Digital Identity and Land Use Cases

Self-sovereign identity will be disruptive for property rights. The technology could explicitly connect people to land parcels within property registries and also provide a platform for documenting land claims and associated data in the absence of a secure formal registry. Discussion below will examine the impact of SSI on four other land-related topics:

• Efficiency in real estate markets: Mitigating fraud risk within real estate markets requires a high degree of due diligence around the identities of the transacting parties, contributing to workflow inefficiencies and high transaction costs. A self-sovereign identity solution could securely connect landowners to their properties and enable trusted and transparent online workflow, including legally-binding digital signatures.
• Property rights in post-conflict situations: The legal return of property to refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) contributes to peaceful rebuilding in post-conflict situations. But the process of restitution is complex, as many of the displaced lack important land-related documents or fear persecution for asserting their claims. A self-sovereign identity solution could enable these vulnerable individuals to securely store property ownership documents or to receive verifiable credentials from an NGO in order to better record a claim in the absence of a functioning registry. Of course, if a country had an SSI-integrated registry in the first place, refugees would never be separated from their claim to property.
• Natural disaster resilience: Accurate property rights are crucial for disaster preparedness and can expedite reconstruction. Current disaster resilience programs do utilize emerging technology, but a self-sovereign identity solution could provide individuals with a more secure and accessible tool to demonstrate their property rights and apply for aid and reconstruction grants. Distributed document storage would ensure the survival of essential records and biometrics would allow people to prove their identities and authenticate to services even if their physical identity documents were lost or destroyed.
• Women’s land rights: Women make up almost half of the world’s agricultural workforce, but are often excluded from land ownership by entrenched, discriminatory customs and practices. Recently, many countries have passed legislation to improve gender equality in property ownership. A robust self-sovereign identity platform could bolster this progress by connecting women more securely to their properties. Paper land records can be withheld or fraudulently transferred by male relatives. Similarly, physical identity documents needed to interact with the registry can be stolen or destroyed. The personal control and persistent identity afforded by SSI would help to address both of these issues. SSI could also improve transparency in judicial decisions related to land disputes, and allow gender-blind interactions with the land registry and related financial and administrative services via zero-knowledge proofs. In turn, a greater degree of women’s land ownership could support socioeconomic development throughout the Global South.

Even advanced land administration systems often lack sufficiently robust identity solutions. For example, in Ontario, real estate lawyers are required to verify the identity of their clients in property transfers. This means that clients must either be physically present with their lawyer for the signing of the documents or, if they are traveling, must hire a second lawyer in their location to attest to their identity. There is no settled law in Canada on the standards for remote, digital identification and authorization. Even a live video call with the client is considered insufficient. In addition, only verified real estate professionals (primarily lawyers) are allowed to file documents for registration in Ontario’s electronic land records system. In order to create an account they must submit an application and appear in person with two forms of ID.¹ The rationale for restricting access to verified professionals is largely the need to shift liability for verifying the identities of buyers and sellers away from the registry.²

In technologically sophisticated and well-governed jurisdictions like Ontario this system functions very well. But the increased cost of registration and restricted access to the land registry is a greater burden in the developing world. SSI and biometrics can help to reduce fraud by bringing existing, verified, foundational identities to the registry.

The consequences of lower liability in real estate can be especially critical for countries in the developing world. Secure connections between people and property through SSI will better allow individuals to use property as collateral, and subsequently access banking services such as loans and mortgages.³ Financial inclusion encourages improvements in land and housing, raising property values and enhancing livelihoods. For those who do not own property, transparent and secure registries provide better access to markets.⁴ Formalization of land and stronger property rights should also increase investor confidence, leading to an inflow of capital.⁵

The legal return of property to refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) is critical for rebuilding in post-conflict situations. But the process of restitution is complex, as many of the displaced lack important land-related documents and/or fear persecution for asserting their claims. A self-sovereign identity solution could enable these vulnerable individuals to securely store property ownership documents or to receive verifiable credentials from an NGO in order to better record a claim in the absence of a functioning registry.

The 2005 United Nations’ Pinheiro Principles state that “all refugees and displaced persons have the right to have restored to them any housing, land or property of which they were arbitrarily or unlawfully deprived…”⁶ Such recovery and/or restitution of property can be complicated. Whole families can change as a conflict carry on for years or decades. People often flee hundreds of miles and cannot return home easily. Many lose their identification cards, passports, deeds, and other important documents as they take refuge in other countries.

