 4. The recently celebrated World Food Day shifted our eyes towards another aspect. "Women feed the world" was its topic, highlighting the vital role women are playing in food production and food security. But one of the major obstacles women are If facing in their efforts to fulfill this productive role is indeed the denial of tenure or even user rights. In most societies women cannot get such rights on their own but only via their husbands or a male relative. Consequently, in cases of increasing shortage and, hence, growing competition for land women as the weakest part are expelled from their plots and forced more and more into marginal lands with all negative implications for (household) food security and for the environment. 5. Land policy and tenure rights determine social justice and stability. The unequal distribution of land, or land policies not adapted to changing political and social environments are more and more a source of conflict and even violence. Land policies and tenure systems serve, in addition to the provision of legal security and the promotion of efficient resource management, also the purpose of social compensation and the stemming and arbitration of land-related conflicts and disputes. They may, however, fall in this respect. The revolt in Chiapas, Mexico, as well as the violent disputes between livestock keepers and farmers of arable lands in the Sahellan are cases in point. The main role of the state in development is to provide the frame conditions in order to stimulate and promote innovative and creative actions of its respective populations to the benefit of overall economic growth, social justice and ecological conservation. This task lies, of course, with national governments and their jurisdiction. The role of donors/development assistance in this context is to advise and support those governments in all their respective efforts. Given that land policy and tenure rights are indeed very important elements of the frame conditions and are affecting our development assistance to the good or the bad, the German Government has put this issue on its development agenda. However, we have to realize that it is in many cases (still) a very sensitive one. Major fields of our interventions are: Policy dialogue with our partner countries. Strong efforts to include the question of access to and control over land in international fora and negotiations like the UN World Conferences and Summits (e.g. UNCED, World Conference on Women

3 Page 3 of 36 and World Food Summit). Supporting research in this field (e.g. project "Property rights, risk and livestock management" by IFPRI/ILRI). A sectoral project on land policy and tenure rights, executed by GTZ, where the idea for this forum was actually born. Technical assistance, e.g. on land use planning and the like. Financial assistance where, in selected projects for erosion control or irrigation for example, the adequate regulation of land tenure questions is made a precondition for our investment. The challenge of achieving food security for all the goal agreed upon latest at the World Food Summit lies still ahead of us. It is clear that agricultural and rural development are crucial to meet this challenge. It is equally clear that land policy and tenure rights as prominent parts of favorable frame conditions are playing a vital role, too. There are, however, some questions left for which answers have to be found. The following questions are selective and meant to give some "food for thought": 1. How do land reforms, which lead to agricultural growth (i.e. land redistribution should not result in plots too small in terms of economic efficiency not only for the current but also for future generations), contribute to social equity (not all landless people can receive land particularly when taking into consideration the above mentioned issue) and contribute to an ecological sustainable use of the natural resource base, have to be designed? What are complementary measures to be taken up (e.g. extension, training and credit services for new landowners, or employment creation for the still landless)? 2. Given the crucial role of women in agricultural production and food security, how can their equal access to tenure rights be achieved and guaranteed (and this for high potential areas and not marginal ones)? The presentations and discussions during this forum today will probably touch upon these and many more important elements of land policy and tenure rights. This will help policy makers to reconsider the respective approaches and to develop them further in order to strengthen our efforts to combat hunger and poverty "International Context and the Paradigm of Human Rights for Land- and Agrarian Reform -- A Civil Society Perspective" by Jochen Donner (Note 2) Ladies and Gentlemen, as one of the initiators and organizers of today's colloquium on land policy and land tenure including land- and agrarian reform in international development cooperation, the Deutsche Welthungerhilfe (DWHH) welcomes you and is looking forward to a most interesting exchange of experiences and views on the subject under discussion. We believe this can be a contribution to the renewed discourse on the question of land- and agrarian reform as an instrument for poverty reduction and increasing food security in many developing countries. It can also be an important step for the German government, as there is a chance of setting new priorities within the overall orientation of the development cooperation. Let me mention three areas within this short presentation. The first will be the International context of such a discourse as it has been set by the process of the World Food Summit (WFS) of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 1996 and its follow-up. Secondly, I will talk about the role of civil society, and thirdly about the human rights orientation in development cooperation as a paradigm and perspective. The first area of my presentation today:

