S U P P O R T T O A N D C A P I T A L I Z A T I O N O N T H E E U L A N D G O V E R N A N C E P R O G R A M M E I N A F R I C A

M i n u t e s o f f o u r t h C a p i t a l i z a t i o n M e e t i n g

2 2 – 2 4 N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 6

U n i t e d N a t i o n s C o n f e r e n c e C e n t r e

U N E C A

A d d i s A b a b a , E t h i o p i a

This activity/product has been funded by the European Union through the Support to and Capitalization on the EU Land

Governance Programme. The contents of this publication can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion

whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development

status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The

mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these

have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.

3

List of Acronyms

APD Academy of Peace and Development (Somaliland)

AU African Union

CLEEH Candlelight for Environment, Education and Health (Somaliland)

CLMB County Land Management Board (Kenya)

CLPA Conference on Land Policy in Africa

DW Development Workshop of Angola

F&G Framework and Guidelines on Land Policy in Africa

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit

GLTN Global Land Tool Network

IFAL Instituto de Formaçäo da Administraçäo Local (Angola)

IGETI Improving Gender Equality in Territorial Issues (FAO tool)

IGCA Instituto Geográfico e Cadastral de Angola

KM Knowledge Management

LC Lands Commission

LIS Land Information System

LPI Land Policy Initiative

LPRC Land Policy Review Committee (Somaliland)

LULSM Lower Usuthu Sustainable Land Management Project, Swaziland

MCA Members of County Assembly (Kenya)

MEEATU Ministère de l’Eau, de l’Environnement, de l’Aménagement du

Territoire et de l’Urbanisme (Burundi)

MLHPP Ministry of Lands, Housing and Physical Planning (South Sudan)

MLHUD Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development (Malawi)

MoA Ministry of Agriculture (Somaliland)

MoERD Ministry of Environment and Rural Development (Somaliland)

MoL Ministry of Livestock (Somaliland)

MPS Multi-Stakeholder Processes

NGO Non-governmental Organization

NLC National Lands Commission (Kenya)

PAGGF Projet d’Amélioration de la Gestion et la Gouvernance Foncière au

Burundi

PENHA Pastoral Environmental Network for Horn of Africa (Somaliland)

PNTD Participatory and Negotiated Territorial Development (FAO tool)

PS Permanent Secretary

PSSFP/RGF Projet de Sécurisation des Systèmes Fonciers Pastoraux au Niger par

le Renforcement de la Gouvernance Foncière (Niger)

RITD Regional Integration and Trade Division, UNECA

RVI Rift Valley Institute (Somalia)

SDF Somaliland Development Fund

SNL Swazi Nation Land

STDM Social Tenure Domain Model

4

VGGT Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of

Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security

WVI World Vision International

5

Contents

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 7

2. OPENING AND WELCOME REMARKS ................................................................................ 8

3. KEY THEMES ...................................................................................................................... .9

4. THEMATIC SESSION: FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT ....................................... 15

5. GROUP EXERCISE: GENDER-EQUITABLE GOVERNANCE OF TENURE .............................. 18

6. THEMATIC SESSION: FACILITATING MULTI-STAKEHOLDER PROCESSES ........................ 20

7. THEMATIC SESSION: EXPERIENCE CAPITALIZATION FOR CONTINUED LEARNING ........ 20

8. VGGT 5TH ANNIVERSARY EVENT ..................................................................................... 25

9. CLOSING ............................................................................................................................ 26

ANNEX I: Agenda ..................................................................................................................... 27

ANNEX II: Updates of In-country projects ............................................................................ 299

ANNEX III: Questions and group results– Free, Prior and Informed Consent ....................... 48

ANNEX IV: Group exercise – Gender-equitable governance of tenure ................................. 52

ANNEX V: Participation ........................................................................................................... 53

ANNEX VI: Survey results…………………………………………………………………………………………..………56

6

Boxes

1. METHODOLOGICAL NOTE 1: WORLD CAFÉ …………………………………………………………………..9

2. INFO-NOTE AND FURTHER READING: CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT IN FAO …………………….13

3. THE VGGT ON CUSTOMARY TENURE SYSTEMS ………………………………………………………….14

4. THE VGGT ON CONFLICTS …………………………………………………………………………………………14

5. THE FPIC PROCESS ..…………………………………………………………………………………………………….17

6. METHODOLOGICAL NOTE 2: FPIC GROUP EXERCISE …………………….…………………………….17

7. FAO RESOURCES ON FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT ……..…………………………….18

8. METHODOLOGICAL NOTE 3: GROUP EXERCISE GENDER-EQUITABLE GOVERNANCE OF

TENURE ………………….………………….………………….…………………………….………….………………….19

9. LINKS TO FAO RESOURCES ON GENDER-EQUITABLE GOVERNANCE OF TENURE

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….20

10. THE EXPERIENCE CAPITALIZATION CYCLE ………………….……………………..…….………………….21

11. HOW TO DOCUMENT A GOOD PRACTICE……………………………….……………………..…………..22

12. DEVELOPING A COMMUNICATION STRATEGY……………………………….……..………..………….23

13. COMMUNICATION PRODUCTS………………………..…………………………….……..………..………….24

14. AWARENESS RAISING TOOL BOX FROM BURUNDI…….…………...…………...………..………….25

7

1. INTRODUCTION This report is based on the discussions and outputs of the Fourth Capitalization Meeting of the European Union Land Governance Programme, which was held from 22-24 November 2016 in the United Nations Conference Centre, UNECA in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. A total of 32 participants comprising project implementers and Government representative from eight of the Phase I countries participated: Angola, Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Niger, Somalia, and Swaziland. Sudan, one of the Phase II countries also participated. Capitalization meetings aim to enhance coherence and alignment of the in-country projects of the EU Land Governance Programme in improving governance of tenure in the framework of the VGGT and F&G. They provide a platform to capitalize on experiences in improving governance of tenure, develop capacities and exchange lessons learnt. Capitalization meetings are not isolated interventions. They are linked to and mutually supportive of other transversal support activities, such as targeted capacity development interventions; the use of the knowledge management platform (KMP); joint monitoring and evaluation (M&E); efforts to collect and disseminate lessons learnt; and joint communication activities. The specific objectives of the Fourth Capitalization meeting were to:

1. Increase technical and soft skills relevant to improving governance of tenure in the following specific areas: facilitating multi-stakeholder processes, documenting and communicating lessons learnt, gender-equitable governance of tenure and Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC).

2. Provide inputs for communication materials to promote success stories at country, regional and global levels including the high-level 5th anniversary event of the VGGT to take place in Rome in May 2017.

The delivery methods included role plays, plenary sessions, group work and a World Café. Through the world café Kenya, Niger and Ethiopia were able to demonstrate in detail the project implementation strategies, success factors, lessons learnt and challenges. The main achievement was equipping participants with the tools for inclusive land governance and improving the visibility of project performance and impact. This systematization of the information will help to enhance the capacity to draw on lessons learnt and achievement, although further support will be needed to ensure that best practices are accordingly extracted. The results of the workshop evaluation were compiled into a survey report (please see annex

VI, survey results, p. 57) and will help guide the next meeting.

The Fourth Capitalization meeting included a set of interactive sessions, which were directly linked to each other. As such, this report does not provide a summary of discussions in strictly sequential order, but, where appropriate, provides an overview of outcomes by key themes addressed during the meeting, background documentation and potential tools, to support the efforts of In-Country projects in improving governance of tenure within their context. In addition, a brief methodological note is provided for selected sessions, to facilitate replication at the country level.

8

2. OPENING AND WELCOME REMARKS The meeting started at 9.30 am on 22 November 2016 with a brief welcome remark by Mr Odame Larbi, FAO Transversal Support Coordinator. Following a self-introduction by the participants the meeting was opened by Mr Sebastian Grey, Natural Resources Officer of the FAO Sub-regional Office for Eastern Africa, Mr Hubert Ouedraogo, Lead Land Expert of the LPI and Mr Joachim Knoth, Policy Officer of the European Commission. Mr Grey stressed that land governance has become a development priority at national and international levels and with it work to improve governance of tenure. Mr Grey stated that each country requires tailored solutions. It is important to remember that land governance is a prerequisite to achieving overarching development goals and not a standalone objective. He further emphasized the unique opportunity the European Union Land Governance Programme offers in providing a regular platform to share lessons learnt including challenges among practitioners. Mr Knoth emphasized the importance of continuous improvement in strategies and programmes, particularly with a view to changing times. As such, evidence should be provided through experience capitalization and monitoring that newly identified priorities such as the UN SDG’s and the EU Development priorities are taken into account in project implementation. Mr Knoth further stressed that supporting efforts to improve land governance is a priority for the European Union, as emphasized by the EU Land Policy Guidelines of 2004 and EU support to the development process and implementation of the F&G and VGGT. As such, the total EU portfolio for land related issues is about 300 million Euros deriving from the EU Development Fund and the Global Public Goods and Challenges Programme, supporting initiatives such as the EU Land Governance Programme (Phases 1&2) and initiatives in 22 additional countries, the Land Policy Initiative, the International Land Coalition and the Land Matrix. Mr Ouedraogo stressed that there is no lack of land resources in Africa, but a critical need to improve land governance on the continent. As such, it is LPI’s mandate to assist Member States of the AU in the implementation of the AU Declaration on Land in accordance with the F&G, in order to achieve socio-economic development, peace and security, and environmental sustainability. He furthermore stated that he sees the reform process taking place at ECA as an opportunity for LPI to increase its outreach, particularly with a view to a growing acknowledgment on the African continent that land issues are central to achieving all pillars of sustainable development including those concerning the economy, the environment, social equity and governance. Moreover, he stated that LPI promotes the development and implementation of proper and comprehensive land policies in order to address issues around all four pillars. Mr Ouedraogo further appreciated the partnership with the EU and FAO which goes back to the establishment of LPI in 2006. He stressed, how the EU Land Policy Guidelines of 2004, the F&G and the VGGT are highly complementary. The EU, FAO and LPI worked as partners in developing these instruments together. Mr Larbi presented the agenda for the meeting, which was adopted without any modifications.

9

3. KEY THEMES The European Union Land Governance Programme foresees support to 17 in-country projects under phases 1 and 2, providing a unique opportunity to learn from the wealth of experience gained by the projects. As such, sharing of lessons learnt is an inherent part of all sessions of the Capitalization meetings. The following summarizes key areas of interest identified in the sessions focusing particularly on lesson learning, i.e. i) Updates by In-country projects and the ii) World Café. As the first session directly built on the second one results are jointly presented, below. During the session on updates by In-country projects, a representative of each In-country project made a presentation on the progress, success factors, challenges and lessons learnt during the past 6 months. The presentations built on the more comprehensive project summary sheets, which were filled in by In-country projects before the meeting and can be found in annex II (please see annex II, Updates of In-country projects, page 29). Building on the questionnaires distributed in advance of the meeting and with a view to the most prominent discussions following the country updates, the facilitators selected three of the key subject areas of common interest that were discussed in a World Café format. The following summarizes a selection of topics discussed following the presentation of In-country projects and during the World Café.

i) Linking project activities to national processes to achieve sustainable impact

(also discussed in World Café Group 1) During the session on country updates participants agreed that linking project activities to national processes is key to achieving sustainable and long-term impact. Project activities in Burundi have been designed from the outset to support ongoing national processes. This includes contributing to all pillars of the Land Policy Letter adopted in April 2016, and particularly the following:

▪ Project objective 1, “Systematically identifying State lands” serves as a direct input into Strategic axis 4 of the Land Policy Letter, “Inventory of State Lands” Given the lack of up-to-date records of tenure rights and uncertainty about extent and location of public lands, the State finds it difficult to identify land legitimately, eligible to be allocated to projects of national interest and/or for use by private entities. This challenge is recognized by the State as a factor which increases the risk of not providing fair and prior compensation.

Box 1: Methodological note 1: World Café

The facilitators identified presenters among the participants, which were perceived as champions in addressing the thematic areas identified. The champions were given a pre-identified set of questions regarding their subject, to prepare for the sessions. Each working group had the opportunity to follow the presentation of each champion. Following the presentations the working groups asked questions and added their experiences to the discussion. Following the discussion they were asked to write the key take-aways (lessons learned) on cards, which were clustered on a flipchart.

10

▪ Project objective 1 – “Systematically identifying State lands” provides a basis for future work on Strategic axis 5, “Development of sustainable solutions, especially for the landless” The inventory of public lands, will facilitate the process of identifying, engaging in a fair process of allocation and compensation, where legitimate tenure right holders exist, and allocating tenure rights to the landless.

▪ The project sub-components on training, scanning and computerization directly feeds Strategic axis 2 of the Land Policy Letter, “Modernization of the State services responsible for land management”

The project also supports the implementation of the Burundi Land Code adopted in 2011, as: ▪ No transfer or concession of State land, including to the landless, is possible until the

land is registered in the name of the State (Art. 218 of the Burundi Land Code). The project contributes to efforts of allocating land to the landless as stated in the Burundi Land Code by working on an inventory of public lands.

▪ The Burundi Land Code makes the demarcation and registration of State land mandatory. This is the main task of the project (Article 213 of the Land Code)

This Ministerial Order No. 770/035 of 13 January 2016 stipulates detailed rules for the inventory of public immovable property and Decree No. 100/114 of 30 May 2016 on procedures for the registration of State immovable property.

In Ethiopia, particular focus was given to linking project activities to national process throughout the design phase of the project. As such, the project is now strictly anchored in national processes and the application of the F&G, RAI and VGGT. Additional political impetus was given to the project through the existing G7 Land Partnership Agreement between Ethiopia, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. In Niger, Land Tenure is governed by the Code Rural, which constitutes a legal instrument and an institution (the National Rural Code Committee and decentralized structures). The objectives of the Code Rural are to safeguard tenure rights of rural actors, organization of rural areas; sustainable management of natural resources; and territorial management. Its mission is to define and register existing rights to land and natural resources; register land transactions; arbitrate disputes related to land and other natural resources; develop and disseminate texts in connection with the management of natural resources. The In-country project in Niger per definition supports ongoing work of the Code Rural and is thereby anchored to national processes by default. In order to ensure buy-in from the overall Government, an Inter-ministerial Committee supports the Code Rural in its efforts.

