International standards, mechanisms and guidelines relating to land, including tenure

expand all
collapse all

Websites/Multiple Documents

Title: Right to Security of Tenure
Description: Links to UN documents plus reference to: (on http://unjobs.org): Agriculture forestry and fishing > Agricultural economics and policy > Land tenure... Agriculture forestry and fishing > Forestry > Land tenure... Human settlements > Housing > Eviction... Human settlements > Housing > Rental housing... Human settlements > Housing > Right to housing... Human settlements > Settlement planning > Squatters... Social conditions and equity > Human rights > Right to housing
Source/publisher: UN Resource Directory
Date of entry/update: 2011-11-12
Grouping: Websites/Multiple Documents
Language: English
more
Title: Right to security of tenure (results of a Google seach)
Description: 34,000 results for a google search for "Right to security of tenure" (November 2014)
Source/publisher: Google
Date of entry/update: 2011-11-12
Grouping: Websites/Multiple Documents
Language: English
more
Title: USAID LAND TENURE and PROPERTY RIGHTS PORTAL
Description: "We envision a world in which land governance systems, both formal and informal, are effective, accessible, and responsive for all. This is possible when land tenure and property rights are recognized as critical development issues and when the United States Government and its development partners demonstrate consistent attention and a firm commitment to supporting coordinated policies and programs that clarify and strengthen the land tenure and property rights of all members of society, enabling broad-based economic growth, gender equality, reduced incidence of conflicts, enhanced food security, improved resilience to climate change, and effective natural resource management..."
Source/publisher: USAID
Date of entry/update: 2015-08-02
Grouping: Websites/Multiple Documents
Language: English
more
expand all
collapse all

Individual Documents

Title: Pathways for the recognition of customary forest tenure in the Mekong region
Description: "Executive summary..... Globally, about 2 billion people live under a customary tenure system, which is a set of rules and norms that govern local peoples’ use of forests, land and other natural resources. This tenure and its accompanying rights are crucial to peoples’ livelihoods, food security and culture, as well as to forest protection, biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation. Customary tenure has long been insecure and, in many places, it is under growing pressure. But it is also increasingly recognized through a variety of mechanisms, both formal and informal. This report focuses on the recognition of customary tenure of communities living in forested landscapes in Cambodia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar and Viet Nam and includes a case study from Thailand. The report addresses a variety of questions: What is meant by the “recognition” of customary tenure? What mechanisms can be used to strengthen communities’ tenure security? How have these mechanisms been used in the Mekong region and what are the remaining gaps or challenges? What are the opportunities to better integrate customary tenure in ongoing interventions at the landscape, national and regional levels? And what lessons can be learned for the region and beyond? The report identifies three main pathways into which mechanisms for recognizing customary tenure can be categorized: self-recognition by communities; joint recognition by communities and others; and formal recognition in legal frameworks. It introduces a conceptual framework for assessing these mechanisms, including by analysing them through the lenses of rights, livelihoods, governance, gender equity and social inclusion, customary and traditional practices and dispute resolution. Ten case studies illustrate different approaches, often a mix of formal and informal mechanisms that have been used to recognize customary tenure in five countries of the Mekong region covered in this analysis. The report also provides an updated account of customary tenure recognition within legal frameworks, reflecting recent legal reforms in some countries. The analysis shows that legal frameworks in all five countries have provisions enabling communities to use and manage forests and natural resources. In most cases, however, these provisions do not fully recognize customary rights and practices and come with various responsibilities and conditions. Restrictions still apply to the scope of rights, the geographical area and land-use types and the duration over which rights are granted. The report identifies gaps and inconsistencies in legal frameworks and how they are implemented. It suggests promising avenues for improving the recognition of customary tenure and makes specific recommendations for each of the three pathways of recognition. It also describes some entry points for improving recognition of customary tenure that are relevant to most or all countries in the region. These include improved coordination and information-sharing mechanisms, awareness-raising, capacity-building, legal reforms and improved implementation of legal frameworks, documentation, testing and safeguards..."