4 Page 4 of 36 Is there an international context which has to be kept in mind by us when discussing land policy issues like land tenure systems, land - and agrarian reforms? The policy frame has been set anew by the World Food Summit in The summit dealt mainly with the question of how to decrease the number of the 840 million respectively 1.3 billion of people who are presently suffering of hunger and living in absolute poverty, mainly in developing countries of South and South-East Asia as well as Africa south of the Sahara. The summit set a clear target. The 186 governments who participated in the WFS committed themselves to cut the number of the hungry by half and to reduce poverty worldwide by the year According to the World Plan of Action of the WFS the access to productive resources as land has to be improved for poor people, equally for men and women, in developing countries by means of landand agrarian reform, wherever necessary in order to achieve this goal. And of course, they where reconfirming reforms which tackle the problem most effectively and efficiently, implicitly encouraging innovative approaches and expressively the active involvement of civil society and the private sector. This will be something, we will deal with today in more detail. To give an answer to the question mentioned above, I would say, that there is in fact an international context that has to be kept in mind. It is obvious, the governments at the WFS have regarded land - and agrarian reforms as a key instrument for achieving their goal of hunger and poverty reduction, especially for countries with a larger proportion of rural poverty, resulting in food insecurity and extremely based on unequal and insecure land distribution. This puts an obligation for land- and agrarian reform on many developing country's governments and on those governments who support them in development cooperation with ODA. Let me now come to my second area of presentation today. What can be the role of civil society organizations in such a context? Do they have a role to play at, all in the first place? Based on sufficient empirical data, including a long line of experiences in its project and program work for many years, the DWHH believes that civil society organizations have taken up a significant role of active involvement and influence on the WFS-process itself as well as on the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of land- and agrarian reform policies and programs that have been already implemented in quite some countries. These measures are supported by international networking, especially, but not only, among NGOs. In order to contribute and support this approaches, the DWHH has recently commissioned two studies on landand agrarian reforms in the Philippines and the Republic of South Africa. Both were developed and conducted by NGO partners in close cooperation with a number of civil society networks. Their draft analyses and policy recommendations were discussed with a number of civil society organizations and government institutions for final conclusions by the authors in December 1997 respectively September The results will be presented in the following sessions by two of the authors, Mr. Quizon from the Philippines and Mr. Hulbert from South Africa. The overall conclusion is in both cases: governments need the active cooperation of their country's civil society organizations in order to be more innovative, sensible and successful with their reforms. They also need the financial, technical and moral support of international ODA as such reforms are complex and costly. Civil society organizations of developing countries also demand financial and technical support as well as moral and political solidarity in lobbying and advocacy on national and international level by their northern counterparts in civil society. It is in this regard, that DWHH has Joined the Popular Coalition to Eradicate Hunger and Poverty together with NGOs (from Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean), North America, IFAD, FAO, WFP, the European Commission and the World Bank. Mr. Moore who is now coordinating this Coalition at IFAD in Rome and Ms. Herrera from FAO who is also active in the Coalition will both speak to us later. Now let me finally mention the third point of my short presentation of today: Civil society organizations and among them NGOs like DWHH regard development cooperation and development policy in the light of human rights orientation, referring to the UN-Body of Human Rights developed since the Universal Declaration of 1948, followed by the two convenants on the economic, social and cultural rights as well as the political and civil rights of 1966 including a long list of special conventions on discrimination and special rights and the UN- assembly declaration on the Right to Development of We all know that human rights implementation still has to be made more judicial and operational, as the on-

