Welcome to this online debate on the Land Rights Implications of COVID-19, which builds upon a series of webinars on on Women’s Housing and Land Rights and COVID-19, Eviction Response During and After COVID-19 and Migration, Displacement, and De-urbanization in the Context of COVID-19 that took place last week as  result of a great collaboration effort.

The Land Portal is privileged to convene this online discussion and to collaborate with a wide range of partners from the land governance sector and beyond to ensure broad representation of stakeholders. We greatly appreciate your participation and value your contributions. 

Countries around the world are facing unprecedented challenges from COVID-19, and the need for openness, transparency, inclusion and accountability have rarely been greater.  

Access to accurate and timely information has become an essential service and it is our collective responsibility to make sure that information is kept out of lockdown during these difficult times, which threatens to undermine all of our combined efforts. COVID-19 can be used as an easy excuse to limit access and availability of key information necessary for communities to defend and secure their land rights. Cooperation now is more important than ever as the challenge is bringing clear messages to governments from different sectors in society.

Governments around the world are grappling with diminishing budgets due to contracting economies resulting from COVID-19 lockdowns. Governments from donor countries are evaluating whether or not it is worth continuing to support land governance programs, or if these precious resources should be dedicated to other efforts. In the land governance sector, we know that women’s land rights, community land rights, secure tenure and related issues are fundamental to an equitable, just and sustainable society, and we must provide clear evidence in the context of this pandemic of the relevance of this work.

We are counting on you, land governance stakeholders from around the world, so feel free to openly share your perspective here in this online debate.

Secure land rights are fundamental to sustainable development and to the prosperity of women, men, and families around the world. The COVID-19 pandemic, and the attendant economic and social upheaval, underscore the importance of land rights.

Our homes, built on secure land, are not only a source of shelter, but a place of sanctuary from the coronavirus. But many are not so fortunate. From the favelas of Brazil to the slums of Mumbai, we know that millions are homeless or face the looming threat of eviction from their land and homes.

For women, COVID-19 is another risk factor on top of layers of gender discrimination. In many countries where women lack rights to own or inherit land, those losing their spouse to coronavirus risk losing their homes and land as well.

In periods of economic upheaval and uncertainty, land is quite the literally the foundation for stability, security, and opportunity. Without it, we witness millions of migrant workers caught between worlds – joblessness for those who remain in urban centers, landlessness for many who return to the villages they left behind.

Against these myriad threats to lives and livelihoods, secure land rights are an essential countermeasure – a stabilizing force that affords women and men the opportunity to invest in their land and in themselves, and an add-on accelerator improving outcomes in housing, food security, gender equity, and more.

In terms of the threat posed by Covid-19 to the safety and security of women, and to their ability to exercise land and inheritance rights, it may be significant to consider developing a constituency of support internationally. In the UK itself, there is a particular opportunity to develop links and support as many of our citizens are from all parts of the world. Our black and ethnic minority citizens identify with their countries of heritage, and are often in touch with their issues. Purposefully giving information and the role they can play in supporting change that benefits these countries that they relate to can become an important part of the picture.

COVID numbers are fairly low in Liberia, with less than 150 active cases. However, the country is in a lockdown with restricted movements between counties and reduction of almost 70% of workforce to only essential personnel.  We do see a threat to women’s land rights particularly in rural areas.   There is a challenge of maintaining the momentum gained from the passage of the land rights act which includes significant protection for women’s land rights.

I think we are still understanding the impacts.  But experience from other crises (natural disasters, conflicts) have shown that these types of situations can lead to further erosion of women’s land rights, particularly if they are already insecure either because of informality (such as in slums) or because they are held in customary or traditional systems - and in these situations women can lose their access and their rights if their spouse dies, if they can no longer afford to pay rent or if others take advantage of the situation to evict women and their families.  And this is on top of the health risk women will be dealing with as care-givers in their families and communities and as those most likely to be informally employed and therefore needing to work to survive.

Human rights defenders are key allies in addressing the challenges posed by the coronavirus pandemic, they should be recognized and protected without discrimination. Reports of land rights defenders being arrested by the police during the lockdown, such as documented in Uganda and Cameroon are retrogressive and should be addressed immediately, especially given that these activists are going out of their way to protect the rights of the vulnerable despite the quarantine measures which make it difficult for the defenders facing threats to file complaints with police and access judicial remedies.

While we know that the widespread closure of the courtrooms due to public health safety concerns occasioned by the virus has brought to a halt court services resulting in delays in delivery of court judgment or cancellation of judgment for most vulnerable groups, it is my hope that actors will mobilize support to bring relief to the defenders across the continent who are wrongfully detained for speaking up for the rights of vulnerable groups such as women who may be subject to familial land grabbing as a result of the virus. The focus must shift to other noble mechanisms such as Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), or the adoption of technology to expedite justice.

When the COVID- 19 guidelines, sanitizing and social-distancing rules were announced in Kenya for the widow Mideva living in rural Bungoma County on her 2 acres parcel of land, this announcement left a lot of questions in her mind. Mideva continued with her farm activities , knowing that she may not get any assistance from her children working in Nairobi. What causes her concern ARE her 3 grandchildren left to her by her late daughter.  She hopes that their health will not be compromised. Mideva felt that , the government was making little effort to contain the locust infestation that was ravaging nearby Counties and there was little to assist her in combating this infestation if locusts invaded to her County. Hence, the March 2020 , Covid- 19 annoucement felt to her as a 'Nairobi- urban' packed and packaged matter and didn't concern her directly. Of importance to her was: making use of the long rains, planting food crops,minding her health and continuing with her changaa [illicit brew] business to supplement her income. Only when the when Government offices were closed, schools , churches and public transport shut down and the local Chief requested her to stop her brewing business in late March, did it strike her that something terrible was happening. To date ( June 2020), there have been no COVID-19 related deaths in her village or any that she claims she knows of. The death of a Politician's brother who lived in Nairobi and no one attended his funeral was testament to her that COVID-19 originated in the City, yet they were poorly informed about it. Mideva desires to know more about the COVID-19 pandemic in a language she appreciates ( her local Lubukusu dialect) so that she can be one of the Community leaders taking charge of this matter and care of her 3 grandchildren. Mideva was happy that her grandchildren were able to assist her more during the planting and weeding seasons. Land matters are important for for now Health matters are a priority for Mideva. In her words, 'If I die or I am sick, will I till my land or go to buy seed, tawe (No! in local dialect)

My comment: My research project in a rural farming community in Bungoma County, where women account for 70% of the residents living and working on the farms. Any concerns women have in regard to their secure land tenure rights have temporarily stopped. It therefore is too soon to discuss about the 'impact of COVID-19' in an area where women like Mideva feel that the packaging of the pandemic was urban, of priviledged lifestyles and required it being transported to them by a relative living in Nairobi or one of the major urban centres. 

Extract- from on-going research work on land matters in rural Bungoma County Kenya. Mideva ( pseudo-name)

This is a great example from Fibian that shows the importance of looking carefully at context and not rushing to judgement about what the eventual impacts of Covid-19 on women's land tenure security in general might end up being. Particularly interesting to see Mideva's appreciation of her grandchildren (not in school) being able to help in the fields instead - if growing more crops could offset lost income from the brewing business that's negatively affected by Covid-19 lockdowns, Mideva may be no worse off net, and therefore no more at risk of tenure insecurity than her current level of (pre-pandemic) risk. Let's have more of this really valuable nuance to enrich this discussion over the coming few days.

I agree with you Dr Lukalo. I happened to have stayed in Bungoma and engage with the community more so widows and child headed household. land is a big issue that needs to be addresed. 

In Kenya, land and valuable properties is predominantly accessed through inheritance and largely passed through male figure of the family (father, son, uncle, nephew).  Additionally,  due to persistent   absence of women in decision making on matters governing land and assets, they are further marginalized when it comes to access, use, own, maintain and control related rights.  Furthermore, the gender inequality in access and control of other resources including capital negate women’s ability to buy land. No wonder in Kenya, like in many developing countries that are heavily weighed by patriarchal practices, less that 5% of women of the total population own land and their secure tenure rights is precarious.

Nonetheless, grassroots women in Kenya have  continued to innovate  ways to increase their security of land tenure. This includes:

1. The use of Community Land Watch dog groups to safeguard their inheritance where legal processes are hard to reach.  This innovative community led dispute resolutions mechanism helped either through successfully mediating conflicts or facilitated community collective actions that helps to pursue legal or administrative interventions when conflicts arise. 
2. To access more land women have found a way of pulling resources together to buy assets including land
3. Women have been at the centre of social audits ensuring that real time data is collected and available for their use or to avail to others where there is potential threats towards women secure land and inheritance rights.   Thus possible redress action is taken.
4. Women land rights continue to improve when families visibilise/recognize and acknowledge  contribution they make in the family economy.
5. As educators, women have been instrumental in creating awareness on women’s legal right to land as well as organizing to challenge norms and practices that inhibits women to have secure land and inheritance rights

The emergence of COVID 19 has compounded problems of secure women land and inheritance rights.