Source/publisher: RECOFTC – The Center for People and Forests and Mekong Region Land Governance
Date of publication: 2022-12-09
Date of entry/update: 2022-12-12
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
Format : pdf
Size: 3.42 MB (72 pages) - Original version
more
Title: SUMMARY REPORT OF THE THIRD MEKONG REGIONAL LAND FORUM
Sub-title: LAND TENURE IN MEKONG FOREST LANDSCAPES: ADVANCING THE RECOGNITION OF CUSTOMARY RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT PRACTICES
Description: The Mekong Region Land Governance project (MRLG) successfully organized the first Mekong Regional Land Forum in Hanoi in 2016 and co-organized the second with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in Bangkok in 2018. The 3rd Mekong Regional Land Forum (hereafter the Forum) took place on 26 and 27 May 2021 and was organized by MRLG, FAO and the Land Portal. The focus of the Forum was on advancing the recognition of customary rights and responsible investment practices in Mekong forest landscapes. Recent global disruptions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have highlighted the dependence of Mekong region communities on land and forest resources. More widely recognized than ever, secure tenure and access to land and forests are preconditions for the sustainable management of resources. The Forum brought together reform-minded actors within and beyond the region to engage in in-depth, interactive debate on issues that cut to the core of local tenure security and community resource management. Day 1 of the Forum focused on advancing customary and collective forest tenure rights. The first session compared and examined experiences and approaches within national tenure regimes in Mekong countries. The second session situated these experiences within global trends, emphasizing the potential for regional platforms such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to foster more inclusive and grounded policies for the sustainable management of forests – with diverse benefits including securing tenure rights, local livelihoods, gender equity, and contributions to national commitments on biodiversity and climate change. Day 2 of the Forum focused on how to manage and respond to patterns and practices of investment in Mekong forest landscapes, which is a key issue for smallholder tenure security within Mekong countries. The third Forum overview session aimed at demystifying the principles of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) – principles that are designed to protect the rights of com- munities to land and resources and also to protect investments by avoiding land conflicts. The fourth session highlighted the potential effectiveness of tools such as the ASEAN Guidelines for Responsible Agricultural Investment in Food, Agriculture and Forestry (ASEAN-RAI) in steering agribusiness investments in Mekong forest landscapes towards a more sustainable future. Each Forum session was organized in four parts: a) An expert review of the topic, complemented by two case study presentations. b) A panel discussion with experts and representatives from government and civil society, followed by questions from the public to the speakers and panellists. c) In-person and online breakout groups for debate among participants around a specific experience, topic or question. d) A sum-up of key takeaways from the sessions to stimulate further action. The goal of the Forum was to provide a multi-stakeholder platform for cross-country dialogue on major policy reforms and programmatic initiatives in Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar and Viet Nam relating to land and forest tenure governance. We hope that this summary of the Forum reflects the quality of the presentations and discussions and provides inspiration for the participants to continue pro- moting the land rights of forest communities across the region. We also intend for this summary to provide a comprehensive review of the key messages from the event for those who could not join. Enjoy the reading. Please find key information about the event, online summaries and more on the Land Portal website..."
Source/publisher: Mekong Regional Land Forum 2021
Date of publication: 2021-05-27
Date of entry/update: 2021-10-12
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
Format : pdf
Size: 5.18 MB (66 pages)
more
Title: The 5Rs in Myanmar
Sub-title: Towards a future federal democratic system where working people can flourish
Description: "This primer is about ‘the 5Rs’ and land and natural resource politics. The 5Rs is a set of five principles: Recognition, Restitution, Redistribution, Regeneration, and Representation/Resistance. The primer briefly explores the idea of a working people’s program on land and natural resources in Myanmar based on these five principles in the context of a future federal democratic system. Each of these principles alone is supported by international human rights law (links to the most relevant UN documents can be found in Annex 1). But here we outline a working people’s land and natural resource program for deep social change based on the 5Rs taken together. By 'working people' we mean ordinary people who have to work in order to ‘make ends meet’. The work that many people do to survive nowadays involves both waged labor and unwaged labor. A lot of unwaged work that is essential to survival is done at home, such as cooking and cleaning, child raising, health care, and elderly care. It is the kind of work that makes it possible for some members of the household to go outside the home and undertake waged work. In rural villages a lot of household work is related to producing goods for own consumption and for selling -- such as farming, artisanal fishing, animal keeping, and other artisanal and ‘cottage industry’ (like handicraft making). This work often relies on the unwaged labour of household members (including children). Sometimes, and if there is money, a household may hire other villagers or someone from outside the village to help them with some of these labors. Over the past four decades, many important structural changes in the way the economy and governance are organized have occurred all over the world. These processes have not been smooth nor have they unfolded in exactly the same manner everywhere. They have been marked by profound disagree- ment and conflict over the most basic matters in society -- such as who owns what, who does what, who gets what, what should happen to the wealth that is created in a society, and, who gets to decide. Ordinary people have been hugely affected in fundamental ways. There has been an explosion in the number of people who are neither full-time farmer nor full-time waged worker. They struggle to survive and ‘make ends meet’ by piecing together whatever low-paying, part-time jobs they can find wherever it may be. This is a common situation in many countries today: households reducing or minimizing their own consumption and foregoing formal schooling and health care, with some family members coming and going, piecing together different bits of low-waged labor in nearby towns or distant cities or abroad. Those who stay home tend to farms and gardens if they have land, raise animals or make handicrafts to sell, and raise the children and care for the sick and infirm or the elderly who can no