5 Page 5 of 36 going discourse on the right to food in the follow-up of the WFS-process. This is especially true for the International Convenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. In this process NGOs are actively involved worldwide. As a conclusion let me summarize: development cooperation is seen increasingly by civil society organizations under the paradigm of human rights, and therefore as an obligation for states in developing and industrialized countries, both in their national as well as in their international and global functions. This laso sets a perspective for land- and agrarian reforms. Let us consider the implication today in the discussions. Thank you Land Tenure in Development Cooperation by Willi Zimmermann (Note 3) The land issue is currently being reappraised world-wide, and greater importance is being attached to land tenure in bilateral and multilateral cooperation. Land and resources policies are keys to future economic and social development. The outbreak of conflicts over land is only one indicator of a process that is more complex. Functioning land-tenure systems are the foundation of socio-legal and socioeconomic infrastructure and are crucial for efficient agricultural production, urban development, more diversified land use in rural areas, sectoral change and urbanization. The focus on economic efficiency should not, however, obscure the crucial role of land tenure and land policy for equity and social balance as well as for environmentally sound development. Land policy issues Development cooperation can play a crucial role in reforming and improving land policies. A land policy which is rational and transparent should be based on certain basic principles. Since land issues are also power issues, a land policy should avoid stabilizing authoritarian practices in centralized governmental institutions and sustaining land-ownership privileges and should instead promote equity-led growth, sustainable development, decentralization and broad participation in all land-related matters. The following are minimum criteria for land policy: It should employ democratic rules, rule of law and law enforcement, participation and transparency (good governance) to control power and thus avoid land-related corruption, land concentration and landgrabbing. It should convey a vision of the path desirable for development. It should focus on an evolutionary process of change that supplants social upheaval and revolution. It should include intensive government-citizen dialogue and dialogue within the civil society. Land is more than just another factor of production or an economic good: it represents other values, such as homeland, ancestral roots, a basis for survival, or a prerequisite for individual freedom. At the same time, it is an object which is taxed and coveted by government and interest groups; it is an instrument of power and dependency, a cause of conflict and war. This social aspect of land is currently being reappraised in the context of market reform and globalization of national economies and also in the light of the social responsibility bound up with landed property amidst far-reaching structural changes in (post-) industrial and industrializing economies. Everywhere in the world, land-tenure systems are based on values and norms: they cannot be divorced from their social and cultural context. Thus, land policy is based on four principles which also serve as yardsticks for evaluating existing land-tenure systems and reforms: 1) certainty in the law, 2) the rule of law and human rights, 3) popular political participation in land issues and 4) the definition of property in market economics.

6 Page 6 of 36 (1) Certainty in law is a crucial precondition for calculating risk in private decision-making. It denotes legislation which is unambiguous, clear and reliable, predictability in land transfer and use, the institutional enforcement of legal claims to land in case of dispute, and the limitation and predictability of government action. (2) Rule of law means respect for the constitution, human rights and a division of power based on an independent parliamentary system, judiciary and courts bound by law and, of course, respect for autochthonous legal systems. As historical experience in Europe clearly demonstrates, public discussion of legislation is crucial to general acceptance of any new land-tenure system. A new law will only achieve the authority necessary for enforcement if it is more discriminating than the old one(s). (3) Without the participation of all those affected by changes in land-tenure systems, indigenous institutions and local knowledge cannot be integrated into the process, and the changes will never be accepted. Greater participation must go hand-in-hand with decentralization and greater application of the subsidiarity principle. Only participation can ensure that legal reforms take into account the complexity of the existing economic and social fabric. (4) In the past, the definition of property was considered the pivotal determinant between market and centrallyplanned economies. From a legal, standpoint, property must be defined universally, and not according to classification (individual, state, community, foundations). Property must be available to all market players, including, of course, the state. Property should never be confused with privatization, which is only one form of transfer among many (i.e., from government to private actors). Property transfer does not take place in a vacuum, but only in conjunction with other bodies of law, such as contract law, family and inheritance law, tax law, and water law. The introduction of private property should not mean the end of state activities: ownership of land, especially, implies broad social obligations and constraints. Property imposes duties: It should also serve the public weal (German Basic Law, Article 14). Despite the wide variety of land-tenure systems, all can be reduced to four ideal types of property regimes: private property, state property, common or communal property and (theoretically) open-access systems. Land tenure should always be seen in the broader context of natural resources generally; and, therefore, land policy must always consider the interdependencies between land tenure and other natural resources, such as water, pasture or forests. It is thus appropriate to employ the broader term "resource tenure", and not just "land tenure". High urbanization rates are overburdening the management capabilities of cities in the developing world. Existing formal urban planning standards and tenure regulations have in most cases proved inappropriate to meet the challenges that arise. In an effort to come to