During the World Café session, Mr Alhou Abey Bazou, Permanent Secretary of the Code Rural du Niger, presented how project activities were being linked to national processes in the In-country project in Niger, particularly with a view to protecting tenure rights of pastoralists and avoiding conflicts between pastoralist communities and farmers. Mr Bazou’s presentation focused around the following questions:

• How was the process?

• What did work well and why?

11

• What were the challenges?

• How can the challenges be overcome?

Key Lessons: To most participants the importance of raising awareness and sensitization of activities was the most prominent lesson learnt, particularly with a view to avoiding conflict and ensuring adequate consultation and participation. In addition participants found it important to pay enhanced attention to have enough information about the specific context which is being operated in, including through surveys and satellite images. Finally, participants stressed the need to pay greater attention to the time and resources required to project activities in national processes and to deal with conflicts between farmers and pastoralists.

ii) Ensuring Inclusive and participatory processes and effective and meaningful

coordination of stakeholders (also discussed in World Café Group 2) During the session on country updates participants agreed that inclusive and participatory processes are key to achieving sustainable impact. Many participants therefore signaled interest in learning more about different approaches to actively increase stakeholder coordination. It was agreed that meaningful consultations should be built on stakeholder assessments including with a view to identifying potential power and influence blocks which can lead to the identification of champions for change.

In Malawi, much focus is placed on meaningful multi-stakeholder consultations, rather than one-offs. Following a multi-stakeholder workshop on governance of tenure a task force was established to coordinate the implementation of proposed policy recommendations and actions. The task force, led by the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development (MLHUD), aims to expand the existing LGAF multi-stakeholder platform in Malawi and revise its mandate, in order to accommodate the broader group involved in tenure governance in the areas of land, fisheries and forestry and ensure coordination among and within the three sectors, with a particular focus on regular consultations rather than one-offs.

In Sudan, it was considered as particularly important to conduct a stakeholder mapping and develop tailored strategies to approach each of the different stakeholders. When mapping stakeholders, it should be clear that addressing tenure issues goes beyond mapping. Questions to address during the mapping exercise include, who will be affected, who will support the efforts and what will be the impact on them.

In Kenya, particular attention was payed to identifying key players in the project, from the outset. It was believed that if all players are not involved there may be gaps in implementation.

During the World Café session, Ms Husna Mbarak, Land Programme Manager, FAO Kenya, presented how the In-country project in Kenya successfully set-up an effective mechanism to coordinate stakeholders. Ms Mbarak’s presentation focused around the following questions: ▪ Why is it important? ▪ Has a stakeholder mapping been conducted? ▪ What worked well and why?

12

▪ What were the challenges? ▪ How can the challenges be overcome?

Key Lesson: To most participants a clear identification and acknowledgement of all relevant stakeholders and their roles was key. In addition, participants emphasized the importance of building trust between parties including through transparency and accountability mechanisms and adequate and inclusive consultations.

iii) Capacity development as a prerequisite for responsible governance of tenure

(also discussed in World Café Group 3) Participants agreed that capacity development is a pre-requisite to realize the Government’s obligations to ensure responsible governance of tenure. It is important to note, that capacity development entails much more than training staff. It involves building or empowering institutions including with a view to providing knowledge about relevant legislation in terms of policies, equipment and technologies as well as dealing with non-technical issues. When capacity development focuses on staff, high turn-over rates may override all capacity development efforts. On the contrary if capacity development enhances capacity of an institution the impact of capacity development efforts may be much more sustainable.

During the World Café session, Mr Bayeh Dessie, Land Management and M&E Advisor of the GIZ Support to Responsible Agricultural Investment (S2RAI) Project in Ethiopia presented the extensive past and planned work they have been doing to develop capacities of relevant stakeholders. Mr Dessie’s presentation focused around the following questions: ▪ Why is it important? ▪ Has a capacity assessment been conducted ▪ What worked well and why? ▪ What were the challenges? ▪ How can the challenges be overcome?

Key Lesson: To most participants the importance of conducting a capacity needs assessment prior to engaging in capacity development was the most prominent lesson learnt. With a view to addressing common challenges in capacity development interventions, such as staff turn-over and personal interests of staff, participants acknowledged that focus of capacity development interventions should go beyond training focusing on the institution rather than individuals.

13

Box 2: Info-note and further reading: Capacity development in FAO A country reaches its development goals only by strengthening its individuals and organizations while creating an enabling policy environment.

Capacities at the three dimensions are interlinked: individuals, organizations and the enabling environment are parts of a whole. Capacity development often involves enhancing the knowledge and skills of individuals, whose work results greatly rely on the performance of the organizations in which they work. The effectiveness of organizations is influenced by the enabling environment. Conversely, the environment is affected by organizations and the relationships between them. In addition to a three dimensional approach, successful FAO programmes have demonstrated that both technical and functional capacities are crucial for strengthening Member Countries’ capacities in agriculture and rural development. Technical capacities are necessary for Member Countries to achieve their development goals in the broad areas of food security, nutrition, agriculture and rural development. Functional capacities enable countries to lead and manage their change initiatives. FAO emphasizes the development of not only the technical capacities but also the functional capacities of its Member Countries' to: ▪ formulate and implement policies and lead policy reform; ▪ generate, manage and exchange information and knowledge; ▪ engage in networks, alliances and partnerships; and ▪ implement programmes and projects, from planning to monitoring and evaluation.

Publications:

▪ Capacity Development - Basic Principles This module provides an introduction to FAO’s capacity development framework, basic principles and concepts. FAO Learning Module 1

▪ FAO Learning Module 2 on Capacity Development - Programming (Revised edition) This module concerns integrating capacity development into programming and covers the assessment process, engagement with stakeholders and tracking capacity development. Tools are provided.

▪ FAO Learning Module 3 on Capacity Development - Good Learning Practices

This module concerns strengthening the capacities of individuals, and hence how to design, deliver and evaluate effective learning events and programmes. Tools for each phase of the cycle are provided.

▪ FAO Learning Module 4 on Capacity Development -Organization Analysis and Development This module concerns the organizational dimension of capacity development, and hence how to strengthen the capacities of organizations. Topics include assessment of organizational capacity, change management and tracking organizational change. Tools are provided.

E-learning: ▪ Developing Country Capacity

This e-learning course is designed for partners in Member Countries and provides an overview of capacity development programming, effective learning practices and organizational change. Useful tools and case studies are provided.

▪ Organizational Analysis and Development This is an e-learning course designed for partners in Member Countries and concerns the organizational dimension of capacity development, including organizational assessment, change management and evaluation of organizational change. Tools and case studies are provided.

▪ Capacity Development Now’ This is an introductory e-learning course on the basic principles of capacity development. It is available for FAO staff only on the FAO learning platform at you@fao.org.

14

iv) Identifying the appropriate role of customary intuitions In Niger, it is perceived as important to be aware that the traditional structures are recognized and customs are enriched in laws. The law stipulates that the customary chiefs are the first to intervene in disputes with the objective to reconcile. They have the competence to regulate all the disputes between the rural actors in the context of customary tenure. Oftentimes, the underlying issue to address is how to share territory. In some zones the chiefs have had a very strong influence. Currently, it is being assessed how to limit the power that the chiefs had to the pre-independence degree.

v) Tenure as a source and a means to address political tensions

Tenure issues have oftentimes been a source of conflict and in some instances the source of civil wars. Tenure issues are highly sensitive. Most countries have in common that given tenure issues are the source of political tensions while addressing them can exacerbate the situation, as well. The projects in Cote d’Ivoire, South Sudan, Sudan and Somalia all deal with tenure related post-conflict situations.

In Burundi, a political crises started at the end of April 2015. In view of the conflict, the project could not continue with all its activities as planned, but had to adjust to the

Box 3: The VGGT on customary tenure systems

The VGGT make many provisions on customary tenure systems. Section 9 “Indigenous peoples and other communities with customary tenure” focus specifically on these issues, e.g. par. 9.2:

“Indigenous peoples and other communities with customary tenure systems that exercise self-governance of land, fisheries and forests should promote and provide equitable, secure and sustainable rights to those resources, with special attention to the provision of equitable access for women. Effective participation of all members, men, women and youth, in decisions regarding their tenure systems should be promoted through their local or traditional institutions, including in the case of collective tenure systems. Where necessary, communities should be assisted to increase the capacity of their members to participate fully in decision-making and governance of their tenure systems.”

Par. 9.6 also states:

“States should consider adapting their policy, legal and organizational frameworks to recognize tenure systems of indigenous peoples and other communities with customary tenure systems. Where constitutional or legal reforms strengthen the rights of women and place them in conflict with custom, all parties should cooperate to accommodate such changes in the customary tenure systems.”

Box 4: The VGGT on conflicts Section 25, ‘Conflicts in respect to tenure of land, fisheries and forests’ focuses specifically on these issues.

You may also want to take the E-learning course: Addressing Disputes and Conflicts over the Tenure of Natural Resources.

15

circumstances. For instance, international staff are still based in and working from Rwanda for security reasons. The suspension of the political spaces in Burundi is a human right violation and violation of the right to expression and free media. Even though, the EU and other resource partners have engaged in dialogues, there is yet no clear way forward.

vi) Using freely available satellite imagery The EU through its Joint Research Centre provides free satellite imagery at a very good resolution (10 metres) provided by the European Joint Research Centre. The Ethiopian project has already taken advantage and is using it. The images are available at the following site:

https://sentinel.esa.int/web/sentinel/home

Access to these maps will greatly enhance capacity of the in-country projects to deliver the mapping component of their projects.

4. THEMATIC SESSION: FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT

Concern about the long-term social and environmental implications of accelerated land acquisition has been raised by most In-country projects in previous Capitalization meetings. In particular, In-country projects indicated the need for further guidance on responsibly managing investment processes, including those from Government, private sector companies or individuals and in particular where communities with customary tenure rights are involved.

International human rights and standard-setting bodies have begun to explore and apply new norms and procedures designed to help regulate these processes. The aim is not to discourage investment and prevent the development of new farmlands, but rather to ensure that such expansion occurs in ways that respect rights, secure favourable and sustainable livelihoods, and divert pressure away from areas that are crucial to local livelihoods and have high conservation value.

The session aimed at introducing one of the most relevant international instruments with a view to providing guidance on managing investment processes, i.e. Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC).

The presentation and Q&A sessions aimed at developing a first understanding of the political positioning and concept of FPIC. The subsequent group exercise aimed at developing a first understanding among participants of how this process could be applied and analyze whether practices in their countries comply with FPIC. 4.1 Presentation The VGGT state that “Responsible investments should do no harm, safeguard against dispossession of legitimate tenure right holders and environmental damage, and should respect human rights.” (VGGT par. 12.4) In this context, the VGGT recall the obligation of all parties involved to comply with their responsibilities in relation to Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), i.e. “States and other parties should hold good faith consultation with indigenous peoples before initiating any project or before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures affecting the resources for which the communities hold rights. Such projects should be based on an effective and meaningful consultation with

16

indigenous peoples, through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent under the United Nations Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples and with due regard for particular positions and understandings of individual States. Consultation and decision-making processes should be organized without intimidation and be conducted in a climate of trust. The principles of consultation and participation, as set out in paragraph 3B.6, should be applied in the case of other communities described in this section.” (VGGT par.9.9)

FPIC also relates to and includes the right to participation as well as other rights contained in legally binding documents, including the following:

▪ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) ▪ International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) ▪ International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

(ICERD) ▪ Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries (ILO

convention 169) ▪ American Convention on Human Rights ▪ African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) ▪ Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

What does FPIC stand for? FPIC goes beyond investments and is about more than defining the individual elements it consists of (see Box 5 below), yet the definition of the words provides a good initial understanding of what FPIC is about.

▪ Free implies no coercion, intimidation or manipulation. ▪ Prior implies consent is sought far in advance of any authorization or commencement

of activities, and the time requirements of indigenous consultation and consensus processes are respected.

▪ Informed implies that all information relating to the activity is provided to indigenous peoples and that the information is objective, accurate and presented in a manner or form that is understandable to indigenous peoples. Relevant information includes: 1. the nature, size, pace, duration, reversibility and scope of any proposed project; 2. the reason(s) or purpose of the project; 3. the location of areas that will be affected; 4. a preliminary assessment of the possible economic, social, cultural and

environmental impacts, including potential risks and benefits; 5. personnel likely to be involved in the implementation of the project; procedures

that the project may entail. ▪ Consent implies that indigenous peoples have agreed to the activity that is the subject

of the consultation. Indigenous peoples also have the prerogative to withhold consent or to offer it with conditions. Consultation and participation are key elements of a consent-seeking process. Consultation must be undertaken in good faith, which, among other things, requires that indigenous views are accommodated in the process or objective justifications are provided as to why such accommodation is not possible. The parties must establish a dialogue allowing them to identify appropriate and workable solutions in an atmosphere of mutual respect and full and equitable participation, with ample time to reach decisions. Indigenous peoples and local

17

communities must be able to participate through their own freely chosen representatives and customary or other institutions. The participation of women, youth and children is preferable where appropriate.

FPIC is an iterative and ongoing process. Although it is possible to organize it into phases (as shown in Box 5, below), you may need to repeat particular steps, prolong them or reposition them according to the specific context.

Box 5: The FPIC Process

4.2 Group exercise: Questions to be addressed by individual stakeholder groups

The objective of the group exercise was to raise

awareness among participants of the different roles

and responsibilities each stakeholder group holds in

the FPIC process, with a view to developing a first

understanding of which questions should be

addressed in practice in an FPIC process. In addition,

the working groups helped participants analyze

whether practices in their countries comply with

FPIC.