1. Women who live in rural and urban areas and in poverty have  limited opportunity to use online tools to organize . They have mostly  used face to face meetings. Thus vulnerable individuals who are threatened with disinheritance and eviction have no social supports during lockdowns
2. In Kenya and perhaps in many countries land administration offices have been shut making it impossible to access related assistance
3. Small farm holders especially women in deep rural areas are most affected by lack of markets for their produce,  and risks their claim for very basic rights on access to   land resources
4. During this time of lockdown, escalating cases of gender based violence that is more targeted to women and girls further compound the threat for women to lose their secure tenure and inheritance rights. This is addition to bodily harm and destruction of hard earned modest accumulated wealth
5. Informal settlements have experienced heightened evictions and most affected are women and children who risk losing ownership of the valuable assets.
6. All over the world and Kenya is not different, there is danger of reported accelerated and grabbing of land and illegal utilization of natural resources due to low community surveillance capacities .  Women especially from indigenous communities and those that rely on forests resources for example will definitely be the biggest losers.
7. Depending on how long the cessation on travel takes, land holders whose land that they till is not within the area that they live,  are likely to lose their land.

   Esther Mwaura Muiru

ILC, Women’s Land Right Manager,

Very very true.  Traditionaly the caregiving was mainly limited to supporting sick and needy in the families  besides usual daily household chores. Today many care givers are also engaged in unpaid work related to advancing local governance and accountibility. They are doing social audits and negotiating and holding  administrators and politicians accountable during planning,   budgetting and implementaion of projects.  . Yet,  majority  have no formal employment,  relying on stipends from CSOs whenever possible, they end up doing alot voluntarily. And its all good, but its an added burden. With COVID 19 and decreased individual source of income, it will become worse 

Land rights and access to land are key to women’s empowerment. Land is at the core of so many things in rural areas. It provides food, a livelihood, even a business – individually or as a group. It also opens the door to access water or to finance. It gives women the power to make decisions at home. That’s why UN Women works to promote women’s land rights.

We are aware of the impact of COVID on women and girls in rural areas. COVID is a health, social and economic crisis, the impact of which is not distributed equally across gender lines. Pre-existing inequalities are making women more vulnerable to the crisis, and the crisis risks in turn widening gender gaps even more. Across rural areas of West and Central Africa, women producers are seeing the disruption of cropping schedules, are unable to do transformation of agricultural products because of social distancing measures or can’t access urban markets because of travel restrictions. The livelihoods of millions are at risk. 

UN Women supports women’s participation in climate resilient agriculture value chains across Africa. As part of this work, we promote legislation that recognizes the equal rights to land, and support Governments in making it happen where it already exists. To cushion the impact of COVID, UN Women is supporting women producers in different ways, such as linking women cooperatives to urban markets, through agreements with Governments to source from women producers for the provision of food transfers, or providing women producers with training and access to digital platforms to access markets. We’re also retraining women agricultural producers in the production of COVID response goods such as soap and hydroalcoholic gel.

But, most important, UN Women is engaging in a conversation with Governments, the private sector and civil society about Building Back Better. In the coming months and years, it will be essential to rebuild social and economic systems for the post COVID period which address, rather than reproduce gender inequalities. In that conversation, there is an important place for discussions about legal discrimination in land legislation or failures of implementation of existing laws that preclude effective equality in access to land in the region. Securing women’s rights to land is critical to build resilience, support women’s empowerment, and achieve gender equality in the post COVID era. Other important pieces of that conversation are reforms to address informality in agriculture, as well as building stronger social protection systems that work for those in vulnerable or informal employment, continue strengthening climate smart approaches to agriculture production, addressing gender gaps in access to finance in rural areas, and recognizing, reducing and redistributing unpaid care work.  

It is affecting both women and men. What I have not yet seen is the gender disaggregated data. 

Thanks so much for this thoughtful comment Liz.  I agree that it's important to look at all vulnerable peoples and not to approach women as a undifferentiated whole and to presume harms when, in fact, harms may be limited.  I do think some women may face some additional risks if, as in India, more city dwellers head back to rural areas and need access to lands for livelihoods or if women are less able to travel to defend contested land claims.  But, thanks so much for asking us to consider such linkages in more detail and more specifically!  Best, Karol

Elena, thanks for pointing out what UN Women is doing and how you are helping address women's land rights and COVID-related challenges.  And so exciting that in your Building Back Better work you are engaging governments to work directly with women to understand, address and meet their needs. I also wanted to point readers to the wealth of materials UN Women has on gender equality and COVID that can be found here:  https://asiapacific.unwomen.org/en/news-and-events/in-focus/gender-equal... The breadth of your work is an inspiration.  Best, Karol 

Tenure security is critical for women because owning land or having access to productive land provides them a way to generate higher income. Therefore, strengthening women land rights is critical and helps in reducing them being unfairly insubordinate into political and economic positions which increase the effects of marginalization and poverty. The measures, such as curfews, lockdowns, etc., imposed by governments to fight against the spread of the COVID 19 virus impacted strongly on the grassroots women groups with regards to protecting their rights to land and housing. In Kenya, cases of eviction of widows were reported to one of Huairou Commission member groups. In the early stage of the lockdown situation, a widow asked for support because her in-laws decided to throw her and her children from their home. The watchdog group was not able to assist them because even small gatherings were not permitted and local authorities not reachable. Protecting women’s land rights is becoming more challenging and groups are searching for innovative ways to ensure that women and orphans are not left behind. Also the lack of daily work caused by lockdown and social distancing is creating a situation where women living in slums are risking not only hunger but also losing their home. 

Great to see so many contributions to this important discussion. The pandemic has exposed deep-seated inequalities based on gender and on socio-economic factors (eg income, age) that influence gender relations. We need to document how these developments affect not just land relations but also the more overarching governance systems. Grace’s comment about land/human rights defenders is a case in point – and many defenders are themselves women facing gendered repression systems. It is early days, and impacts may take time to unfold and be documented. But this type of forum is a great way to “crowdsource” early insights so we can begin to understand the issues and chart next steps. The contributions from Nana Ama, Esther, Fibian, Patricia, Dagnachew, Mina and several others provide great examples of this. I also agree with Liz on not rushing to conclusions and instead seeking to understand these emerging stories in all their complexities.

We know inequality between genders exists, that women, especially women who are poor, are vulnerable to shocks, and the pandemic is a massive shock. The pandemic's economic toll means fewer resources for all countries to address ever increasing problems. It is difficult to get governments and donors to make concrete changes to improve women's tenure security in the best of times. The specifics of what is needed and what is possible will be different from country to country and within countries, so in my view, the most immediate help we can offer is to support organizations and people working in-country with vulnerable women already. Learn what is needed from them, discuss what is doable in the short term, and support them in the best way we can.

Access to land is essential to food production and income generation. It is also a key social and economic asset, crucial for cultural identity, political power and participation in decision making. Social and cultural beliefs often discriminate against people because of gender, social class or ethnic group. To reduce hunger and poverty and promote sustainable development, efforts must be made to address these inequalities. Ensuring equal land rights for men and women increases economic opportunities, encourages investment in land and food production, improves family security during economic and social transitions and leads to better land stewardship. The global covid19 pandemic is further entrenching these social norms around ownership of land.  Land is a livelihood commodity that impacts agriculture, production and is one key question that needs to be addressed in the campaign area. Due to lockdowns, quarantines  cases of land grabbing have been witnessed in some countries because now the women cannot access justice centers to secure their land rights.

Home schooling and caring for the elderly and sick has fallen mainly to women. A survey showed 84% of women doing the household tasks while there has been a correlating increase in, say for example, men having more publications coming out during the lockdown than women. The gender pay gap becomes more noticeable as does the glass ceiling that women experience – especially women from minorities like Muslim, black or travellers, or women with disabilities, or the absence of (farm and consumer) women’s participation or representation in the agricultural sector (this adds in to many other issues which can be summarised as pre-existing vulnerabilities are exacerbated by or more noticeable in the crisis). Financial assistance (Pandemic Unemployment Payment) is more difficult for women to access. Women exiting maternity leave had to fight for the right to apply for the payment. 

