Article of the Month - March 2025 |
 |
 |
 |
| Simon Hull | Royal Mabakeng | Didier Milindi Rugema |
 |
 |
 |
| Grazyna Wiejak-Roy | Rosalie Kingwill | Eugene Uchendu Chigbu |
This article in .pdf-format (21 pages)
It is with great delight that we endorse this FIG position paper. The Teaching Essentials for Responsible Land Administration (TERLA), developed between 2015 and 2018 under the patronage of the Global Land Tools Network (GLTN), marked a pivotal step in advancing the understanding, unity, and practice of land administration globally. We acknowledge the collaborative effort by distinguished scholars and practitioners in the creation of TERLA. It addressed the challenge of teaching the daunting and complex domain of land governance at a country-level. This publication acts as a touchstone. It looks back on that foundation work, unpacking lessons, but also draws on the insights of those valuators and educators deeply engaged with its application to case forward. Representing the joint efforts of the International Federation of Surveyors (FIG) Commissions 2 and 7, this paper recognizes the need to adapt TERLA to the evolving demands of professional education in land administration. We encourage all educations and practitioners in the land administration domain to read and reflect on the contents within, considering how they impact on their own teaching and learning contributions in land administration, and the ensuring of a sustainable pipeline of responsible talent enters our important domain.
Dimo Todorovski and Rohan Bennett Chairs of FIG Commissions 2 and 7
The Global Land Tools Network (GLTN)[1] developed a comprehensive teaching and learning guide on land administration between 2015 and 2018 called the Teaching Essentials for Responsible Land Administration (TERLA). The TERLA, as a product of the GLTN, was co-authored by Grenville Barnes, Jean Du Plessis, Stig Enemark, David Mitchell, Asad Muhammed, Agnes Mwasumbi, Dimo Todorovski, Siraj Sait, and Jaap Zevenbergen. TERLA represents a breakthrough in creating global awareness of land administration as a critical lens for understanding the land governance challenges experienced in post-colonial countries and providing guidance for teachers and practitioners in land administration and related fields. It has positioned land administration to qualify as a discipline of study in tertiary institutions and beyond.
This position paper provides findings of an evaluation of TERLA by members of the joint International Federation of Surveyors (FIG) Commission 2 (Professional Education) and Commission 7 (Cadastre and Land Management) Working Group on Land Administration Education. The evaluators, who are the authors of this paper, felt that for TERLA to fulfil the potential for greater impact, it should be revised and updated to remain responsive to new ideas and changing needs in education and training. Therefore, this position paper proposes a revision of TERLA to maintain and potentially expand its relevance in the future. It also recommends actionable items for the FIG to enhance surveyors’ professional education and training.
The authors of TERLA identified a need to develop a teaching package to support the development of skills and capacity for responsible land administration given the development of new ideas and practices in the post-colonial era. This led to the identification and production of six modules ( REF _Ref178342658 \h Figure 1). The motivation for TERLA was to consolidate fragmented and ‘hidden’ knowledge concerning land-related issues and innovative land tools and to create an accessible knowledge base on responsible land administration to support the development of university curricula.
The content of TERLA was peer-reviewed and validated by external stakeholders including those within the GLTN. The concept was first presented at the World Bank Land and Poverty Conference (Mitchell et al., 2017) and was then reviewed by individuals from participating organizations. These inputs were assimilated into the final TERLA, published online as an open-access resource in 2019.[1] In 2021, selected authors and reviewers of TERLA conducted an assessment of its use by individuals, countries and institutions (Chigbu et al., 2021). The assessment differentiates the use according to several categories including average time spent on the site and completion of the course. From this paper, it appears that the uptake of TERLA has not been as strong as anticipated. However, there is an expectation of a greater uptake over time (Chigbu et al., 2021). Following this assessment, TERLA was rolled out by GLTN and stakeholders outside the GLTN in a workshop organised by the Namibian University of Science and Technology (NUST) in August 2021 where the potential priority areas for its dissemination were debated and agreed. Later, TERLA was again endorsed by the Network of Excellence for Land Governance in Africa (NELGA) in a NUST/NELGA/GLTN/GIZ workshop in 2022.
TERLA presents itself as a living document that can respond to suggestions and evolve. It was thus purposefully published in a beta version with welcomed feedback on the content (Chigbu et al., 2021). The intention was for it to form a non-prescriptive base on which lessons may be built using a flexible and active learning approach according to the teaching and academic needs of the users. TERLA is not meant to be all-inclusive, as this would have been unmanageable and possibly too prescriptive. Instead, the content was consciously presented as a structured knowledge base to guide teachers or practitioners (Lunenberg & Dengerink, 2021). ‘Depending on need and context’ users are expected to supplement the content provided in the course notes with case studies, class discussions, class exercises, and up-to-date examples (Chigbu et al., 2021).