The working group results indicated that certain

elements of an FPIC-compliant process are given in

most countries, but that improvements need to be

made both in the provisions foreseen in relevant

legislation and policies and in their practical

application. As members of the United Nations and

of other regional treaties, and in accordance with the human rights instruments to which they

have committed, it is the duty of Governments to ensure that human rights of indigenous

peoples are respected, protected and fulfilled. They likewise have a duty to ensure that other

actors, including, in particular, the private sector, respect such rights by actively protecting

1. Identifying right holders

2. Ascertain the legal status of the land

3. Participatory mapping

4. Identifying institutions and representatives

5. Carrying out iterative consultations

6. Providing access to appropriate information

7. Monitoring and verifying agreements

8. Establishing a grievance process

9. Providing access to conflict resolution

PH

ASE

1

PH

ASE

2

PH

ASE

3

Box 6: Methodological note 2: FPIC group exercise A selection of questions to be addressed in the FPIC process was given to three working groups, representing i) Government officials, ii) investors and iii) Indigenous People and local communities. The working group members were included in groups, irrespective of their actual affiliation to a stakeholder group. The questions drew on a more comprehensive, yet not exhaustive list of questions, as drawn out in Governance of Tenure Technical Guide Nr.3: Respecting Free, Prior and Informed Consent, Practical guidance for governments, companies, NGOs, indigenous peoples and local communities in relation to land acquisition, FAO 2015.

18

them where necessary. It is thus incumbent on governments to review and, where necessary,

revise national laws and establish or maintain effective judicial and other remedies by which

those rights may be enforced, so that they give effect to these rights and ensure that

companies also respect them. This means that governments must ensure that national laws

recognize communities’ and indigenous peoples’ customary rights to their lands and

territories, provide legal personality for their self-chosen representative bodies, provide

judicial and other effective remedies to enforce those and other rights, and require that both

government agents and companies obtain their free and informed consent prior to imposing

measures that may affect their rights.

Detailed answers of the working groups can be found in annex III, Questions and group

results, on page 48.

5. GROUP EXERCISE: GENDER-EQUITABLE GOVERNANCE OF TENURE Gender and gender roles shape the opportunities and constraints that women and men face in securing their livelihoods, including their access to land, decision-making about land, and the institutions that administer land and other productive resources. Stark gender disparities in land holdings are apparent in all regions of the world. The evidence illustrating gender inequalities in access to land is overwhelming. Women across all developing regions are consistently less likely to own or operate land; they are less likely to have access to rented land, and the land they do have access to is often of poorer quality and in smaller plots. Access to land is a basic requirement for farming and control over land is synonymous with wealth, status and power in many areas. Strengthening women’s access to, and control over, land is an important means of raising their status and influence within households and communities. Improving women’s access to land and security of tenure has direct impacts on farm productivity, and can also have far-reaching implications for improving household welfare. Gender equity has to be mainstreamed into the governance of land tenure to ensure that the interests and needs of all people – women and men – are addressed, and that the processes and institutions for land tenure are transparent, consultative and participatory. Mainstreaming of gender equity in land tenure governance is also essential for the achievement of the SDGs, and particularly SDG 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls.

Box 7: FAO Resources on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: - E-learning module: Respecting Free, Prior and Informed Consent - Governance of Tenure Technical Guide 3: Respecting free, prior and informed consent.

Practical guidance for governments, companies, NGOs, indigenous peoples and local communities in relation to land acquisition

- Video: Free, Prior and Informed Consent: an indigenous peoples’ right and good practice for local communities

- Video: FPIC explained in a 3-minute animation by Asia Indigenous People’s Pact

19

Mainstreaming gender-equality into projects is not only a requirement of the EU Land Governance Programme and assessed through the Transversal Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, it is also supported by internationally endorsed principles of non-discrimination, including:

▪ The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW): The Convention was adopted in 1979 by the UN General Assembly and is often described as an international bill of rights for women. Consisting of a preamble and 30 articles, it defines what constitutes discrimination against women and sets up an agenda for national action to end such discrimination.

▪ Agenda 2063, “The Africa We Want”: Agenda 2063 is both a Vision and an Action Plan which translates the 50th Anniversary Solemn Declaration of the Heads of State and Government of the African Union into concrete objectives milestones, goals, targets and actions/measures. The agenda makes strong commitments towards improving gender equality, e.g.

o “The African woman will be fully empowered in all spheres, with equal social, political and economic rights, including the rights to own and inherit property, sign a contract, register and manage a business. Rural women will have access to productive assets, including land, credit, inputs and financial services.” (par. 43, Agenda 2063)

o “Develop and implement affirmative policies and advocacy to ensure women’s increased access to land and inputs, and ensure that at least 30% of agricultural financing are accessed by women. (par. 67, Agenda 2063)

▪ African Union Declaration on Land Issues and Challenges in Africa: The AU Declaration “resolves to strengthen security of land tenure for women which require special attention.”

▪ Framework and Guidelines on Land Policy in Africa: They F&G give more detailed guidance particularly on the process for developing, implementing and monitoring land policy.

▪ Voluntary Guidelines on Responsible Governance of Tenure: Acknowledging the centrality of efforts to improve gender-equality as targeted interventions and as an integral part of all areas of work gender-equality is one of ten implementation principles of the VGGT and is mainstreamed throughout the text, i.e. “Gender equality: Ensure the equal right of women and men to the enjoyment of all human rights, while acknowledging differences between women and men and taking specific measures aimed at accelerating de facto equality when necessary. States should ensure that women and girls have equal tenure rights and access to land, fisheries and forests independent of their civil and marital status.” (par. 3B.4 VGGT)

Given the centrality of gender in the EU Land Governance Programme a group exercise was conducted with the objective of recalling the basic concepts of improving gender-equitable governance of tenure. The exercise

Box 8: Methodological note 3: Group exercise Gender-equitable governance of tenure Working groups were given statements on individual cards that were either right or wrong. In group discussions consensus needed to be found on whether the statements should be placed in the column for right or in the column for wrong answers on the flipchart. The list of statements can be found in annex IV, Group exercise – Gender-equitable governance of tenure, p. 52 The full list of questions and a key to their solution can be found in Annex III.

20

supports group members to reflect on their perspectives on gender-equality and what it means to support efforts to improve it. It also facilitates peer-learning and exchange of lessons learnt. The exercise is useful particularly in contexts, where a basic level of knowledge and experience among participants already exists.

6. THEMATIC SESSION: FACILITATING MULTI-STAKEHOLDER PROCESSES

“Consultation and participation: engaging with and seeking the support of those who, having legitimate tenure rights, could be affected by decisions, prior to decisions being taken, and responding to their contributions; taking into consideration existing power imbalances between different parties and ensuring active, free, effective, meaningful and informed participation of individuals and groups in associated decision-making processes.” (VGGT par. 3B.6)

Consultation and participation stand at the heart of improving governance of tenure. Next to being one of the implementation principles of the VGGT, participation and consultation are mentioned over 60 times. Yet, most practitioners are not sure how to effectively turn this principle into practice, i.e. to facilitate multi-stakeholder processes (MSPs) and to include all relevant stakeholders. A multi-stakeholder process was defined as "a process in which diverse actors (e.g. government agencies, producer organizations, NGOs, private actors, donors and others) collaborate to achieve a common goal" (FAO, Learning Module 4, p.62). In this session participants were introduced to the concept of MSPs, a core set of approaches, skills, tips and tools to facilitate multi-stakeholder processes (MSPs). The delivery methods included group work, active peer discussion and highly participatory and experiential sessions in which participants practiced their facilitation skills. Working in groups, participants:

- planned facilitating events - conducted stakeholder mapping and problem tree analysis; - practised facilitated an event; - brainstormed and explored ideas to deal with power issues in MSPs.

7. THEMATIC SESSION: EXPERIENCE CAPITALIZATION FOR CONTINUED LEARNING

The European Union Land Governance Programme foresees support to 17 in-country projects under phases 1 and 2, providing a unique opportunity to learn from the wealth of experience gained by the projects. Systematically including capitalization of experiences in projects is not only useful to share lessons learnt between projects and enhancing monitoring and evaluation but also provides an opportunity to guide the efforts of stakeholders beyond the EU Land Governance Programme, including at country, regional and global levels.

Box 9: Links to FAO Resources on Gender-equitable governance of Tenure: - E-learning module: Governing Land for Women and Men - Governance of Tenure Technical Guide 1: Governing land for women and men. A technical

guide to support the achievement of responsible gender-equitable governance of land tenure

- Developing gender-equitable legal frameworks for land tenure: a legal assessment tool

- Gender and land rights database

21

The session on experience capitalization included a presentation to introduce the concept and benefits of participatory and systematized capitalization processes. Following the presentation the facilitators organized a “world café”- session. The world café showed a practical approach to sharing lessons learnt and gave the participants an opportunity to further develop their capacity in specific areas of interest. (see section 3, ‘key themes’, for a methodological note and outcomes of the world café.)

7.1 Presentation on experience capitalization

Experience capitalization, or “systematization” is an iterative process through which an experience (with its successes and failures) is identified, valued and documented in various media. This systematic process allows learning of lessons and identification of good practices. Thanks to this approach, the practice can change and improve and may thereafter be adopted by others.

In order to progress and to adapt to change, individuals, institutions, stakeholders, and projects must actively learn by drawing on lessons from experiences. Experiences can be applied to specific contexts, institutionalized, shared and replicated at different levels: from local to international. Even small experiences can be replicated to create change. However, if no action is taken to analyse, capitalize and share the knowledge gained in programmes and projects, institutional memory will not be transmitted, the same mistakes will be repeated, the success of experiences will not be known and opportunities for improved practices will be lost, thereby preventing the sharing of good practices. An organization can turn knowledge into action through knowledge sharing and capitalization of experiences, one of the key objectives of the Transversal Project.

In the best case scenario experience capitalization should be a systematic, participatory and iterative process which should include the following elements as part of a knowledge strategy: ▪ Systematically integrate experience capitalization into the project cycle; ▪ Plan it from the beginning along the

different steps; ▪ Use participatory methodologies (to

ensure effective involvement of stakeholders);

▪ Integrate monitoring and evaluation (allowing comparison and verification of data and information obtained at the different steps of the implementation of the practice);

▪ Follow approaches that are useful to the process, such as analytical, self-evaluation and self-criticism approaches, and be open to criticism and changes;

▪ Use Communication for Development;

▪ Use the whole range of knowledge sharing methods and tools;

Box 10: The experience capitalization cycle

22

▪ Take gender into account (in order to include the specificities of target groups).

Some of the key questions to address prior to initiating an experience capitalization process are:

▪ What for? Purpose and expected results ▪ Who for? Who will benefit from this experience ▪ What? Which experience (or part of an experience) do we wish to focus on? ▪ With whom? Stakeholders that will (directly or indirectly) be engaged in the process ▪ When? Time to get started and have in mind that capitalization is an ongoing process ▪ How? Make a plan to collect the data

Most stakeholders find it useful to use templates to collect data, no matter in which format the end product will be (text, audio, video). The template will serve as a checklist from the beginning of the project in order to take into account the different elements that should be kept in mind throughout the project or experience. This approach gives good results if it is part of the monitoring and evaluation process and of the Communication for Development process. In this way, at any time of the project or experience, benchmarks can be immortalized in the form of interviews (audio, video or written), or photos (places, men and women at the beginning of the experience, during and after a change was made). They serve as indicators for monitoring and evaluation. A good template should provide room to address the following issues:

▪ context and the process ▪ what the change/innovation is,

as a result of applying the practice

▪ Explains failures and not only successes, as these help to identify weaknesses, thereby allowing improvement of the good practice

▪ explains the critical success factors that have triggered the positive change being observed

▪ what risks and constraints there are in applying the practice

▪ explains the impact on the community (based on appropriate evaluation and validation)

▪ uses participatory approaches in order to engage stakeholders and ensure good practice ownership and sustainability

Box 11: How to document a good practice

23

ii) Presentation of the web-based knowledge management platform

As a part of the support to FAO Transversal Support to the EU Land Governance Programme a web-based knowledge management (KM) platform is being developed. The platform is

based on the LPI knowledge management platform.

The Knowledge Management system is an online web based system which aims to facilitate knowledge sharing between the in-country projects and to provide readily available tools and information for the in-country projects. In addition, the platform will contribute to the overall communication strategy of the EU Land Governance Programme and increase the visibility of the projects. As such, the platform will have both a public and a restricted space. The public in general can access information that will be available in the public section. The restricted information will only be available to the in-country projects and staff in support of the Transversal Programme. In order to access the restricted space registration and approval of the Web Manager will be required. During the workshop Mr Rigava made a presentation on the status of the Knowledge Management system and provided guidance on its use.

iii) Presentation on integrating capitalization into communication strategies

To make full use of its potential, experience capitalization should be integrated into projects and programmes from the beginning of their planning. Communication, sharing experiences and knowledge are essential in the ongoing learning processes leading to change and improvement of country initiatives. Systematically taking stock of lessons learned and sharing them supports efforts to scale-up project activities. The e-learning course on experience capitalization (Lesson 4.5) provides guidance on how to integrate capitalization into communication strategies. Box 12, Developing a communication strategy, provide examples of steps to consider in a communication strategy and a template that can be used.

According to the message and targeted audience, different types of products, for different channels need to be developed. It is important to have a mix of products and channels to increase the impact. The lesson 4.5 “Communication products and channels” of the e-learning course on experience capitalization presents tools and tips to choose the appropriate communication products and dissemination channels for different target groups (see box 12, above).

Box 12: Developing a communication strategy

24

The following examples of communication products resulting from capitalizing on VGGT experiences were presented:

i. Good practices factsheets The factsheets focus on VGGT implementation in Senegal and Sierra Leone and were used as advocacy examples for decision-makers and donors.

