Réforme de la loi foncière au Mozambique: valeurs acquises et besoins d'intégration
Au cours de la dernière décennie, la question de la mise en valeur des terres et de la réforme agraire a été l'une des préoccupations dominantes de la population du Mozambique et de son gouvernement démocratiquement élu, la FAO apportant sa contribution en tant que consultant technique. Cette démarche s'appuyait sur la conviction constante que le secteur des ménages ruraux peut devenir, en association avec l'entreprise privée, le puissant moteur d'un développement économique basé sur la terre et les ressources naturelles.
Fruit d'un dialogue constructif entre les parties prenantes à tous les niveaux de la société, le processus de la réforme agraire a réussi à traduire la réalité de la gestion des terres agricoles en un corpus juridique accepté par la nation tout entière, tout en tenant compte des différences régionales et socioculturelles. Ce processus et l'élaboration des instruments nécessaires à sa mise en uvre suscitent une prise de conscience du rôle actif des communautés locales et des responsabilités qui sont les leurs en matière de gestion des terres. Toutefois, une importante difficulté subsiste, à savoir la nécessité d'associer plus étroitement les exploitants au dispositif politico-juridique mis en place, pour en faire un instrument efficace du développement économique rural, sous le contrôle de la population et avec l'appui du gouvernement.
La reforma de la ley de tierras en Mozambique: valores adquiridos y necesidades de consolidación
A lo largo del último decenio, los temas relacionados con la elaboración de una política de gestión de tierras y con la reforma del derecho agrario han suscitado gran interés en la sociedad de Mozambique y en su gobierno democrático, y en este contexto la FAO ha desempeñado una función técnica consultiva. Piedra angular de este proceso es la firme convicción de que el sector de los hogares rurales, asociándose con la empresa privada, puede transformarse en potente motor de un desarrollo económico que tendrá en la tierra y otros recursos naturales una importante base de recursos.
El proceso de reforma del derecho agrario, fruto de un diálogo constructivo entre las partes interesadas que proceden de todas las capas sociales, ha traducido la ordenación de las tierras rurales en un cuerpo legislativo de validez nacional, que al mismo tiempo toma en cuenta las diferencias socioculturales regionales. Este proceso, así como el desarrollo de los instrumentos necesarios para su realización, va creando conciencia sobre el papel activo y responsable que incumbe a las comunidades locales en la ordenación de la tierra. Sigue existiendo, sin embargo, el problema de lograr una mayor identificación de los usuarios con las políticas y leyes en cuestión a fin de que éstas se transformen en una herramienta eficaz para el desarrollo económico de las zonas rurales, que ha de controlar la población con el apoyo del Gobierno.
P. De Wit
Paul De Wit is a Land Management Specialist with project GCP/MOZ/059/NET.
Over the last decade, land policy development and land law reform have been major issues of concern for Mozambican society and its democratically elected government, with FAO playing a technically advisory role. A cornerstone of these developments is the strong belief that the rural household sector, in partnership with private entrepreneurs, can evolve into a powerful engine for economic development in which land and other natural resources form an important resource base.
The land law reform process, which is the product of constructive dialogue among stakeholders from all sections of society, has transformed rural land management into a nationally validated legislative corpus and also caters for regional sociocultural differences. This process, and the development of tools for its implementation, are creating awareness of the local community's active role and accountability in land management. However, a major challenge remains: how to instil users of the process with a stronger sense of ownership in the policy and legislation, turning it into an efficient instrument for economic development in rural areas which is controlled by ordinary people and supported by government.
After the multiparty elections of 1994, the Government of Mozambique initiated an ambitious policy reform programme in several key sectors. The main objectives of the economic and social policy are the elimination of poverty and the promotion of self-sustained economic and human development. The major resource for achieving these overall objectives is the nation's population, which shows a high resilience to fast-changing conditions, inventiveness and dynamism. It is estimated that about 80 percent of this human resource lives in rural areas and depends directly on land and other natural resources for meeting daily requirements and long-term life goals. The rural household sector is the main target for the promotion of sustainable economic growth.
The Agrarian Policy, approved by the government at the end of 1995, proclaims "the development of agrarian activities in view of achieving food security, considering the sustainable utilization of natural resources and social equity" as one of its pillars. It focuses on both the private and the rural household sectors, and highlights the involvement of rural communities in natural resource management through direct benefits and incentives.