Farmers are exempt from the lockdown restrictions that the public is bound by because we are ‘essential workers’ providing food for the nation. [The fact that this statement is inaccurate is ignored. Ireland imports most of its fruit and vegetables and exports over 90% of the milk and meat it produces. The industries which package or process the meat and milk are fraught with ‘hotspots’ due to awful labour practices.] We farmers are thus able to travel more (our land parcels are not contiguous and can be some distance from each other), and interact with more people (vets, marts, agricultural supply stores etc). As women are caring for the elderly and sick, and looking after the needs and schooling of children – we are less inclined to be out on the road or interacting with people who are in contact with many others (eg vets, livestock agents, supply stores). Widows, spinsters and vulnerable women at risk due to co-morbidities or with disabilities are similarly constrained by their need to cocoon.

Am also sharing insights from the LAC region where oxfam is working with the Indegenous people. " For over 500 years, indigenous peoples of the Amazon and across the Americas have faced invasions and loss of their ancestral territories, ethnic and socioeconomic discrimination, and the constant threat of physical and cultural extermination resulting in displacement, disease, and genocide. Now, indigenous peoples – particularly those living in voluntary isolation – are gravely threatened by the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. "  read more on the impact of covid 19 in the Amazon https://amazonwatch.org/news/2020/0408-statement-in-solidarity-with-amaz...

Until last Friday, a total lockdown from 3pm to morning was in place nationwide, while monitoring was not as robust in the rural areas as in the cities, the shortened day impacted women’s ability to leave home, get to their farms, work and return home before 3pm. For the past 2 months many women have been unable to farm and this has resulted in additional threats to lands (their plots are being reclaimed), and a threat to livelihood creation and increase in food insecurity.

Lack of LLA’s presence in the rural areas, due to the suspension of land related services has given rise to increase encroachments, illegal occupation and a rise in land related disputes.

Without the ongoing M&E that the LLA was implementing, there is a threat that progress made in actualizing equitable access to land, again particularly in rural customary areas is likely to stifled.

For Kenya, I believe that there will likely be added pressure on land as a result of COVID-19 in general because of the impact the disease has had on the economy and on livelihoods due to the lockdown of urban markets (particularly Nairobi and Mombasa) which has probably helped stem the transmission of the virus to rural areas, but has likely had a major impact on food markets. Fortunately, from a health perspective so far, the impact of COVID-19 has largely spared the rural population. A majority of deaths are However, the impact on productivity and farmgate sales are most certainly large, although not yet quantified and difficult to pin directly on COVID-19 because Kenya experienced extremely heavy rains in many parts of the country in April and May (killing over 200 persons, whereby there have been 69 deaths attributed to COVID-19 to date). Hence, the impact on women landowners will be greater in the sense that all smallholder farmers will be trying to eek out more production in the ensuing seasons (planting season for maize is ongoing), albeit with diminished access to inputs due to disruption in businesses, supply chains and diminished buying power of farmers. Added pressure on the land includes the unplanned migration of urban residents to rural homesteads, resulting possibly in newfound interest in taking over family lands, and perhaps the usurping women’s rightful inheritance and reverting to the customary practice of land from deceased males going to sons rather than to the wife.

More concerted efforts need to be made to 1) educate women of their rights around land and property, 2) educate local administrators of women’s lands rights, and 3) watchdogging local courts to ensure that they are upholding the Constitution and legal rights of women. More gains can also be made to add the names of spouses to land titles. The only way that women's rights to land are ultimately if their name is
on the title deed, linked to their ID number. There are too many cases of men selling family lands out from under their wives by hiring a proxy female to go to the land office with them to grant authorization.

A system has to be devised to be more savvy to prevent such widespread fraud.

he Amazigh woman is active and has always been able to generate a substantial profit from the surplus of these achievements.  Weaving, pottery, food agriculture (vegetable garden), dairy, livestock (goats, chickens...), some of these products are intended to meet the needs of the household, but some of them are intended for sale in order to generate enough money to meet other needs.  Unfortunately, the closure of the "Souks" / weekly markets and travel bans have had a heavy impact on women's activities because of a lack of sales so they are unable to sell their goods, which are sometimes perishable, so they cannot keep them or obtain the basic necessities for their families.  

The Social Justice Coalition (SJC) works with communities in informal settlements to ensure that informal settlements in Cape Town have access to basic services. One of our campaigns is on ensuring that communities in informal settlements, who are often some of the most vulnerable and marginalised in South Africa, are safe from illegal evictions. At the beginning of the lockdown in South Africa, the Government Gazette No: 43167 dated 26 March 2020 declared that evictions are suspended during the lockdown. Despite this, and the amended Regulations issued in terms of section 27(2) of the Disaster Management Act dated 16 April 2020, which also suspends evictions during lockdown; some communities in informal settlements still found themselves facing evictions. This has mostly affected women. The SJC, alongside other organisations, are working with these communities to ensure that these illegal evictions stop even beyond the lockdown and that informal settlements get access to basic services such as water and electricity. 

COVID-19 IS A WIDOW MAKER. Global Fund for Widows estimates that of the 371,000 documented COVID-19 related deaths around the world as of 5.31.2020, approximately 70% have been men over the age of 50. In fact, the virus seems to be inexplicably killing twice as many men as it is women. GFW estimates that in the first 5 months of 2020, COVID-19 is responsible for the creation of approximately 250,000 widows.  If the novel COVID-19 virus ravages the global south as experts anticipate, we may tragically welcome an additional 3.25 million widows to the 285 million that currently exist around the world today.

LAND, INHERITANCE, AND WIDOWHOOD

The Global Fund for Widows believes that widows around the world endure 3 forms of human rights violations: Disinheritance, Discrimination, and Harmful Traditional Practices (HTPs). Disinherited widows are evicted from their marital homes and denied their rightful inheritance to land, property, and valuable assets.  Kenya’s 2019 survey confirmed that 40% of widows were disinherited from their rightful land and property.  We believe the incident of disinheritance in Africa and Asia is similar if not worse. Deeply entrenched discriminatory practices perpetrated by patriarchy and institutions such as police forces, chiefs, and courts, prevent widows from accessing justice or reclaiming their rightful estate. 

The result of Disinheritance is that widows are left impoverished, food insecure, in poor health, and unable to educate their children.  As the majority of widows were actually widowed before the age of 39, they are invariably mothers of young children. Without access to their inheritance, land and resources, their daughters become vulnerable to child marriage and sons to radicalized indoctrination.  Their lack of access to justice and resources forces them to turn to informal, insecure, and oftentimes indecent work. 

LAND, LOCKDOWN, AND WIDOWS

COVID-19 is exacerbating widows’ vulnerability. Already on the periphery of decent/secure work, global lockdowns have resulted in widows’ sudden loss of employment. Deprived of an income, widows have been forced to live off of meager savings, to the extent that any exist at all. As widows have been disinherited from their land and property, they do not have any fiscal source of backstop or support. The absence of any form of government issued social protection for widows in most developing countries further exposes their immediate and acute financial vulnerability. 

LAND, INHERITANCE, AND HUNGER

Within two weeks of individual country lockdowns, GFW’s partners around the world began sounding the alarm, reporting that widows in their countries were calling for immediate hunger relief. Having been disinherited of land and property that could have been used for simple subsistence or to generate an income, widows have no buffer to manage the impact of COVID-19 lockdowns. Food insecurity was a problem for widows before COVID-19, now starvation is their reality. As mothers of young children, they bear the added burden of feeding their young.

LAND, INHERITANCE, AND EDUCATION

Unable to afford school fees after being disinherited, widows have always found educating their children to be a major challenge. Unable to send children to school exposes their daughters to child marriage while leaving sons vulnerable to a life of radicalized indoctrination and recruitment. Impoverished and disinherited, widows also lack access to internet resources. With COVID-19 school stoppage, children of widows are unable to access online school if it exists, disrupting their qualifications for sitting for annual exams, and having long-term implications on their path forward.  Furthermore, continued lockdown and loss of employment means widows may struggle to return to work in the post-COVID world, rendering them further weakened in addressing their children’s educational needs. Exposed in this crisis is governments’ absence of social protections such as school bursaries for widows and their children.

COVID-19 & WIDOWHOOD: EXPECT FURTHER DETERIORATION 

While the Global Fund for Widows has been able to identify some of the implications that the COVID-19 pandemic is having on widows and their children, there is much that needs yet to be revealed. We expect that impoverishment and desperation will exacerbate the incidents of property grabbing as COVID-19 claims the lives of more husbands. With certainty we believe that the pandemic will continue to expose government failures to address the plight of widows, especially as it pertains to securing widows’ inheritance, land, and ownership rights. Failure to offer widows with protections such unemployment insurance, cash transfers, food rations, and school bursaries will have multigenerational impact on their families. The implications of this will continue to exacerbate the current status of widows including their hunger, vulnerability to human trafficking, and inability to educate their children. 