▪ A good practice on the Implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure. A multi-actor and multi-sector approach in Sierra Leone

▪ A good practice on multi-actor dialogue: the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure at the heart of Senegal’s tenure reform (English)

▪ Une bonne pratique en matière de dialogue multi-acteurs : Les Directives Volontaires sur le foncier au cœur de la réforme foncière au Sénégal (French)

ii. Videos

A video documentary on VGGT implementation in Sierra Leone “Implementation of the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in Sierra Leone” provides the opportunity to learn from lessons learnt in Sierra Leone. The video includes examples of stakeholders in Sierra Lone participating in Radio programmes after a VGGT training workshop as a way to engage community members in discussions on tenure governance.

▪ Full version (11 minutes) of the video

▪ Short version (3 minutes) of the video

iii. Other visual and audio products

Visual and audio products are a powerful medium to share the results from experience capitalization, especially with an illiterate audience. Visual products can be graphics or images alone, or used in combination with text. During the meeting, Mr Habwintahe, from GIZ Burundi, presented success stories from developing an awareness raising tool box within the

Box 13: Communication products

25

country project (e.g. Image box, brochure, poster, songs). He emphasized how the process of writing a song in the national language “Kirundi” about the planned State land inventory and land registration helped project reach out to members of the community. The song was broadcasted using loudspeakers inviting the population to a hill assembly in 13 communities in 5 provinces in Burundi. The impact of the song resulted in having more people participating in meetings and discussions on the importance of land registration at community level.

The discussion during the 4th meeting revealed that support is needed to help country projects to better document, communicate and share their experiences.

8. VGGT 5TH ANNIVERSARY EVENT

Eleventh (11) May 2017 will mark the 5th anniversary of the CFS endorsement of VGGT. On this occasion, FAO with funding provided by the European Union through its ‘Support to and Capitalization on the European Union Land Governance Programme – Phase II’ project will be organizing a two-day international event (10th and 11th May 2017). The overall objective of the event is to provide stimulus into maintaining the momentum to improve governance of tenure within the framework of the VGGT. The event will provide a platform for discussion and:

• highlight the achievements and lessons learnt in VGGT implementation at global, regional and country levels from the perspective of different stakeholder groups and sectors;

• strengthen dialogue and networks on governance of tenure among different stakeholder groups and regions;

• address emerging issues, challenges and gaps that require attention in the immediate future.

Among others, the event provides a platform for the European Union Land Governance Programme and its In-country projects to showcase results and lessons learnt, e.g. through the organization of a joint side event. The Transversal Team will be in contact with In-country projects to assess potential interest in contributing to such an event. Beyond the scope of the event, the 5th anniversary of the VGGT will provide an excellent opportunity to increase awareness and political buy-in for the VGGT at the country level.

Box 14: Awareness raising tool box from Burundi

See the document: ”Capitalisation et partage d’expérience de sensibilisation de la population à l’inventaire et enregistrement des terres domaniales «

26

9. CLOSING

The meeting was closed at 5 pm on 24 November 2016 with closing statements by Ms Joan Kagwanja, Chief of LPI, Mr. Stephen N. Karingi, Director of the Regional Integration, Infrastructure and Trade Division (RITD) at UNECA and Mr Joachim Knoth. Ms Kagwanja emphasized that the Land Policy Initiative attaches a lot of importance to the capitalization meetings which help to avoid problems of past projects implemented at country level but with no platform for lesson learning and sharing of experiences. She also emphasized the importance of the long-standing partnership between the EU, FAO and LPI. Mr Knoth expressed his appreciation for having been part of the capitalization meeting and having the opportunity to learn more about the In-country projects. He emphasized the need for increased attention to monitoring results at the impact-level. Mr Karingi thanked participants for their active participation and underlined the importance of improved land governance to the achievement of the Africa Union Agenda 2063 and the strategic goals of UNECA. Mr Larbi announced that the 5th Capitalization Meeting will be held in Addis Ababa tentatively, from 23 – 25 May 2017.

27

ANNEX I: AGENDA

Day 1: Tuesday 22.11.16

08:30-09:00 Registration

09:00-09:30 Opening

▪ Introduction of participants

▪ Welcome statement by FAO

▪ Welcome statement by the EU

▪ Welcome statement by RITD/LPI

09:30-09:45 Purpose and objectives of the meeting

Adoption of Agenda

09:45-10:00 Group photograph

10:00-10:20 Coffee break

10:20-11:15 Updates on progress of the in-Country projects:

▪ Presentations by in-country projects (Angola, Burundi, Ethiopia)

▪ Q&A

11:15-12:00 Updates on progress of the in-Country projects (continued):

▪ Presentations by in-country projects (Kenya, Malawi, Niger)

▪ Q&A

12:00-13:30 Lunch

13:30-14:15 Updates on progress of the in-Country projects (continued):

▪ Presentations by in-country projects (Somalia, Sudan, Swaziland)

▪ Q&A

14:15-14:45 Free, Prior and Informed Consent

▪ Presentation

▪ Q&A

14:45-15:05 Coffee break

15:05-16:50 Free, Prior and Informed Consent

▪ Group discussion

16:50-17:00 Closing and introduction of day 2

Day 2: Wednesday 23.11.16

09:00-09:05 Introduction of agenda of day 2

09.05-10.00 Gender-equitable governance of tenure

▪ Group discussion

10.00-10:30 Facilitating multi-stakeholder processes

▪ Interactive training

10:30-11:00 Coffee break

11:00-13:00 Facilitating multi-stakeholder processes

▪ Interactive training

28

13:00-14:30 Lunch break

14:30-15:50 Facilitating multi-stakeholder processes

▪ Interactive training

15:50-16:10 Coffee break

16:10-17:20 Facilitating multi-stakeholder processes

▪ Interactive training

17:20- 17:30 Closing and introduction of day 3

Day 3: Thursday 24.11.16

09:00-09:10 Introduction of agenda of day 3

09:10-09:40 Experience capitalization for continuous learning

▪ Presentation

▪ Q&A

09:40-10:45 Capitalization and knowledge sharing exercise

▪ “World café” to address challenges faced by reflecting on:

o what did work well and why?

o what didn’t work well, why?

o how to overcome the challenges

10:45-11:15 Coffee break

11:15-12:00 Experience capitalization for continuous learning

▪ Debrief

▪ Plenary presentation of group results.

12:00-12:45 Experience capitalization for continuous learning

▪ How to document and share experiences and lessons learned?

12:45-14:00 Lunch break

14:00-15:15 5th year anniversary of the VGGT

▪ Presentation and brainstorming of possible inputs for event

▪ Development of action plans

15:15-15:45 Coffee break

15:45-16:30 General discussions and evaluation

16.30-17.00 Closing

29

ANNEX II: UPDATES OF IN-COUNTRY PROJECTS

1. Angola

Strengthened capacity for improved governance of land tenure and natural resources by local government in partnership with non-state actors in the Central Highlands of Angola

Period: May 2014 – April 2017

Funding: 3,529,412 € (including 15% contribution by World Vision International)

Contacts: Implementing organization(s): ▪ Development Workshop Angola (Moisés Festo, Project Manager,

dinhofesto@gmail.com) ▪ World Vision Angola (Marco Orani, Project Manager, marco_orani@wvi.org)

European Union: ▪ Fernando Trabada Crende, Head of Sustainable Agriculture, Water and

Sanitation (SAWS) Section, Fernando. Fernando.Trabada-Crende@eeas.europa.eu

▪ Vicent.Rodrigues-Van-Halsema, Vicent.Rodrigues-Van-Halsema@eeas.europa.eu

FAO task force: ▪ FAO Angola, FAO-AGO@fao.org ▪ Paolo Groppo, Paolo.Groppo@fao.org (new project in the country); ▪ Vivian Onyango, vivian.onyango@fao.org (Pastoralism) ▪ Maria Paola Rizzo, MariaPaola.Rizzo@fao.org (Open tenure) ▪ Txaran Basterrechea, Txaran.Basterrechea@fao.org (FAO Angola Land

Programme)

Objective:

Empower national, provincial and municipality level government and local non-state actors and communities to facilitate the recognition of tenure rights.

Thematic areas:

Themes: ▪ Legal framework, participatory mapping, cadastre management, capacity

development of non-state actors

Key outcomes:

▪ Strengthened technical capacity of the municipal government in participatory mapping, cadastre management, the use of geographical information systems, and assessing the legal framework from the perspective of the VGGT and the Social Tenure Domain Model (STDM).

▪ Capacity of public administration and legal entities increased to simplify and fast-track the land rights recognition processes and to meet the demand for land rights formalization.

▪ Non-state actors (NSAs) in the peri-urban and rural communities, traditional authorities and local government are involved in a collaborative engagement, have a better understanding of land governance mechanisms and are able to better advocate for their rights.

▪ Public sensitized, land law and VGGT widely disseminated and lessons learned shared with land governance stakeholders including the global networks, such as the Global Land Tool Network (GLTN).

Context: ▪ Angola is facing a delicate economic situation, due to the drop in the crude prices, which is affecting negatively in the balance of payment, and is leading to end of subsides, increased local prices, and devaluation of national currency.

▪ Elections are scheduled for September 2017, which means the political activities for the electoral campaign are already in place.

30

▪ The drafting of the new land law without the participation of all actors.

Progress (last 6 months):

Participatory land delimitation ▪ Following trainings on participatory land delimitation through seminars and/or

fieldwork, technical personnel is able to lead the field activities.

Legal-Administrative ▪ After the the by-law was issues which officialized the steps to be taken for the

formalization of community land titles, the Provincial Government of Bié issued a second instrument, relating the individual titles. The Provincial Government of Huambo is planning to adopt the same mechanism.

Work at the community level ▪ 8 community titles have been already approved by the Governor in the Province

of Bié since the issuing of the by-law . ▪ Awareness raising ▪ National VGGT conference including multi-stakeholder, multi-sector

participation of professionals dealing with land tenure at national level.

Success factors:

n.a.

Challenges: Capacity development ▪ High turn-over of technical personnel to other areas including by being moved

to other areas of the administration can eliminate all efforts in the area of capacity development.

Recording of tenure rights ▪ No Portuguese version of STDM available and the coding of STDM does not

work well with the diacritics used in Portuguese. ▪ No simple/clear possibility to gather data in the field and have them be

automatically fed into the system without complicated steps that are difficult to follow for the average technician.

▪ There was difficulty in working with various coordinate systems, as urban areas and rural areas use different coordinate systems in Angola.

Lessons learnt:

Capacity development ▪ The involvement of technical personnel in field activities enhances their

capacity to conduct activities and thereby ensures sustainability of the process.

Legal Administrative strengthening ▪ Many of the VGGT principles are already included in the Angolan legal

framework on land, but are not respected in practice. ▪ Institutional stability is the key. ▪ Contradictory claims to land: ▪ When private claims to land are being formalized on community lands,

grievance and communication mechanisms should be strengthened for government entities and communities.

Highlights: n.a.

Recommendations:

Initiation of a collaboration with FAO to replace STDM for SOLA, so that it can respond to the problems faced by STDM.

31

2. Burundi

Project d’amélioration de la gestion et de la gouvernance foncière au Burundi

Period: 1 October 2014 – 30 September 2018

Funding: 5,500,000 EUR + 500,000 EUR (Germany))

Contacts: Implementing organization(s): ▪ GIZ (Florent Lasry, Project Manager, florent.lasry@giz.de, Martin Kraft,

Country Director, martin.kraft@giz.de)

Government partners: ▪ Commission foncière nationale (Damien Macumi, Secrétaire permanent,

Dancie Nzojibwami, Directeur d’Intervention, nzojibwamidancie@yahoo.fr)

European Union: ▪ Géza Strammer, Chargé de coopération, Geza.STRAMMER@eeas.europa.eu ▪ Estella Nzitonda, chargé de suivi du projet, Estella.NZITONDA@eeas.europa.eu

Objective:

Contribute to the improvement of land governance which is sensitive to the risk of interpersonal conflicts, to access to land for vulnerable groups and equitable production and economic development in Burundi

Thematic areas:

▪ Public lands, recording of tenure rights, decentralization, legal framework, conflict resolution

Key outcomes:

▪ Improve governance of tenure of public lands, by systematically identifying state land (about 10% of national territory), through: - an inventory of State lands in hill areas, including the identification and

delimitation of lands through the Comités Reconnaissance Collinaires. - Demarcation and measurement by the National Cadastre and registration by

the Land Registry. ▪ Provide legal support and mediation in case of conflict to support the

registration of state land processes and support some aspects of the implementation of land reform;

▪ Propose a roadmap for decentralized systematic land management on private lands, while continuing to support certain priority communal services owners.

Context: ▪ Very high population pressure in a predominantly agricultural population resulting in a lack of cultivable land and land fragmentation.

▪ The allocation of State land to new rights holders in agricultural development programmes, for other public purposes to investments or for allocation to the landless requires: - information about available State land and legitimate rights communities

or individuals may have to this land including refugees; - clear mandates between the State and municipalities about State land.

▪ Land speculation is increasing as a result of land scarcity and an influx of returning refugees. Land disputes account for 70% of court cases in rural areas.

▪ Albeit a strong demand for increased tenure security by private individuals, currently most private and state lands are not registered.

▪ An inventory for State lands has become the pre-requisite for: - the effective implementation of new legislation on land tenure and State

lands, in accordance with the objectives of the National Strategy for Sustainable Land Use and the ‘Lettre National de l’Habitat et de l’Urbanism’;

- realise land governance at the decentralized level through community land tenure services;

32

- allocate State land through agricultural development programmes; - Information about State land is equally necessary in the planning and

allocation of lands for other public services, developing clear mandates for the State and the municipalities, respectively, support to private investments and returned refugees.

Progress (last 6 months):

▪ Identification, delimitation, geolocation, demarcation and measurement of public lands in the 2 pilot communities (close to completion, around ~450 lands).

▪ Commissions and surveying teams were formed for the identification and delimitation of State lands. Nine commissions have started their work and nine of the surveying teams are currently carrying out their tasks in five provinces.