During the 2022 workshop, NELGA saw the opportunity to develop a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) using TERLA. This and the 2021 assessment (Chigbu et al., 2021) sparked the need for an abridged version to make the resource more concise and accessible. This version prepared by Enemark was published in 2023 and provides user guidance that aims ‘to support the wider use of the knowledge base and provide some practical guidance for how to use the six modules in a range of education, research, training, and capacity development activities’ (Enemark, 2023).
Figure 1 The 6 Modules of Terla
The motivation for this position paper resulted from discussions at the FIG Commission 2 annual meeting in Deventer in October 2023 (FIG, 2023a). TERLA had been developed assuming that its main users would be universities and training institutions, but responses since its publication show that there is wider interest. It was noted that TERLA has the potential to reach a wider audience beyond academia, including consultants and land professionals, for their research, education, training, and capacity development purposes.
The FIG joint Commission 2 & 7 Working Group on Land Administration Education (WG2.4/7.7) resolved, as part of its 2023-2026 4-year work plan, to review and support the further development of TERLA. This position paper responds to the call for further input to help with continual adaptation and to improve TERLA’s uptake. This position paper provides insights, ideas and new directions that could deepen understanding and encourage adaptations or debate where necessary. This paper is also a contribution to the GLTN for consideration when future changes or updates to TERLA are contemplated.
This position peper presents a summary of the findings of the module-by-module review following a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) assessment. A SWOT analysis was deemed necessary as a basis for a systematic review of the current TERLA in view of its future use. Most importantly, it helps to identify the content and delivery of the modules that require updating. In this regard, it provides a focal window for building on the strengths, leveraging on opportunities, and addressing weaknesses and threats. Six questions served as aide memoire for the review, with three questions focusing on the modules’ content, and another three questions about the approach to delivering the content ( REF _Ref178342768 \h \* MERGEFORMAT Figure 2). The review identified the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the TERLA. This allowed for framing actionable items to improve TERLA and highlighted the role of FIG in enhancing surveyors’ professional education and training.
Content |
Delivery |
|
1. Are all bases covered? 2. Are there more recent publications / theories to include? 3. Is any content outdated or is the focus too narrow? |
4.Are the learning outcomes appropriate and complete? 5. Are the graphics useful? Can they be improved? 6.Is the sequencing of ideas correct or can it be improved |
FFigure 2 Guiding questions, considering both content and delivery
The outcome of the review is organised around the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the TERLA. The objective of the TERLA was to consolidate land administration knowledge to create an accessible knowledge base on responsible land administration to support the development of university curricula. Strengths and opportunities represent the features of the TERLA that support achieving its objective. Weaknesses and threats constitute the features of the TERLA that impede the achievement of its objective. Figure 3 summarises the results of the SWOT assessment, while the subsections below provide a more detailed assessment.
| Strengths | Weaknesses |
|
|
| Opportunities | Threats |
|
|
Figure 3 The SWOT matrix for updating the TERLA
With comprehensive content, each module provides wide-ranging coverage of the relevant topics, suitably referenced. The reference list allows educators and learners to explore the concepts further. References are not restricted to academic papers but include sources published by non-government and intergovernmental organisations (so-called grey or soft literature). This broadens the scope beyond academia and avoids the paywall barrier associated with many academic publications. Each module provides clear and achievable learning outcomes, supplemented with simple graphics. In most cases, the sequencing of ideas is logically presented. Key strengths are noted below:
Some key concepts that are central to the course were found to be
somewhat out of date. These require greater currency and clarity, in
particular (a) what is understood by property, which is defined in the
course in a very narrow way; (b) limitations of the formal-informal
divide, a concept widely employed in the course; and (c) the impact of
the registration system on off-register rights, which is not
sufficiently covered in the course to ensure that the complex trade-offs
involved in the paths to formalisation are better understood.
There are numerous opportunities for strengthening TERLA in the short
and medium to long term (Figure 4). Details are provided in the
following sub-sections, where weaknesses and associated opportunities
are presented.
Figure 4 Short, medium, and long term interventions for improving TERLA
TERLA was designed to serve various types of users. It aims to cater for those with limited understanding and those wishing to fill gaps in their knowledge and improve their understanding of land administration. While the content should cater to both audiences, it sometimes misses the mark. There are elements that assume a certain basic understanding of key terminology. An example is in module 1, which introduces TERLA but does not provide a working definition of land administration. This is nevertheless listed as a core learning outcome of the module. Instead, some definitions are provided in module 4.
Overall, more definitions are needed and where they are provided, they are not always sufficiently robust. Some of the definitions are too narrowly conceived and need to be broadened to include a wider range of circumstances. While definitions do evolve (Hull et al., 2024; Hull, 2024), a strong foundation for common understanding and less interpretational leeway is important.