Better access to land resources, with greater security, is a necessary condition for the successful implementation of this strategy. The Land Policy emphasizes this in the following declaration: "assure the rights of the Mozambican populations over the land and other natural resources, and promote investment, sustainable and equitable use of these resources".
The policy promotes the creation of a favourable environment both for the development and growth of the rural household sector and for the promotion of commercial sector investment in rural areas. Commercial investment opportunities should not, however, prejudice the development of rural communities; on the contrary the populations need to benefit directly.
The Government of Mozambique also initiated a process of institutional and legislative reform. To begin with, this entailed the creation of an ad hoc Land Commission under the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries and the National Institute of Rural Development.
This temporary body called for an intersectoral committee to develop the Land Policy. In a later stage, the Interministerial Land Commission (ILC) was created, with the participation of nine ministries, along with a Technical Secretariat (TS) to coordinate its day-to-day activities with representatives of each ministry. The TS also invited a number of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to take part in its functioning and
Over a period of four years, three key pieces of legislation were developed and approved: the Land Law, the Land Regulations and the Technical Annex. Together they can be considered as the Land Law of Mozambique. All of this legislation was elaborated by government through a genuine process of participation by civil society, the NGO community (including religious organizations) and other stakeholders, resulting in solid instruments for policy implementation that are legitimate for all, rather than in documents that are alien to their beneficiaries.
This process is considered an important contribution to the creation of awareness among all Mozambican citizens, regarding not only the land issue but participatory democracy in general. Civil society has adopted the "land theme" through the Campanha Terra (Land Campaign), which disseminates the spirit and contents of the Land Law in simple, local languages, allowing it to reach tens of thousands of households, community leaders, local authorities, administrators, etc.
During the iterative and interactive Land Law reform process, a number of policy and legal concepts were, and still are, widely and openly debated among the stakeholders. Given the innovative character of the Land Law and the lack of practical experience in dealing with several of the issues it raises, these discussions have contributed to the unravelling of some fundamental concepts contained in the Law but rather vaguely perceived in its initial stages of development. The process was facilitated by the implementation of 21 pilot exercises dealing with community land delimitation and covering different socio-economic and cultural settings.
One important outcome is that a number of values have been acquired and are slowly becoming part of daily life in Mozambique. These now need to be introduced to different environments in order to involve the entire society. However, it has become clear that the promotion of the new legal mechanisms requires further clarification of concepts and values. In the early stages of implementation, there is still a risk that a lack of clarity may lead to misinterpretation, which would eventually create conditions for bypassing the spirit of the law or even the law itself.
Rural households have always contributed substantially to the national product, but are considered as having subsistence-oriented livelihood strategies, not making investments and not being integrated into a market economy. It has been claimed that such livelihood strategies are not compatible with private entrepreneurship principles and that, therefore, rural community development must be considered parallel to, and not integrated with, the private sector. The apparently weak position of the communities in an open market economy results in the concept of reserving land for their development and providing them, within this closed structure, with state-financed basic services and infrastructure. In practice, this has resulted in a strong move to separate communities, spatially, from private investment areas, thus putting communities in a position of ever-increasing dependency which undermines their development potential.
Such an approach espouses all the false dichotomies that are often claimed to exist between a community-based, "subsistence" economy embedded in custom and an individualized, accumulation economy that uses modern administration techniques. It is based on the belief that demarcation brings development, whereas history has shown that it is development that brings stronger forms of tenure and results, eventually, in demarcation.
The Land Policy, on the other hand, does not follow this reasoning and relies heavily on the rural household sector as an engine for economic development. As such, one of its main objectives is the creation of a favourable environment for the economic development of the country, which integrates rather than separates the private sector and the rural household sector, with mutual benefits for all stakeholders. A significant achievement of the Land Law reform process is the adoption by all actors of the "open border development model", which creates the necessary favourable environment.
The open border development model can be described as being an integrative model, in which the community and other land users exist side by side in an extensive area, managed by the community in collaboration with recognized state institutions. The community can reject requests for concessions on the grounds that the land is required for future community needs or has some communal or socially important use attached to it. Alternatively, the community can approve a concession application provided that the new investor accepts a deal that is favourable to the development of the community.