This phenomenon is far from new. Jewish groups are still attempting to obtain the return of Holocaust-era assets throughout Europe⁷; Palestinians continue to claim houses and land lost during the chaotic formation of Israel.⁸ And ruinous intra-state conflicts have proliferated since 1945; these civil wars last an average of seven to 12 years.⁹ According to the 2017 Global Trends report by UNHCR, an unprecedented “68.5 million people were displaced as of the end of 2017. Among them were 16.2 million people who became displaced during 2017 itself, either for the first time or repeatedly.”¹⁰ The relative ease of modern travel has resulted in millions fleeing far from home to Europe and beyond.

Case studies demonstrate the dire need to secure land rights in war-ravaged states. John Dempsey, formerly a senior advisor for Afghanistan to the U.S. Agency for International Development, notes that the South Asian country has produced roughly 8 million refugees and IDPs since the 1979 Soviet invasion. Families often return home to find their property long occupied by others. Poorly-organized, conflicting, and informal property claims unsurprisingly lead to land disputes, which easily devolve into violence, perpetuating instability.¹¹

The Syrian Civil War has currently displaced 12 million people, or approximately half of the pre-conflict population.¹² Although fighting has largely subsided, many refugees are afraid of returning to a state still controlled by the brutally repressive Assad regime. The Assad regime does appear to be interested in the homecoming of millions officially viewed as the opposition. Instead, Assad aims to reshape the demographics of his war-torn country.¹³

Even for those Syrian refugees who do desire to return home, it will be increasingly difficult to lay claim to property. Recent surveys indicate that only 17 percent of Syrian refugees possess documentation of their property rights, while only 9 percent of IDPs have managed to maintain their records.¹⁴

Worse, the vindictive Assad regime in April 2018 passed Law No. 10, which enables the government to expropriate informal settlements for the ostensibly benign purpose of reconstruction or development. Most inhabitants of informal communities supported the opposition and fled the country. Both Syrians and international observers perceive Law No. 10 as little more than formalized land grabbing as punishment for rebellion.¹⁵

The Assad regime is clearly aware of the immense power of land ownership, but instead of utilizing property as a tool for reconstruction and peace, the state is exploiting land as another weapon against its opponents. And Assad may very well realize a demographic revision of Syria.¹⁶ Human Rights Watch notes that a significant segment of the Syrian refugee population is “unlikely to return without a house or property to return to.”¹⁷

Precautionary actions could have been taken to mitigate this crisis. Various organizations are presently examining new technologies to support marginalized populations, including refugees and IDPs.¹⁸ Implementation of self-sovereign identity is a compelling option to empower vulnerable groups during their displacement and repatriation. Digitized land records encrypted in distributed storage would not be destroyed or become inaccessible during displacement. These would ideally be copies of the legal land records held in the state-sanctioned registry. But other information to support land restitution claims can be recorded by an NGO through personal interviews and earth observation data. Such information can then be connected to a self-sovereign identity through a credential, giving refugees and IDPs time stamped documentation of their claim to that property. These credentials could later be used in the post-conflict dispute resolution and land restoration process.

Hurricanes, typhoons, and floods have all intensified in recent decades.¹⁹ As vulnerable communities confront these natural disasters, land administration is increasingly recognized as a critical part of the emergency planning and recovery process. A lack of clear property rights particularly leads to conflict, delay, and higher costs during reconstruction.²⁰

Sameh Wahba et al. argue compellingly that land records and related geospatial data are vital in “all phases of disaster risk management, such as disaster reduction, risk reduction, preparedness and mitigation, and emergency response.”²¹ In the aftermath of a natural disaster, thorough and secure registries ensure protection of property rights and livelihoods for returning evacuees. Post-disaster access to PII and land data facilitates loss valuation, reconstruction planning, and access to financial services including reconstruction grants.²²

Many disaster resilience programs do not take full advantage of emerging technologies, but there are notable exceptions. In the eastern Indian state of Odisha, for example, an initiative run by the state government in partnership with the Tata Trusts and Omidyar Network combines drone mapping, land title formalization surveys, and financial assistance to encourage the construction of permanent “monsoon-resistant” housing.²³ (Disclosure: Omidyar Network is a funder of the Future of Property Rights Program at New America, and provided financial support for this report.)

