REPORT ON THE ILC AFRICA REGIONAL WORKSHOP 30 TH OCTOBER TO 2 ND NOVEMBER 2007. NAIROBI. INTRODUCTION Theme, Goal and Objectives The ILC held a four day Africa Regional Workshop in Nairobi which Theme was Putting a pro-poor land agenda into practice in Africa. Participants were largely from four regions in Africa; namely West Africa, East Africa the host country, Southern Africa and Central Africa. There was a guest speaker from Asia who gave the Asian experience. North Africa and the Horn were not represented. The language at the meeting was English and French with translators assisting. The Goal of the meeting was to develop, as an alliance of members and partners of the International Land Coalition, priorities, strategies, and modalities for working together in Africa in support of pro-poor land tenure reform. The objectives of the meeting were: -To identify key emerging issues and trends as well as challenges and opportunities in the area of access to land by the landless poor (on a per country basis, and on a sub regional clustering basis). -To define optimum strategic roles for ILC in Africa. -To formulate the framework for a 3-4 year action plan to align with regional priorities and ILC Strategic Framework. -To develop operational modalities for functioning of ILC in the Africa region. DAY 1 OPENING CEREMONY Day one was heavily loaded. There were about 16 presentations on the whole The opening ceremony was very brief. After the Welcome Address by the host KLA LandNet West Africa (Didi Odigie) representing Civil Societies, gave a short welcome address which read thus: Welcome to the ILC Africa Regional Workshop Nairobi 2007. On behalf of the Council of which my organization LandNet West Africa is a member, I have the mandate to draw the attention of the assembly to a few key issues in my opening statement. The Uganda meeting focused on Regionalizing ILC. Now the time has come to strengthen the role of members. Therefore this meeting amongst many other things should focus on building a member led coalition if the coalition is to be effective, make a global impact and also achieve its goals and objectives. This meeting therefore affords us as members and partners the opportunity to shape the coalitions future by coming up with principles, activities and priorities for collaboration; in other words the assembly is expected to come up with a concrete action plan on how we intend to collaborate in the next four years as a member led coalition.
There will be a Council meeting by mid November and the out come of this meeting will deliberated upon. If at the end of the meeting, the building of a member led coalition is achieved, then we can rightly say that this significant meeting Nairobi 2007 marks the beginning of a new era in the existence of the ILC- That is the CHANGE to a MEMBER LED COALITION. After LandNet IFAD (Harold Liversage ) representing the IGO s spoke next,followed by ILC Secretariat represented by Micheal Taylor. CEBEDES (Roch Mongbo) then gave the background and overview of the workshop objectives and process all in line with LandNets welcome statement as earlier written. KEYNOTE ADDRESSES The Keynote addresses were by Professor Sam Moyo,AIAS and Dr Ward Anseeuw of CIRAD/ University of Pretoria. Professor Sam Moyo in his Keynote address titled : The current status of civil society organization on land issues in Africa argued that the issues are beaurocracy and technocracy.he opined that debates on land reforms are polarized, saying that they are either social, economic or political. He also said that there are conflicting models in land reforms. According to him land reform should be based on interaction between all the forces or interplay. For Professor Moyo, the Latin American experience is good for historical development in land reform. According to Professor Moyo, The response of the State to a social movement can bring about land reform. He however warned that the evolution of movement varies with time, sometimes conflicting and sometimes working with the State. The Professor explained that Governments operate under pressure to avoid land conflicts but operate to co-opt land movements.nevertheless Professor Moyo believes that autonomy of movement and radicalism is required. He sited the critical experience of Brazil which he said appears to be working in cooperation with the State. The next keynote address was delivered by Dr Ward Anseeuw titled Policy choices in land reform.his keynote address dwelt on his observation in South Africa. He explained that apart from market forces, that there are three programes in South Africa namely, Restitution Redistribution Land Tenure With regard to the Restitution programme, Dr Ward said that it is to do with land given for agriculture to people who were deprived under apartheid. While the Redistribution project he said entails privatizing communal land. He however noted that in the past 14years nothing has been done on communal land and that with respect to land sales only 4% has been sold. According to Dr Ward Land is linked to Economic Policy but policies presently are elite, urban based, supported by the Government and Western powers and are not pro-
