THE POLITICS OF REFORM IN INSTITUTIONS OF LAND ADMINISTRATION IN GHANA:

1. THE POLITICS OF REFORM IN INSTITUTIONS OF LAND ADMINISTRATION IN GHANA: Land Politics, Institutions & Institutional Change Daniel Appiah, MPhil/PhD (University of York) Supervisor: Dr Adrian Leftwich

2. UNDERSTANDING LAND POLITICS • Defining Land: Two Conceptions of Land (Dale and McLaughlin, 1999) • Physical earth • Abstract set of formal or informal rights over a physical portion of the earth • Defining Land Administration: 4 Components (Dale and McLaughlin, 1999; Steudler et al, 2004; Williamson et al 2008) • Juridical (land tenure or ownership) • Fiscal (land valuation) • Regulatory (land use) & • Information management • The Primacy of Politics in Land Administration • Conflict among diverse interests over scarce land resources • Power and control over people and land resources

3. AN OVERVIEW OF LAND ADMINISTRATION IN GHANA • The State vs. ‘Customary’ Land Tenure Administration • State Land Tenure Administration: 20% (Kasanga and Kotey, 2001; World Bank, 2003a) • ‘Customary’ Land Tenure Administration: 80% • Institutional Problems in Land Administration • State Institutions of Land Administration • Inter-organizational conflicts and lack of co-operation among agencies • Customary Institutions of Land Administration • Lack of transparency, accountability, and tenure security

4. THE PROBLEM FOR RESEARCH ANALYSIS • Institutional Reforms in State and Customary Land Administration in Ghana – The Land Administration Project (LAP). • The Diversity Of Interests In LAP(Toulmin, et. al., 2003; World Bank, 2003b; Quan, et. al., 2004). • International Development ‘Partners’ (World Bank, DFID, GTZ etc) • Market Interests • Customary Authorities • The State • Civil Society Actors • Public Sector Land Agencies (6/7?) • Land Tenants

5. HYPOTHESIS & RESEARCH QUESTION • Hypothesis • Institutions, whether formal or informal, matters for development in all human societies; they enable or constrain interests in the development process, and; ultimately shapes social outcomes. • Key Research Question • How, and to what extent, do state (formal) and customary (informal) institutions of land administration enable or constrain institutional reform, and; ultimately, shape reform outcomes?

6. SPECIFIC CASE STUDY RESEARCH QUESTIONS • What are the state (formal) institutions of land administration? • What are the customary (informal) institutions of land administration? • What are the power relations between the state and customary institutions of land administration? • How do the state and customary institutions of land administration impact on diverse interests (businesses, the state, customary authorities and tenants) in land administration? • What is the origin (interests involved) and nature of the reform in the state and customary institutions of land administration? • How have the state and customary institutions of land administration enable or constrain institutional reform?

7. AN HISTORICAL INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH AGENDA • Historical Institutionalism(Pierson and Skocpol, 2002; Leftwich, 2006; 2007) • Research Methodology • A Historical Analysis of the State and Customary Institutions of Land Administration • Analysis of the Politics of Reform in State (formal) Institutions of Land Administration • Analysis of the Politics of Reform in Customary (informal) Institutions of Land Administration • Methods for Data Collection(Searle, 2001; Creswell, 2007; Bryman, 2008) • Documentary Analysis • Purposive Interviews

8. ANALYTICAL PROPOSITIONS OF HISTORICAL INSTITUTIONALISM • Institutional formation and evolution involve political processes. • Political processes in human societies occur in given institutional contexts. • Path dependency commonly constrain or enable the interests involved in institutional formation and change. • The agents or interests involved in institutional reform bring to the political process diverse forms of power and resources embedded within formal or informal institutions. • Agents in uncertain, evolving or insecure institutional environments can have more effect than agents in contexts where the institutional architecture is well-established, secure and consolidated. • ‘Critical junctures’ often provide the ‘windows of opportunity’ or occasions when fundamental institutional reform can occur.

9. HOPED FOR CONTRIBUTION OF THE THESIS • Understanding of the origin and nature of state (formal) and customary (informal) institutions of land administration • Understanding of how formal and informal institutions matter in enabling or constraining development • Understanding of the problems of and prospects for institutional reform in land administration in Ghana • Highlight the advantages and limitations of historical institutional theory in political analysis

10. HOW IS THE STUDY GOING? A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON LAND ADMINISTRATION

11. LITERATURE REVIEW OF LAND ADMINISTRATION IN AFRICA • The State vs. ‘Customary’ Land Tenure Administration • State Land Tenure Administration: 1-10% (World Bank, 2003; Toulmin, 2008) • ‘Customary’ Land Tenure Administration: 90-99% • Controversy over definition of the ‘Customary’ (Leonard and Longbottom 2000; Quan, et. al., 2004; Cutola, et. al., 2007; Wily, 2008) • Common property • Indigenous/Traditional • Customary • The need for critical analysis of the origin and nature of the institutions that govern ‘State’ and ‘Customary’ land tenure in Africa. • Emerging issues from the Land in Africa Conference,2004, London(Quan, et. al., 2004:11-12); • The State as ultimate owner of land resources • Imported solutions of tenure individualisation and titling are not workable in the African context

12. LITERATURE REVIEW OF THE ORIGIN AND NATURE OF LAND ADMINISTRATION – Theory & Practice • Two Perspectives in The Literature • The World Bank Perspective(World Bank Land Sector Policy Paper, 1975) • The Rational-Technical Perspective (De soto, 2000; Williamson and Wallace, 2006; Williamson et al, 2008; Enemark, 2008) • My Perspective: A Political Approach – The Primacy of Politics (Caneiro, 1970; Tilly, 1990; Gran, 2002) • The origin and nature of land administration is primarily shaped by political processes between powerful and less powerful interests. • Land administration is intricately embedded within the larger political process of state formation. • Political processes of conflicts, co-operation, negotiation between rulers and other interests in the concentration of coercion over land shapes the nature of the rules that govern land administration across states.

13. THANK YOU! Caution & Motivation; “It is not easy, to be sure. The whole terrain is an intellectual and political minefield, dotted with institutional jealousies and border police, with well-placed and often concealed booby-traps, diversions and dead ends. … But it has been done and can be done.” Adrian Leftwich(2004:117) DISCUSSION…