Applying the LGAF to Peru: insights and follow up

1. Applying the LGAF to Peru: insights and follow up Victor Endo Administracion del Territorio Consultores Member of the Advisory Committee of the Project for the Consolidation of the Immovable Property Rights in Peru

2. Outline • The tool and its metrics • Why is LGAF relevant in a country like Peru? • Example of relevant results in Peru: • recognition vsenforcement of rights • efficiency of services, reliability and sustainability • Conclusions and recommendations • How following up?

3. Land Governanced Assessment Framework – LGAF: the tool and its metrics 21 land governance indicators organized in 5 groups Each indicator unfolds in “dimensions”. LGAF contains 72 dimensions to capture governance processes

4. Methodology Preparation (data gathering and coordination) is critical

5. Why LGAF is relevant in a country like Peru?

6. Why LGAF is relevant in a country like Peru? Laws Conflict Rule of law Organizations Issues of Sustainability Implementation In a context of conflict and polarized ideologies we need to agree on facts

7. WhyLGAF is relevant in a country like Peru? Laws Conflict Rule of law Organizations Issues of Sustainability Implementation In a context of context of conflict and polarized ideologies we need to agree on facts. LGAF contributes to: • Objective measure of institutions’ actual functioning • Traceable over time • Instrument to identify need for policy intervention • Useful for different actors: government, multilaterals, private sector organizations, civil society organizations

8. Relevant results in Peru: recognition vs enforcement LGI 1 Legal and institutional framework • Recognition and enforcement of rights (based on LGI - 1, LGI-2 and LGI-3) • Most of land tenure categories (urban and rural) are recognized in the text of the laws • Notable progress in practical implementation due to mass scale formalization programs • Formalization mechanisms need to be adapted to pending urban typologies • Titling of peasant Andean communities and Amazonian native communities is held back: • Boundary delimitation issues • Rules for defining community representatives

9. Recognition of rights vs enforcement : Andeanpeasant and Amazoniannativecommunities LGI 2 Enforcement of rights LGI 1 Rural rights recognition LGI–1 (i)Land tenure rights recognition (rural) AExisting legal framework recognizes rights held by more than 90% of the rural population, either through customary or statutory tenure regimes. Panel members could not assign a dimension: LGI–2 (i) Surveying/mapping and registration of rights to communal land B. 40-70% of the area of communal lands has boundaries demarcated and surveyed/mapped and communal rights registered. C. 10-40% of the area of communal lands has boundaries demarcated and surveyed/mapped and communal rights registered. ¿? LGI–1 (iii) Rural group rights recognition: A The tenure of most groups in rural areas is formally recognized and clear regulations exist regarding groups’ internal organization and legal representation.

10. Recognition vs enforcement: obstacles faced by Andean and Amazonian comunities’ rights • Boundary conflicts with neighbor communities • Mapping processes are complex in jungle areas • Communities cannot comply with legal representation requirements • Result: • Vulnerability • Lost opportunities • Conflict • Communities’ territories are hardly identifiable using traditional concepts for land use • What to do with new communities?: fragmentation of existing communities, creation of new ones as a strategy to acquire lands

11. Relevant results in Peru: efficiency of services, reliability and sustainability of registries Public provision of land information • Reliability of land registries • (based on LGI - 16 y LGI - 17) • The Superintendency of Registries - SUNARP is a modern, financially self-sustainable, intensive in the use of technology, with transparent rules for operation. • However: • Poor definition of boundaries creates acute problems. Processes for cadastre – registry integration is a work in progress • Sustainability of successful national formalization program is put into question: too high transaction costs and lack of “registration culture”.

12. Sustainability of formalizationefforts and registries’ efficiency: fieldsurveysresults OWNERS ON THE FIELD MATCH WITH PROPERTY RECORDS? SOCIO ECONOMIC PROFILE Match No match Undetermined

13. Efficiency of registry services and sustainability of formalization Registration system: land records reflect reality? A system cost-effective, accessible and reliable (for all citizens)? • Weaknesses in parcel definition in the traditional registry • Overlapping rights • Complex and cumbersome registration processes • (especially for the poor) • Registrars have limited incentives for efficiency • Lack of standards for processing applications • Limited incentives to register subsequent transfers • What information is valid?: only specialized lawyers can tell • High transaction costs: registry as a tax gatekeeper, the notary public

14. General conclusions • The land administration system works well for some but not for all. • Limited institutional capacity is associated to lack of resources (financial and technical) • Need to develop strategies for inclusion • A key element is a integrated vision of the property system that contributes to coordinating efforts among different sectors and levels of government

15. Specificrecommendations • Prioritize recognition of land tenure rights to prevent the pervasive effects of an open-ended formalization process. • COFOPRI (the titling agency): to produce and monitor specific indicators -by typology- of the remnant demand for formalization • Promote housing alternatives for the poor • Promote development of land use planning instruments through specific incentives to local and regional governments • Design strategies for municipalities to develop land tax collection capacities • Incentives to regional governments who contribute to the inventory of public lands • Re-launch the implementation of the National Cadastre System linked to the registries.

16. Howfollowing up theLGAF in Peru? • There exist a diverse community of actors that share an interest to contribute to a better land administration. How making this effort sustainable? • Feedback • Dissemination and public discussion • Collaboration through partnerships • To provide the indicators with hard evidence • To deepen the analysis • To produce new versions of the LGAF and monitor progreess Actors can disagree on the interpretation of what the correct path is, but agreeing on the facts about where we are now serves all and contributes creating citizenship

17. Applying the LGAF to Peru: insights and follow up Victor Endo Administracion del Territorio Consultores Member of the Advisory Committee of the Project for the Consolidation of the Immovable Property Rights in Peru