longer work. In using the term 'working people' in this primer, we hope to capture this kind of situation and the dynamics that propel so many people into it. In the context of Myanmar and its long history of ethnic conflict, this stress on working people may seem to be missing the mark or leaving out a lot. But bringing into focus working people is not intended to deny or ignore ethnic and other social differences. Rather, it is also and at the same time to make visible what so many people despite other differences have in common -- the struggle to live a life filled with social and economic precarity and hardship and bereft of social insurance or social protections. Ultimately, at the heart of a truly federal democratic system is a difficult balancing act -- a strategic balancing of socioeconomic class issues and social-political identity issues. Both sets of concerns are complex on their own. Yet both are important. All over the world today (not just in Myanmar), there is deep injustice and rightful struggle around both. Staggering economic inequalities are fueling working people’s struggles for egalitarian distribution of wealth. Non-recognition or mis-recognition of certain ethnic, religious and sexual groups and of racial and gender differences is fueling ‘identity’-framed struggles for recognition. The two kinds of struggle often seem opposed to each other; we may feel pressure to choose between them. But the 5Rs starts from the belief that nei- ther struggle alone is sufficient for achieving deep social change. Advocating only for working people’s economic class interests without regard to ethnic identity concerns or advocating only for ethnic identity recognition without regard for the class position of working people within ethnic communities -- each ignores strategic issues. Class and ethnicity (along with other aspects of identity) are both integral parts of a single pillar; one without the other cannot constitute a pillar. Both types of injustice shape exploitation and subordination; and both types of struggles have emancipatory aspects. The 5R approach assumes that it is possible and necessary to integrate the emancipatory aspects of both struggles into a single frame. If we don’t, we risk impeding construction of a future federal democracy with equal rights and opportunities for all. Applying the five principles to the ‘land problem’ is necessary to defend against elitist efforts to thwart democratization of access and control of land and related natural resources. Even well-intentioned responses to Myanmar’s land problem can be undermined if they approach the problem with only one or two of the 5 Rs, or any combination less than all 5 Rs. It would be like trying to make a whole puzzle with a hundred pieces of the same shape. Deliberately linking all 5Rs together has the best chance of handling the complexities of the land problem in Myanmar today. It is designed to detect and address the multidimensional character of land-based injustice. Failure to do so will contribute to the process of loss of land and of the right to land for millions of working people all across Myanmar. It risks to exacerbate old and create new grievances, especially among ethnic nationality communities practicing customary tenure systems, thereby further contributing to and prolonging ethnic conflict and war. The stakes are thus very high. Rich country, poor people -- that is what Myanmar has been. It is rich in natural resources, but the proceeds from access to these resources remain in the hands of a very few -- most of whom are military or military-connected. This must change. Natural resources are essential for human life and the health of the planetary ecosystem. For decades, rural working people across Myanmar have been losing access to land and natural resources because of various processes of enclosure and dispossession -- commonly called ‘land grabbing’ -- and because of the socially differentiating currents of free market relations in the rural areas. This trend encompasses aquatic resources, forest resources, and land resources. Enclosures and dispossession have been facilitated by many laws that span diverse policy areas and ministries -- economic, investment, mining, forest, fisheries, agriculture, environment, conservation, land and natural resources. Shrinking access to land for working people is especially alarming because land is an entry point for accessing forest and aquatic resources too, and because working people need a range of access to an array of natural resources for their economic production and social reproduction activities. Yet people are resisting land grabbing. Civil society organizations (CSOs) across the country have studied and rejected laws and policies that facilitate dispossession and displacement. For example, the nationwide network called Land In Our Hands (LIOH or Doe Myay) has produced numerous analyses of existing laws and policies -- such as the government’s National Land Use Policy (2014 Draft); the 2012 Farmland Law and the amendments to this law proposed in 2017. In 2018, LIOH spearheaded a nationwide grassroots campaign against the government’s Vacant, Fallow and Virgin Land Management Law. More recently, in defense of customary land systems and practices including shifting cultivation, LIOH has shown how existing laws undermine these and offered recommendations on what is needed to support and promote them instead. CSOs have formulated pro-people alternatives that not only reflect realities and customs on the ground, but also internationally respected principles that they felt are relevant for them. In one notable example, CSOs from numerous ethnic groups across Shan State joined forces to research and document customary land systems and eventually to produce a joint report with their findings and recommendations. Similarly, a number of ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) have taken part in developing land policies that value inclusion, equity and an ecologically healthy future for all. One CSO network -- the Burma Environmental Working Group (BEWG) -- developed a ‘roadmap for resource federalism’. These are all building blocks for a comprehensive national 5R program. Myanmar is now at a new crossroads. The February 2021 coup has made the need to forge new social foundations for a future multi-ethnic federal democratic system of government painfully clear. Now is the time to go deeper into imagining the substantive and inclusive agenda of that future -- e.g., providing deeper substance to a federal democratic system with a clear pro- working people agenda that is gender- and generation-sensitive. We assume that a core value of any positive future would be recognition that each and every person -- regardless of any differences between us -- is born with equal dignity and equal right to access the material, ecological, social and political conditions needed to live a flourishing life. Diverse kinds of access to an array of land and natural resources is part of what rural working people need to flourish. A 5R land and natural resource program can inspire different people affected differently by land and natural resource injustices to find common cause, and develop alternative land and natural resource policies that protect, support and promote the rights and needs of all the people of Myanmar..."