▪ Awareness-raising and mobilization of people in project area in order to ensure effective involvement in the inventory of State lands.

Success factors:

▪ Integrating conflict resolution aspects into the process of developing the State land inventory.

▪ Activities which preceded the activities to facilitate the inventory of State lands were crucial, i.e. the pre-identification of State lands and the collection of data on transfers and concessions of State lands throughout the country.

▪ The development of awareness raising tools and activities aimed at mobilizing local populations to validate information.

Challenges: ▪ Difficult political context. ▪ Irregular reliefs in some areas make inventory work difficult and hence slows

down project implementation. ▪ The process to form commissions to identify and delimit land requires a long

time as several institutions are involved. ▪ In its design, the project was inspired by similar activities of other partners

who did not have the same requirements as the PAGGF (composition of the commissions of identification of the State lands, integration of the conflict resolution approach). This has underestimated the budget and the implementation period.

Lessons learnt:

▪ Appropriate time should be planned for forming commissions involving several.

▪ More commissions are required to speed up the process of identifying and delimiting State land.

▪ Time and finances required to implement the projects should be evaluated from the outset.

Highlight: ▪ Integrating elements of conflict resolution. ▪ Strong involvement of the population.

Recommendations:

▪ Allocate sufficient funds to awareness raising and sensitization activities of local populations. Their involvement is key.

▪ Allocate sufficient time to consider all relevant factors that influence the project, in order to come up with a reasonable estimate of time and funding requirements for the project.

▪ The identification and delimitation of public lands must include the conflict resolution component to be more beneficial to the people.

33

3. Ethiopia

Support to Responsible Agricultural Investment in Ethiopia

Period: March 2016 – December 2018

Funding: EUR 3.8 million (3 million European Union + 800,000 German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ))

Contacts:

Implementing organization(s): ▪ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, (Oliver

Schönweger, Project Manager, oliver.schoenweger@giz.de)

Government partners: ▪ Ethiopian Agricultural Investment Land Administration (EAILAA) (Bezualem

Mogessie Agency, Head of PCU, bezualemmogessie@gmail.com) ▪ Rural Land Administration and Use Directorate (RLAUD) (Abebaw Abebe,

abebawabebek@yahoo.com) EU delegation: Alex Carrasco, Cooperation Attaché, Alex.Carrasco@eeas.europa.eu

Objective:

To contribute to improved food and nutrition security by promoting secure land tenure and responsible agricultural investments.

Thematic areas:

Responsible agricultural investments, land management, secure land tenure

Key outcomes:

▪ The institutional framework with functional coordination structures at federal and selected regional levels is strengthened;

▪ Human capacities in land management and responsible agricultural investments are strengthened;

▪ An information, knowledge and performance management system for land based agricultural investments is developed;

▪ Local communities’ tenure rights are secured & capacities to benefit from large scale agricultural investments are strengthened.

Context: ▪ To address food insecurity, the Government of Ethiopia has strategically promoted land investments for agricultural plantations as part of the five year Growth and Transformation Plan, aiming to increase production, productivity, markets and employment. About 3 Million ha of land suitable for commercial agricultural investments have been identified by the federal land bank, and over the period of 2005 to 2012 at least two Million ha of land have already been leased out by regional governments (1.7 Mio ha) and at federal level.

▪ However, performance of investors in terms of production, employment, and development of land has to date been disappointing for the most part. Out of the land transferred, only a fraction has actually been developed. In general terms, there is a lack of an overall consistent and transparent framework and severe human and institutional capacity constraints for managing such large-scale land based agricultural investments.

▪ Social and environmental issues have received little attention during project planning, decision-making and implementation phases of most projects. A large proportion of the projects could not accomplish commitments as made within their EIA document and often had negative environmental and social impacts with no mitigation mechanisms in place. The information level about the scale and extend in this regard is poor. Monitoring and evaluation of land deals remains a major challenge, given the size of many regions, the remoteness of investment locations and lack of staff and vehicles.

34

▪ The overall poor performance of investments has lead the federal government to declare a moratorium on further land leases, providing a window of opportunity to address legal, institutional and human capacity gaps to better design, manage and monitor commercial agricultural investment.

Progress last six months:

▪ Completed set-up of project team and office (also in region). ▪ Conducted first trainings: Awareness training on VGGT and RAI. principles at

federal and at the regional level, Training of EAILAA and RLAUD staff on land administration, database management and GIS.

▪ Detailed business mapping of EAILAA and Benishangul Gumuz Region to develop electronic lease management system.

▪ Supported the development of strategic framework on commercial farming. ▪ Drafted comprehensive Social and Environmental Code of Practice for

Investment in Agriculture. ▪ Held first CSO meetings to identify joint activities.

Challenges: ▪ Capacity gaps in government partner institutions/unclear mandates ▪ Slow bureaucratic procedures. ▪ 3. Alternatives to large-scale land acquisitions are not yet properly. identified

and the list of best practice examples is short.

Lessons learnt:

n.a.

Highlights: ▪ Having a good team in place. ▪ Set up your office within the partner institution. ▪ Screen and tap on existing resources and activities to avoid duplicate efforts.

Recommendations:

See highlights.

35

4. Kenya

Support for Responsible Land and Natural Resource Governance in Communal Lands of Kenya

Period: 01/2014 – 12/2015

Funding: 2,500,000 EUR

Contacts:

Implementing organization(s): ▪ FAO Kenya (Ms Husna Mbarak, Land Programme Manager,

Husna.Mbarak@fao.org)

Government partner(s): ▪ National Land Commission (Mr Elijah Letangule, Deputy Director,

Elijah.Letangule@gmail.com;elijah.letangule@landcommission.go.ke) ▪ Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning (Mr Francis Orioki Kenyeru, Principal

Land Registrar, fkenyeru@yahoo.com) ▪ Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning, Mr Peter Kahuho,Secretary (Land),

kangethe2012@gmail.com)

Objective: Secure and improve equitable access to land and natural resources for food security and socio-economic development of agro-pastoral communities in the Arid and Semi-arid Lands (ASALs) of Kenya

Thematic areas:

▪ Recording of tenure rights, communal lands, harmonization of policy, legal and institutional framework, land administration

Key outcomes:

▪ Land tenure and natural resource use mapped and recommendations developed for land use planning;

▪ Institutional capacities at national and county level to support sustainable governance of communal lands established/enhanced;

▪ Policy, institutional and legal framework for sustainable governance of community lands supported and harmonized;

▪ Knowledge management on community land and natural resource tenure administration enhanced.

Context: n.a.

Progress (last 6 months):

▪ Basis created and lessons learnt from pilot feed into larger scale Land Programme “Support to the Attainment of Vision 2030 through Devolved Land Reforms in Community Lands of Kenya”

▪ Establishment and development of LIMS software platform for Turkana county; ▪ Knowledge sharing and exchange with various systems both locally and

internationally – exchange visits to Uganda, modern registry in Kitale, Kenya; ▪ Facilitation of a Community natural resources and boundary map through the

participatory land delimitation process in Wayu Community in Tana River; ▪ Support to policy formation process – Tana River County Animal Grazing control

law; ▪ Support to legislation at national level on land and natural resources e.g.

Community Land Act, National Spatial Plan, NLIMS, LUP guidelines and monitoring tools;

▪ Continuous corporation and networking with various stakeholders , CSO’s; ▪ Reviving of the Development partners group on land (DPGL), FAO elected as the

chair.

Success factors:

n.a.

Challenges: Some of the challenges encountered include:

36

▪ the National Land Commission and the Ministry of Lands are still going through a transitional phase and that the devolution process leaves unclear responsibilities.

▪ the community land bill had not yet been passed; ▪ the initial fragmentation of CSOs and NGOs; ▪ there is a lack of Government staff at local level; ▪ gender responsiveness from partners could be enhanced; ▪ lack of up to date information on land; and ▪ the overall political burden to deal with land issues.

Lessons learnt/recommendations:

▪ Goals should be realistic and take into consideration the given situation, i.e. the full range of complexities.

▪ It is beneficial to involve the main implementing partners and other stakeholders from the outset and sort out working modalities. In addition, sufficient time should be allocated to training the project team.

▪ Project development should take into consideration country priorities and the capacity to address those.

▪ During project development the extent of possible costs should be assessed in more detail, e.g. office establishment, direct implementation, security escorts, etc.

▪ County Land Management Boards (CLMBs) should be in place early on and strengthened in order to avoid susceptibility to questioning structures.

▪ It is important to carefully choose pilot areas, particularly, with a view to avoid potential conflicts.

▪ The following points were recommended by the project team to ensure implementation success:

▪ Statutory and customary approaches for land governance should be harmonized;

▪ Inclusive and gender sensitive approaches should be applied; ▪ Participatory methods to asses land use and secure land rights should be

applied, such as Participatory Land Delimitation (PLD) and territorial development approach should be used;

▪ Policy engagement should be ensured at central and county level, amongst different well-placed actors;

▪ Strong support between partners should be established, e.g. through the development/strengthening of a Development Partners’ Group on Land (DPGL);

▪ The context should be fully understood and discussed with partners from Government and other stakeholder groups including CSOs before the project start.

▪ Offices should be shared by main partners; ▪ Champions should be identified and alliances built in all possible areas; ▪ There is a need to systematize results and establish a sound Monitoring and

Evaluation system; ▪ Scaling up should be based on a highly consultative process of programme

development, which builds on past experiences; ▪ The National Land Commission (NLC) and Ministry of Lands should be connected

through this programme, working towards similar goals, identifying thematic areas of coverage: NLIMS, ADR with NLC; Registry with MoL;

▪ Work on existing legislation or support development of legislation / policy should address existing gaps;

▪ Expectations should be managed wisely;

37

▪ It is important to sensitize not only communities but also those providing services on land laws. From the Kenya experience it seemed as if they knew less about land rights than the communities.

Highlight: ▪ Successfully developed bases for and designed follow-up project.

5. Malawi

Promoting Responsible Land Governance for Sustainable Agriculture in Malawi

Period: 09/2015-09/2018

Funding: 3,000,000 EUR (revised programme 1,800,000 EUR)

Contacts: Implementing Organization (s): ▪ Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development (Mr. Kwame Ngwira,

Commissioner for Lands, kwamengwira@gmail.com; Mr. Misheck Longwe, Deputy Director of Policy and Planning, coco1longwe@gmail.com; Mr. Davie Chilonga, Principal Estate Management Officer, daviechilonga@gmail.com)

Government partners: ▪ Ministry of Finance, Economic Planning and Development (Ms Barbara

Chibambo, Agriculture and Food Security Sector Manager, National Authorizing Office support Unit, bchibambo@naosupportmw.org)

Technical Assistance: DAI Europe, Roxanne Garrana, Project Manager, roxanne_garrana@dai.com

Component 2: ▪ Oxfam Malawi (Ms. Caroline Towera Kayira, Programme Manager)

Objective: Contribute to an improved land governance framework and its implementation in Malawi in line with the VGGT, with particular emphasis on gender sensitive compliance regarding land tenure rights.

Thematic areas:

▪ Institutional framework; capacity development

Key outputs: ▪ Malawi Land Governance Framework ▪ Land administration and institutional strengthening plan ▪ District land registry plan ▪ Estate registry information and management proposal ▪ Customary estates and registration plan ▪ Manual to establish customary estates ▪ Guidelines for responsible land governance ▪ Market development study ▪ Traditional land management area boundary demarcated ▪ Individual, family and group customary estates demarcated and registered

Context:

▪ Malawi has a population of approximately 16.7 million (World Bank, 2014), which is growing at a rapid rate. About 80% of the population lives in rural areas. The agricultural sector accounts for approximately 90% of the workforce, and the majority of the Malawi’s sector comprises farmers cultivating, rain-fed plots to grow food for consumption.

▪ Pressure on land and natural resources is particularly prevalent among smallholder farmers. Landholding are typically small and fragmented with low yields. The ability to ensure equitable access and productive use of land is limited by low institutional surrounding land management and administration.

38

▪ This project therefore focuses on two key result areas: strengthening institutional framework and capacity for an effective and efficient land reform programme and improving land rights for smallholder farmers particularly women guided by principles enshrined in the VGGT.

Progress (last 6 months):

▪ The Government reviewed ten land related bills, four of which were tabled and passed into law in Parliament in July, 2016. The four are Land Act, 2016; Customary Land Act, 2016; Physical Planning Bill, 2016; and Land Survey Act, 2016. The remain six are: Registered Land Bill, 2016; Forestry (Amendment) Bill, 2016; Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 2016; Local Government (Amendment) Bill, 2016; Malawi Housing Corporation (Amendment) Bill, 2016; and Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2016. The remaining bills are expected to be tabled in subsequent sitting of Parliament within 2016/17 financial year.

▪ Hired consultant team to provide professional and technical cooperation to support the Task Force on Land Governance to achieve Result 1 and to assist the CSO team. The consultant team has since mobilized and is expect to issue inception report within a month.

▪ Currently, engaging with the consultant team on technical assistance on land governance and CSO team on activities that can be implemented to achieve result 2 taking into account the fact that four of ten pieces of land related bills were passed into law and registered land bill, 2016 is yet to be enacted.

Success factors:

▪ Political will to improve land governance in Malawi and willingness of stakeholders to participate in the process.

▪ Existing, functioning multi-stakeholder platform on land governance. ▪ Government and other stakeholders are committed to use the VGGT.

Challenges: ▪ Limited sharing of information and lessons from implementation of land governance programmes.

▪ While stakeholders are increasingly become aware of the VGGT, they have limited understanding on how to use them in practice.

▪ Partial enactment of land related laws in a package of legal framework which consist of complementary pieces of legislation.

Lessons learnt:

▪ Establishment of a multi-stakeholder platform to address tenure issues (LGAF/VGGT platform) improved coordination among stakeholders and developed their capacities to actively engage in the governance processes.