CALL TO ACTION

Widows inheritance rights to land and property must be secured and protected.

Hi Eugene, this is a great idea and I think echoes an idea Chris Penrose-Buckley raised in one of the other webinars.  Is this something that can be done in conjuction with CSOs?  Espaco Feminista does some similiar work in Brazil so good to connect with Patricia Chaves!  Best, Karol

This is extremely interesting.  Can you share thoughts on how the prohibition came about?  What coalition within and outside government supported this?  Did the experiences of addressing land issues after the Sumatra tsunami contribute to this approach?  Thanks, Karol

Most rural areas in Liberia are more patriarchal and do not allow women to own land. This deeply rooted cultural practice and traditional norm is still in existence even after the passage of the 2018 Land right Act which placed women as equal as men. Hence, the probability that women will face eviction from the land they are cultivating as a result of the death of a husband due to COVID-19, is high. The eviction mostly happens at the discretion of the particular family she is married into.

Additionally, the likelihood that the size of farmland for women can be reduced to make way for a male relative who has returned home due to COVID-19 is high.

Without a private land, women in deeply rooted traditional settings in Liberia cannot pass on their portion of a customary land to their children or husband if anything happens to her because women do not own land. She is at the mercy of her male relatives (father, brother, or husband) for land for cultivation or a house spot or for anything else. The Land Rights Act document alone cannot fully gurantee a systemic change to the advantage of women in this kind of setting without its full implementation and enforcement.

The Covid-19 pandemic has exacerbated some of the already existing challenges and inequalities faced by women. Land is central to our lives and its protection as a basic human right is key to ensuring human dignity. Because of its intrinsic link with many other aspects of our lives including food, health, housing and education, secure land rights serve as the premise upon which many other civil, political and socio-economic rights can be realised.

For many women, land is inherently linked with their position in the family and community. Access and control over land has a direct bearing on women’s decision-making power within the family and her social status. Often, access to land is dependent on women’s relationship with the male family members. Women are faced with further challenges under gender discriminatory land laws, inheritance rules, customs and community land tenure systems. When faced with displacement or forced evictions, the culmination of the above factors has devastating impacts on women.  Access to land and related natural resources such as forests and water sources is critical to guarantee sustainable livelihood options and opportunities, especially for women. The pandemic has aggravated some of these challenges that women face and it is important that their rights to land is secured during this difficult time enabling their participation in decision making processes relating to land, securing their access to justice and enabling their engagement in economic opportunities.

In these days of lockdown due to the Covid-19 pandemic, rural areas are experiencing a real rush into land sell-off as a result of a crippled economic system. The agricultural markets are confronted with a gloomy climate or nearly shut down in total chaos. Facing this challenge, and in order to meet their family needs, this poor population will just sell off their lands.

And unless African States tackle this issue right away, damages and land disputes likely to arise after the Covid-19 pandemic might be huge, while overburdening our courts and public land regulation institutions.

It is therefore critical to make provisions for securing land tracts falling under the State property and land parcels belonging to individuals. To this end, each African State must raise rural women and youth’s awareness of refraining from selling off  their lands, which will serve for intensive farming projects to bridge the possible gap that would be generated by the lockdown imposed by the  Covid-19 pandemic.

In short, the Covid-19 pandemic dramatically affects rural land in Africa and our countries must swiftly implement a contingency plan to address the situation.

What should the States do? 

–  Implement an awareness-raising plan for populations to refrain from selling off their land at this time of lockdown due to the Covid-19 pandemic;          

– Implement a plan to secure private and public land properties to prevent their being sold off by the populations;          

– Implement a plan to reframe the land transaction costs during this pandemic period.        

In this regard, the Youth Initiative for land in Africa (Yilaa) is willing to support States in this noble cause during Covid-19 pandemic.

Coordinator of yilaa

www.yilaa.org  - contact@yilaa.org

Women’s ability to access and use land has been affected by the pandemic. Most laws, Kenya included, provide for equal legal protection of land rights, for instance on ownership and succession. However, the law in books paints a different picture from the law in action. The negative patriarchal norms are to blame for this state of affairs. With the increased number of deaths mostly among men as a result of COVID19, many widows and divorced women face challenges in claiming their ownership rights in the case of death or divorce. Social norms and harmful traditional practices around widowhood such as wife inheritance also impede transfer or ownership of land. The situation is exacerbated by the challenge in enforcing their land rights since courts are not operating optimally at this time. In places where court sessions are ongoing, it becomes challenging accessing the courts due to cessation of movement as part of restrictions by the government to reduce infection rates.

The likelihood of women facing added pressure on their land as a result of COVID-19 as people move back to rural areas or due to death or sickness of their spouses, parents, children or siblings become sick or die is high. Discriminative cultural norms will give priviledge of land to men as opposed to women. By being caregivers to their sick relatives, they run the risk of losing their land to grabbers, greedy in laws at the time their attention shifts to caregiving.

Even though we are not able to carry out much policy advocacy work, we have found ways to continue our connection with our stakeholders at all levels to learn what is happening and give advice. We are strengthening the capacity of Queen Mothers’ Platform, Ghana, to be the voice of women and be monitoring at the community level. 

We are documenting experiences for strategizing and informed programming in the coming months.

I like Victoria's comments but would like to add that land and territories are much more than economic assets and I am sure she agrees with that. It goes far beyond and especially for women in patriarchal societies in which women’s land rights are denied, or even if exists in law, does not exist in practice. Therefore, I would like to jump over another topic and look at what women's organizations and civil society groups are doing to protect women’s lives and rights during the pandemic. It is a way of looking at the pandemic from another angle, looking at what needs to be done immediately to protect lives, rights and to strengthen solidarity networks between different groups. Women's land rights needs to be highlighted in a broader context and concept to capture the many aspects in which grounded organizations are acting in so many countries. Recognizing women as food producers, territories defenders, ancestral knowledge guardians, and caregivers. On the other hand, looking at how they are in forefront of the pandemic battle, facing all the stigma and prejudice but also copying with injustice and cruelty of patriarchal societies that overload women with domestic care due to sexual division of labor and expose women to domestic violence due to social distance or isolation.

How are we organizing on the ground to cope with all this and build ties and networks of solidarity among different groups to cope with such difficult situation and also rethink the manner in which we deal with the so called  modern societies.  Am I jumping too much or too quick?

Concerning question 1 in this discussion about impacts of COVID specifically on women. If women are dying from COVID in Tanzania there may be a drop in girls attending school as they stay home and takeover household responsibilities. From what we have learned in our WOLTS research, this would seem to be a more likely outcome than men or boys taking up greater domestic responsibilities, as the latter is still not very culturally acceptable within traditional Maasai communities like those in which we have been carrying out our research.

Concerning Question 2, again reflecting on Tanzania. In the case where men are dying and leaving behind widows, these women may face greater challenges to claiming their inheritance rights to their deceased husband’s land as both formal and informal justice systems are likely to be unable to operate at a normal capacity during the pandemic. The threat of land grabs in respect to rightful inheritance claims by widows may end up increasing as potential offenders exploit the suspension of legal processes in lockdowns. In the post-pandemic world, it will be interesting to see how different countries deal with the increased number of cases that will have built up, and particularly to see how that might impact differently for different women and men. This is something we would hope to look out for in communities as we continue our WOLTS activities when restrictions on fieldwork ease.

Information I have from the rural South-East & South-South of Nigeria points to scenarios where the lockdown has not only restricted physical access to land (especially farmland) for women, it is enabling the initiation and completion of land transactions with zero participation by women even where they were duly and legally deserved to have been involved.

My understanding is that the lockdown situation is breeding a conducive environment for the initiation and completion of transactions without prior and informed consent or adequate consultation of the poor and weak population (mostly women). Women are the main losers in the land-coronavirus situation. This is because of the intimidating atmosphere posed by lockdown rules. Under the lockdown situation, only those with strong political and social leverage break the lockdown rules without severe penalties or undue intimidation from both traditional and law enforcement agents. 

The wealthy and highly connected in communities are still able to complete transactions that were under dispute in the pre-pandemic period - mainly because the lockdown has allowed them to isolate the unempowered (mostly women) in the scheme of land deals and transactional matters.

For instance, Corporate bodies, especially firms seeking to buy off parcels in rural areas, are still able to initiate meetings and negotiate with their preferred land dealers (usually, the men) to signed off land agreements with landowning families communities. In most cases, this period is preferred because it provides an enabling environment to sideline women who are expected not to move freely around and visit the Chiefs' palaces under lockdown conditions.