Adding a glossary as a navigational tool will help readers grasp the meanings and help them interpret the reading materials. It would also help for comparison across their professional, social, economic and political environments. This glossary could use the terminology provided in Land Administration for Sustainable Development (Williamson et al., 2010) as a starting point. However, educators and students should be encouraged to draw from a wide range of sources to avoid perpetuating a narrow rhetoric or stereotyping.
| Weaknesses | Opportunities |
|
Definitions of key concepts are static and somewhat outdated. |
Concepts with potentially multiple interpretations should be qualified or their use clarified, e.g. ‘in this module we use [concept A] with the following meaning/in the following way’ and, where relevant, acknowledge it has other uses. |
|
Module 1 defines property to be land ‘with permanently attached structures or improvements’, i.e. unimproved land is not property. This is a false comparison. The definition implies that unimproved land is neither an asset nor belongs to anyone. This undermines not only the economic principles of land administration but also social norms. For example, the African commons, whether improved or not, is collectively owned for the good of the community. Module 5 makes frequent use of the concept of ‘market value’ but does not provide an internationally recognised definition. It is therefore not clear if the underlying concept of market value is the generally accepted definition of ‘highest and best use’ (IVSC, 2024). |
Broaden the definition of land to link land, water, and other resource rights while emphasising people's social and religious connections to land (Hull et al., 2024). Provide a broader understanding of cadastre (FIG, 1995) and cadastral systems (see e.g. Silva & Stubkjær, 2002; Hull & Whittal, 2013; Hull et al., 2019; Krigsholm, Riekkinen & Ståhle, 2020). |
|
Module 4 does not explain how ‘responsibility’ in land administration/management is to be measured. A course that provides teaching essentials for the development of curricula for responsible land administration should contain the means for measuring the relative responsibility of current and potential future land administration systems. |
Refer to de Vries & Chigbu (2017) and related publications – see the Recommended Readings. |
Figure 5 Definitions – Weaknesses and Opportunities
It is considered important to probe widely used concepts and not simply adopt them as self-evident truths. Many are problematic and are used as political tools. TERLA would benefit from a more nuanced understanding and acknowledgement of regional and national variations. These weaknesses compromise the overall analysis and limits its global efficacy.
Specific conceptual issues requiring attention:
Further weaknesses and opportunities around conceptual issues are descried in Figure 6. A list of recommended readings is provided at the end of this document.
| Weaknesses | Opportunities |
| The approach in module 6 is too high-level and biased towards perspectives generated through the United Nations and World Bank. It is overly aspirational and lacks grounded realities of policy- and law-making. There is nothing on customary law and the implications thereof. ‘Other’ systems of law are presented as such (i.e. abnormal) rather than as central issues / normative for customary contexts, reflecting a Western bias in thinking. In its current form, the learning outcomes will be superficial. | Rearrange
the section so that it fits into a module on
Institutional aspects and embed policy and governance discourse
in all modules. Since land policy gives rise to all
aspects of land administration (Hull, Kingwill & Fokane, 2020),
this should be addressed in modules 1 or 2. Teachers and learners should be directed towards more literature that critiques and reviews the approaches and principles that are presented in TERLA as formulaic instead of as guides. They may have unintended negative consequences if adopted without sufficient understanding of the relevant regional contexts (Scanlan et al., 2023). |
| The formal/informal dichotomy underpins much of the discourse despite acknowledgement of diversity of land tenure and administration systems. This degrades unregistered land rights and promotes registered (freehold) land rights. The approach seems to support a view of the supremacy of ownership, titling and registration (Kingwill et al., 2017) which requires revision as it does not reflect some relevant current and emerging thinking. | Show a more nuanced understanding of ‘formal’ and ‘informal’ as a means of distinguishing between systems of land administration and tenure in particular. Where it is used, it should be qualified and explained. Conceptual clarity is needed to avoid the perpetuation of unhelpful stereotypes. |
| TERLA does not adequately address the complexities and implications of customary law in Africa — especially in relation to the concepts of ‘customary’ and ‘community’ and the ambiguities around the concept of ‘indigenous’ throughout the world. The concept of ‘indigeneity’ is increasingly a basis of many contestations in Latin America and Asia (Li, 2010) and is subject to critique by academics (see e.g. Baird, 2016; Ovesen, 2003; Singh, 2023). | Show understanding of the nuances in terms such as ‘indigenous’, ‘traditional’, ‘communal’, ‘tribal’, and ‘customary’. |
Figure 6 Conceptual issues – Weaknesses and Opportunities
While the current version of TERLA does refer to some case sttudies, they lack consistent structure. These examples could be made more visible to inform lesson arguments and include more detailed referencing. There are two interlinked issues to be addressed: (1) There are insufficient case studies in all modules to illustrate the concepts in context; and (2) Users of TERLA should develop their own case studies to support the material and make it appropriate for their contexts – this should be more strongly emphasised.