▪ Sensitization of targeted stakeholders through awareness– raising platforms increases their understanding and engagement in securing tenure rights.

▪ Capacities of decentralized structures and the effectiveness of land administration are key factors in ensuring the success of land governance processes.

Highlights: ▪ Enactment of four pieces of land legislation including Customary Land Law in July, 2016 allowed for execution of project activities which could otherwise be not implementable without the new land related laws.

Recommendations:

▪ Continuous consultations among stakeholders that include local leaders and people are necessary to ensure successes in implementation governance projects.

▪ It is imperative to remove all the policy and legal bottlenecks and other factors that may obstruct project implementation.

▪ Considerations should be made in building capacity at all levels since there will always be capacity gaps.

39

6. Niger

Sécurisation des systèmes fonciers pastoraux au Niger par le renforcement de la gouvernance foncière

Period: Jan 2015 – Dec 2017

Funding: USD 3,400,000

Contacts: Implementing organization (s): - Gestion decentralisee partielle (Mr Altine Boubacar, Mr Amadou Maman Sani,

Asst Technique, Code Rural du Niger)

Government partners: - Mr Alhou Abey Bazou, Permanent Secretary, Code Rural du Niger

abeybazou@yahoo.fr

Objective: To help secure pastoral land tenure systems in Niger by improving the recognition of land rights of pastoralists, safeguarding the space and resources needed for breeding purposes, preventing conflicts around the use of pastoral resources, strengthening the capacities and structures of the Code Rural with regards to pastoralism, and supporting the regional permanent secretariats of the Rural Code in the Dosso and Zinder regions in the elaboration of a management scheme (SAF) and the running of the Cofos.

Thematic areas:

Pastoralism, recording tenure rights, decentralization

Key outputs: ▪ Pastoral land tenure systems are secured in Niger; ▪ The status of crops cultivated on pastoral lands and their allocation is clarified; ▪ Previously collected data on pastoral resources is stored into databases at

national and regional levels; ▪ Pastoral resources in agricultural regions are systematically and

comprehensively mapped and classified; ▪ The tools for the recognition and registration of pastoralist land rights are

developed and made available to the Land Commissions and institutions responsible for land management;

▪ The capacities of the structures of the Code Rural in the Zinder and Dosso regions are strengthened.

Context: n.a.

Progress (last 6 months):

▪ Systematic inventory of pastoral lands in Tillabéri and Tahouha: Tillabéri

- 302 pasture areas ; - 493 passing corridors ; - 93 permanent water holes; - 555 semi-permanente water holes; - 43 pastoral wells ; - 6 salt fields ; - 75 resting areas for animals

Tahoua

- Data processing

Success factors:

n.a.

Challenges: ▪ Difficulty encountered when georeferencing due to uneven ground ▪ Disputes over limits to grazing routes of pastoralists

40

▪ Lack of collaboration and active participation in preserving pastoral spaces, particularly by local chiefs

▪ Effective use of rural police ▪ More time and resources are required for the effective implementation of the

inventory of pastoral lands, yet the project

Lessons learnt:

▪ Implementing an inventory of pastoral lands requires a lot of time and resources given its sensitive nature;

▪ The use of satellite imagery as a solution to the accessibility problems of certain areas;

▪ Seasonality should be considered when planning field work for the inventory. conduct invenary work,

▪ Local capacities and an effective land administration are key factors for successful land management processes particularly for pastoral land.

▪ Capacity development of civil society actors, in particular pastoral organizations involved in citizen control of land management processes at commune and village levels, is important for improving land governance.

▪ The lack of harmony in the intervention logic and in financial procedures and the search for visibility and specific results have hampered the intervention synergies between PTF and the project/programme.

▪ In Niger, land registration and certification was an immediate need. 12 million hectares have been identified through satellite imagery which are now assessed for use by tenure right holders, through ground work.

Highlights: n.a.

Recommendations:

n.a.

41

7. Somalia

Rebuilding Confidence on Land Issues in Somalia

Period: 19 October 2014 to 31 October 2016

Funding: 2,269,000 EUR

Contacts: Implementing organization(s): ▪ FAO (Michael Oyat, Land Tenure Officer, michael.oyat@fao.org; Paolo Groppo,

Lead Technical Officer, paolo.groppo@fao.org)

EU: ▪ Maria Pilar Palmero Vaquero, MariaPilar.PalmeroVaquero@eeas.europa.eu ▪ Pauline Gibourdel, Pauline.GIBOURDEL@eeas.europa.eu

Objective:

To improve secure and sustainable access to land and other natural resources in order to facilitate productive investments as well as social and economic development

Thematic areas:

▪ Natural resource mapping and land use survey ▪ Land policy formulation and legal analysis ▪ Institutional and community capacity development in land governance ▪ Cross cutting issues: gender, minorities and conflict ▪ Coordination of actors in land governance issues.

Key outcomes:

▪ An inventory of the natural resource base and a territorial diagnostic report released and shared with stakeholders.

▪ South-Somalia conflict analysis in order to understand sources of land disputes and related dynamics.

▪ Negotiation tables for managing issues related to access and use/management of land and other natural resources established at municipality and community level.

▪ South-Central Somalia and Somaliland plural legal framework analyzed ▪ Revision of Somaliland Land Policy ▪ Identification of country level capacity gaps in the governance of land issues

and the application of the VGs’. ▪ Trainings on PNTD and IGETI guidelines conducted. ▪ Reinforcement of Somaliland Inter-ministerial Land Commission operational

capacities ▪ Set up a Technical Government Unit leading land delimitation processes.

Context: ▪ Historical overlapping land tenure systems (statutory, customary and Islamic) ▪ Legal and institutional pluralism resulting in overlapping, even conflicting

mandates and imperatives ▪ Inadequate and inappropriate institutional arrangements and capacity for land

governance ▪ Illegal land enclosures, land grabbing, land speculation and increased value of

land in urban and peri-urban areas ▪ Return situation and land and property restitution issues ▪ Share cropping - an increasing phenomena for accessing productive irrigated

land along Jubba and Shabelle rivers. ▪ Land degradation (overgrazing, deforestation and drought) ▪ Rapid population growth and rural-urban migration phenomenon ▪ Displacements and IDP situation (as the result of conflict and climatic

problems) result in issues of access to and use of land. ▪ Absence of comprehensive land policy and legal frameworks

42

Progress (last 6 months):

▪ Deliverables achieved since the last capitalization meeting (May to November 2016)

▪ Negotiation Table (NTs): Eight additional NTs established covering 16 villages with 240 members (30% women).

▪ Review of Zero draft land policy for Somaliland: This has been done in order to peg the National Land Policy of Somaliland to international best practice of land policy development with regards to comparative experiences from other African countries with similar land sector challenges and priorities, and with reference to the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (VGGT) and the Framework and Guidelines on Land Policy in Africa (F&G).

▪ Training in IGETI and PNTD approaches: 320 members of rural communities in 16 villages sensitized and trained.

Success factors:

▪ General consensus among stakeholders about the poor land governance system in Somalia with resultant land disputes and conflicts and political will in the political leadership to address land issues.

▪ Functioning political governance institutions, more so in Somaliland notwithstanding weak capacity for effective and efficient land administration and management.

▪ Collaborative partnership between FAO and government institutions on one hand and between FAO and other UN agencies, INGOs and LNGOs on the other hand.

Challenges: ▪ Institutional arrangements: Mandate of land is scattered in multiple sector ministries resulting in overlapping and conflicting roles and responsibilities. Power politics has been the hallmark characterizing land management and administration constraining smooth implementation of planned activities. The situation is further compounded by weak institutional capacity. Technical capacity for policy formulation is generally lacking.

▪ Security risks: Somalia, including Somaliland is considered a “High Risk” environment resulting in restriction of movements for UN national and international personnel. Implementation through implementing partners is one of the measures to mitigate against risks of exposures to security threats. However measures have reduced the level of technical supervision and monitoring of field activities implemented by partners hence some challenges in quality and timeliness of delivery by partners were encountered.

▪ Currency exchange losses: The Euro depreciated by about 20% against US dollars resulting in budget reduction by about US$ 580,000 since start of project implementation.

Lessons learnt:

▪ Stakeholders’ analysis: Analysis of stakeholders (state and non-state actors) directly or indirectly involved in land issues mapping their profiles to better understand their interests and priority. The analysis helped in formulating strategy for engagement with the stakeholders.

▪ Evidence based information that is socially and scientifically valid is required to inform land policy formulation. Investing time and resources for baseline study, analysis of dynamics of land conflicts and women land rights, history and culture of tenure, analysis of land related laws and status of land administration and management will all help in reforming land governance system.

▪ Traditional institutions: These are the bedrock for managing tenure issues at community level and therefore important to ensure the practices are

43

grounded in the statutory laws. It also important to support capacity building based on existing systems and institutions.

Highlights: ▪ Time lag between completion of project design/appraisal/funding and implementation: Long time gap between design and implementation have negative impact: loss of momentum and issues overtaken by time and changing reality.

▪ Country in transition: Complex land issues usually faced and requires immediate action and good will on the part of political leadership. Building confidence among stakeholders takes time to achieve and sustain in a changing political and social landscape.

▪ Livelihood diversity: Somalia, despite being ASAL with over 90% of the territory classified as drylands, it has diverse production system (fishing. Livestock, crop production), diversity of fauna and flora giving it a rich ecosystem. However, the landscape is fragile and prone to degradation if not managed in a sustainable manner. The land question include land and territorial rights, good land governance through appropriate policies, legislations, regulations and institutions with technical capacity is key to guarantee sustainable management of natural resource

Recommendations:

▪ Inception process: A critical prerequisite to starting of a new project ensures that all stakeholders are on board, are aware of the issues to be addressed and endorse the actions in project Year 1. The inception process is to include stakeholders mapping and analysis to better understand who is involved in land issues, their interests and potential to support or pose risk to the project should be started right at the start of the project.

▪ Baseline information: Establishing benchmarks for the project through baseline studies should be done right at the outset of implementation. Baseline information forms the bases for monitoring, impact assessment and reporting.

▪ Consultations and dialogues with stakeholders: Regular consultations and dialogues through meetings, workshops or conferences should be maintained to ensure continuous development of common understanding of the issues and political support in tackling the issues.

44

8. Sudan

Promoting the provision of legitimate land tenure rights using Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests (VGGT) in the Context of National Food Security for conflict-displaced communities, including small‐scale rural farmers, pastoralists, and Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in the Greater Darfur region of the Sudan

Period: 09 May 2016 – 08 May 2019

Funding: EUR 3 000 000

Contacts: Implementing organization (s): ▪ FAO (Veronica Quattrola, Programme Officer, Veronica.Quattrola@fao.org;

Tea Dabrundashvili, Land Tenure Officer, Tea.Dabrundashvili@fao.org; Louisa Jansen, Land Tenure Officer, Louisa.Jansen@fao.org; Daniel Dale, Land Management and Tenure Officer, Daniel.Dale@fao.org)

Government partners: ▪ State Ministry of Agriculture Darfur Regional Authority (DRA) ▪ State Ministry of Animal Resources Darfur Land Commission (DLC) ▪ Forest National Corporation (FNC) at state level ▪ Voluntary Return and Resettlement Commission (VRRC)

EU: ▪ Umberto Ambrosi, umberto.ambrosi@eeas.europa.eu

Objective: ▪ To support the Government of the Sudan to reform its land laws. ▪ To develop practical solutions to secure access to and use of crop land,

livestock routes, range and pastures including the provision of adequate and practical dispute resolution mechanisms; and assist DLC, VRRC, Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Animal Resources, Ministry of Housing and Public Infrastructure at state and locality levels.

▪ To promote the provision for legitimate land tenure rights to conflict displaced communities including small‐scale rural farmers, pastoralist, and IDPs in Darfur region.

Thematic areas:

Conflict resolution, displacement, repatriation, institutions

Key outputs: ▪ Effective enabling environment for rural social stability established, through responsible governance of land tenure (engaging with Community Committees, Native Administration, DLC, DRA, VRRC, Local and State Authorities, State and Locality Ministries for a participatory approach).

▪ VGGT resource competition and environmental protection principles and instruments are applied through engagement with Community Committees, Native Administration, DLC, DRA, local and state authorities and state and locality Ministries.

▪ Facilitation of the voluntary return of conflict-displaced people in the Darfur Region and enhancement of basic services. This will be achieved through engagement of community committees, Native Administration, DLC, DRA, VRRC, local authorities and, state and locality Ministries.

▪ Operational Framework for Land Tenure is developed based on VGGT principles.

45

Context: ▪ Current situation in Darfur: The protracted conflicts in Darfur region exacerbated the problem of environmental governance.

▪ Competition over the natural resources: As access to land is often related to social identity, the land rights of certain social groups may be contested in relation to national and ethnic identity, providing a breeding ground for the potential political exploitation of tension. Land related disputes has turned increasingly violent and resulted in population displacement when new comers gain access to community land in a manner that does not follow customary rules.

▪ Land Tenure Governance in Sudan: The legal framework governing land in the Sudan is a complex mix of statutory law and customary law with limited coordination between the two. No uniform policy on land tenure in the Sudan.

▪ Action Required: Resolving tenure disputes. ▪ The use of VGGT in transforming violent conflict into settled resentments by

focusing on community agreements to inform policies for enforcement. ▪ Build the capacity of DLC and land use related institutions to take leadership in

governance of land, water, forest, fisheries resources.

Progress: ▪ Endorsement of the project by the Government of Sudan, through formal signature;

▪ Consultation with beneficiary institutions; ▪ Recruitment of project personnel; ▪ Preparation underway for Project launching.