Creator/author:
Source/publisher: Transnational Institute ( Amsterdam)
Date of publication: 2021-07-02
Date of entry/update: 2021-07-02
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
Format : pdf
Size: 2.18 MB (48 pages)
more
Title: Marginalised people's land rights and access: ethnic minorities, the poor and women
Description: "Overview: The poor, ethnic minorities and women in particular suffer marginalisation that is exacerbated by circumscribed access to land and insecurity of tenure. Ethnic minority land use practices, notably shifting cultivation, are criminalised, while citizenship issues and outright discrimination and ethnic chauvinism have excluded or displaced minorities from access to resources as majority farmers have increasingly availed themselves of land and other resources since upland margins have become more accessible. In some cases, security-oriented programs have distanced ethnic minority communities from land and other resources that are the basis of their livelihoods. Women have seen customary rights in land weakened by formalisation that privileges officially designated heads of households, who are usually male. Decisions and meetings often mainly involve men, and land use planning can neglect land-based resources that are primarily in women's work domains.....Key trends and dynamics: The concept of marginalisation brings together other key themes to specify the negative impacts of land relations on certain groups of people around the Mekong region. The term ‘marginalised’ can be defined as representing the treatment of a person or a group as insignificant or peripheral. There are three important relations to highlight here. Firstly, marginalisation is a process rather than an antecedent condition. Secondly, one becomes marginalised from something, and in this case marginalisation primarily involves access to, control of, or use of land. Thirdly, the marginalised are placed in relation to others who do not suffer the same tribulations. For this latter point, it is possible to apply multiple scales, such as highlighting individuals within a household or a community, or a significant social sub-group or ethnic minority within a particular nation-state. It could be argued that the Mekong region itself is marginalised within global trade and power relations, caught up in power struggles between large capitalist forces such as the USA and China. However, the larger the scale of reference, the greater the risk that inequalities within go unqualified. Although processes of marginalisation take place in specific localised ways, it is important to reflect on the bigger picture of economic transformation in the Mekong region. At one level, it is important to take a historical perspective in order to view the marginalising effect of land policies over the long term. This includes colonial-era law drafted in support of plantation economies, certain aspects of which are retained in present-day statutory law. Moving towards recent economic policy, when considering access to and control of land for smallholders and the rural poor, the marketisation of agriculture, with the introduction of ‘boom crops’ has a strong impact when unaccompanied by propoor policies (Lamb et al. 2015). Neoliberalism encourages well-connected national elites to take control of markets and resources that bolsters their land-based wealth at the expense of the poor (Springer 2011). This is clearly seen in the advent of crony capitalism in Myanmar (Global Witness 2015; Woods 2011). A point of focus for research on marginalising practices highlights large-scale land investments that are discriminatory to local land users, particularly those who make a living outside of statesupported market arenas that have become the priority of developmentalist regimes. In Cambodia, Economic Land Concessions (ELCs) have led to the clearing of farmland and forest under use by indigenous peoples, undermining community resource management practices (Bues 2011). They have also affected the ability of indigenous groups to register themselves under collective land titling, while most concession labour is given to in-migrants (Prachvuthy 2011). Similarly, concessions in Lao PDR have enclosed space, shutting it off to communities who were previously reliant on variety of resources in the designated zone (Baird 2011). In Myanmar, Gittleman and Brown (2014) assert that nearly 1,000 families will be displaced to make way for Thilawa Special Economic Zone, and that the process of this relocation fails to meet international guidelines. There are certain social sub-groups who can be highlighted as being on the receiving end of marginalising processes. However, it is important to clarify that each sub-group should not be assumed to carry a singular identity, and that disparity will be found within. Firstly, large-scale land development can marginalise smallholders who already may be poorly served by statutory law on tenure security. Drbohlav and Hejkrlik (2018) highlight a case from Cambodia where 1,400 fishing families were relocated to make way for a land concession in the Botum Sakor National Park. The study shows that the livelihoods of those relocated has worsened, with employment issues, poor infrastructure at the relocation site, and issues over access to health and education services. Nguyen, Westen and Zoomers (2014) show how the acquisition of land for infrastructure development in peri-urban areas of central Vietnam takes little account of the wishes of local farming households whose land is taken. Ethnic minorities frequently suffer from the exploitation of land for new investment ventures. For example, there is evidence of multiple land grabs from the Ta’ang minority in Shan State, Myanmar, in order to serve military needs such as housing, training, and income generation through hydropower, oil and gas pipelines (Ta’ang Student and Youth Organization 2011). There is much attention brought to the plight of indigenous communities in Ratanakiri, Cambodia, who have lost their land to rubber plantations operated by the Vietnamese company HAGL (Work 2016). In the aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, indigenous sea nomads in Southern Thailand have suffered from land dispossession to make way for tourism developments (Neef et al. 