grips with existential problems, people use informal and often illegal urbanization processes to bypass formal planning regulations and create parallel structures. A land policy should point the way to more flexible land management and a transparent process for the transition from rural to urban land use. Minimum requirements for the growing urban agriculture sector and the strengthening of urban-rural links are examples of areas ripe for new development goals and appropriate land management. Women's legal status in land-tenure institutions is generally inferior to men's; they are often entitled to exercise only secondary rights; landlessness among single women is increasing. They have more difficulties than men do in registering themselves as heads of households. In disputes, they have trouble enforcing their claims in court. In transition processes or following structural adjustments, women are the first to lose their jobs - often without recourse to land for a livelihood. However, women are no longer willing to accept the role of passive victims of discrimination and are starting to form alliances to purchase land. Controversy persists on the issue of the economic, social and environmental effectiveness or limitations of autochthonous land-tenure systems and regulations. One of the greatest challenges for each country's land policy, and for development cooperation as well, is to make proper allowances for indigenous land principles amidst rapid change. Challenge for Development Cooperation GTZ has been commissioned by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development to systematize the discussion on land-tenure issues in development cooperation, to generate specific knowledge

7 Page 7 of 36 and capacities, and to provide projects and programs with instruments and services that are related to land policy and land tenure. The work of the GTZ is substantially supported by an interdisciplinary scientific advisory committee board for "land tenure in development cooperation". The sectoral project on land tenure in development cooperation has published Guiding Principles - Land Tenure in Development Cooperation (GTZ 1998) and more than 20 studies, has held international workshops and seminars, has designed training programs, and has developed instruments and established networks on land matters. Dialog with decision-makers both in partner countries and Germany and the experience we have gained in projects and programs have put us in a better position to streamline our efforts. Priority is given to the following issues: Land tenure and controlling power Access to land, land tenure security Land rights and land access for women Formal and informal mechanisms for resolving land conflicts at the local level Legal and institutional reforms Shift from land tenure to resource tenure Contribution of land tenure to food security Land tenure security and economic development Empowering local populations in regard to land matters Land tenure in post-conflict countries Internationalization of land policy Capacity development in all land matters Building bridges between land-related indigenous knowledge and scientific knowledge Policy dialogue in the area of land tenure should be intensified not only among international partners but also among development-policy-makers in Germany. Information deficits are currently being reduced step by step. Reservations are also being reduced about land matters in development cooperation and about the operationalization of land tenure problems as discussed in government negotiations and during project implementation. The following would be appropriate steps for fostering this process: Bring together executives from ministries, technical cooperation, financial cooperation, political foundations and NGOs to broaden awareness and streamline effort; Deal with this issue in the BMZ scientific advisory committee, in the committee for economic cooperation (AWZ) of the German parliament, and in the respective EU departments; Include this topic in international forum discussions and other conferences on agricultural growth, sustainable resource management and poverty reduction, urban development and in international applied research; Strengthen the role of specific advisory services in land-policy formulation and land tenure development. Development cooperation can assist identification of the instruments necessary for reaching the objectives of

8 Page 8 of 36 land policy. The challenge is further to develop existing instruments, to adapt to local partnership conditions and to identify an optimal and flexible mix of instruments which are affordable, efficient and effective. The following is an outline of the most important and flexible land-policy instruments: INSTRUMENTS FOR THE CERTAINTY OF LAW. Harmonization of inconsistent or contradictory legal requirements on land tenure and land- tenure systems. Closing of loopholes; making access to landrelated information easier; creating transparency (especially in the case of land-transfer procedures and efficient contractual conditions; laws of inheritance) INSTRUMENTS FOR LAND ADMINISTRATION. Land registration and cadastre, land adjudication, land markets, lease regulations, land valuation, land banking FISCAL INSTRUMENTS: Land taxation, taxes on land value, levies, taxes and fees on transactions, incentives INSTRUMENTS FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND TENURE: Agrarian structure development plans, reallocation of land, land consolidation, land readjustment, land-use planning INSTRUMENTS FOR URBAN MANAGEMENT. Land banking, urban land readjustment, regularization Specific instruments for the accompaniment and implementation of agrarian reforms and transition processes Formal and informal instruments relating to the resolution of conflicts over land Instruments for capacity development and participation