Success factors:

▪ Links to other programs ▪ Lessons learnt (Peace and Stability), ▪ National VGGT Stakeholder Workshop and Way forward (MoA, DLC, UNAMID,

Darfur Parliamentarians (96 participants), ▪ DDS- Assessment and Technical Support to Darfur Land Commission And

Addressing Land Concern at Return Sites (UNDP, UN-Habitat and FAO, DRA, DLC, VRRC),

▪ DDS-Water Facilities (UNOPs and FAO, MoW), ▪ National Agriculture Investment Plan (MoA, MoL, MoEF), ▪ Comprehensive Livestock Census( MoL, BOS) ▪ National Food Security and Nutrition Policy-Food Security Technical Secretariat

(MoA) ▪ National Soil Mapping, (ARC), ▪ Seed multiplication in Nyala (MoA),

Challenges n.a

Lessons learnt:

n.a.

Highlight n.a.

Recommendations

n.a.

46

9. Swaziland

Enhanced Capacity for Sustainable Land Administration and Management at National Regional and Chiefdom Levels

Period: 05/2016 – 05/2019

Funding: 1,800,000 EUR

Contact: Implementing organization (s): ▪ Ministry of Agriculture, Swaziland Water and Agricultural Development

Enterprise (Ms Lynn Kota, Project Manager, (LULSM)) ▪ Ministry of Natural Resources and Energy (Mr Clement Dlamini, Chairman,

Land Management Board; Mr Sydney Simelane, Surveyor General) ▪ Ministry of Economic Planning and Development, Aid coordination and

management, Swaziland (Mr Lwazi Mkhabela, Economist/ Planning Officer) Technical Assistance:

• COWI AS of Denmark, Sean Johnson, Institutional Advisor and Team Leader, sejn@cowi.com

European Union

▪ Ariane Labat LABAT Ariane.LABAT@eeas.europa.eu; ▪ Umberto AMBROSI, Umberto.AMBROSI@eeas.europa.eu

Objective: The overall objective of the project is to improve the security of tenure and access to land for the rural poor, thereby improving food security, economic development and enhanced sustainability. Purpose

▪ The purpose of the project is to provide analytical tools and capacities for sustainable land administration and management at national, regional and chiefdoms level.

▪ The purpose of the Technical Assistance services contract is to support the implementation of the project.

Thematic areas:

▪ Land administration, institutions.

Key outputs: ▪ Tools are developed and used for more efficient Land Administration and management of SNL at the Constituency and the National level

▪ The related structures (Traditional Authorities, and government officials), are capacitated to use the cadaster and manage SNL more efficiently and sustainable

▪ Institutional arrangements for SNL are endorsed by all stakeholders.

Context: ▪ Land tenure system in Swaziland is categorized into three; SNL, TDL and Crown land

▪ SNL is land vested in the Ingwenyama in trust for the Swazi Nation and is allocated to the Swazis by chiefs

▪ TDL is freehold land registered at deeds office ▪ Crown land is land administered by the Swaziland Government

Progress: ▪ The Project was presented to Land Management board ▪ Consultant awarded the contract and on the ground setting teams ▪ Authorization to commence has been given by three ministers ▪ Consultation with Ministry of Tinkhundla and Administration is ongoing

47

Success factors:

▪ Chiefdom Planning ▪ Support by Land Management Board

Challenges: ▪ Draft Land Bill was developed by the LUSLM project in 2013, but has not yet been passed on to cabinet.

▪ Access to traditional structures require more time

Lessons learnt:

▪ Swaziland needs to take appropriate measures to ensure that land plays a primary role in the development process and more particularly in poverty reduction, enhancing the economic status of the rural poor, strengthening governance, managing the environment and driving agricultural modernization.

▪ Land in Africa, and in turn in Swaziland, is not only an economic asset, it has major historical, political and cultural significance.

▪ Good Management and administration of land and natural resources is therefore key in preventing conflict and driving economic development

▪ Swaziland faces challenges in achieving meaningful land administration and management:

▪ Low levels of stakeholder and civil society involvement/ participation, in particular local communities and traditional authorities, in initiatives aimed at land management and administration (development of Chiefdom Development Plans);

▪ Inability to provide for adequate budgetary allocations for the implementation of land related policies and legislations;

▪ Inadequate human and institutional capacity.

Highlight: ▪ The consultation with traditional structures can be ranked as the most valuable and successful experience so far.

Recommendations:

▪ Engage all stakeholders during project initiation and also during implementation.

48

ANNEX III: QUESTIONS AND GROUP RESULTS– FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT The Government has a critical role in the FPIC process. It is the duty of the Government to ensure that human rights of indigenous peoples are respected, protected and fulfilled. The working group responded to the given questions as follows. Group 1: Government officials

1. Who is living in the targeted project area, and what are their formal and informal statuses and rights under national laws and international law? People living in the target areas may include people with formal, registered land rights, with customary lands rights; people occupying land to which they have no customary or formal rights. Affected groups include pastoralists, farmers, agro-pastoralists, Internally Displaced People (IDPs), men, women, youth.

2. What international instruments has your country signed, endorsed or ratified, and how are they made consistent with or incorporated into national laws? International Instrument which have been signed and incorporated into the Constitution and the land policy, include: ▪ Universal Declaration on Human Rights ▪ Biodiversity agreement ▪ Environment – Climate Change Framework; ▪ FPIC regarding endangers species; ▪ UN Agreement to control desertification (1994) ▪ Rotterdam Convention

3. For how long prior to contract signing are local communities involved in and informed about negotiations, decision-making processes and to access formal judicial mechanisms? Following the identification of land for investment, local negotiations take place involving all parties (all relevant officials and the communities). Once they have agreed they sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) ensuring the full understanding of the local communities at district and community level. ▪ In Ethiopia, communities are involved starting from the identification of land for

investment. The negotiation may take months/years depending on the country and project. Communities sign a tacit agreement.

▪ In Kenya, once the land is identified, land owners are consulted to appoint representatives who will participate to all meetings.

4. What risks do the local communities run by giving their consent to the project? How will they be compensated? How can you ensure that the benefits of the project accrue to local communities in an equitable, corruption-free way? ▪ Potential risks for the communities include the possibility of the project to fail,

negative environmental impacts of the project (particularly in cases where no Impact Assessment was conducted), corruption and social disruption, particularly in cases where consent obtained from the community was not inclusive all community members.

▪ Compensation should include long-term benefits from the project including monetary compensation and allowing for communities and individuals to build alternative livelihoods through the provision of inputs or capacity development initiatives.

▪ Measures to prevent corruption include stakeholder involvement, a good monitoring system and ensuring that quality assurance is in place.

49

5. How will you seek to make information about the project readily available to local

communities and NGOs, in appropriate forms and languages? This process will include stakeholder identification; dissemination of information through local administration, extension officers Chief of villages; VDCs, CBOs and mainstream media such as radios. All communication should respect local cultures and languages.

Group 2: Indigenous peoples and local communities According to the UN declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), indigenous peoples and local communities enjoy a set of human rights related to self-governance, participation, representation, culture, identity, property, and, crucially, lands and territories. For Indigenous Peoples, granting or withholding their free, prior and informed consent is a means of protecting and fulfilling these rights. In the practical implementation of FPIC, indigenous peoples and local communities themselves, as the rights-holders, should determine the form, pace and identity of participants in the FPIC process. NGOs, CSO, Indigenous peoples organizations play a critical role in ensuring that FPIC is appropriately sought. Their role is mainly to support indigenous peoples, in part by ensuring that they receive clear, timely, accurate and objective information on the proposed projects on their land. They also oversee companies that commit to proceeding only with free, prior and informed consent, and monitor project implementation. Moreover, they often play the role of mediator and facilitator in the FPIC process.

1. Did the communities have the freedom to choose for themselves their representative organizations, or were these nominated by the government, or chosen by intermediaries or the company? ▪ In Ethiopia and Kenya communities chose their representatives, while the

Government facilitates or appoints administrators. This can be seen as a high level of interference.

▪ In Burundi and Niger communities choose their representatives for themselves without interference.

2. Has participatory mapping been carried out under the direction of the local communities to identify the extent of your rights? Did your community participate in the social and environmental impact assessments? ▪ In Kenya, participatory mapping is not carried out. Instead, information is

published in the newspaper. ▪ In Ethiopia, mapping is mostly carried out by Government in cooperation with

investors. Environmental Impact Assessments are carried out by consultants at the expense of the project without the involvement of communities

▪ In Burundi, the Government carries out mapping without participation of communities

▪ In Niger, communities are involved in mapping and in Environmental Impact Assessments. However, the final decisions are taken by the Government.

3. In negotiations with the company was time and scope given for the community representatives to make decisions in accordance with their own preferred or customary systems of decision-making? Did community members have the opportunity to engage freely and consult among themselves in an inclusive and

50

participatory way to ensure consensus could be achieved? Did a legally binding negotiated agreement result? ▪ In all represented countries, local communities are consulted but final decision are

taken by the Government. Communities cannot practice a veto right. 4. Are there unresolved land conflicts between communities? Between local people or

communities and the company or government? Are there mechanisms in place to resolve such conflicts? Are these mechanisms acceptable to all concerned parties, and have they been effective? ▪ In Ethiopia, where conflicts are given between communities, investors and the

Government, resolution mechanisms applied include mediation with elders and the court, which is very expensive and cumbersome.

▪ In Kenya, there are no formal provisions for alternative conflict resolution mechanisms. In practice, traditionally mediation with elders takes place. Oftentimes, this practice does not pay tribute to the rights of the community members who often have lower bargaining power.

▪ In Niger, there are several examples of conflicts between communities. These include local people building fences on pastoralist land. As this is illegal according to the law, pastoralists can turn to the Government for help which provides conflict resolution.

5. What do you know about the history and reputation of the developer? Where can you find independent information about the project? Do you feel you have access to enough information, and is this information presented in ways that are meaningful and useful to you? ▪ In none of the countries. ▪ ALL COUNTRIES: No independent information available at all for local

communities, developer himself is the only source of information. ▪ Example Ethiopia: Blacklisted floriculture investors from Kenya coming to invest in

Ethiopia, no way of knowing their history.

Group 3: Companies and investors Company and investors have a clear legal and ethical responsibility to respect human rights, as emphasized in the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. In fact, while it is primarily the obligation of governments to uphold human rights, companies and investors remain responsible for respecting human rights even in those cases when States are unwilling or unable to fulfill their own human rights obligations. As a pre-requisite to answering the given questions the group made the assumption that the investment is for large scale agricultural production; the investor wants his/her investment to be protected to guarantee optimum return for the investment; and that the laws of the country provide some repatriation of profits.

1. Are there people living in the targeted project area? If so, what claims, rights and uses do these people have over the land?

▪ Yes, there are people living in the project area, who have formal and informal claims over the land and related resources including water. Rights to these resources differ, e.g. passage, crop production, build infrastructure. These rights should be clearly communicated. While formal rights are more easily identifiable, difficulties are encountered in determining legitimate informal rights.

51

2. Do you feel you have a clear understanding of national laws pertaining to land acquisition?

▪ National laws governing land acquisition exist in all represented countries. However, each country has different provisions related to land acquisitions including with implications on Environmental and Social Impact Assessments taxes, permits and licences. The investor has a responsibility to inform himself of these provisions and comply with them.

3. What forms of compensation and mitigation measures will be considered to protect the livelihoods of local communities?

▪ Monetary and equal value compensation should be foreseen, which is prompt, adequate and just. Mitigation measures should be foreseen as part of the corporate social responsibility scheme.

4. Does your company have a clear and binding FPIC policy or procedure? How does it provide for an ongoing, iterative process of communication and negotiation throughout the entire planning and project cycles? ▪ Most countries have policy provisions for land acquisitions which are tailored to

varying degrees to international instruments and also to provisional national laws of the respective countries. In some countries communication with different stakeholders is foreseen in policy.

5. How will customary modes of decision-making, negotiation and consent-seeking be taken into account in the FPIC process? ▪ The consultation process should involve all the stakeholders in the target area and

ensure that vulnerable groups (women, youth and other disadvantaged) are fully represented and their voices are heard.

6. Who is responsible for monitoring and evaluating agreements made between you and the communities? ▪ A participatory M&E system should be put in place to monitor the agreed resource

allocation.

52

ANNEX IV: GROUP EXERCISE – GENDER-EQUITABLE GOVERNANCE OF TENURE

Red= false; Black= correct

1. Gender-equitable governance of land tenure should ensure that both women and men can enjoy equal land tenure rights and access to land.

2. Gender-equitable governance of land tenure should always put in place measures to prioritize the rights of women to own and use land.

3. The VGGT say that “States should consider the particular obstacles faced by women and girls with regard to tenure, and take measures to ensure that legal and policy frameworks provide adequate protection for women”.

4. Gender equitable land tenure will be achieved as soon as policies and laws will not discriminate against women.

5. The implementing principle Gender equality is directly related to the principles of “non-discrimination”, “human dignity”, and “Equity and justice”.

6. In the VGGT, the implementing principle Gender equality is directly related to the principles of “Equity and justice” “ Free Prior and Informed Consent” and “Environmental sustainability”.

7. To achieve Gender Equality, one must take into account the differences between women and men, so that specific measures can be put in place to ensure that both can enjoy their rights.

8. The formalization of land rights must be prioritized over the protection of other rights that women may enjoy under customary law.

9. To ensure inclusive participation, all people – men and women from different social groups – should be consulted and their opinions should be taken into account.

10. To ensure effective participation it is important to pay attention especially to the opinions of those who represent the greater number of people.

11. One of the means to promote equal rights to land is to actively work so that both men and women are aware of their rights.

12. It is important to focus capacity building efforts on sensitizing those women working in Civil Society Organizations on their rights, because they work at the community level and need to pass on the information.

13. Joint titling and registration is a means to protect women and men and men land rights. 14. You can protect equal rights to land for women and men by ensuring that widows can obtain the

consent of their in-laws. 15. Dispute resolution mechanisms should be accessible to all women and men, regardless of their

location, language and procedures. 16. In case of disputes, one should try to avoid working with customary authorities, since they are

usually discriminatory and patriarchal. 17. To improve gender equity in land titling, it is important to ensure that both women and men can

own land either jointly or in their own name. 18. To improve gender equity in land titling, you should try to raise registration fees for women, so

that men and women can pay the same fees and a level playing field between them is ensured. 19. Gender equality is one of the 10 implementation principles of the VGGT. 20. Gender equality is one of the general principles of the VGGT. 21. To raise awareness on land rights among men and women in rural communities, it is important

to provide information in formats that can be understood by all. 22. To raise awareness on land rights among men and women in communities, it is important to

disseminate information through local newspapers and magazines.