2018). However, as a counterpoint Mellac (2011) notes that customary practices for Tai-speaking groups in Northern Vietnam have endured during periods of collectivisation and then individualised marketdriven land use rights. In this way, ethnic groups do display the solidarity and power to ride out the potential negative impacts from outside pressures. Despite legal declarations of equality, patriarchal practices in Mekong countries favour men who monopolise control of land as heads of households (see also the ‘Gender and land’ key theme for further details). They frequently maintain control of land through titling programmes. In Ratanakiri Province, Cambodia, women and girls are becoming marginalised as a consequence of emerging capitalist relations, with reduced autonomy and agency including the recognition of their land rights (Mi Young Park and Maffii 2017). However, there are actions to let women’s voices be heard. In Myanmar, a coalition of over 100 organisations lobbied for the inclusion of women in discussions over National Land Use Policy (NLUP) and helped bring them to the table in the peace process (Faxon 2017; Faxon, Furlong, and Phyu 2015). The urban poor also suffer from insecure land tenure while residing in informal housing, leaving them open to the threat of forced eviction (Cambodian Human Rights Action Committee 2009; Chi Mgbako et al. 2010). Bugalski and Pred (2010) note how a land titling programme in Phnom Penh excluded certain informal communities, thereby exacerbating inequalities (see key theme on ‘Urban land governance’ for further information). There are various ways in which marginalisation is felt by affected communities. Most clearly in relation to land is dispossession (see key theme on ‘Land dispossession/land grabbing’). Engvall and Kokko (2007) make a statistical link between land tenure security and poverty in Cambodia, where a proposed land reform package could result in a 16% fall in poverty incidence for landowning rural households and a 30% fall for the landless. A report from Myanmar looks at rural debt, and how its emergence through entry into marketised agriculture can result in distress sales of land (Kloeppinger-todd and Sandar 2013). Marginalisation from access to land can also impact upon food security for smallholder farmers, where the emergence of cash cropping takes precedence over production for local consumption (Land Core Group 2010; Rammohan and Pritchard 2014). A further impact is cultural, particularly considering that the capitalisation of land frequently ignores other important meanings to its users. By isolating access, the very cultural identity of users can be threatened, where land operates as a key identifier..."
Source/publisher: Mekong Land Research Forum
Date of publication: 2021-06-00
Date of entry/update: 2021-06-24
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
Format : pdf
Size: 337.1 KB
more
Title: Land: Gaining Ground - earthrise
Description: "The survival of people and wildlife depends on the health of the land. The economic prosperity of a country is linked to the richness of its resources. But, our demand for these is destroying the land and all it harbours. Our consumption of the earth's natural reserves has doubled in the last 30 years. Now, a third of the planet's land is severely degraded. Each year, we lose 15 billion trees and 24 billion tonnes of fertile soil. And at least 10,000 species go extinct every year. The land we live on is being strained to breaking point. Restoration and conservation are key to its survival. earthrise travels to the dry forests of Southern Ecuador and the ancestral lands of the indigenous peoples in Western Australia to learn how these communities are working to protect the unique ecosystems currently at risk due to natural and man-made disasters. Saving Ecuador's Cerro Blanco On the outskirts of Ecuador's port city of Guayaquil lies the Cerro Blanco reserve; one of the last remaining dry forests in the country. Dry forests are named as such due to the ability of the vegetation to survive long periods without rain using natural water conservation methods. Cerro Blanco is threatened by a host of natural causes and human activity, including an expanding city that means people who cannot afford to live centrally are edging closer to the forest. earthrise speaks to the reserve's chief ranger, Eleutario de la Cruz about the increasing issues related to an ever-encroaching city population plus the dangers of land trafficking, illegal logging and hunting. We also speak to engineer Topher White who has developed a surveillance system made from recycled technology that could help protect the forest and its endangered wildlife. Juliana Schatz learns more about the Rainforest Connection as a means to end the threat to one of Ecuador's last survivng dry forests. Burning to save Australia's Western Desert The Martu are the indigenous peoples of Australia's Western Desert cultural bloc. The traditional owners of those lands, the Martu practiced small-scale "land burning" for tens of thousands of years. The burning would encourage a regrowth of diverse vegetation across the landscape that would then make large-scale bushfires less likely to occur. However, as the last of the Martu were cleared off their lands by the Europeans in the 1960s, wildfires have once again devastated the landscape with as many as 18 animal species disappearing from the area since then. In 2002, the Martu were once again granted native title to their land, bringing back their ancient practice and an unparalleled knowledge of the land at risk of further damage. Rachael Hocking travels to the Western Desert to spend time with a group of Martu rangers on a fire programme set to stop the wildfires before they take hold. .."
Creator/author:
Source/publisher: "Al Jazeera" (Qatar)
Date of publication: 2017-06-13
Date of entry/update: 2019-09-26
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
more
Title: Climate Change and Land: Is the IPCC being straight with us?
Description: "On the 8th August 2019 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a comprehensive report on Climate Change and Land Use. Their findings immediately sparked controversy and debate. This week we take a brief look at the report and also at some of the reaction..."