| Weaknesses | Opportunities |
| There
are no case studies on large scale investments
and their impacts on land tenure security of the rural community
or peri-urban areas, despite this being a critical issue
concerning integrated land-use management. There are no specific case studies on integrated land use management and the impact of interventions on local communities. There is a need to balance their land rights with environmental protections and consider distribution of benefits when large scale investments are made. |
Include examples of longitudinal studies. These are especially important for assessing the impacts of land-based interventions. The photographic images included in module 4 could be accompanied by case studies to assist the teachers in preparing teaching materials, and to aid learners in their understanding of issues throughout the learning process. Case studies that demonstrate issues concerning the protection of natural resources and observing land rights of local communities for large scale investments are presented in existing scholarship such as Bekele et al. (2021); while impacts arising from compulsory land acquisition processes are recorded in Adam (2019), Agegnehu (2020) and Dires et al. (2021). Examples of land asset management would help students navigate the complex range of mechanisms used to optimise the use and productivity of land by applying best practices, technologies, and innovations to enhance the economic, physical, and social value of land. This topic should include negative externalities generated by some harmful land-based finance mechanisms, and ways of anticipating and dealing with them as they arise to avoid social injustice and agitation. Case study boxes showcasing selected mechanisms and challenges concerning land value capture policies, e.g. OECD (2022a), and more current views on the potential to implement land value capture-focused policies, even in the G7 countries (House of Commons, 2018), would be useful to illustrate conditions under which each mechanism is more likely to deliver greater social value. Module 5 would benefit from sector-specific examples
to help teachers and students identify the most appropriate
mechanisms for specific projects, e.g. for transport
infrastructure (OECD, 2022b). Similarly, more detailed
exploration of land asset management would be important in the
context of political debates on the extent to which the public
sector should intervene and what mechanism would be the most
suitable under various conditions. |
Figure 7 Case studies – Weaknesses and Opportunities
TERLA was developed with a particular focus on African countries. However, it is clear now that it is much more universally used, as demonstrated in Chigbu et al. (2021). It would benefit from some reorientation to ‘speak’ to a global audience while maintaining relevance for the Global South.
| Weaknesses | Opportunities |
|
Despite ample references to mature economies, TERLA is written from a Western donor perspective with over-confidence in the ‘western model’. The storyline of land administration evolution seems to envisage the western economies as the aspirational model. The implied focus is on the developing world. The Global Financial crisis of 2007-2008 demonstrated that even in wealthy economies, implementations of public projects are nuanced, and funding is subject to political debate resulting in many governments struggling to implement optimal solutions in fear of losing political power. Thus, the rhetoric and selection of case studies would help explain these nuances to avoid repeating issues. The tools described in module 5 are generally used for urban development. However, the module does not adequately extend their application in rural and peri-urban areas. Given the rapid growth in many peri-urban areas, this approach perpetuates the dichotomy between urban and rural land. |
Broadening the global perspective and adding evidence from other regions of the world would deepen the analysis and draw in a wider range of experience from other regions. This may unsettle and contradict the seemingly ‘self-evident truths’ of the western model. A broader theoretical, empirical and practical focus with more inclusive global, regional or local relevance would likely engage a wider audience, which would in turn add to its value. The vision should even broaden beyond the current
global agenda, e.g. to the post-2030 era and the
possible trajectory of the SDGs. Linkages to regional or
continental organisations other than the United Nations and its
various offshoots would be an important signal that other global
perspectives are included, such as African Union Agenda 2063
(African Union Commission, 2015), among others in Asia and Latin
America. |
Figure 8 Geography restricted focus – Weaknesses and Opportunities
Although the modules are freely available online and referenced in several open-access conference papers, their visibility and access are somewhat limited. Formatting inconsistencies and typographical errors constitute additional barriers to improving TERLA’s uptake.
| Weaknesses | Opportunities |
|
The modules lack a consistent ‘look and feel’, and there are several grammatical and typographical errors. There is inconsistency in formatting. Modules 1, 2, and 4 share a common introductory structure. Modules 3 and 6 share a similar introductory structure. Module 5 has its own introductory structure. As the 6 modules share a common purpose, they should be harmonized in their structure. |
The document flow needs to improve including a consistent approach from general to specific issues, solutions, etc. The accessibility and readability of the modules can be improved through proofing and ensuring consistency across the modules. Improving layout, formatting, section structure, illustrations, graphics and maps etc. will enhance accessibility of the content. |
|
While it is acknowledged that the purpose of TERLA was to develop modules that can be used on a stand-alone basis, each of them provides limited links to other modules or lessons.
|
Add clear links between modules. Clearer links would make the document more cohesive.
|
|
Despite being published as a beta version, the current TERLA is a static document. |
To ensure that it is always up to date, it could be potentially transformed into a more dynamic set of learning materials. The Curriculum Open-access Resources in Economics (CORE Econ, no date) is an example of how the idea of a free economics book evolved into a fast-growing set of learning materials for learners from across many disciplines and is now used across all continents |
|
TERLA appears to be visible mainly to the NELGA, GLTN and FIG-affiliated institutions. |
There is scope to widen and increase its visibility
and accessibility to include a range of land-related
organisations and academia, which should improve its global
uptake. |
|
The modules are currently only available in English and French |
Translation into more languages would help to increase their global reach. |
|
Assessment is a core component of curriculum design, yet the TERLA include limited examples of assessments. |
Include examples of quizzes, problem questions, case study-based exercises and other assessment tools that make learning materials more transparent, better structured and easier to use. While these can (and should) be developed by the users of the Teaching Essentials, exemplars would provide a useful starting point. |
Figure 9 Visibility and accessibility – Weaknesses and Opportunities
The major threat is that the content will become outdated and disused if more flexible and dynamic formats are not implemented and TERLA is not regularly updated. Thus, it is essential that the modules are regularly updated. It is recommended that a systematic revision is completed at least every 4 to 5 years to keep abreast of the latest developments in theory and practice. This process should be accompanied by regular ad-hoc updates in the form of side notes or an accompanying document (such as this position paper) specifying major changes and references to critical recent publications. This is proposed as a standing objective of WG2.4/7.7 as part of their engagement around Land Administration Education. It must be noted that this engagement is voluntarily given by members of WG2.4/7.7. Hence, lack of funding should not be an obstacle to ongoing reviews. ( Noting that were funding provided, it would allow for more focussed and in-depth review.)
There is a very real threat of misunderstanding due to the use of imprecise or unclear definitions. For example, a myopic understanding of land limits the application of responsible land administration to dry land, leaving other areas unsupported. Confusion over the differences between land administration, land management and land governance can constrain TERLA’s application (especially seeing as the dominant term used is land administration). This creates the potential threat that graduates may find it difficult to find employment because potential employees do not understand their qualifications (Hull, 2024). Another threat is that learners will not get an adequate sense of what it means to engage in policy- and law-making and observing the changing economic, social and political environment, due to an over-emphasis on theoretical aspects of policy and law.
The TERLA, being a living document can be used and promoted in various forms by the FIG. The FIG Publication 46, Enhancing Surveying Education through e-Learning (FIG, 2010), and 81, Enhancing Surveying Education through Blended Learning (FIG, 2023b), presented the potential role of blended and e-learning. These documents support these learning modes for life-long-learning and CPD as they are flexible modes of learning for surveying and other land professionals. Key specific critical steps for the utilisation and promotion of the TERLA by the FIG are presented below.
TERLA for strengthening curriculum development implementation:
TERLA for enhancing land management and cadastral knowledge:
The above actionable steps fit within the roles of the Commissions 2 and 7 of the FIG, which both have a specific focus on innovations in curriculum development implementation and land administration education.
TERLA is a major contribution to identifying land administration as a critical constellation of issues to improve the understanding of land administration's role in land governance and also the application of coherent land governance in land reform contexts. TERLA has helped to raise the profile and visibility of land administration internationally and to provide a more balanced view of the concept of land administration that tends to focus disproportionately on land tenure in isolation from the other components. It has also re-centred customary or informal rights as part of the 'normal' narrative on land rights, rather than on the margins as an outlier that needs to be corrected. TERLA plays a critical role in curricular application to academic and technical studies on ‘land administration’ that has been almost entirely missing from many related disciplines in the past.
Enhancements to TERLA will help the advocacy work to strengthen land administration as a respectable academic area in tertiary education institutions. The promotion of its usage by the FIG within its organisation, as well as to other stakeholders, is crucial for capacity development on responsible land administration. Such promotion helps in facilitating TERLA’s future updates and potential expansion as a knowledge base covering various land administration themes.
This position paper presents a summary of what we consider to be the strengths and weaknesses of the modules as published in 2019 (this being the only available version, notwithstanding supplementary updates such as Enemark's abridged version published in 2023). The authors have responded to questions pertaining to the content and delivery of the TERLA. Based on issues that emerged from the SWOT analysis and questions investigated, this position paper provides actionable recommendations that FIG could support in its effort to improve practices around professional education (Commission 2) and cadastre and land management (Commission 7). It is the authors’ intention that these suggestions be used by adopters of TERLA to build on the existing body of work.
To summarise:
Adam, A.G. (2019) ‘Thinking outside the box and introducing land readjustment against the conventional urban land acquisition and delivery method in Ethiopia’. Land Use Policy, 81, 624-631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.11.028
African Union Commission (2015) Agenda 2063: The Africa we want. Addis Ababa: African Union commission. https://au.int/en/agenda2063/overview
Agegnehu, A.W. (2020) ‘Protection of local land use rights in the process of large-scale agricultural land acquisition in Ethiopia’. African Identities, 21(1), 113–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/14725843.2020.1851652
Baird, I.G. (2016) ‘Indigeneity in Asia: an emerging but contested concept, Asian Ethnicity, 17(4), 501–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/14631369.2016.1193804
Bekele, A.E., Drabik, D., Dries, L. & Heijman, W. (2021) Large-scale land investments, household displacement, and the effect on land degradation in semiarid agro-pastoral areas of Ethiopia. Land Degradation & Development, 32(2), 777–791. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3756
Chigbu, U., Enemark, S., Mabakeng, R., du Plessis, J., Mitchell, D., Sait, S., and Zevenbergen, J. (2021) Structured Knowledge Base and Teaching Essentials on Responsible Land Administration: Assessment of Uses and Users, FIG e-Working Week 2021: Smart Surveyors for Land and Water Management - Challenges in a New Reality, Netherlands (online): International Federation of Surveyors (FIG). Link
CORE Econ (no date) Our mission. https://www.core-econ.org/
De Vries, W.T. & Chigbu, U.E. (2017) ‘Responsible Land Management-Concept and application in a territorial rural context’. Fub. Flächenmanagement Und Bodenordnung, 79(2), 65–73.
Decoville, A. & Feltgen, V. (2023) ‘Clarifying the EU objective of no net land take: A necessity to avoid the cure being worse than the disease’. Land Use Policy, 131, 106722-. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106722
Dires, T., Fentie, D., Hunie, Y., Nega, W., Tenaw, M., Agegnehu, S.K. & Mansberger, R. (2021) ‘Assessing the Impacts of Expropriation and Compensation on Livelihood of Farmers: The Case of Peri-Urban Debre Markos, Ethiopia’. Land, 10(6), 614-. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10060614
Enemark, S. (2023) Teaching Essentials for Responsible Land Administration: Summary and guidance for education, research and capacity development. UNHabitatt and GLTN. https://gltn.net/2023/09/25/teaching-essentials-for-responsible-land-administration-summary-and-guidance-for-education-research-and-capacity-development/
FIG (1995) FIG Statement on the Cadastre. http://www.fig.net/commission7/reports/cadastre/statement_on_cadastre.html
FIG (2010) ‘Enhancing Surveying Education through e-Learning’. FIG Publication 46. https://www.fig.net/resources/publications/figpub/pub46/figpub46.pdf
FIG (2023a) ‘Teaching Essentials for Responsible Land Administration - the past, present and future of TERLA, Commission 2 at the FIG Commission 2 and 7 Annual Meeting’, 2-4 October, Deventer, the Netherlands. https://fig.net/organisation/comm/7/activities/events/2023_annual_meeting.asp
FIG (2023b) ‘Enhancing Surveying Education through Blended Learning’. FIG Publication 81. https://www.fig.net/resources/publications/figpub/pub81/Figpub81.pdf
Hornby, D. Kingwill, R., Royston, L. & Cousins, B. (editors) (2017) Untitled: Securing Land Tenure in Urban and Rural South Africa. Durban: UKZN Press.
House of Commons (2018) Land Value Capture – Tenths Report of Session 2017-2019. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcomloc/766/766.pdf
Hull, S., & Whittal, J. (2013) ‘Good e-Governance and Cadastral Innovation: In Pursuit of a Definition of e-Cadastral Systems’. South African Journal of Geomatics, 2(4), 342–357.
Hull, S., Babalola, K., & Whittal, J. (2019) ‘Theories of land reform and their impact on land reform success in Southern Africa’. Land, 8(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/land8110172
Hull, S.A., Kingwill, R. & Fokane, T. (2020) ‘An Introduction to Land Administration’. LandNNES: Cape Town, South Africa. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.29539.17442 \
Hull, S., Whittal, J. & Kingwill, R. (2024) ‘What is Land Administration? Exploring an inclusive definition’. FIG Working Week 2024. Link
Hull, S.A. (2024) ‘All for one and one for all? Exploring the nexus of land administration, land management and land governance’. Land Use Policy, 144, 107248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107248
IFAD (2023) Frontier Technologies for Securing Tenure: a review of concepts, uses and challenges. Rome, Italy: International Fund for Agricultural Development. https://www.ifad.org/en/web/knowledge/-/frontier-technologies-for-securing-tenure-a-review-of-concepts-uses-and-challenges
IVSC (2024) International Valuation Standards (IVS). https://www.ivsc.org/new-edition-of-the-international-valuation-standards-ivs-published/
Kingwill, R. (2013) ‘The Map is not the Territory. Law and Custom in 'African Freehold': A South African case study’. PhD thesis, University of the Western Cape.
Kingwill, R., Hornby, D., Royston, L. & Cousins, B. (2017) ‘Conclusion - Beyond “the Edifice”’. In Untitled: Securing Land Tenure in Urban and Rural South Africa. D. Hornby, R. Kingwill, L. Royston, & B. Cousins, Eds. Pietermaritzburg: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press. 388–430.
Krigsholm, P., Riekkinen, K. & Ståhle, P. (2020) ‘Pathways for a future cadastral system: A socio-technical approach’. Land Use Policy, 94(1), 04504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104504
Li, T. (2010) ‘Indigeneity, Capitalism and the management of dispossession’. Current Anthropology, 51 (3), 385-414. https://doi.org/10.1086/651942
Lunenberg, M. & Dengerink, J. (2021) ‘Designing knowledge bases for teacher educators: Challenges and recommendations’, In: Vanderlinde, R., Smith, K., Murray, J. & Lunenberg, M. (Eds.). (2021) Teacher Educators and their Professional Development: Learning from the Past, Looking to the Future (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003037699
Mitchell, D. P., Mwasumbi, A., du Plessis, J. & Sait, S. (2017) ‘Towards a Curriculum on Responsible Land Administration’. 2017 World Bank Conference on Land and Poverty. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315738813
Obeng-Odoom, F. & McDermott, M. (2018) Valuing unregistered land, RICS. https://www.rics.org/content/dam/ricsglobal/documents/to-be-sorted/valuing-unregistered-land-rics.pdf
OECD (2022a) Global Compendium of Land Value Capture Policies. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/urban-rural-and-regional-development/global-compendium-of-land-value-capture-policies_4f9559ee-en
OECD (2022b) Financing Transportation Infrastructure through Land Value Capture. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/8015065d-en.pdf?expires=1707076664&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=6685DF7C2975D1D552BF7491493F3A38
Ovesen, J. (2002) ‘Indigenous Peoples and Development in Laos: Ideologies and Ironies’. Moussons, 6, 69-97. https://journals.openedition.org/moussons/2589
RICS (2024) RICS Valuation – Global Standards: https://www.rics.org/content/dam/ricsglobal/documents/standards/Red-Book-Global-Standards-incorporating-IVS.pdf
Scanlan, O., Siraj, N, Ritchil, P. & Mankin, S. (2023) ‘Is “pro-poor land administration” a realistic proposition? How a land survey in Bangladesh reproduced and reconfigured gendered and racialised poverty’,. Land Use Policy, 138, 107016-. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.107016
Silva, M.A. & Stubkjær, E. (2002) ‘A review of methodologies used in research on cadastral development’. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 26(5), 403–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0198-9715(02)00011-X
Singh, M. (2023) ‘It’s Time to Rethink the Idea of the “Indigenous”’, The New Yorker, February 20, 2023
Williamson, I., Enemark, S., Wallace, J. & Rajabifard, A. (2010) Land administration for sustainable development. Redlands, California: Esri Press.
In addition to the in-text references listed above, the following are recommended readings to support the adoption and further development of the TERLA.
Babalola, K.H., Hull, S.A. & Whittal, J. (2023) ‘Assessing Peri-Urban Land Management Using 8Rs Framework of Responsible Land Management: The Case of Peri-Urban Land in Ekiti State, Nigeria’. Land, 12(9), 1795. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12091795
Barry, M. (2018) ‘Fit-for-purpose land administration – administration that suits local circumstances or management bumper sticker?’. Survey Review, 50(362), 383–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396265.2018.1501130
Chigbu, U.E., Bendzko, T., Mabakeng, M.R., Kuusaana, E.D. & Tutu, D.O. (2021) ‘Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration from Theory to Practice: Three Demonstrative Case Studies of Local Land Administration Initiatives in Africa’. Land, 10(5), 476. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10050476
Chitonge, H. (2021) ‘Land Governance in Africa: The New Policy Reform Agenda’. In Chitonge, H. & Harvey, R. (Eds.), Land Tenure Challenges in Africa (pp. 1–24). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82852-3_1
De Vries, W.T. & Rudiarto, I. (2023) ‘Testing and Enhancing the 8R Framework of Responsible Land Management with Documented Strategies and Effects of Land Reclamation Projects in Indonesia’. Land, 12(1), 208. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010208
De Vries, W.T., Bugri, J. & Mandhu, F. (2020) ‘Advancing Responsible and Smart Land Management’. In De Vries, W.T., Bugri, J. & Mandhu, F. (2020) Responsible and Smart Land Management Interventions: an African Context. Boca Raton: CRC Press. 279–286.
FAO, UNECE, & FIG (2022) Digital transformation and land administration – Sustainable practices from the UNECE region and beyond. FAO; UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe). https://doi.org/10.4060/cc1908en
Metaferia, M.T., Bennett, R.M., Alemie, B.K. & Koeva, M. (2022) ‘Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration and the Framework for Effective Land Administration: Synthesis of Contemporary Experiences’. Land, 12(1), 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010058
UN-GGIM (2019) Framework for Effective Land Administration: A reference for developing, reforming, renewing, strengthening or modernizing land administration and management systems. http://ggim.un.org/meetings/2018-Deqing-Expert-Group/documents/Concept_Note.pdf
Wubie, A.M., de Vries, W.T. & Alemie, B. (2021) ‘Evaluating the Quality of Land Information for Peri-Urban Land-Related Decision-Making: An Empirical Analysis from Bahir Dar, Ethiopia’. Land. 10(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10010011
Alban Singirankabo, U. & Willem Ertsen, M. (2020) ‘Relations between Land Tenure Security and Agricultural Productivity: Exploring the Effect of Land Registration’. Land., 9(5), 138. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9050138
Global Land Tool Network (2021) Tenure-Responsive Land Use Planning: A Practical Guide for Country-level Intervention. UN-Habitat: Nairobi. https://unhabitat.org/tenure-responsive-land-use-planning-a-practical-guide-for-country-level-intervention
FAO & IFAD (2022) GeoTech4Tenure – Technical guide on combining geospatial technology and participatory methods for securing tenure rights. Rome, Italy: FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc1076en
UN-HABITAT, IIRR & GLTN (2012) Handling land: Innovative tools for land governance and secure tenure. Nairobi, Kenya: UN-HABITAT, GLTN, IIRR. http://www.gltn.net/jdownloads/GLTN Documents/handling_land_eng_2012_.pdf
RICS (2019) Valuation of Development Property. RICS guidance note, global. https://www.rics.org/content/dam/ricsglobal/documents/to-be-sorted/valuation-of-development-property---first-edition.pdf
Module 6: Land policy and regulatory frameworks[1]
Amanor, K. (2012), How historical context has shaped key contemporary
issues relating to policy on land. Land Governance in Africa: Framing
the Debate Series, no. 1. International Land Coalition.