As opposed to a closed community structure with exclusive rights, where the state (with limited resources) is the main investment provider, this model promotes partnerships between the community and outside investors, with the state playing a regulatory role. It is clear that the use and management of land and other natural resources such as forests and water are main targets for these partnerships. While the principle of partnership is implicit in the 1995 Land Policy, the concept of the open border model was not formally presented to a national audience until the Beira Conference in 1998, when it was approved, in principle, as the way forward.
To date, the rural communities appear to be in a rather weak position in terms of negotiating as equal partners. The period following the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF)-induced economic reform programme in Mozambique has demonstrated that, although the promotion of private investment can lead to greater macroeconomic output, it also entails greater inequality at the local level, with larger private farmers being the main beneficiaries of change. In particular, the rush for access to land and other natural resources, at the expense of the communities, leads to a process of socio-economic differentiation among rural producers.
An excellent tool for assuring that communities and their members have secure access to land and, at the same time, are put in a stronger position vis-à-vis their more powerful partners is the recognition of their rights to use and manage their resources. These rights are not new; they exist through occupation of the resources, as stipulated in the Land Law, and do not necessarily need to be registered. A main problem is that, when these rights are not registered, outsiders are sometimes not aware of their existence, although local people know about them and respect them. In the past, outsiders have taken advantage of the situation to obtain so- called "free areas" for development; the criterion for identifying free areas often being the absence of visibly established land uses such as intensive cultivation.
Previous attempts to register land in rural areas have not had satisfactory results. A few years ago the option of assuring land rights through individual land registry was considered. This was defended by arguing that, in an ever-more individualized society, any form of cooperative registry would be difficult to manage because of a lack of common goals and little social cohesion. Communities are heterogeneous; different players have different interests and there is considerable social stratification. However, after being uprooted for years by war and disaster, most refugees return to their zones of origin, resisting resettlement elsewhere, because social security networks are in place and operational in these areas - traditional mechanisms for organizing access to land for all community members, including immigrants, are especially efficient. Thus there exist social structures that underpin land registry under an appropriate cooperative form.
Another difficulty with individual rural plot registry is that households operate in complex agrarian systems in which they have access to several dispersed parcels of land. A wide range of resources are used in common (sacred places, lagoons, some forests), but with strict management rules. Registering all of these individually would not reflect the true situation, would be very expensive and may not even be technically possible.
A recent cooperative type of land registry, based on the creation of "associations" (normally groups of people who share the same entrepreneurial ambitions) failed to be efficient, let alone reflect rural reality. The procedures were cumbersome, and it was difficult and time-consuming to register such associations officially. The associations had very limited numbers of members, thereby constituting élite groups within communities. In addition, the land that associations wanted to register often included prime land and other key resources such as lowlands with important water resources for irrigation: registration of such lands led to the immediate exclusion of a majority of the population from the management and eventual use of these resources.
The concept of co-titling (co-titularidade) was introduced into the Land Law as an economical and quick way of registering the community's lands. Co-titling refers to the registration of land that belongs to the community, and not to individuals within that community. It confirms the existing rights of the community to their lands with the same degree of security as a land title has for a private concession. A community land certificate is the outcome of the registration process, and has the same legal value for confirming land rights as a land title.
It is clear that development will bring more individual land and resources rights - they already exist - but the open border development model caters for that. The advantage is that there is now an efficient mechanism in place to assure that the future individualization of tenure passes through a process of consultation and negotiation with the rightful managers of the land, the community.
During this process, one of the main issues has been how to identify a community, its land rights and the area over which those rights exist. The major conclusion drawn is that, given the wide variety of interpretations and, within each interpretation, the wide range of sociocultural settings, it is not possible to make an overall definition of the concept "community". Because of this, the government has abandoned its attempts to define a community by decree.
However, for the purpose of co-titling, the Land Law has defined the concept of the "local community" as "a group of families and individuals living in a territory, at the locality level or below, that has the aim of safeguarding common interests through the protection of residential areas, farming areas (cultivated or fallow), forests, sites of cultural importance, grazing lands, water sources and areas of expansion". Extensive fieldwork has demonstrated that this concept corresponds to the present situation in rural Mozambique. Thus, whereas co-titling provides fast and cheap registry, the local community assures that what is registered reflects the rural reality. This system has legal backing, having been approved by law in the Technical Annex, and is legitimate, being the result of wide consultation, testing and validation with all sectors of Mozambican society.