Instruments for project management, program implementation, and financial management procedures Instruments for PARTICIPATORY approaches to problem analysis, resolution and impact assessment Instruments for quality control and accountability Partnership and networking The implementation - of international agreements (AGENDA 21, World Food Summit, Habitat II and the liberalization of the public sector call for a new quality of partnership and networking. Networking in land tenure should lead to new forms of partnership between the public and private sector, between rural and urban land matters, between local and international initiatives, between multilateral and bilateral development cooperation, and among the stakeholders in the civil society. Electronic networks assist considerably in opening access to land-related information and help to create greater transparency. ( Today, the land policy forum can be considered a very promising example of improved cooperation and exchange of experience among NGOs and national and international institutions for development cooperation. 1.4 Agrarian Reform in the Philippines: Where are we now, and where are we going? (Note 4) by Antonio B. Quizon (Note 5) Understanding the Roots of the Agrarian Problem Philippine history is replete with over 400 uprisings, many of them land-related and peasant-led thus underlining the seriousness of the agrarian conflict in this country. Our 350 long years of colonial rule first

9 Page 9 of 36 under the Spaniards, and then the Americans brought about a highly-skewed pattern of land ownership, similar to Latin American countries, because of a common heritage coming from the "latifundia encomienda" (or the colonial plantation) system. In the Philippines, land has traditionally been the dominant source of wealth, prestige, power and economic privilege. Land ownership also determines political and social structures marked by a feudal dependence among farmers and agricultural workers on the one hand, and political patronage as propagated by a small class of wealthy and powerful landlords, on the other hand. Resistance to change often comes from this miniscule elite composed principally of politicians, military men, loggers and traders. Back in 1988, barely 20 percent of the population owned 80 percent of 01 agricultural lands. Indeed, largescale plantations continue to dominate the cash crop sector (i.e. sugarcane and pineapple), while sharecroptenancy arrangements between farmers and absentee-landowners dominate the food crop sector (i.e., rice and corn). Poverty in the Philippines remains predominantly rural. Two-thirds of the country's poor live in rural areas, and 68% of all rural households live in poverty. More than half of all rural households are absolutely landless. Some 18 million people live in the uplands forced to eke out a living in fragile ecosystems, with no security of tenure. Overall Land and Land Use The Philippines consists of 30 million hectares representing fragile ecosystems spread across 7,000 islands. Over half of this (54 percent, or 16.3 million hectares) consists of lands with an above 180 slope highly susceptible to erosion and soil degradation, and therefore considered as inalienable state lands. Of the remaining 13.7 million hectares, between 10 to 11 million are classified as agricultural lands. Only 6 million hectares of these consist of alluvial plains that form the backbone of the country's food security (Note 6). However, these agricultural lands are rapidly shrinking, because of continued conversion uses (Note 7). It to non-agricultural is also in these prime agricultural lands, mostly privately-owned, where past agrarian conflicts have been most pronounced. Meanwhile, as far back as 1975, we had already reached the limits of bringing new lands under cultivation. Thus, practically all non-statelands today are either titled, tilled) claimed, or occupied. In other words, limited scope exists for opening up and distributing new public lands, and reforms must therefore take place on existing farmlands. Historically, there have been other areas of land conflict as well. Apart from the northern Cordillera mountain range, which has been the traditional homeland of the Kalingas, Igorots, Ifugaos and other tribal communities, there are some 100 major cultural communities across the Philippines seeking to protect their ancestral land rights (Note 8). Although these ancestral land rights are mentioned in the Agrarian Reform Law, they are the subject of separate legislation and programs. The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) Established in June 1988, CARP is a wide-reaching program that seeks to improve land tenure over 8.1 million hectares, covering 27 percent of the entire country. It seeks: (a) to improve tenure and transfer land ownership to tenants and farm workers in 4.3 million hectares of private lands; (b) to award land titles to tillers of 2.5 million hectares of public lands; and (c) to grant land-user rights to occupants of 1.3 million hectares in the uplands, under the Integrated Social Forestry Program. CARP's total target of 8.1M hectares compares favorably with what Japan tried to do in under 3M hectares in the 1960s, or Taiwan with about 300T hectares. Yet, two marked differences make its implementation more difficult: First, the Philippines are trying to do agrarian reforms in a democratic setting. The biggest drawback to this is that cases can get stuck in the judiciary system for years before they are finally resolved. Second, the Philippines have a very poor system of land records. The Torrens Title system was introduced by the Americans only in the 1920s. Most land claims remain undocumented; documents are often outdated or conflicting; at times, records do not match on-the-ground cadastral surveys, or else the records get lost or manipulated in the care of our custodians.