Source/publisher: " Just Have a Think"
Date of publication: 2019-08-18
Date of entry/update: 2019-08-27
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
more
Title: Climate Change and Land: Summary for Policymakers Approved Draft
Sub-title: IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security, and Greenhouse gas fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems
Description: "This Special Report on Climate Change and Land1 responds to the Panel decision in 2016 to prepare three Special Reports2 during the Sixth Assessment cycle, taking account of proposals from governments and observer organizations3 . This report addresses greenhouse gas (GHG) fluxes in land-based ecosystems , land use and sustainable land management4 in relation to climate change adaptation and mitigation, desertification5 , land degradation6 and food security7 . This report follows the publication of other recent reports, including the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (SR15), the thematic assessment of the Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) on Land Degradation and Restoration, the IPBES Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, and the Global Land Outlook of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). This report provides an updated assessment of the current state of knowledge8 while striving for coherence and complementarity with other recent reports. This Summary for Policymakers (SPM) is structured in four parts: A) People, land and climate in a warming world; B) Adaptation and mitigation response options; C) Enabling response options; and D) Action in the near-term. Confidence in key findings is indicated using the IPCC calibrated language9 ; the underlying scientific basis of each key finding is indicated by references to the main report. The terrestrial portion of the biosphere that comprises the natural resources (soil, near-surface air, vegetation and other biota, and water), the ecological processes, topography, and human settlements and infrastructure that operate within that system. 2 The three Special reports are: “Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty.”; “Climate Change and Land: an IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security, and Greenhouse gas fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems”; “The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate” 3 related proposals were: climate change and desertification; desertification with regional aspects; land degradation – an assessment of the interlinkages and integrated strategies for mitigation and adaptation; agriculture, foresty and other landuse; food and agriculture; and food security and climate change. 4 Sustainable Land Management is defined in this report as “the stewardship and use of land resources, including soils, water, animals and plants, to meet changing human needs, while simultaneously ensuring the long-term productive potential of these resources and the maintenance of their environmental functions”. 5 Desertification is defined in this report as ‘land degradation in arid, semi-arid, and dry sub-humid areas resulting from many factors, including climatic variations and human activities’. 6 Land degradation is defined in this report as ‘a negative trend in land condition, caused by direct or indirect human induced processes, including anthropogenic climate change, expressed as long-term reduction and as loss of at least one of the following: biological productivity, ecological integrity, or value to humans’. 7 Food security is defined in this report as ‘a situation that exists when all people, at all times, have physical, social, and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life’..."
Creator/author:
Source/publisher: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
Date of publication: 2019-08-07
Date of entry/update: 2019-08-09
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language:
Format : pdf
Size: 2.25 MB
more
Title: LEGAL RECOGNITION OF INDIGENOUS GROUPS
Description: "...The main purpose of this paper is to examine legal measures taken to recognize indigenous groups and provide for their ongoing operation; the paper starts, therefore, from an underlying assumption that indigenous groups have continued relevance to the needs and wishes of the people who operate within them. Nevertheless, while it is beyond the scope and purpose of the paper to explore this complex issue in any depth, it may be useful to present ? however briefly ? some of the arguments made for and against the preservation of indigenous groups. In the course of this brief discussion, the focus of the present paper will be narrowed to a concentration on the role of indigenous groups in the ownership and control of land and other natural resources. It should, perhaps, be stressed at the beginning that it is the role of groups as groups which is under consideration - that is, the group as an entity over and above the individual members which make it up..."
Creator/author: J. S. Fingleton
Source/publisher: FAO Legal Papers Online December 1998
Date of publication: 1998-12-00
Date of entry/update: 2015-08-02
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
more
Title: ?We are not afraid” Land rights defenders: attacked for confronting unbridled development
Description: "The scale of attacks against land rights defenders is particularly preoccupying and should attract our utmost reaction and urgent mobilisation. The toll they pay, together with their families and communities, is dramatic, be it killings, forced disappearances, harassment or criminalisation. Caught in the crossfire between poor land users fighting for the respect of their basic human rights and powerful economic actors fighting for juicy profits, they account as one of the most vulnerable categories of human rights defenders. This particular vulnerability is due to various factors including the fact that they challenge important economic interests pushed by powerful actors such as States and corporations, the fact that they generally operate in remote areas in which the rule of law is weak and the access to protection mechanisms is difficult. Moreover, land rights defenders operate within a weak legal framework governing land rights and land deals, in a global context of intense pressures over land and resources. Behind attacks against them, the situations on which they intervene are those where authorities are shunning their obligation to ensure the fulfilment of their human rights obligations. This, in turn, portrays a world where development plans and investments impacting on land, are made at the expense of the local users who depend on these lands for their survival. Authorities and political actors often favour economic actors, be they national or transnational ones, at the expense of the rights of their own populations. The balance of power becomes dramatically unequal and the efforts to bring the respect for human rights at the centre of so-called development are clearly insufficient..."