53

ANNEX V: PARTICIPATION

Mr/Ms

Name Stakeholder group

Country

1 Mr Moises Festo Development Workshop DW Angola dinhofesto@gmail.com

2 Mr Jean Marie Habwintahe

PAGGF Land Expert GIZ Burundi jean.habwintahe@giz.de

3 Mr Dancie Nzojibwami Legal advisor Ministry of Water, Environment, Land and Urban

Burundi nzojibwamidancie@yahoo.fr

4 Mr Bezualem Mogessie

Director of Land Administration and PCU of the S2RAI Project

Ethiopian Agriculture Investment Land Administration Agency

Ethiopia bezualemmogessie@gmail.com

5 Mr Alex Carrasco Programme Manager European Union Ethiopia alex.carrasco@eeas.europa.eu

6 Mr Oliver Schoenweger

Project Manager, S2RAI Project GIZ Ethiopia oliver.schoenweger@giz.de'

7 Ms Kibra Aleeged Director of Environment Ethiopian Agriculture Investment Land Administration Agency

Ethiopia kibraalem@gmail.com

8 Mr Bayeh Dessie Land Management and M&E Advisor, S2RAI Project

GIZ Ethiopia bayeh.tiruneh@giz.de

9 Mr Mulugeta Taddesse GIS and Database Management Adviser, Support to responsible agricultural investment in Ethiopia (S2RAI)

GIZ Ethiopia Mulugeta.tadesse@giz.de

10 Ms Julia Leiss Intern, Support to responsible agricultural investment in Ethiopia (S2RAI)

GIZ Ethiopia julia.leiss@giz.de

11 Ms Husna Mbarak Land Programme Manager FAO Kenya Kenya Husna.Mbarak@fao.org

12 Mr Elijah Letangule Deputy Director National Land Commission Kenya Elijah.Letangule@gmail.com;elijah.letangule@landcommission.go.ke

54

13 Mr Peter Kahuho Secretary (Land) Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning

Kenya kangethe2012@gmail.com

14 Mr Francis Orioki Kenyeru

Principal Land Registrar Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning

Kenya fkenyeru@yahoo.com

15 Mr Mike Chigowo Economist Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development

Malawi chigowomike@gmail.com

16 Mr Patrick Makawa Lands Officer Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development

Malawi patrimakawa@gmail.com

17 Mr Stephen Nathambwe

Land Administrator Technical Cooperation to Strengthen National Capacity in Implementing Land Policies and Laws Efficiently and Effectively

DAI Malawi roxanne_garrana@dai.com

18 Mr Alhou Abey Bazou Permanent Secretary Code Rural du Niger Niger abeybazou@yahoo.fr

19 Mr Michael Oyat Land Tenure Officer FAO Somalia Somalia Michael.Oyat@fao.org

20 Ms Veronica Quattrola Deputy FAO Representative FAO Sudan Sudan Veronica.Quattrola@fao.org

21 Mr Ali Musa Executive Manager of the Ministerial Office

Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry

Sudan

22 Mr Sipho Shiba Land Planning Officer Ministry of Agriculture Swaziland sthokozane@yahoo.co.uk

23 Mr Clement Dlamini Chairman Land Management Board Swaziland lynnk@swade.co.sz

24 Mr Lwazi Mkhabela Economist, Aid Management and Coordination Section

Ministry of Economic Planning and Development Ministry of Economic Planning and Development

Swaziland lwazi.mkhabela@mepd-ac.org

25 Mr Joachim Knoth (EU) Policy Officer European Commission International Cooperation and Development DEVCO/C1 Rural Development, Food Security, Nutrition

EU Joachim.KNOTH@ec.europa.eu

26 Mr Hubert Ouedraogo Land Expert LPI LPI HubertO@uneca.org

27 Ms Judy Kariuki Land Expert LPI LPI JWambuiKariuki@uneca.org

28 Mr Ayehualem Tameru LPI LPI tameru1@un.org

55

29 Mr Belay Demissie Regional Land Expert LPI LPI demissie7@un.org

30 Mr Sebastian Grey Natural Resources FAO Sub-regional office for Eastern Africa

Ethiopia Sebastian.Grey@fao.org

31 Mr Ingeborg Gaarde Experience Capitalization Consultant FAO FAO HQ Ingeborg.Gaarde@fao.org

32 Mr Justin Chisenga Capacity Development Officer FAO FAO HQ Justin.Chisenga@fao.org

33 Ms Leila Shamsaifar Land Tenure Officer FAO FAO HQ Leila.shaaifar@fao.org

34 Mr Mackay Rigava Land Tenure Officer FAO/LPI FAO/LPI Mackay.Rigava@fao.org

35 Mr Wordsworth Odame Larbi

Land Tenure Officer FAO/LPI FAO/LPI Wordsworth.Larbi@fao.org

36 Ms Joan Kagwanja Chief, Land Policy Initiative LPI LPI jkagwanj@uneca.org

37 Mr Yonas Tafesse Communication and Research Consultant

FAO/LPI FAO/LPI yonas.tafesse33@gmail.com

56

ANNEX VI: SURVEY RESULTS

This report presents the analysis of the results of the evaluations of the "4th Capitalization Meeting EU Transversal Land Governance Programme" which took place at the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa in Addis Ababa from 22 to 24 November 2016. The meeting was organized by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and Land Policy Initiate (LPI). The overall objective of the meeting was to support the countries in implementing European Union supported land governance projects. The objectives of the capitalization meeting were the following:

• Enhancing coherence and alignment of the in-country projects in improving governance of tenure in the framework of VGGT and Framework & Guidelines in Africa (F & G)

• Strengthening capacities of in-country project teams • Sharing and capitalizing on experiences and lessons learnt and progress of in-country projects

The topics at the 4th capitalization meeting were: Free, Prior and Informed Consent, facilitating multi-stakeholder processes, gender-equitable governance of tenure, experience capitalization for continuous learning, documentation and sharing of experiences and lessons learned, as well as the 5th year anniversary of the VGGT. The participants were focal points from relevant Government institutions, EU delegations, FAO representations, civil society organizations and other relevant stakeholder groups. The participants came from 9 countries: Angola, Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Niger, Somalia, Sudan and Swaziland. 27 participants (23 men and 4 women) attended the workshop. A. Knowledge assessment evaluation

The participants received a pre-assessment test at their arrival on the first day. The objective was to check their knowledge on each of the topics addressed during the 3-day meeting. The participants received the same test the last day. This helped to check for differences and measure the knowledge uptake during the 3 days meeting. Due to the lack of good Internet connection in the country, participants were asked to fill out the questionnaires on paper. We received 19 knowledge assessment evaluations out of 27 (4 participants arrived on day 2)1. The questionnaires revealed that

• Most participants have already participated in one or more of the earlier capitalization meetings

• 4 have participated in experience capitalization meetings in other contexts (French speaking participants). These meetings ended up with documented products.

• 6 have participated in a multi-stakeholder training or seminars in other contexts. After a number of questions related to the participants' background and previous experience, the knowledge evaluation was divided in two main parts: A. Mini quiz: True or false questions B. Self-assessment of knowledge

1 Not all participants gave their names. Therefore, it was not possible to check if the same participants replied both before

and after. It was also not possible with a gender-differentiated analysis.

57

A. Mini Quiz: True or false questions The true or false questionnaire included 9 statements. Participants were asked to indicate whether they are true or false by ticking the appropriate box:

True False

Gender-equitable governance of tenure means that men and women have the same amount of land. ☐ ⌧

Gender-equitable governance of tenure is about men and women having equal rights. ⌧ ☐ Processes are Gender-equitable if 50% women are present ☐ ⌧

Consultations, participatory engagement and negotiations are components of the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) process

⌧ ☐

Facilitation of multi-stakeholder process/events follows a defined cycle ⌧ ☐ Multi-stakeholder processes promote better decision making by focusing on the views of carefully selected and well knowledgeable concerned actors

☐ ⌧

Capitalization is an individual exercise ☐ ⌧

Capitalization is an isolated event that takes place at the end of a project or initiative ⌧ ☐ Capitalization helps to improve practices and generate change ⌧ ☐

The following differences can be noted:

• Before the workshop, only 1 participant made no mistake and 7 participants only one error. After the workshop 3 of the participants made no errors and 15 only one error.

• Before the workshop, 19 % of the participants made 3 errors and more. After the workshop, no participant made more than 2 errors.

5%

33%

43%

9%

10%

Errors before the meeting

0 error 1 error 2 errors 3 errors 4 errors

15%

75%

10%

Errors after the meeting

0 error 1 error 2 errors

58

B. Self-assessment of knowledge Participants were asked to rate their current level of knowledge in the following areas. 1 = Very good 2 = Good 3 = Fairly good 4 = Low 5= None

1 2 3 4 5

Free, Prior and Informed Consent

Gender-equitable governance of tenure

Facilitation cycle

Methodology and tools to capitalize on an experience

Communication tools to document and share experiences/lessons learned

Before the meeting

After the meeting

The following results can be noted: This analysis shows that according to the participants, their level of knowledge has progressed through the 3 days meeting. In particular, the session on gender equitable governance showed a remarkable knowledge uptake, and participants considered that their knowledge increased considerable after the meeting.

1 3 2 1

77

4 7 7

5 2

37 7

3 7

4

6 51

3

3

2

0

5

10

15

20

25

Free, Prior andInformed Consent

Gender-equitablegovernance

Multi-stakeholderprocesses

Experiencecapitalization

Communicationproducts and

channels

Knowledge before the meeting (self-assessed)

HIGH GOOD FAILY LOW NONE

9

3 42 2

4

116

7 6

3 1 86 9

32

13

33

0

5

10

15

20

25

Free, Prior andInformed Consent

Gender-equitablegovernance

Multi-stakeholderprocesses

Experiencecapitalization

Communicationproducts and

channels

Knowledge after the meeting (self-assessed)

HIGH GOOD FAILY LOW NONE

59

C. POST- EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE At the end of the meeting, participants were asked to give their appreciation of the workshop, both on its content and on its progress. This was done through an anonymous questionnaire. Out of 27 participants a total of 21 evaluation questionnaires were received at the end of the workshop The objective of the final evaluation of the final evaluation was to measure the 1) the level of general appreciation of the meeting 2) the level of appreciation of the content of each session of the meeting Overall assessment of the meeting Expectations: The participants were asked whether the meeting met their expectations.

17 Participants responded that the meeting met their expectations 4 Participants responded the meeting exceeded the expectations 0 Participants indicated that the meeting did not met the expectorations.

Assessment of each session of the meeting Content: Which elements of the capitalization meeting did you find more/less useful? Please indicate: 1 = Very useful 2 = Useful 3 = Moderately useful 4 = Less useful 5 = Not useful at all

1 2 3 4 5

Session on Free, Prior and Informed Consent

Session on gender-equitable governance of tenure

Session on facilitating multi-stakeholder processes

Session on experience capitalization for continuous learning (including knowledge exchange exercise in thematic groups)

Session on communication products

• Participants evaluated all sessions as either useful or highly useful. No participants indicated that the sessions were less useful/not useful at all.

148

1611

8

511

410

10

2 1 13

0

5

10

15

20

25

Free, Prior andInformed Consent

Gender-equitablegovernance

Multi-stakeholderprocesses

Experiencecapitalization

Communicationproducts and

channels

Final evaluation

Very useful Useful Moderately useful Less useful Not useful at all

60

Suggestions for the 5th Capitalization Meeting in May 2017 In the evaluation questionnaire participants were asked to provide their suggestions to the 5th meeting. The following are the participants’ statements and suggestions are clustered into categories below:

Preparation

• Let the invitation come on good time for preparation.

• Communication on inviting participants need to be done at least one month before the event.

Time planning

• The 5th Capitalization meeting should be at the least 5 days so that we can cover everything in detail.

• I suggest it should be 5 days not only 3 days we had because some of the sessions needed much more time. Sharing problems and together identify solutions that were addressed by each country.

• For the 5th meeting there should be planned enough time for the presentation of each country so that the participants confront together the different lessons drawn.

• Allocate enough time for the practical sessions in the programme.

• Time was not enough.

• Last day to end at lunch time.

Format

• The county presentation should continue to follow same or better format used in the 4th capitalization meeting.

• Include a more interactive “get to know part” of the beginning of the meeting (first day) as it helps a lot to make participants comfortable and at ease.

• Continue to use interactive facilitation methods and calculate enough time for them.

Content

• Kindly widen the capitalization area.

• Discuss on capturing/documenting best/good practices.

• Include Monitoring & Evaluation as a topic.

• Include the topic of governance of cross-border pastoral tenure

• Focus on the pastoral land tenure.

• It would be good to ask the countries which area of capacity learning that should be included in the next meeting.

• Experiences should be forwarded on how the Gov’t involvement helps to take fully use the VGGT as an instrument. Output or real results should be documented. The possible communication tools (pictures, songs and posters) can show how to influence national policy professes.

Additional comments

• The session on the multi-stakeholder processes was very useful. I did take excellent learnings with me which will help in organizing the similar events scheduled in the next 2 weeks.

• I came of the second day and did not attend the session on FPIC. I found that the rest of the meeting was relevant for the implementation of the EU land governance program in Malawi.

• Possible to change the venue to another country, if possible.

• Print documents on double page. Conclusion Participants highlighted that they appreciated the format of the interactive sessions, the content and the clarity of the presentations as well as the atmosphere. Participants were overall satisfied with the

61

topics of all the sessions but would have liked more time to deepen the discussion and share their experiences.