10 Page 10 of 36 That such a comprehensive agrarian reform law was passed at all in 1988 was due to the interplay of several factors the widespread public clamor for reforms after the 1986 People's Power Revolution; the emergence of a strong peasant lobby group called the Congress for a People's Agrarian Reform (CPAR); the sudden entry into government of many Progressives and "street parliamentarians" who had previously fought the Marcos regime; the strong backing of the Catholic and Protestant Churches; and the support of middle-class elements fearful of a resurgence of armed conflict in the countryside. CARP is comprehensive; it seeks not just to transfer land rights and ownership, but to "reform agrarian relations." Thus, a critical factor spelled out for the success of agrarian reform is the provision of adequate support services to farmer-beneficiaries to ensure that family-based farms are made productive and sustainable. The overall equation for agrarian reform (AR) is thus seen as: where LTI = land tenure improvement; SS= support services; PP = people's participation; and LR = landowner resistance. "Agrarian Reform (AR) = (LTI + SS) x PP", / LR The fundamental rationale for agrarian reform is social Justice -- i.e. "to improve the socioeconomic conditions of farmworkers and tenants, both men and women, through a more equitable distribution of land." Other stated goals are ecological preservation, food self-sufficiency, as well as agricultural development as the base for industrialization. Key features of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law Without going into finer detail I would like to mention here ten major features of the 1988 Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program: 1. A land retention ceiling of 5 hectares for the landowner; 2. In all retained lands, agrarian relations will be transformed from sharecropping tenancy to a fixed rental or lease agreement; 3. Eligible AR beneficiaries will consist of all tillers who are landless or small owner- cultivators of less than three hectares. Priority will be given to (in order): the actual tillers and occupants of the land, eligible beneficiaries in the surrounding vicinity, or other eligible beneficiaries from other areas. 4. Land awards to beneficiaries would consist of a maximum of three hectares land transfer in agricultural lands, and five hectares in land-user rights (i.e. stewardship contracts of 25 years + 25 years) in the uplands under the Integrated Social Forestry program; 5. Payments for private lands are computed in 30 equal installments, plus 6 % annual interest. Land valuation is based on three factors: productivity (the average net income from the land in the years preceding the transfer); comparable sales (land transactions in the same village); plus the declared market value of the land (as per the owner's tax declaration). 6. Government would act as an intermediary -- providing land valuation and pre-financing through the Land Bank. The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) is provided with extra-judicial powers, although parties may approach judicial courts as a last resort. 7. Funding for the program would come primarily from the recovery of (the Marcoses') ill-gotten wealth, and the sale of government assets. 8. Corporations are given an option of transferring an amount of stocks equivalent to the value of the land. 9. The government would provide support services to beneficiaries. 10. Guarantees for the equal rights of women to land & support services. The Current Performance of Agrarian Reform: Where are we now?

11 Page 11 of 36 The data as of late 1997 shows that 54 percent of all targeted lands have been distributed -- consisting mainly of public lands, private lands voluntarily offered for sale, and completion of a previous 1972 Land Reform covering rice and corn lands (Note 9). On the other hand, very little has been accomplished in the Bicol provinces, Negros island, and in sugar and coconut lands -- areas characterized by extreme disparities in land distribution (Note 10). This is to say that the remaining balance still to be covered by the DAR consists mainly of the difficult part -- i.e., private lands that will have to be subjected to compulsory acquisition. Others are alienable and disposable lands, and upland areas still to be covered by Integrated Social Forestry agreements with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). In terms of support services, the government has perennially been faced with the critical lack of resources. Thus, to make ends meet, the DAR identified some 879 clusters (Note 11) called Agrarian Reform Communities (ARCs) as the focus of its support services. ARCs consist of large contiguous areas with a high density of agrarian reform beneficiaries. Such ARCs have also been the main focus of foreign assistance. Yet, studies show that despite its best efforts, support services of government have had limited reach and coverage. ARCs covered only 15 percent of all areas and beneficiaries. And within ARCs, only 30% were members of organizations. Thus, not surprisingly, levels of production in "reformed" lands have risen only slightly, if at all, for different crops. Yields remain only slightly higher or at par with that of the national average, yet way below their true potential when compared to productivity levels in other Southeast Asian countries. Thus, the data suggests that most agrarian reform beneficiaries continue to remain at levels of poverty (Note 12). Other data on agrarian reform beneficiaries reveal: their low educational levels (73% only reached