poor. Dr Ward said that from 1994 they witnessed the weakening of Civil Societies in South Africa and that the Government policies are dangerous to development. Dr Ward also said that the reforms did not give room for participation of CSO s even though the claim is that about 50 CSO s were consulted.according to him inequality is growing and so is unemployment. Dr Ward then posed the question: What is the new context in Africa? In answering the question, Dr Ward opined that land reform is influenced by a criss cross of factors such as: The Population in Africa becoming urbanized The growth of Rural areas Lack of political goodwill to carry out reforms The preference for old ways i.e. importation The new elite are urban based CSO.s he said are not strong in land issues in South Africa. Dr Ward continued to say that one can no longer claim that land is abundant in Africa and that things have changed ; citing Madagascar as an example he said what obtains there now is agrarian reforms not just land reform. He is of the opinion that land reform and agrarian reform go together therefore when one talks about land reform, the following must be considered- Inequality Slums Inexistence of social movements Lack of strong social movement where they exist. The position of agriculture in our economies. Urban elite(n/b Black & White elite- discord) Negative government policies. Resistance by the people Dr Ward concluded by recommending that duo land reform is required in Africa. That is the reform should have both a social and economic base. He pointed out that population growth will bring about land pressure at a stage but according to him it is worth trying as was done in Madagascar. He also drew attention to the issue of urbanization and the youth and youth unemployment which he said makes land reform difficult especially with regard to price of land, increase in crime rate and the fact that most African countries are consumer societies. After Lunch 9 presentations were made, this comprised of 7 presentations by CSO S and 2 IGOS -World Bank and UN-Habitat. The reports from the CSO S were similar experiences of injustice to the landless poor and efforts made to alleviate poverty in those areas. The highlights of the experience sharing were LandNet West Africa (Ibrahima Diakite)- Guinea, and the Indigenous People of Africa Coordinating Committee IPACC (Massai- Kenya), The following are a brief summary of each presentation.
1) West Africa: Status,trends and challenges in pro-poor land tenure by Ibrahima Diakite, Ministere du Plan, Guinea /LandNet West Africa.( French) In this presentation LandNet West Africa gave an overview of issues affecting land management in the region. The paper showed how Displacement and Movement from arid land to areas conducive to agriculture affects land management, eg Burkina Faso. It also explained how Conflicts influence land management. The presenter noted that boundaries do not have linguistic demarcation and as such the groups of people are mixed. He pointed out that Franco-phone countries are in conflict and that the source of conflict is land related. Also in Nigeria, the Niger Delta crisis is land related and is over the issue of management of resources. The Sale of Land the presenter said is slowly turning landless people into land owners while original land owners are dispossessed of their land. Sometimes just to obtain visas to go abroad they sell. New Actors in land therefore emerge in addition with new problems; for example in the oil producing area of the Niger delta region of Nigeria there is the problem of land pollution which further impoverishes the people as they can neither fish nor farm Liberia and Sierra Leon he said are just recovering from wars which were land related. Ibrahima pointed out that the Return of Refugees also has an impact on land management especially amputees, widows and children already impoverished, the hardship deepens as some do not have land and those who do, cannot use them because of their physical disabilities, poverty etc. He concluded with the following Recommendations: o Decentralization o Legislation of suitable laws o Security of transaction ie agrarian reform o Security of produce. o New Land administration. 2 ) East Africa : Uganda land Alliance. They reported that they have made a tremendous mark with farmers especially widows. 3) South Africa: LAMOSA.reported that the South African land law has no provision for HIV/AIDS and Gender issues 4) Indigenous Peoples of Africa Coordinating Committee- IPACC. This regional Ngo with chapters all over Africa presented the case of the Masai people of Kenya who according to them owned about 80% of the land in Kenya but are now confined to small areas which do not allow pastoralists to flourish. The Masai fields are now being shared with individual land owners, industrialists and the National Park. The Masai are bitter over the sale of their land, the pollution of their land and water which kill their cattle; therefore they want their land back. The last