Identification of a local community is based on field analysis of the local populations' social organization, with special emphasis on management issues (access, holding and transfer of land), the existence and functioning of management institutions and their representatives, and relations among different stakeholders. It is important to consider horizontal relations of cooperation and social cohesion, as well as vertical relations of power and authority.
The identification of local community lands follows a different systems approach based on analysis of rural household strategies. The main characteristics of these strategies are:
Community land identification should be based on these rural household strategies, and not on the land use patterns of intensively cultivated areas that are currently followed. The latter are conjunctural and are direct functions of, among other factors, labour availability and the cycle of family development. They therefore present a static picture that leaves no room for an expansion phase.
In practical terms, the lands of a local community coincide with the territories over which a group of local land managers have jurisdiction, i.e. their management territories of land and natural resources. At the same time, these management territories often coincide with lineage territories.
The Technical Annex provides a flexible methodology for identifying the existence of legitimate land rights and the territory over which such land rights exist.
The securing of rights on the basis of co-titling and local community concepts has produced a series of basic principles that have been widely discussed over the last few years and that are now commonly accepted as realities.
Land cannot be separated from other natural resources because they are all used and managed in a complementary, integrated and dynamic way. When community territory is identified in terms of management territory (access to land), its delimitation on the basis of ecological characteristics (such as watersheds) or resource endowments (such as forest inventories) is not necessarily appropriate. A good example of this is the Tchuma Tchato project, where the target area was delineated on the basis of a wildlife survey. Here, the boundaries of the ecological territory did not automatically match with those of the management areas of the local communities, which led to serious problems in distributing the benefits derived from ecotourism to the selected communities.
The example illustrates the potential conflict between community-based development and resource-based development. In the first approach, the community is the target and the natural resources are considered as an asset to be developed. In the second, the natural resource is the target and the community is used as a management tool, often for conservation purposes. The Tchuma Tchato case also contributes to discussions about whether community-based natural resource management is an alternative for rural development, or part of rural development.
It is possible that within the community lands identified on the basis of management territories there are areas that require, or may require, special resource management practices. Management territories are often characterized by specific physical management practices aimed at more efficient and sustainable use, or for conservation purposes. Examples are lowland areas with special drainage requirements, areas set aside for the conservation of specific wood species, irrigation perimeters and wildlife management areas. Although such areas are identified within the community lands, they should not be mistaken as being the community lands. They can be delimited and subsequently registered in the name of an interest group that is different from the local community, but only with the agreement of representatives of the entire community. When these areas cross community land boundaries, partnerships between the communities involved can be encouraged for their management.
The non-separation of land rights from natural resource rights also has legislative implications. The laws dealing with land and other resources (forest, wildlife, minerals, water) need to be streamlined and compatible, and it is not clear that this is the case between the Land Law and the Forest and Wildlife Law in Mozambique. The Land Law confirms the existing rights of local communities to use and manage their lands and natural resources, while the Forest and Wildlife Law gives rights to communities to use the forest for own consumption only, thus reflecting the false concept of self-sufficiency strategies that is often associated with rural households. In the case of commercialization of forest products, a new right has to be created by the state under the form of an exploitation licence.
The local community has legal status and should be considered as a legal entity that is eligible to hold private rights. Therefore, its representatives can, for example, sign contracts with potential investors or apply for bank loans without the need to create any other cooperative form such as an association.
It is the responsibility of the communities to identify themselves within existing management institutions and to choose representatives for public meetings. Although the local community is often formed around structures that are based on lineages at one or other hierarchical level, its functioning is not confined to members of the founding family. There are a wide range of mechanisms through which outsiders can gain access to resources and be integrated into the local community. These structures differ greatly from region to region, reflecting the rich variety and diversification of customs, so codification of customary laws is a cumbersome process. The existing land legislation system is not based on codification but allows for flexibility and self-determination, albeit within the framework of a common methodology, the Technical Annex.
Local communities, therefore, do not always coincide with lower-level administrative units such as localities, although in several areas of the country they have similar boundaries. Neither should the community's territories be confused with the regulados, although again there are similarities in some regions. In both cases, such similarities reflect remnants of the territorial subdivision of the country during the colonial period.
The main results of self-determination are that the community has a social identity, and that its representatives and corresponding territory are legitimate entities for the community and its neighbours.