Source/publisher: Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders (OMCT, FIDH)
Date of publication: 2014-12-00
Date of entry/update: 2015-01-05
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : pdf
Size: 10.71 MB
more
Title: Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (Burmese/ မြန်မာဘာသာ)
Description: Preliminary: 1. Objectives... 2. Nature and scope..... General matters: 3. Guiding principles of responsible tenure governance... 3A General principles... 3B Principles of implementation... 4. Rights and responsibilities related to tenure... 5. Policy, legal and organizational frameworks related to tenure... 6. Delivery of services..... Legal recognition and allocation of tenure rights and duties: 7. Safeguards... 8. Public land, fisheries and forests... 9. Indigenous peoples and other communities with customary tenure systems... 10. Informal tenure..... Transfers and other changes to tenure rights and duties: 11. Markets... 12. Investments... 13. Land consolidation and other readjustment approaches... 14. Restitution... 15. Redistributive reforms... 16. Expropriation and compensation..... Administration of tenure: 17. Records of tenure rights... 18. Valuation... 19. Taxation... 20. Regulated spatial planning... 21. Resolution of disputes over tenure rights... 22. Transboundary matters..... Responses to climate change and emergencies: 23. Climate change... 24. Natural disasters... 25. Conflicts in respect to tenure of land, fisheries and forests..... Promotion, implementation, monitoring and evaluation: "Tenure is the relationship, whether defined legally or customarily, among people with respect to land (including associated buildings and structures), fisheries, forests and other natural resources. The rules of tenure define how access is granted to use and control these resources, as well as associated responsibilities and restraints. Tenure thus usually reflects the power structure in a society, and social stability may depend on whether or not there is a broad consensus on the fairness of the tenure system.".......These Guidelines seek to: 1. improve tenure governance by providing guidance and information on internationally accepted practices for systems that deal with the rights to use, manage and control land, fisheries and forests.... 2. contribute to the improvement and development of the policy, legal and organizational frameworks regulating the range of tenure rights that exist over these resources... 3. enhance the transparency and improve the functioning of tenure systems... 4. strengthen the capacities and operations of implementing agencies; judicial authorities; local governments; organizations of farmers and small-scale producers, of fishers, and of forest users; pastoralists; indigenous peoples and other communities; civil society; private sector; academia; and all persons concerned with tenure governance as well as to promote the cooperation between the actors mentioned..."
Source/publisher: Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO)
Date of publication: 2012-00-00
Date of entry/update: 2014-12-21
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: Burmese/ မြန်မာဘာသာ (Metadata: English)
Format : pdf pdf
Size: 2.41 MB 2.32 MB
more
Title: COMMUNAL TENURE AND THE GOVERNANCE OF COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES IN ASIA
Description: Summary: "This paper presents an overview of the distinctive features of communal tenure in different community-based land and natural resource management systems. Communal tenure refers to situations where groups, communities, or one or more villages have well defined, exclusive rights to jointly own and/or manage particular areas of natural resources such as land, forest and water. These are often referred to as common pool resources: many rural communities are dependent on these resources for their livelihood. In communal tenure, both the boundaries of the resource owned in common and group membership are clearly defined. These are necessary conditions to exclude outsiders and to secure the rights of group members so that these rights cannot be taken away or changed unilaterally. Two models of communal tenure are presented in the paper; these models differ in terms of the function of the state, the length of tenure and the characteristics of the resource system concerned. In the first model, the permanent title model, the state fully and permanently hands the land over to local indigenous communities for private collective ownership. In this situation, the resource system is often multi-facetted, comprising agricultural lands as well as forest, water and pasture land. Permanent title for indigenous peoples? communal land is a special claim supported by national legislation and by international conventions, coven ants and declarations that many countries have endorsed. Examples of permanent title in Asia include the Philippines and Cambodia, where legislation provides for collective rights of indigenous communities. In many instances such as Cambodia, Philippines or, for instance, Papua New Guinea, the indigenous groups or communities that are eligible by law for private and permanent communal tenure need to become a legal entity to be recognized as a communal right-holder by the state. This may require community incorporation. However, the process of incorporation can be cumbersome for people who are not necessarily literate in the national language or in the demands of state bureaucracy. In the second model, the delegated management model, the state maintains ownership of the resources and delegates management to local groups, most often villages, for a specific period of time, with the possibility of renewal. Such agreements are generally subject to national legislation only. In this case, the resources are often uniform and relate to, for example, community forestry, community fishery, pasture or irrigation group tenure that all come in many different forms with different bundles of rights. This model is far more common than the first, with Nepal, India, Thailand, Cambodia or Mongolia providing examples. In addition to these two general models, one may still find traditional customary communal tenure in remote communities. Here the state does not actually regulate or intervene in the management of resources, but all local communities in the area would know of the local rules of harvesting and withdrawal rights. Both the permanent title in communal land and the d elegated management model may originate from an existing customary arrangement, where the rules are known and have been adhered to by right-holders ? and their neighbors ? for generations. The state can acknowledge these existing communal systems through formalization of existing rules and rights. In a different situation, where customary arrangements