CoViD 19 has meant a State of Emergency in Kenya. We are facing curfews countrywide as well as lockdowns in a number of regions (counties). These restrictions have restrained free movement of persons and goods. Yet, life dynamics aren’t static, awaiting for the pandemic to subside. We are still facing deaths, if not more. Our courts are still in session albeit slower. And prisoners are being released as others are incarcerated.

All these means that the often slow wheel of justice, are now on snail pace, if not static, as it regards women’s rights, including land rights and customary law as impacts wife-inheritance tradition. With or without deceased brother, son or husband’s will, sisters, mothers and wives are deprived of a right to land inheritance. 

Women depend on their husbands, sons and or brothers to facilitate their land tenure. That CoViD 19 came just at the planting season. Men faraway in cities weren’t well prepared to send their beloved money for farming. And thus, land remains bear. This was made worsse by locust invasion and the ever changing weather patterns that brought heavy rains, floods and landslides.

Still, last funeral rites to the dead aren’t carried out given the ‘new normal’. It’s in such burial ceremonies that separated couples are united in death. Without such arrangements, estranged wives aren’t reconciled with her in-laws. This means lost land.

With prosperity of marriage, re-marrying and wife inheritance, women, wife or daughter are rarely considered permanent residents at their marital home or maiden home. This is because widowhood in Africa was a rare phenomenon, not unless the widow was in her advance age. That way, she wouldn’t need land, for land was communal. A physically or mentally challenged daughter will be presumed to be a permanent resident to her fatherland, since her chances to marry are slim. Spinsters were really heard of, given our polygamous marriage presence. 

A husband’s death might mean a death-blow to the widow if at all she’s a mother of daughters or is childless. The latter scenario could as well mean, she got married to the deceased awhile having a child from another marriage or had adopted a child – not biological child to the deceased.

Boy-child is considered a permanent resident to the homestead. Even if he’s acquired large tracks of land elsewhere and desires to relocate, he’s often compelled to inherit a piece of his ancestral land. 

If a women passed on without a child or leaving behind daughters, with or without children, sadly that is traditionally considered ‘gone-case’, in as much as Kenyan Laws recognize every child’s right of inheritance, regardless of the sex or gender.

Sadly, women are seen as risk-factors in terms of selling their deceased husband’s land whenever they feel unwelcome in their marital home or if at all remarrying crosses their mind.

If a woman loses her son(s) during or even after this period and yet she’s past menopause, her fate is as good as sealed. The land is likely to be taken by her in-laws and shared amongst those with male heirs.

Worse still, if at all she’s in a polygamous marriage, the other wife or wives are to disposes her of her land. 

At the Single Mothers Association of Kenya (SMAK) where I am a paralegal, we offer free legal aid and advice women to ensure their husbands write a will. This plays a big role in curbing land clashes. Similarly, we encourage women to join Self-help groups that have co-operatives to purchase land.

This is meaningful in that, land fragmentation experienced in the rural Kenya, is an indicator of the shrinking farmlands and population explosion. Indeed these are factors that affect land rights and rights of inheritance.

Land, as in the past, should be communal-owned. This ensures all feel belonging to the community. Kenyans should adapt the Kibbutz system of land ownership. Or better still have the Communal Land Trust model that Bernie Sanders and other had implemented in Vermont.

In the short run or medium term, communities here should be encouraged to have community cemeteries, so that even the technocrats in the city, would be assured of a resting place in the ancestral home when their time comes. For indeed, these professionals are the ‘Mr. Jekyll and Dr. White’ in the form of absentee landlords. And all this is basically to have a resting place by their forefathers, not farming per se. 

We should ensure that ancestral land shouldn’t be for sale, thus communally-owned. This way, collective land ownership will discourage absentee landlords. Women and other rural folk will be encouraged to till the land with the surety that the harvest is those who toiled and sweated in the farm.  

Women in both rural and informal settlement urban poor dwellers are affected by COVID-19, but mainly the urban poor in informal settlements, are hit harder.  A common factor is more family disputes, given that men are spending longer hours at home, which is not common in both settings.  Although men own everything, but it is women who are responsible for children, homes and even production in agriculture.  Culturally, most African men spend many hours out side their homes.  With COVID-19, where they spend more time at home, and want to be in charge with limited contribution, apart from demanding for attention of their wives.   This has added stress on women both in rural and urban informal settlement poor.

Specific for women in the urban informal settlement poor.  Over 86% of families depend on women income for livelihood.  Common businesses for women in urban informal settlement is informal job like fruits, fresh food, cleaning jobs in the up class neighborhood, tailoring, saloon, etc.   with COVID-19 which brought about lock-down, all these informal jobs ceased to exist.   Family disputes are normally linked to poverty …. this is what is happening in most of these areas.   Securing of the required masks is not possible because they are not affordable.  Hence, health remain a big threat in urban poor.  

Because of diminished sources of income, families are entering informal transaction of land either through leasing or sales at speculated and very small values, which will affected many families in terms of landless and in terms of increased land related disputes.

Developing and circulating awareness messages,  However, there are also limitations of reaching the rural because of the lock down.  As NGOs, we also lack resources during the COVID-19 to develop and use the right tools that would effectively reach the population especially the grassroots.   Field staff who are normally employed at the grassroots/field to reach the population have been recalled because of lack of financial resources and uncertain situation ahead.

Focus more at the grassroots; invest more resources in the local organization to domestic legal instruments to protect the rights of women, while influencing the policy makers; mobilize financial resources to support women’s small business for food security and smart agriculture; invest in ICT at the for women and local organizations.

ICT and financial support for small businesses can help women to confront problems arising from COVID-19. 

Vulnerable women will be the ones most likely to have their land rights. CAP assumes that men and women are equal and thus there is no need to provide specifically for the vulnerabilities experienced by women (and some men) who are widows or single parents, especially those with young children requiring home schooling. In every other sector, a single parent is seen as working or running a household with disadvantage or at least constraints. This is especially so in relation to accessing resources, grants or schemes that require farmers to access credit through formal institutions. The bank will not give a single parent on a low farm payment a loan or mortgage. 

Thus, a single parent farmer or woman who finds herself farming whilst looking after children of school age and needing to cocoon with frail or elderly parents will certainly find her land at risk – bringing in an income to keep the farm is put in second place to raising and caring for her family.

As an individual, I am engaging with women on the ground to clearly understand the causes, scale and solutions to the problems experienced by the women farmer. [It is important to note that all farmers are not in the same boat. We may be at the mercies of the same sea, but we are not in the same vessels – some of us are on yachts, others on cruise liners and then there are those of us on rafts which are held together with baling twine.] We need to generate the numbers / statistics and the research to be able to do or influence anything for women in farming at National or EU level. Our established farm representative organisations have next to no women in leadership and our issues are either invisible to men in leadership or ignored. Women tend to be the seed savers in communities, and women tend to focus on food security whilst men tend to focus on bringing in the cash. With no women at the national and EU policy tables, issues like seed saving and food security do not get raised or fought for.

We need to challenge the gender composition of our agricultural representation organisations and state bodies. Obviously, we are not saying women for the sake of women – anyone can be a Snow White and most women do very well in a man’s world. The litmus paper should be about women’s issues appearing on the agenda and being spoken to, and fought for, by women. The legitimacy of an all-male delegation lobbying or meeting and interacting with government departments and EU officials or donors and funding agencies – especially on the future of agriculture in the context of climate, biodiversity, pandemics, antimicrobial resistance and other crises - needs to be called out as lacking the diversity of insight that women bring to the mix and the issues that only women know about. Once again, we need to rally the call Not About Us, Without Us!
 

In the light of my rant above, I would say that women, armed with good research and statistics, need to be at the tables discussing how / what the future of feeding the planet is going to look like. We are all saying we cannot go back to ‘normal’. We are talking about green deals (some new and some not so). We need women to speak for ourselves on the issues, including land rights, that hold us back from delivering food security to our families and communities.

Land rights, generally titled men (65%), only 10-20% of landholders are women. In times of pandemic, when the husband sick or die, the pressure to lose their land's right higher due to the social/traditional norm. 

No, they still have the same right. If the women die, the land right will give to her heirs. 

If the Covid-19 pandemic continues and lockdown imposed, many public land administration offices remain close, so the service to provide women's right to land registration and ownership will be decreased. This situation causes many land grabbing, particularly in the rural area.

The Covid-19 pandemic impact on migration due to lockdown caused many farmers to lose their customers in the urban area and lead to the consequences of poverty.

We need to work together with local NGOs to reach women community in the rural area and provide some information about their rights particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic.

We should conduct more discussion/webinar with multi-stakeholders to work together in land's right equality during the Covid-19 pandemic to reach more international awareness. 

For the medium-term: work together with local government to improve the rural economy by support with cash transfer program, particularly for vulnerable groups such as a single mother with children and widow.