The methodology of the Technical Annex considers the community itself as the major player in the identification of its rights and the delimitation of its corresponding territory. An external team facilitates the process of self-determination by providing the community with a set of tools that can be used to translate indigenous knowledge into a form that can be registered in a modern registry system, the National Cadastre. This method is genuinely participatory because the communities identify their own values while the technical team facilitates the process. It relies heavily on the findings of the participatory rural appraisal, including participatory mapping.
The approach has been tested and found to work in all ten provinces through the implementation of a series of 21 pilot exercises. Some 130 development workers and technicians and 45 potential trainers have been trained in applying the methodology, so a solid foundation for implementation of the Land Law at the local level has been developed.
The validation of existing rights and values is inherent to the methodology itself, and is achieved through consensus seeking - one of the greatest virtues that Mozambican communities possess. A series of validation mechanisms are built into the registration process so that the interests of groups within the community and neighbouring communities and of private investors are taken into account.
The outcomes of such a process are, first, consensus among the different interest groups within the community and, second, a basis from which to negotiate agreement in cases of territorial conflicts with neighbouring communities. Through these outcomes, implementation of the Land Law and, more specifically, registration of community land rights can contribute to intra- and intercommunity conflict resolution and prevention. A third outcome is consensus with private investors, which serves in resolving existing conflicts or preventing future conflicts between private investors and communities. Thus, the process can contribute significantly to addressing the issue of post-independence concession requests that were not registered according to the previous land law and regulations.
The Land Law also recognizes the importance of rights of way and provides mechanisms for their recognition on the part of all actors through describing them in the community land registry process.
Communities and their leaders have always played an important role in land and resources management, even in times when they were marginalized during the socialization of the rural areas. This active role has now been confirmed by law and mechanisms have been created to facilitate its implementation in practice.
Local communities identify themselves and choose their representatives for public meetings without outsider involvement. The outcomes of this elective procedure are officially recognized in the Technical Annex. Community representation plays a pivotal role in the identification of the community's territory, in the validation of neighbouring communities' territories and in territorial conflict resolution. These are very concrete responsibilities which are the outcome of a locally generated process which is, itself, induced by a sensitization process prior to the land delimitation.
It is also anticipated that local community representatives will take a more active role in the management of other natural resources by, for example, constituting the core of a future committee dealing with integrated natural resources management. This may facilitate their links with district and other local-level state authorities because, according to law, they represent the entire community. Indeed, relations between local administrations and community representatives still depend, to a great extent, on the latter's legitimacy within the state and not necessarily within the community itself.
The presence of community representatives at public meetings strengthens such local values as customary land management institutions, but does not entail the institutionalization of customary authorities. By tradition, the latter are actively involved in organizing access to land, including for outsiders, land conflict resolution and reconfirmation of boundaries. When the local population regards the customary authorities as legitimate they will probably be elected as part of the community's representation. Through this system, the modern state can make effective use of the qualities of local leaders, focusing on their traditional role in land matters, at no cost to the state.
The Land Law provides mechanisms for improving women's access to land, and secures these rights through oral (good faith) or written testimony of occupation (land title). In the previous law, women had, at least officially, only indirect access to land through the heads of their families, i.e. their husbands. Now inheritance rights must be independent of sex. It has been argued that the granting of increased powers to customary authorities automatically undermines women's rights, but an article (x) in the Land Law on customary practices states that they must abide by the constitution, i.e. that "men and women are equal before the law in all aspects of political, economic, social and cultural life". As equal members within the community, women now have direct access to the community lands and can be selected to represent their communities in land management decision-making processes. However, over the next few years, profound advocacy work on the part of NGOs and others will be necessary to solidify these values.
There are indications from the field that the process leading to community land registration is an excellent tool for strengthening local empowerment. The methodology used comprises extensive information and sensitization activities, rural analysis with emphasis on land and natural resource use and management, activities aimed at creating consensus within the community and consultations with neighbouring communities, resulting in enhanced awareness of present and future land management options. Local accountability for land management increases when the situation in neighbouring communities - and thus the definite character of land expansion - is taken into account.
The state now needs to reinforce this embryonic form of local accountability with appropriate measures. It is imperative that local communities gain direct and substantial benefits, both monetary and in kind, from sound local-level management. The redistribution of financial benefits between the different public services (such as forestry services, national and provincial cadastres) and the community must be well balanced. In this context it must be observed that communities derive no direct benefits from the payment of forest exploitation licences of from fines collected for failure to comply with existing forestry legislation.