or finished elementary school); their lack of basic rural infrastructure; their need for agricultural extension (only 20% practice multi-cropping or inter-cropping, while 78 % practice mono-cropping); their lack of organization (only 38% of ARBs are members of organizations); and their lack of general support services (only 30% of ARBs availed of credit, 72% of which come from informal sources that charge an average of 40% interest per annum) (Note 13). It must be pointed out that farm incomes in small family plots can be raised only by diversifying and integrating the farm. But this is possible only if the farmers have access to capital such as working animals, equipment and credit needed to venture into new farming systems. Indeed, a potential exists for strengthening farmer organizations, and for expanding their reach and membership. Further, studies in 1996 showed that 85 percent of all beneficiaries listed in the Certificates of Land Ownership (CLOAs) were male, thus prompting the DAR to issue Circular 18/1996 directing all officials to issue land titles and CLOAs in the names of both spouses as co-owners. Also, there is a continuing gender issue in rural development in general; studies show that women earn only 9 centavos (9%) for every peso that a man earns in agriculture (Note 14). Overall, the situation of AR beneficiaries merely reflects that of rural poverty in general. For while land tenure improvement plays a central role in addressing rural poverty, the data suggests that a broader rural development strategy will be necessary to get poor farmers out of the poverty trap. Key Issues in Implementation Over the past 10 years, many issues continue to obstruct the implementation of CARP. Among those often cited are: 1. Landowner resistance, threats and violence often in collusion with local politicians, police and military. 2. Conversion and reclassification by landowners of agricultural lands. 3. The loss and/or tampering of official land records and documents. 4. The overall lack of support services to agrarian reform beneficiaries. Most agricultural services have been devolved to local government units (LGUs), which often lack the resources and technical expertise. 5. The lack of coordination and bureaucratic red tape within government agencies. Land acquisition involves 14 different steps and 6 agencies.

12 Page 12 of The overall lack of law enforcement. 7. Conflicting policies related to land and agriculture (i.e., on land use, and on family-based versus plantation-based farming). The Way Forward: Key Issues and Prospects The year 1998 marks the 10 th year of CARP. The new deadline for completing all land transfer activities under CARP is June 2004, or by the end-of-term of the present Estrada administration. But CARP will be faced by many new challenges. For the coming final phase will mainly involve the compulsory acquisition of private lands, where even more landowner resistance is expected. What are some of the strategic policy questions and possibilities as we look into 1998 and beyond? The Political Question A 1996 public opinion survey conducted by the Social Weather Stations reveals that 47% of the population believe that "much of the improving peace in the countryside is due to CARP". Indeed, the growth in the Philippine economy by 6-8% in was due in large part to relative peace and political stability. But it has been the middle- and upper-class who have mainly reaped the fruits of this "peace dividend". And as the DAR begins its compulsory coverage of private lands, it will be important to see how the middle-class, whose support was critical for the passage of CARP, will react. For peace has two faces: while it brings some level of prosperity, those who enjoy its fruits now may fall into a state of complacency. DAR is among the few government agencies, which have been able to attract former NGOs and activists. Thus it is important for DAR to continue with an "activist" posture vis-a-vis policy issues and legislation. Yet, ongoing resistance of private landowners may slow down the work of DAR. DAR's administrative work is also expected to grow more tedious, as it moves towards the acquisition of smaller landholdings, often in widely-scattered farmplots. Thus, agrarian reform policies need to be more clearly defined in those proven bottlenecks of the past -- particularly on issues of land valuation, land conversion, and landowner compensation. Further, policies should clarify the extent of DAR's extra-judicial powers, the role of police authorities, and sanctions against those who refuse to implement AR-related decisions. As experience shows, the main problem often lies not in the lack of policy, but in the lack of law enforcement and implementation. Thus, in the coming years, there will be need for a strong agrarian reform lobby among civil society organizations (CSOs), for viliglance is the price of reform. Meanwhile, more agrarian cases are likely to flood the judicial courts which may take years to resolve. It will thus be important to ensure that farmers are properly installed on the lands-in-question, even while their cases are being heard in court. This will secure for farmers a stable source of food and livelihood, even while they await court decisions. Much of CARP's budget must come from internal resources, since foreign donor agencies consider land acquisition to be a "political activity" that is best left to the (sovereign) government. The other (un-stated) reason is that land acquisition offers poor prospects in terms of returns-on-investment that "language of economics" that creditors best