are no longer present and the resource is degraded and under open access, the formalization of Communal tenure and the governance of common property resources in Asia delegated management of, for example, a new community forest, may imply setting up or inducing communal tenure institutions, where they did not previously exist. Inducing institutions is a major exercise in social engineering; the resulting induced institution must be carefully aligned with the physical and natural characteristics of the resources or resource system and, ideally, should build on an existing set of norms in the community. Where governments and/or donor projects have a pro-poor approach in inducing communal tenure for natural resource management, the pro-poor targeting mechanisms must be mainstreamed in the institution building. In all communal tenure systems, the physical and biological characteristics of the resource system factor decisively into the regulatory frameworks that communities establish. One must match with the other. In situations where both subsistence and market value products can be withdrawn from the resource system there are also many kinds of interlinked and embedded rights: the communal tenure is usually embedded within a larger nested hierarchy of institutions." Nowadays the communities will often need support an d recognition by the state in order to manage effectively their common pool resou rces. As a consequence, communities will need to establish two sets of rule s: (i) those rules that constitute the community as an entity in the eyes of the state and (ii) those that define internal rules of benefit sharing. Whereas constitutional rules de fine the community as a legal entity, internal community rules establish the management r ights in the resources and the fair appropriation of benefits. Interest in communal tenure and common property res ource management has risen since the 1980s among academics, governments and internat ional development organizations working on land and natural resources management. D ebates on communal tenure are still ongoing in many countries in Asia, in the con text of market pressures and dynamics, which call for privatization to increase productivity, and in the context of big business vying for a stake in valuable land and other natural resources, in some instances leading to land grabbing. The current mar ket driven pressures on natural resources create both challenges and opportunities for communities and governments. Overall, policies and institutions that promote acc ountability and good governance over these resources, both by the government at nat ional and local level and by communities, are required. Some specific approaches , such as communities? mapping of their territories, are proving useful tools to s afeguard their lands, although they are not sufficient conditions: the wider political and regulatory environment must be supportive too. Communal tenure will very likely play a significant role in the policies and actions for climate change mitigation. With the emergence of in itiatives for Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD and REDD+) , governance and benefit sharing of carbon finance become critical questions in defining who owns the carbon stocked in forest. Marketable community rights to t his special resource unit (stocked carbon) must be supported by national legislation t hat favors communal tenure of some of the carbon properties. This may lead to a separa tion of rights to carbon from the broader rights to the forest and land, an aspect no t yet addressed by theoretical work on communal tenure..."
Creator/author: Kirsten Ewers Andersen
Source/publisher: Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO)
Date of publication: 2011-04-00
Date of entry/update: 2014-12-08
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : pdf
Size: 464.43 KB
more
Title: Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (English)
Description: Preliminary: 1. Objectives... 2. Nature and scope..... General matters: 3. Guiding principles of responsible tenure governance... 3A General principles... 3B Principles of implementation... 4. Rights and responsibilities related to tenure... 5. Policy, legal and organizational frameworks related to tenure... 6. Delivery of services..... Legal recognition and allocation of tenure rights and duties: 7. Safeguards... 8. Public land, fisheries and forests... 9. Indigenous peoples and other communities with customary tenure systems... 10. Informal tenure..... Transfers and other changes to tenure rights and duties: 11. Markets... 12. Investments... 13. Land consolidation and other readjustment approaches... 14. Restitution... 15. Redistributive reforms... 16. Expropriation and compensation..... Administration of tenure: 17. Records of tenure rights... 18. Valuation... 19. Taxation... 20. Regulated spatial planning... 21. Resolution of disputes over tenure rights... 22. Transboundary matters..... Responses to climate change and emergencies: 23. Climate change... 24. Natural disasters... 25. Conflicts in respect to tenure of land, fisheries and forests..... Promotion, implementation, monitoring and evaluation: "Tenure is the relationship, whether defined legally or customarily, among people with respect to land (including associated buildings and structures), fisheries, forests and other natural resources. The rules of tenure define how access is granted to use and control these resources, as well as associated responsibilities and restraints. Tenure thus usually reflects the power structure in a society, and social stability may depend on whether or not there is a broad consensus on the fairness of the tenure system.".......These Guidelines seek to: 1. improve tenure governance by providing guidance and information on internationally accepted practices for systems that deal with the rights to use, manage and control land, fisheries and forests.... 2. contribute to the improvement and development of the policy, legal and organizational frameworks regulating the range of tenure rights that exist over these resources... 3. enhance the transparency and improve the functioning of tenure systems... 4. strengthen the capacities and operations of implementing agencies; judicial authorities; local governments; organizations of farmers and small-scale producers, of fishers, and of forest users; pastoralists; indigenous peoples and other communities; civil society; private sector; academia; and all persons concerned with tenure governance as well as to promote the cooperation between the actors mentioned..."
Source/publisher: Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO)
Date of publication: 2012-00-00
Date of entry/update: 2011-11-12
Grouping: Individual Documents
Language: English
Format : pdf
Size: 552.11 KB
more