In the long term: Supporting the government for commitments made on gender equality and women's economic empowerment 

We need to support women's groups and organizations of rural women to participate in the formulation of land policy and land reforms through financial support, dialogue with the government, and providing space/forum for dialogue.

What we need to do now in the context of this pandemic is to:

• Declare access to land as an essential service and allow movement within counties and across border lines to address land dispute.

• Increase communications and awareness. 

• Increase monitoring within customary areas and particularly where threats to WLR continues to rise.

• Liberia learned many lessons from the Ebola epidemic that ravaged our nation 5 years ago. One key lesson was the importance of a gender equal response team with a bottom-up approach with interventions participatory and community driven. Revisit this approach and develop a strategy with a strong community led focus to not only mitigate the spread of COVID but reduce ongoing land conflicts and disputes.

We should realign interventions to fall within the local context, developing a system that both responds to customary dispute resolution mechanisms while incorporating statutory means as required.

Land rights should be mainstreamed in all development interventions in agriculture, climate change, afforestation, etc.  This will help enlarge the land rights portfolio and get it focused on all issues, both on a broad scale and on a localized scale. This will make the issues the real to many of our donor partners and will help expand the attention given to it. 

At this point I would like to bring in the urban-rural land connection and the kind of insecurity it has generated during the pandemic. In India the loss of income and uncertainty of resumption of work caused by the nation-wide lock down has created a new class of the poor, who had incomes but have lost their jobs and are now impoverished. Most of these were migrants in cities, both men and women, engaged in informal work. Hundreds of thousands have had to go back to the village under extreme hardship. Studies in Indian cities - Delhi, Ludhiana, Surat, Bangalore and others- have shown that a majority of such migrants practiced a frugal lifestyle in the city so that they could save money for remittances to the family in the village and investment in housing and agriculture land. Sometimes they even borrowed money for these investments. For most migrants, working in the city is perceived as a temporary hardship for a better future back in the village– the transition from landlessness to land ownership, or bigger and more productive land. The investment in land invariably takes place in instalments based on informal agreements, which are honoured. But loss of regular income streams means that many of these deals are incomplete and face uncertainty. A dialogue with women returnees who worked as domestic help in Delhi show that many have invested significant amounts for buying land, and they still have to pay more to get ownership. They have invested all their savings and even borrowed money from employers for land and house improvements. Some of them did continue to get paid by their employers, but their husbands had no income for the last two months, making survival in the city difficult in spite of access to subsidised rations. One of the women commented, “ We are neither here nor there. We have no savings to survive till work starts and we have no land to till in the village until the land becomes ours”.

The pandemic has drawn attention to the urban-rural interconnectedness of income, investment and land, which needs to be addressed in public policy for poverty reduction. But how is that going to happen with ministries working in silos?  

South Africa went into a hard  Level 5 lock down on 27 March 2020 in response to the corona virus. This was relaxed slightly to Level 4 on 1st May and again to Level 3 on 1st June. The hard lock down has impacted severely on millions of poor and food insecure households in urban and rural areas. Food insecurity has emerged as the most serious policy blindspot in South Africa's corona virus response. The networks of hawkers and bakkie (mobile) traders who make a living purchasing fresh produce at markets and the farm gate and selling it on to township greengrocers and spaza shops were fundamentally disrupted by the lockdown regulations. Initially the regulations did not recognise how the majority of South Africans live, and how many many household live with high levels of food insecurity which was deepened as a consequence of lock down in Stage 5. This was aggravated by the closure of school feeding schemes which reach 9 million children. 

The lockdown regulations impacted heavily on small scale producers - both men and women who were unable to sell their produce.  Government relief available for smallholder farmers proved to be difficult to obtain, as many people did not have the required documentation to qualify for relief. In the agricultural sector, particularly in the food and wine value chains many workers are seasonal and increasing live off farm.  Increasing numbers of landless women work seasonally on farms. In the off season they depend on Unemployment Insurance to stay alive. The closure of government labour centres has created major hardships for seasonal agricultural workers.

With regard to access to land and land rights more generally, evictions have been prohibited during lockdown, but several muncipalities and some land owners have disregarded the regulations. Overall Covid-19 has pulled the handbrake up on South Africa's already problematic and faltering land reform programme. As the economy takes serious strain and unemployment rises steeply there have been government budget cuts in the sector where it can be argued there is a need for more resources to address stark land inequalities and provide access to land and support services for women and landless households. Land reform in South Africa is increasingly recognising the need for urban land reform to address South Africa's deep legacy of spatial inequality and to ensure that households headed by women have access to well located land for settlement.

For more on land issues in South Africa visit knowledgebase.land where we as Phuhlisani NPC cover all aspects of the South African land question and now provide land news for Southern, Central and Eastern Africa.  

And for your suggestion to work with and through local people and organizations that are well respected and in a phased approach - very sensible. 

Thanks so much for highlighting the important connections between womens' abilities to accumulate and control assets, including land and housing, and the widespread problem of gender-based violence, pointing to how pre-existing social and economic stresses may be compounded by COVID. Do you have a sense of best approaches towards large-scale mobilization to raise awareness?  Is it best done through civil society? through government agencies or offices such as the State Livelihoods Missions? In partnership with the private sector? all of the above?  Helping more women understand what rights they hold under the law and supporting more families to talk about equitable land holding among family members is absolutely critical.  Best, Karol

Thank you team at MACRAD for sharing this case study on evictions in Chiredzi.  You have also been doing a great job with your regular COVID updates from the field!  Much appreciated all around. Best, Karol

Hi Rick, Thanks for these thoughts and for pointing to the serious problems of food insecurity that arose when lockdowns went into place. I also appreciate your point on the need for women-headed households (and other vulnerable households, such as orphan-headed) to have access to lands that are better connected to livelihood opportunities.  I also appreciate you sharing the link to the work of Phuhlisani NPC!  Best, Karol

Hello Ntebaleng,

Thank you for sharing this experience from the informal settlements in South Africa - I was curious as to what were the drivers of these illegal evictions? And what approaches are SJC and other organizations using or did you use to respond to these illegal evictions? I hope you will also engage in this week's discussion on Evictions - during and after COVID 19!

Best regards,

Alex

COVID is a Widow Maker. In the last several months alone, the COVID pandemic has produced some 250,000 widows, adding to the 285 million widows around the world today. COVID widows, similar to other widows, are systematically disinherited. Such disinheritance - the institutionalized or culturally condoned prevention of a widow from accessing her rightful estate, usually her LAND and HOME – impacts a minimum of 40% of widows around the world. Importantly, the majority of widows are under the age of 39, meaning they are also responsible for young children. 

Having been separated from their land or valuable assets, widows struggle for survival. Marginalized and ostracized, widows are pushed into the periphery of safe and secure work. The combined impact of widowhood and COVID has several implications on Tenure Security of Renters. 

LOSS OF INCOME

As a result of COVID lockdowns and curfews across the world, such unsecure employment was among the first to disappear, resulting in immediate loss of income for the widows. Having no income, meager savings, and disinherited from a backstop of land or property, COVID widows have been unabile to feed their families, much less pay their rent. GFW in in receipt of testimony from widows around the world indicating financial distress and inability to honor rent obligations as a result of work interruptions.

VULNERABILITY

Inability of widows to honor rent obligations at this time significantly increases their vulnerability.  Landlords can prey on this vulnerability forcing widows who have no protections or advocates into further vulnerable states. This can lead to various risks and implications, below are just a few:

RISKS

Indebtedness - The risk to widows of missed rent payments could be devastating. Indebtedness to landlords can ultimately result in financial entrapment. Permanent, mounting, and insurmountable burden of rent debt can result in devastating legal action and in some instances imprisonment.

Homelessness – Widows, already vulnerable to discriminatory practices, and without any male protection, may find themselves among the first to be evicted, rendering them, and their children, homeless.

Human Trafficking – Increased vulnerability, indebtedness and even homelessness can push widows into the underworld of human trafficking. Debt burdens may lead to debt bondage. Homelessness could force widows into high risk work, forced organized crime, or other forms of human trafficking.  Their children are no less vulnerable.

CALL TO ACTION

Without security of land tenure through inheritance, widows are rendered vulnerable.  It is critical that widows rights to land, property, and valuable assets be secured, protected and enforced.

Until a few weeks ago, my son Joost had a part-time job as bartender/cook in an Amsterdam café. When all restaurants, bars etc. had to close because of lockdown measures, the place was unable to pay the rent (a high one, in inner-city Amsterdam!) and had to declare bankruptcy, letting go all employees. There was income loss for all parties concerned, sometimes compensated by third parties (fathers, for instance), sometimes not. 