The Mozambican Land Law reform process is the result of interplay and dialogue among different actors from all layers of society, with the ILC and its executive TS in a promoting and facilitating role.
The contents of the Land Policy are largely made up of empirical analysis of the rural environment, in particular the functioning of the rural household sector, its strategies for using and managing land and other natural resources, its integration into an open market economy and its socio-economic relations and exchanges with the private sector. The academic world, NGOs and the public sector have all contributed to this process.
The Land Law, Regulations and Technical Annex are products of a wide and intensive consultative process and interactions between the public and civil sectors, in which NGOs often play a lobbying role. The more practical parts of the Land Law have been developed, tested and validated by technical public services and NGOs, before being included in legally accepted documents. The contents and spirit of the Land Law and its implications for households and communities in daily life have been widely disseminated by civil society through the Land Campaign.
The Law is being implemented in a multidisciplinary way, with clearly defined responsibilities for all actors. The state, through its relevant and existing institutions (the ILC, TS, etc.) has a coordinating role, in which the main tasks are elaborating a methodology framework, ensuring national compatibility and administering national and local registers, and a regulatory role, which lies in validating land claims. By its nature, the non-governmental sector is involved in community sensitization, working at the grassroots level, and diagnostics. The private sector is encouraged to participate in land delimitation, in coordination with the public cadastral services, while civil society has acquired an information and dissemination role through the Land Campaign.
A significant number of multilateral and bilateral donors, specialized institutions and private sector agents have contributed to the financing of this programme; a considerable part of these funds having been channelled through the TS of the ILC. The implementation of the programme by all the actors involved has created an environment of trust, dialogue and mutual respect.
Through its participatory approach, the Government of Mozambique has also expressed a genuine desire for partnership in achieving its policy and economic goals, with communities taking a very active role. The Land Law reform programme, having been conducted with transparency, has created a situation of mutual trust among stakeholders which is imperative for its successful implementation in the field.
A major challenge that remains is how to strengthen ownership of the policy and legislation among its users. Initial efforts to inform Mozambican society about the process have been very successful, but have not reached all corners of the country. In addition, there is still a considerable difference between knowing about a tool and using that tool in an efficient way for development. The law must become an instrument that is controlled by ordinary people and supported by government structures for its implementation.
To complement the implementation of its policy, it is imperative that the Government of Mozambique gains as much practical experience as possible, and as quickly as possible. Any policy may have unpredictable side-effects, and any law may contain loopholes. These must be detected and adjusted, and only experience will show how this can be done.
As land rights cannot be dissociated from rights to other natural resources, there is a clear need to investigate the extent to which legislation dealing with those resources - forestry, water, minerals and others - are harmonized with the Land Law, which can be considered as the "mother law". According to the Land Law, land rights can be acquired through occupation or good faith. However, communities have not yet acquired rights to derive direct cash benefits from good management of the land and other natural resources.
The implementation of the Land Law will also require that technical servicing systems at the provincial level are improved and made more efficient, especially those cadastre services that have a major responsibility in the registry of community lands. Coordination of Land Law implementation at this level will be assured by a provincial TS which will directly assist the provincial government, but these institutions are not yet in place.
There is also a need for an effective judicial system at the local level. Once community lands are registered at a larger scale, and partnerships between community lands and the private sector start to be negotiated, the state has to monitor the situation effectively. The proper functioning of a local-level network of community tribunals and paralegal officers has to be encouraged.
The main objective of the Land Law is not only the registration of community lands, but also the engagement of all stakeholders in successful implementation of the Land Policy. Its aims include attracting investment into rural areas and promoting sustainable and equitable management of the resources that does not penalize, but rather benefits, the communities. There is therefore a need for clear ideas about the constraints and opportunities for community development, and about the necessary conditions for the law's successful implementation. Participatory land use planning, area-based management and community-based natural resource management have already proved to be important tools. Further experience, through pilot testing, is now required if these development instruments are to be fully exploited and fitted into an overall economic development strategy.
The open border development model promotes the establishment of partnerships between the communities and the private sector. A next priority in the process of Land Policy implementation is to investigate how such partnerships can be put in place effectively and how their proper functioning can be facilitated. This must include the development of mechanisms for sharing resources or the benefits derived from their management, the promotion of effective negotiation platforms and procedures, and the reinforcement of communities' negotiation capacity. Compliance with partnership contracts will also have to be monitored, and sanctions for non-compliance established.