time in court they lost. But they are not giving up. The Masai have worked out a zoning proposal which they want to Government to endorse. 5) GROOTS Kenya a movement of grassroots women led organization whose mission is to facilitate women and their communities to effectively participate in development gave an over view of their organization. Their programmes include community responses to HIV/AIDS, women and property programme, women leadership and governance, community resources and livelihood. It is pertinent to mention that GROOTS is an affiliate of Huairou Commission and GROOTS International which is a global coalition of networks, institutions and individual, professionals working for the advancement of grassroots women-led community development work. 6) The Multi-lateral agencies namely the WORLD BANK and the UN- HABITAT gave accounts of their activities in the region and pledged their support for the ILC. CONCLUSION From the discussions after the presentations it was concluded thati) The role of civil societies need to be clearly defined ii) Poverty now appears to be defined against the dollar therefore poverty needs to be redefined. iii) In some areas for example Cameroon, the laws and policies are in place but the problem is to do with implementation. DAY 2 & DAY 3 The second and the third day had the group discussing the Strategic framework 2007 to 2011. Questions such as who are we? Why are we here? What are our challenges were discussed based on the survey study which was circulated to members prior to the meeting. These questions were necessary so as to be able to identify the challenges ahead and possible areas of collaboration in the next four years as a member led coalition. For the purpose of practical experience field trips were also organized. Challenges identified in order of priority- voting results. 16- Lobby for platform where marginalized voices (women, iliterate, indigenous, etc.) are heard 14- Build capacity of all actors to understand pro-poor policies and processes and challenge the dominant framework. 14- Inadequate human and financial resources and partnerships 13- Involving (participation) marginalized groups (poor, gender etc) 11- Government policies in conflict with community interests 10- How to transform, strengthen and protect customary tenure to secure the rights of the poor. 9- Lack of coordination and harmony among CSOs. 9- Develop a vision of National development which integrates appropriate land and agrarian principles in support of the rural poor.
8- Design strategies to re-orient and strengthen CSO S roles in advancing and changing the pro-poor agenda. 7- Weak land management and governance institutions. 6- Marginalisation and discrimination of indigenous peoples (concerning land). 6- Develop land strategies to prevent land concentration and displacement of indigenous people by elites ( foreigners). 6- Equitable distribution of resources (natural, financial, human) to support marginalized especially resettled communities. 5.- Lack of research capacity on poor people s livelihood and land related issues. 5- Extension of land laws and of all laws with an impact on land tenure. 5- Respect for zoning plan. 5- lack of evidence and research to link HIV/Aids and land rights as well as vulnerabilities. 4- Poor participation of CSOs in legal reform process. 3- Institutional weakness of CSO. 3- Use of research to inform policy agenda. 2- Desertification. 2- Clarification of the role of kings/chiefs concerning access to land 2- Monitoring of implementation of forest conservation policies. 2- To reverse biases against common property regimes. 1- Equitable land rights for women and children. Open Space Technology Session In addition to the challenges identified above, during the group work open space technology about 13 thematic points of possible activities were identified and the out lines of the issues given, they are- 1.Tools and strategies to influence land policy. 2. How to position thematic approaches in ILC strategy. 3. Gender and marginalized people: access and control over land. 4. Participatory GIS/community mapping of indigenous peoples and local communities land and territorial rights and interests. 5. Capacity building of CSOs 6. Global partnerships on land issues. 7. Land conflicts prevention and management. 8. Need for research to inform policy processes, lobbying and advocacy. 9. CSOs engagement with AU/UNECA/AFDD- Led process of formulating Africa- wide land policy guidelines. 10. Building CSOs alliance between rural groups (waged agricultural workers, pastoralists and small farmers. 11. (French) How to defend the land access rights of indigenous peoples using national, regional and global mechanisms? 12. i Advocacy with government on issues of landless ii) The issue of the urban poor and urban slums. 13. Land and broader reforms.