In other words, it is clear COVID-related evictions and decisions to leave rented premises are a fact and come at a cost. But it is precisely these two phrases, ‘are a fact’ and ‘come at a cost’ that I think are worth further clarification during this dialogue. 

First the facts. In the announcement for this session, it is stated that “Evictions have emerged as the most common housing, land and property risk globally associated with the COVID-19 pandemic”. Not only would I like to see some corroboration for this claim (what does ‘most common’ mean in this context? How is that measured? What are the figures? In other words, what are we exactly talking about?), but I am also interested in the regional variation of the eviction phenomenon and its (proposed) solutions. Where (what continent; rural or urban areas) is the problem most acute? How do solutions differ? 

For instance, in Costa Rica, where I live, in all likelihood a law (nr. 21.927) will be approvedthat suspends evictions and imposes a compulsory (unless tenant and lord come to an agreement of their own) three-months moratorium (no waiver!) for rent payments, with accountsto be settled in 2021. I have no idea how the problem is dealt with elsewhere and wonder whether there is a global overview. 

And then the costs. With this Costa Rica law, it is clear that it is the tenant who bears the lion’s share of the burden: landlords will not be allowed to raise the rent, but that’s about it. The rent payment is only postponed but its total remains the same, while it is unlikely that the loss of income will be made up for at some later point in time. In other words, the tenants stand to lose most. 

So why not share the burden? If the authorities can devise a moratorium, they can also think of generalized proposals in which the costs are borne more equitably by tenants and landlords. Again, I am curious to know whether in other countries policies are being discussed that also put on the table the option of some financial sacrifice being made by landlords, and consider public spending to attenuate income losses for bothparties.  

To clarify: the above is not meant as a harsh criticism. Costa Rica is one of the few Latin American countries that is a welfare state of sorts, with an excellent universal healthcare system and preventive measures that have effectively limited, as of 5 June, the number of infections (slightly over 1,200) and deaths (a mere 10, with a 5M population). In other words, its COVID statistics are among the best in the world. Part of this has been made possible by the existence of relatively high taxes (in the Central American context) that pay for good public healthcare – just as is recommended by the OECD, of which Costa Rica is, precisely, the newest member state. 

But the country must make do with what it has, and spending discipline is a central tenet of the present government. Perhaps this explains the reticence to make available (more) public funds for the impending rental crisis – but still, they could look into it. I can only fear that in other developing countries, with even more regressive tax systems and less spending room for the governments, the option to use public funds for the eviction problem is a non-starter, but I’ll be happy to be proven wrong!

This is such an important topic and is often overlooked by policy-makers. Even in jurisdictions where inheritance laws attempt to protect the rights of widows, local practices continue to exclude women from succession entitlements, particularly over land and property. 

Thank you for this extremely rich contribution on the local context in South africa, Justin. Mass evictions of informal settlements are a key concern and has been highlighted by the Special Rapporteur on Housing Rights in a targeted Guidance Note, which recommends that States "declare an end to all forced evictions of informal settlements and encampments. Ensure the necessary resources are available to implement this order effectively, including resources to monitor and prevent extrajudicial evictions". 

https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Housing/SR_housing_COVID-19_Guidance_informal_settlements.pdf

Rather than address the specific questions on this topic at the outset of this part of the discussion, I would like to make a couple of more general global points from economics. And, in spirit of openness, I declare myself as someone who is both a tenant and a landlord in countries where governments have put in place moratoria on evictions and other tenancy-protection measures. So, as a tenant, I appreciate the protections and it is good to have reduced uncertainty over my housing in a globally economically uncertain situation. As a landlord – in a time when housing markets (both sale and rental markets) are liable to stagnate – I also appreciate the protections in place for existing tenants, as it is better to have a house occupied and being looked after than empty and unable to be rented out due to lack of demand. The reason to make this point is to highlight, from the economic perspective, that where the questions guiding this discussion assume that evictions will become more likely with Covid-19 as landlords get rid of tenants who may be no longer able to pay their rent due to sickness etc, we must also consider what would be the interest of the landlord in doing that when they might not easily find new tenants any more able to pay the rent. Where evictions would be a bigger concern then, is where the land use would be changed as a result of the potential eviction, rather than where the property being rented out (whether a house or a farm) would continue to be rented out by the landlord but to a new tenant. Because in the overall and very likely longer-term global economic crises we are facing as a result of the pandemic, there is most likely to be a shortage of ‘good’ tenants to occupy all the currently leased houses and farms worldwide. So it therefore becomes in the landlord’s own economic interest in the medium-to-longer term to be cautious in evicting tenants just because they are having short-term difficulties in paying their rent.

As a final comment from the gender perspective, we could then also not assume that women in general would be more likely to be evicted as a result of the pandemic, as who is affected will depend entirely on the individual tenants’ economic circumstances in different contexts, including who in the renting family is affected in what ways by the Covid-19 virus ie who may be sick, who may die, who may have been ill but recovered in slower time, who may have lost their job, who may have changed their job etc etc.

Thank you for capturing this essential dimension related to growing debt - even if tenant's rights are temporarily assured through moratoria, the most vulnerable households will fall deeper into poverty and will have to increasingly rely on negative coping mechanisms, or be exposed to predatory actors who will exploit their vulnerablility. 

The Advantages of suspending the possible evictions of tenants during this period ensures that all Kenyans enjoy the right of living a life with dignity as provided for under Article 28 of the Constitution of Kenya. Article 43 of the Constitution, also guarantees that every Kenya shall enjoy the right to accessible and adequate housing and to reasonable standards of sanitation. In instances of forced evictions, property is either lost or destroyed. This deprives the evictee of their right to own property as provided for in Article 40 of the said Constitution. However, despite the fact that these rights are enshrined in the Constitution, many rental agreements lack clauses that provide for suspension of payment of rent by tenants in cases of national calamities like the one we currently experiencing.  Another limitation, is that, there is no legal provision that makes Landlords suspend collection of rent during such times and in most instances, it’s only personal discretion of the Landlords.  

Furthermore, landlords can be protected by: Waiving of land rates for Landlords by the County Government so that they can go easy on rental demands; Parastatals to waive Landlords Power Bills and Water Bills; Government to come up with a compensation package for the Landlords for the time tenants failed to pay rent. Government to assist Landlords servicing loans to get a six- month moratorium from lending commercial banks. 

What happens when the moratoriums and other measures end and tenants have to pay several months of back rent? Rent will accrue which will be due after the Period. Therefore, both residential and commercial tenants are still responsible for paying their rent and performing any other obligations set forth in their leases. Tenants will be forced to dig deeper into their pockets, accrue more loans to pay the pending rent arrears.  In instances where tenants cannot pay the rent after due notices are given, there are going to be instances of forced evictions. 

In Brazil, evictions are currently not the primary issue being faced by the communities we work with. With regard to land rights, the first thing is that at the federal level we've seen attacks on the quilombola communities, historically black communities that go back to slavery and have stayed on their land and have land rights that are constitutionally guaranteed. The federal government has been using this moment to threaten these communities and, in some cases, take away land rights.

At the same time, land-grabbing leading to deforestation in the Amazon is reaching new highs, with an increase of nearly 64% in April 2020 over April of last year. 

But let's focus on housing. There have been housing activists and housing rights movements across the country promoting eviction moratoria but there are actually very few jurisdictions in Brazil that have instituted them. And here in Rio we don't have a moratorium, but at the same time it's a very different circumstance.

So most people in Rio who are vulnerable in this pandemic, economically, in terms of their housing and health, are residents of the city's favelas. So nearly a quarter of the population lives in favelas. And in a typical favela over 70% of people own their homes. It might be informal, they might not have title, but adverse possession and Brazil's constitution give them some level of security, nonetheless. They essentially own their homes. So rent is not their primary concern, nor is being expelled by a landlord. Their big concerns right now are around survival, lost income, food, health, and being able to stay isolated.

This is what we're living with right now. Our big concerns with regard to eviction are actually down the road. After the pandemic has wreaked its havoc, we're expecting a wave of what you might call "hygienization" or "sanitization" eviction policies where governments, city, state or federal, will try to institute evictions on scale using the fact that some of the poor infrastructure and conditions of these communities have led to such devastation. But what we're seeing right now is actually, the government look the other way, and, to be honest, actively promote the deaths of favela residents through a combination of minimal reporting on Covid deaths, insufficient health services, encouraging low-income workers people to break quarantine, inadequate sanitation infrastructure, bureaucratic impediments to income transfers, and even a historic increase in deadly police operations. Favela-based organizations are the ones doing the heavy lifting developing their own relief, information, mobilization, prevention and mitigation efforts. But they are working against huge odds and pressures.