Investment in a more storm-resistant housing stock is essential for human security and economic development in places like Puerto Rico, where FEMA recovery grants –based on the replacement value of the existing structure, have been too small to allow for sturdier reconstruction that will survive the next major storm. According to reporting by The New York Times, the median repair grant was $1,800, and while “a new roof of cheap corrugated zinc typically starts at about $5,000 and might blow off again in the next hurricane; a concrete roof that could survive future storms costs about $15,000.”²⁴

Paper land and identity documents are vulnerable to loss or destruction, and even simple ways of increasing the durability of documents, like lamination, may prohibit service at banks or government institutions.²⁵ Paper records still serve an important role, especially in communities where connectivity is limited. But the issuance of paper documents should be accompanied by the concurrent creation of digital credential, linked to a SSI, in order to create a more resilient system.²⁶ The process of digitizing land records is relatively simple and has many practical benefits. We have written about the success of large-scale digitization projects in Punjab, Pakistan.²⁷ SSI could provide individuals with more agency and opportunities during post-disaster situations, especially given a synthesis of digital identity platforms and land registries. Due to decentralization, a self-sovereign identity solution will be more resistant to destruction, more accessible to vulnerable populations, and will allow for improved data management.²⁸

Almost half of the world’s farmers are women, but they are often excluded from land ownership due to entrenched discriminatory customs and practices. Although many countries have passed legislation to improve gender equality in property ownership, a robust self-sovereign identity platform could bolster this progress by connecting women more securely to their property. SSI could also improve transparency in judicial decisions related to land disputes. In turn, a greater degree of women’s land ownership could support socioeconomic development throughout the developing world.

On average, women comprise 43percent of the agricultural workforce in developing countries.²⁹ Small farms are labor intensive, and women are often expected to perform additional duties, including supplying food to men in the fields, fetching water, collecting firewood, caring for children, and preparing meals.³⁰ Women are also heavily involved in the livestock sector, and many others labor under contract farming arrangements.³¹

Female farmers often lack proper access to resources and services such as land, animals, human capital, financial services, and new technology.³² There is an enormous gender disparity in global land ownership. A recent analysis of eight African countries revealed that women comprise less than one quarter of landowners. The proportion of female landholders in Latin America is about 20 percent; in the Middle East and North Africa it is as low as 5 percent.³³ Poor women usually work in harsh conditions, earn meager wages, and are subject to sexual harrasment.³⁴

In many contexts, a woman’s right to use land depends on her relationship to a man: a husband, father, brother, or other male relative. If said man dies or becomes estranged, the woman may be coerced off of land or out of a home with little or no recourse. Paper land records may be withheld from a woman or fraudulently transferred to a man during a subsequent dispute. These physical documents, needed to interact with a registry, might also be stolen or destroyed.

Even in places where women have equal land rights before the law, practices and customs often favor male rights over female. Officials often fail to protect women’s rights, and male relatives can withhold court notices to sabotage proceedings related to land-grabbing and other disputes.³⁵

Various developing countries, such as Nepal, have enacted progressive legislation to fight discrimination against women’s land ownership.³⁶ The African Union formally pledged in 2016 to ensure that women constitute 30 percent of landowners by 2025.³⁷ Punjab, Pakistan recently connected “next of kin” data within the national identity system to its provincial digital registry in order to guarantee women properly receive legally-mandated land inheritance. Related legislation concerning female property rights was previously ignored; now technology has improved lives by helping to ensure that good laws are executed.³⁸

Technology is not a panacea, and laws, behaviors, and attitudes will need to change. Yet a self-sovereign solution could mitigate many of the aforementioned abuses and help to sustain progress in gender equality. Personal control of a persistent identity afforded via a self-sovereign identity platform would allow for more secure management of land-related documents. It would be difficult for a male relative to fraudulently transfer, steal, or destroy a title connected to a women’s SSI, and stored on a biometrically-secure smartphone or in the cloud. Through use of zero-knowledge proofs, women might not even need to disclose their gender when interacting with a land registry or related financial and administrative services.³⁹

It is unrealistic to assume that digital identity can prevent real world threats and physical intimidation in land disputes. But an SSI ecosystem connecting women to the judicial system and/or relevant NGOs could help to streamline reports of injustice, as well as document sharing for legal proceedings. Increased transparency and the potential for human rights organizations to monitor data via observer nodes⁴⁰ might prompt previously apathetic officials to protect female title security. Repeated abuse could be connected to specific identities and clearly displayed on a blockchain for easy access by law enforcement.⁴¹

The importance of women’s land rights cannot be overstated. Title security is strongly correlated with higher economic gains for women in countries like Tanzania, Rwanda, and India.⁴² Female land ownership further promotes entrepreneurial investment, agricultural productivity, and food security. Multiple studies have even demonstrated that the resulting economic stability reduces women’s vulnerability to domestic violence, poverty, and the impact of HIV/AIDs.⁴³