Day 4. Presentations were made on building a more member- led Coalition, focusing on Regionalization, Decentralization and Governance.Questions were raised on the Structure of the regional coalition ie Governance, Strengthening the functioning of members and Decentralizing the Secretariat. Members were required to discuss these three areas and possibly come up with their own questions. In order to tackle the issues members were to chose any of the groups and submit suggestions after a detailed discussion at the plenary. Below is the out come of the discussions. Group 1. Governance Interim Council The group on Governance proposed an Interim Council for the Africa region whose mandate shall be- 1.Building the membership, 2. Setting up the Secretariat 3. Ensure accreditation and link with relevant bodies 4. Call for and prepare an AOM. 5. Have the responsibility for the preparation of the SP / SF. 6. Resource mobilization. The key issues were- 1. Who constitutes the members (issue of independence)? 2. What powers should be divested from Rome? 3. Knowledge gaps (what activities shall regions and sub-regions under take?) 4. What resources are needed? The Assembly Functions of the Assembly Policy body of members at regional level Electing representatives to Global Council and Regional Council Endorsing Strategic frame work, budget / annual report for office. Ensuring heterogeneity with global strategic framework Recommendations Operational Set Up 1. Set up an interim Council now 2. Recruitment of membership for setting up of Regional assembly and Council (Cession of powers from Rome however recruitment criteria comes from Rome Africa will implement) 3. Set up of secretariat 4. Establish sub-regional structures on what is already working Issues raised: How do you meet? Relationship of sub-region and process of election? Time frame for operational set up? Will there be representation of the Global assembly when drawing up the strategic frame work.?
Group 2. Strenghtning the Functioning of Members This group made their proposals and recommendations under 6 major headings. 1. Communication: a) Regional e:mail b) Use of Skype c) Each member partner to designate a focal point for communication to take responsibility of sharing information. d) Problem- language translation. 2. Fund Raising: Regional initiatives- (a) share information on opportunities to promptly develop proposals (b) share information on list of existing donours. Risk: Competition for fund raising - members/partners to develop partnerships with each other and at regional level. - Secretariat and members/partners to raise fund together. 3. Annual Work Plan and Budget. - relates to communication or - make use of meetings members/partners are attending to discuss joint Initiatives. - basic priorities defined at this meeting. Question:- How many sub-regions? -Will there be one committee per sub- region? - in whatever decentralized structure that is chosen, how are the sub-regions represented? Define the Structure in order to do budgets and work plans 5. Thematic Links within Regions. -Themes based on priorities -Create thematic groups defined at sub-regions that can link to other sub-regions. - Sub-regions can define mode of working together. 6. Promoting involvement of IGOs. - involve IGOs, - build advocacy skills of members/ partners to approach IGOs - visit and give information on our work, - access existing relationship between members / partners and IGOs - identify allies. - Engage those who are distant
GROUP 3. Decentralizing the Secretariat With regard to Decentralizing the Secretariat the major issue was to do with the structure of decentralization. Questions: (i) should we have structures - in Africa or Rome? - in how many regions? ( ii) How do we go ahead to decide options? - workshops? - group discussions? - task force? A survey was however carried out in this regard and the findings tally with the consensus that a large number of functions would be best shared but there is need for more clarity and that perhaps some rules should be provided to cater for the conflicts. Conclusion At the end of the Regional Workshop, there were more questions that could not be answered and which the assembly were not expected to find immediate answers to in view of the fact that the change to a member led coalition is a process which requires time. It was however agreed that an interim steering group for the region of Africa be appointed comprising of LandNet West Africa, Kenya Land Alliance, Uganda Land Alliance and ZERO of South Africa. Kenya Land Alliance opted to host and was accepted. The interim Steering committee was to resume duty with immediate effect. Electronic copies of the presentations are available on request to Mike Taylor.