understand. Most donors, therefore, have put in their funds into financing support services for AR beneficiaries. Since support services come into the picture only after land transfer has been instituted, this fact alone makes it seem "non-political". Yet the net effect is the same. Any external support (for any essential component of CARP) in effect "frees" more internal funds for land acquisition and tenure improvement. In the Philippine context, while problems are often systemic, their solutions are often dependent on personalities. Thus, the current administration will determine whether CARP will continue to occupy a central place in the development agenda. Yet today, we remain uncertain over the real policy position of the Estrada administration. Despite favorable policy pronouncements, we see conflicting signals in the resurgence of former Marcos cronies, in the President's shabby treatment of farmers in the recent Mapalad land case (Note 15), and in the continuing low priority given to agriculture in the national budget. The Economic Equation

13 Page 13 of 36 While tenurial security has somewhat improved the lives of beneficiaries, available data indicates that the majority of ARBs still live in poverty. Thus, support services and agricultural extension' will need significant attention by government and NGOs. Among those who have received support services, 96% received these from government, compared to other farmers' organizations (7%) and NGOs (4%). While the relevance of such services needs to be assessed, this also yields a lesson particularly for NGOs. NGOs themselves must begin to accept the fact that, in terms of scope and resources, they should not attempt to serve as a substitute for government, which still has the widest spread and the most resources for providing support services and extension. Thus, it should not be the strategic goal of NGOs to "grow big". Instead, NGOs would do best in influencing government initiatives, and in expanding the work of farmer-organizations. With growing rural populations, CARP implementors and advocates must also begin to address the broader need of creating viable forms of rural and off-farm employment. There is a need for a more comprehensive and integrated rural development strategy in which agrarian reform forms a central component, and where rural poverty is directly addressed. The Sustainability Dimension Nearly 30 percent of the country's total population, or 18 million people, now live in upland areas (lands of 18 slope and above). Counted among the "poorest of the poor", many have been driven to the uplands because of landlessness and the lack of off-farm employment, often using techniques that contribute to soil degradation and erosion. Thus, the government's approach was to institute an ISF stewardship arrangement with existing settlers, for two practical reasons: (1) it was simply impossible for government to undertake any form of massive resettlement; and (2) a formal recognition of the tenurial rights of upland dwellers would lead to better forest and resource protection. The government's overall policy measure with ISF seems to be in the right direction. But a critical need will be extension and support services for ISF. Thus, line agencies, academic institutions and NGOs will need to improve the capacities of local governments to provide such services and assistance. Also needed are precise land delineation and mapping systems, and determined law enforcement. These will be important in order to resolve conflicting claims, for instance, between areas under ISF versus areas designated for plantations and areas under protection. Yet the DENR itself faces several constraints -- including the fact that agrarian reform is not a priority program among its many concerns. In addition, DENR will be directly responsible for implementing two new land laws that have direct impact on CARP -- the Ancestral Domain Act and the National Land Use Act. Thus, access to land and resource rights will increasingly have to be central, cross-cutting themes in the work of CSOs and the DENR. Some critical areas for international cooperation: Finally, I would like to highlight certain concrete areas where Philippine NGOs and Germany can build solidarity and cooperation. (1) Creation of a civil society "quick response fund". As agrarian reform moves towards the compulsory acquisition of private lands over the next six years, we expect greater landlord resistance. As a form of concrete support, CSOs will need a flexible fund to support negotiations, mobilization, field investigations, case documentation and the installation of farmers in actual land transfer cases. This is important for conflictprevention, especially in the growing number of land disputes today that involve local politicians, the police and the military. (2) Support services. As agrarian reform implies cutting-off the traditional dependence of former tenants on their landlords, new sources of support services become more critical. These may come in the form of community organizing, credit, agricultural extension, infrastructure, marketing, or even health and education services. (3) International solidarity work. The land issue has always been seen as a "national" rather than an "International" concern. Hence, for nearly two decades since WCARRD in 1979, agrarian reform has been conspicuously absent from the International development agenda. It is only over the past 2-3 years that agrarian reform has once again resurfaced on the global scene, due largely to new development thinking, which international solidarity work must now pursue: