III. Tools and Strategies for Thinking and Working Politically on Land

The challenges of land work vary considerably, depending on the political, economic, social, cultural, and environmental context, as well as on a project’s scope, activities, and objectives. Nevertheless, within those differences, a common set of tools and strategies can be applied in thinking and working politically (TWP) on land. These are grouped below in relation to their dominant role in the program cycle, but given increasingly frequent iterations of learning and adaptation most of them can and should be repeated throughout the life of a program activity.

Conduct Situational Analysis (Or a Political Economy Analysis) During Activity Design

Deep knowledge of the local context is indispensable for TWP. Each country possesses distinctive political, economic, social, and cultural structures and power dynamics. It is essential to develop a good working knowledge of the relevant stakeholders and key actors for the program activity, drawing on but not limited to the stakeholders listed in Section II. These are the individuals and groups who have a stake or stand to benefit or lose from change brought about by land governance reforms. It is important to assess the likely degree of alignment or divergence of each stakeholder with respect to program objectives, as well as their relative power and influence. TWP views the status and evolution of national, regional, and local land policies and legal frameworks through the lens of underlying power relationships and institutional realities. A good situational analysis provides the basis for developing the program activity’s theory of change and program design, which should incorporate TWP in scheduled program reviews from the outset to minimize obstacles and maximize opportunities for achieving program goals. Land specialists should be familiar with the main political and economic challenges, opportunities, and trends that inform a country’s development strategy and the potential role of land tenure in achieving its success.

Approach Stakeholder Engagement as Foundational

A critical first step in the design of land programming is identifying key entry points to engage with the host country government, particularly official land governance institutions. Entry points might exist through personal or professional networks or emerge through political windows of opportunity, like a new national development strategy or a presidential election in which land is a major voter concern. Second, development agency staff should seek out a variety of sources to develop informed contacts and triangulate information regarding a country’s land governance system. Experience demonstrates that in-depth discussions with a range of stakeholders, including government officials, academics, representatives of civil society and the private sector, peer donors, and grassroots actors, is key to developing a well-rounded understanding of land-related challenges and opportunities ahead of program design. Program start-up activities should encourage multi-stakeholder discussion of the program activity to generate understanding and buy-in.

These stakeholders can become constituents and sometimes champions of the program and their feedback can also help manage expectations and alleviate concerns. Up-front stakeholder discussions open lines of dialogue about relevant issues of land-related policy and legislative and regulatory reform for the duration of the program and beyond. In practice, early stakeholder engagement may also dovetail with ongoing baseline or background research, and subsequently provide shared learning opportunities with government officials, civil society advocates, private sector representatives, and community members. In cases where Indigenous Peoples are present on or around a project site, stakeholder engagement should follow protocols aligned with the principles of Free Prior and Informed Consent.

Create Space for a Diversity of Local Voices

In light of the growing land-related challenges associated with the climate and biodiversity crises—including the need for more active engagement with Indigenous peoples and local communities on whose lands critical resources often exist—it is more important than ever that development agencies and implementers create space for a diversity of local voices in program design. They must invest time and resources to learn about the realities of land governance at both national and local levels. Through inclusive conversations with an expanding range of stakeholders, with particular attention to women, youth, and other marginalized groups, practitioners can identify a better-targeted range of options for location-specific land governance programming. While staying mindful of local norms and power relationships, donors can use their convening power to create spaces and platforms that foster respectful dialogue among participants of equal standing and bridge perspectives across government, civil society, and the private sector. More inclusive approaches also enhance information gathering and bring greater attention to the possibilities for shared benefits from program activities.

Recognize and Take Advantage of Windows of Opportunity

There is often political inertia against land governance programming. But certain events and circumstances are transformative enough to move past such barriers. These include recovery periods following a conflict or disaster; political events, such as elections and major legislative initiatives; a change in development priorities by donors or the host country government; and technological and communications advances around land governance services. Sometimes, a “land champion” is elevated to a key decision-making position, which creates an opportunity for land programming. Alternatively, large initiatives on agriculture, food security, and rural development can create key entry points for land programming.

Consider Starting Small to Build Momentum

In situations where there is reluctance around tackling land issues at scale, smaller and incremental programs can help build trust and confidence and foster relationships with critical stakeholders. Assuming these small pilots and reforms show promise, they can provide a basis and justification for larger land tenure work by donors, host country governments, and other international development partners. Incremental successes can demonstrate the utility of land programming, encourage continued investment, and inform the design of larger initiatives. Focused programming, especially related to institutional, regulatory, or legal reform, can have a large and long-term impact on land administration. Engagement with host country officials to improve administrative capacity can help to ensure local ownership and the sustainability of land governance.

Make the Case That Secure Land Rights Are Foundational for Other Development Objectives

Research indicates that strong land governance is a fundamental precondition for the achievement of a range of other goals. During program design processes, technical staff should work to integrate land governance into other sectors. Cross-sectoral issue areas might include agriculture and food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, biodiversity conservation, women’s empowerment, economic growth, conflict and peacebuilding, democracy and governance, and inclusive development. It is also critical to understand the host country’s government priorities—and how land is related to them—from the national to local level.

Cultivate Trusted Local Contacts in Different Levels of Government and Civil Society

Deep local knowledge, networks, and trust are critical for land program implementation, as success depends in part on identifying local drivers of change, building consensus, and amplifying champions’ voices. It is always important to engage with host country officials, but many times land champions are journalists or in academia, the private sector, or civil society. Local Mission staff are also indispensable as advisors and “land champions,” as many have extensive experience and intuitively understand their country’s land issues and political dynamics. Local NGOs also can be key sources of information on local perspectives and often provide candid assessments of state–society relationships. Other donors often have relevant experience or ongoing activities related to land and may find informal discussions mutually beneficial. Multi-stakeholder dialogues during program design and start-up are a good way to cultivate local contacts. It is important to build in regular touch points with these contacts, both formally and informally, through the duration of a program. It is also possible to use research findings, case studies, workshops, and other communications opportunities to help create coalitions of political and social champions around land reform.

Hire Local Experts

The politics of land can be intensely local, often changing from region to region or even from town to town. In countries where customary and statutory governments coexist, the power dynamics between customary and statutory government leaders are complex and dynamic. Understanding and tracking these variations is crucially important to TWP on land. For this reason, it’s vitally important to hire local experts to interpret these dynamics, instead of relying solely on foreign land tenure experts.

Get Out to the Field

Field visits, political and cultural ceremonies, and other high-visibility events are important opportunities for political engagement. At such events, technical staff can likely engage with key stakeholders in attendance as well as key host country government representatives, civil society leaders, and influential community members. Additionally, donors can sometimes influence the progress of land programs and projects through field visits in tandem with government officials, or by active participation in workshops and conferences centered on political and institutional reform. Taking part in joint field visits with other development sector representatives can serve to highlight the centrality of land issues to overall development and identify cross-sectoral implementation opportunities. Field-based assessments like political economy analyses (PEAs) also may create opportunities to meet with local communities and deepen their understanding of on-the-ground realities. For TWP, time spent in the field is a valuable investment that contributes to better program outcomes.

Unpack the Politics of Commonly Used Terms

Commonly heard political terms used to characterize political obstacles faced by land governance program activities such as “lack of political will,” “weak governance,” and “corruption” serve more to point toward problems than to explain them. TWP involves efforts to unpack these familiar, but often not very useful terms, and move the conversation toward solutions. It poses questions that help better ground the analysis through a shift from factors to actors.

TWP means taking common political catch-all terms as starting points rather than endpoints in understanding day-to-day challenges in land programming. By converting these terms from factors to actors, TWP helps to clarify the possibilities and limits of program responses to political constraints.

Be Cognizant of Political Risks

Technical staff should understand how local stakeholders view the agency and its expressed priorities. TWP’s emphasis on localization means that staff should avoid the appearance of imposing land-related interventions on partner countries, and instead approach work as a collaborative effort to boost buy-in and ensure local ownership. In illiberal or unstable countries, especially, development practitioners should refrain from setting overly explicit political goals or mobilizing citizen concerns if the justice system has few ways of addressing grievances.

Network Everywhere

Technical staff should consider attending and actively participating in various national, regional, and international land rights conferences (such as the World Bank Land Conference), where new research, lessons learned, and best practices are shared. Such gatherings provide critical opportunities to learn how to improve land programs and also to strategically influence international development donors, technical experts and consultants, officials from host country governments, and representatives from regional organizations in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East. These stakeholders are often important behind-the-scenes players in addressing political and institutional constraints at the national level, and they can provide valuable advice on how to address political sensitivities, as well as offer key points of engagement with senior government officials.

Make Evaluation and Learning Continuous and Schedule Opportunities to Pause and Reflect

The turn toward TWP arose from poor program outcomes caused by an inadequate understanding of local dynamics and political bottlenecks, the prioritization of technical fixes over political reforms, and a failure to make timely course corrections in program activities. Political change can happen steadily or suddenly at both the national and local levels, and should be monitored accordingly. TWP advocates for more rapid and frequent cycles of evaluation and learning, as well as greater flexibility in adaptive management, to mitigate adverse events and seize windows of opportunity. Regularly scheduled opportunities to pause and reflect can provide staff and implementers, as well as selected additional participants, an opportunity to step back and assess relevant land governance program developments, including political considerations. These kinds of discussions can also contribute to improved qualitative evaluation of important aspects of program activities such as advocacy, alliance-building, reform processes, and alignment of evolving national and local interests and stakeholder motivations. The scope, size, and formality of pause and reflect exercises can vary considerably, but resources need to be available to make them possible.