Amanor, K. (2019), Strengthening Customary Rights under Community
Management. In Hino, H., Langer, A., Lonsdale, J. & Stewart, F. (eds)
(2019) From Divided Pasts to Cohesive Futures: Reflections on Africa.
Cambridge University Press, 246 – 299.
Barry, M. & Kingwill, R. (2023), Land Titling Suitability Classificaiton
Theory. International Federation of Surveyors (FIG) Conference: FIG
Working Week 2023, Orlando Florida.
Link
Boege, V., Brown, A., Clements, K. & Nolan, A. (2008), On Hybrid Political Orders and Emerging States: State Formation in the Context of ‘Fragility’, in Berghof Handbook Dialogue No. 8, Berghof Research Center for Constructive Conflict Management. https://berghof-foundation.org/library/on-hybrid-political-orders-and-emerging-states-state-formation-in-the-context-of-fragility
Boone, C. (2019), Legal Empowerment of the Poor through PropertyRights Reform: Tensions and Trade-offs of Land Registration and Titling in Sub-Saharan Africa. The Journal of Development Studies, 55(3), 384-400. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2018.1451633
Chimhowu, A. (2019), The ‘new’ African customary land tenure. Characteristic, features and policy implications of a new paradigm. Land Use Policy, 81, 897–903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.04.014
Delville, P.L. & Moalic, A. (2019), Territorialities, spatial inequalities and the formalization of land rights in Central Benin. Africa, 89(2), 329–352. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0001972019000111
Durand-Lasserve, A., Durand-Lasserve, M. & H. Selod, H. (2015), Land Delivery Systems in West African Cities: The example of Bamako, Mali. Africa Development Forum Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/256321468088771210/Land-delivery-systems-in-West-African-cities-the-example-of-Bamako-Mali
Fukuyama, F. (2013), What Is Governance? Governance (Oxford), 26(3), 347–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12035
Ghorbani, A., Ho, P., & Bravo, G. (2021), Institutional form versus function in a common property context: The credibility thesis tested through an agent-based model. Land Use Policy, 102, 105237-. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105237
Hino, H., Langer, A., Lonsdale, J. & Stewart, F. (eds) (2019), From Divided Pasts to Cohesive Futures: Reflections on Africa. Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/from-divided-pasts-to-cohesive-futures/5BBF2EC3711E90B4778F44838855625F
Ho, P. (2018), Institutional function versus form: The evolutionary credibility of land, housing and natural resources. Land Use Policy, 75, 642–650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.001
Kingwill, R. (2013), In the Shadows of the Cadastre: family law and custom in Rabula and Fingo Village. In Hebinck, Paul & Cousins, Ben (eds), In the Shadow of Policy. Everyday practices in South African Land and Agrarian Reform. Johannesburg: Wits University Press.
Lund, C. (2006), Twilight Institutions: An Introduction. Development and Change, 37(4). 673–684. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2006.00496.x
Lund, C. (2006), Twilight Institutions: Public Authority and Local Politics in Africa. Development and Change, 37(4), 685–705. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2006.00497.x
Meagher, K. de Herdt, T. & Titeca, K. (2014), Unravelling Public Authority: Paths of Hybrid Governance in Africa. IS Academy, Human Security in Fragile States. Research Brief 10
Murray Li, T. (2020), Epilogue: Customary Land Rights and Politics, 25 Years On. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 21(1), 77-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/14442213.2020.1680016
Ochieng, C. (ed) (2020) Rethinking Land Reform in Africa New Ideas, Opportunities and Challenges, African Natural Resources Centre. https://dlci-hoa.org/assets/upload/land-documents/20200804042940748.pdf
Peters, P. (2009), Challenges in Land Tenure and Land Reform in Africa: Anthropological Contributions. World Development, 37(8), 1317–1325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.08.021
[1] Notwithstanding our earlier
recommendation ( 8) that module 6 should be reimagined as a module on
Institutional Aspects early on in the course, and that policy issues
should be addressed throughout the course, we provide herewith some
essential reading on land policy, governance, and institutional aspects.
International Federation of Surveyors – FIG
Commission 2 & 7 Working Group on Land Administration Education
(WG2.4/7.7)
e-mail: simon.hull@uct.ac.za
FIG Office
Kalvebod Brygge 31-33
DK-1780 Copenhagen V
DENMARK
Email: FIG@fig.net