So what we expect to see in the end is that the pandemic has killed many, many people in favelas, with Rio's favela perhaps being the worldwide epicenter of deaths. After the pandemic we're expecting a wave of attempts at evictions using "sanitation" arguments as justification. Even though this is a government responsibility and it is widely understood that, in Rio, upgrading the existing favela built environment is cheaper, less intrusive and more empowering than relocation.

Hello Lucia!

Thank you for sharing this important case for Venezuelan refugees and migrants. What actions are being taken by NGOs to reduce the risk of evictions for these populations - especially in what seems to be an absence of government action to secure their housing? 

Hello Richard,

Thank you for this nuanced perspective on landowner-migrant relationships. Indeed there are many places I have witnessed where landowners often allow their tenants to live without requiring rent - often for months - out of solidarity. However, even in these situations, landowners often have a limit. 

What kinds of situations do you have in mind when you say:  "But policy makers should recognise the need to adjust their measures or supplement them to deal with unanticipated emerging phenomena, especially those which affect the most vulnerable." What kind of adjustments do you have in mind - are there examples of this being done in practice? 

Also your point about informal street traders and day labourers is well noted - what policy and programming options are available to governments and NGOs hoping to support these populations?

Reports show that insecurity of tenure is being experienced and anticipated in a number of different ways in India because of the pandemic. Realising that the first to get affected would be renters, the national as well as state governments gave directives that tenants cannot be evicted and rents should be waived off for the month of April. Unfortunately, these well-intentioned directives are not enforceable as nearly 90% of rent agreements in the country have no written contracts. In spite of this limitation, there were no mass evictions of renters. For example, in Delhi’s urban villages, which house a large population of migrant workers and students, there were negotiations between the two parties to reduce rent or to pay later; many with regular jobs got help from employers and others moved to places with lower rents. True, there were threats of eviction, but not carried out most of the time. After all, landlords had little prospect of finding new renters in the situation of dried up earnings and mass exodus of migrant workers back to their villages. Landlords in urban villages have taken to renting as a means of livelihood after their agricultural lands were expropriated for urban expansion and are equally threatened economically by their tenants’ inability to pay rent. In the industrial city of Ludhiana, workers associations as well as the police were active in preventing eviction of informal industrial labour, who rent rooms from private landlords. However, the perception of a rental housing crisis has prompted the national government to now announce a social rental housing scheme for migrant workers in cities, which will surely benefit some.  

More worrying is the change in attitude towards informal settlements. They are high risk areas for the spread of COVID 19. Social distancing is hardly possible with high densities, small dwellings, narrow lanes and community toilets. Water is not available all the time for hand washing. Mumbai’s Dharavi slum, reputedly the largest informal settlement in Asia, has regular media coverage these days for the large number of positive cases. The result is that there is heightened sense of insecurity towards informal settlements among the middle class, which is translating into a demand for doing away with slums. This brings a threat to places like Dharavi, in which almost a million people live and work and which has so far resisted attempts at redevelopment in the PPP mode, with private businesses reaping the benefits of its central location. In Chennai there has been an acceleration of relocation of people from informal settlements to the city’s periphery. So, the aftermath of the pandemic might bring in a new era of insecurity and marginalisation of the poor in cities.

Further down, India has a post-COVID economic recovery plan. One of the main features of this plan is to create land banks on public lands to attract industries. The inventory of public land is leading to waste lands but also informal settlements on public land and village commons. The implications are eviction or resettlement and loss of commons used for grazing and other collective use. Civil society organisations are already flagging up these issues and getting ready for awareness campaigns and action.

UN-Habitat has maintained, and in important aspects extended, its longstanding position on evictions. We remain of the opinion that forced evictions must be avoided unless absolutely necessary and, where found necessary and proportionate, they must be subject to all of the requirements and protections set out in international law and guidelines. In response to the COVID crisis, we believe that this approach should be extended to all evictions and relocations. A point raised in your question is of central importance: “public health emergency”. Public responses need to consider the usual obligations under the right to adequate housing and the fact that housing is central to addressing the public health emergency. People without homes cannot stay at home. So, the most important advantage of a suspension of all formal eviction proceedings is that it allows those who might have been evicted to protect their most basic right - the right to life - by finding sanctuary in their homes. In terms of limitations, we have observed some cases of opportunistic land invasions but these have been managed reasonably well. Yes, there is also an issue that a suspension is effectively a shifting of the burden of the impacts of COVID from tenants to their landlords. Given that the burden on the landlord is an economic one, whereas the risk to the tenant is to their right to life, this might be considered proportionate. However, we would also recommend that member states seek to limit the burden on landlords as well, provided that this does not come at the expense of meeting basic needs. Cash transfers to tenants may help, although we recognise that these can be challenging in the context of a wider threat to basic needs. Where mortgages and other forms of credit are available, public guarantees and subsidies might be used to help small scale landlords. More creative options, such as the mutualisation of housing or other forms of cooperative solutions, might also be considered, albeit that they might be more complex or time consuming to establish. Concerns about accrued rents may require similar consideration. This could include legal or financial support to extended repayment periods for those with some financial capacity and either cash payments or a mutualisation of debt for the most vulnerable. Ultimately though, we have to face the fact that there will be a burden and it will eventually have to land somewhere. Politics and public policy are about choices, and these are usually hard. 

Tanzania did have in-country lockdown but there were no International travels until 27^th May 2020 where the government announces to open doors for international travels. Despite that, there was no lockdown we experienced a lot of challenges from the lockdown of neighboring countries Kenya, Uganda, and Zambia. The effects on farmers who are landowners or renters affected by COVID-19 as their products cannot access regional markets. The discussion where whether each country is doing better on controlling the spread of COVID-19 to other countries and control measure within each nation.

Neighboring countries are markets of Tanzania’s farm and manufactured products and port of landlocked countries like Zambia, Congo, Rwanda, and Uganda mention few.  Tanzania’s government used a different approach with other countries in releasing information about affected people with COVID-19 and not doing total country lockdown. Tanzania perceived by other countries as failures to control the spread.  The use of the mentioned approach leads to trade within East Africa Region in an unsettled condition. Farmers and agribusiness enterprises affected to a large extent especially for perishable products and their no measure that the government has taken to compensate the damages or subsidize their products that affected by borders misunderstanding.

House renters (hotels and lodges) affected by outbreaks of COVID-19. The effects of the international lockdown and gathering restrictions lead to more effects to renters as no more use of these houses. Many employees have lost their jobs and government revenues collected from the industry. Due to these, I see the need to reviewed laws and policies for the government to compensate damages from the outbreak of COVID-19 to producers and to employees.  Some of the complaints arise are whether social security funds can pay some money to their subscribers who their jobs affected. Social security funds by considering their laws there is no form of pension to help affected employees.

Tanzania did have in-country lockdown but there were no International travels until 27^th May 2020 where the government announces to open doors for international travels. Despite that, there was no lockdown we experienced a lot of challenges from the lockdown of neighboring countries Kenya, Uganda, and Zambia. The effects on farmers who are landowners or renters affected by COVID-19 as their products cannot access regional markets. The discussion where whether each country is doing better on controlling the spread of COVID-19 to other countries and control measure within each nation.

Neighboring countries are markets of Tanzania’s farm and manufactured products and port of landlocked countries like Zambia, Congo, Rwanda, and Uganda mention few.  Tanzania’s government used a different approach with other countries in releasing information on affected people with COVID-19 and not doing total country lockdown. Tanzania perceived by other countries as failures to control the spread.  The use of the mentioned approach leads to trade within East Africa Region in an unsettled condition. Farmers and agribusiness enterprises affected to a large extent especially for perishable products and their no measure that the government has taken to compensate the damages or subsidize their products that affected by borders misunderstanding.

House renters (hotels and lodges) affected by outbreaks of COVID-19. The effects of the international lockdown and gathering restrictions lead to more effects to renters as no more use of these houses. Many employees have lost their jobs and government revenues collected from the industry. Due to these, I see the need to reviewed laws and policies for the government to compensate damages from the outbreak of COVID-19 to producers and to employees.  Some of the complaints arise are whether social security funds can pay some money to their subscribers who their jobs affected. Social security funds by considering their laws there is no form of pension to help affected employees.

When asking what practical tools and approaches that practitioners can use on the ground to advocate for or deploy to keep people housed, a few things come to mind.  There are genuine challenges and contexts and dynamics tend to vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. However, moratorium or other forms of public temporary suspension on evictions remains one of the most practical and cost-effective approaches to reducing the impact of eviction during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.  These challenges include the systematic monitoring and reporting of eviction incidents to inform continuous advocacy, planning and response efforts.  Furthermore, the donor community should encourage governments through diplomatic channels to take concrete actions aimed at preventing evictions. We should enhance and expand collaboration and support to local municipalities to integrate eviction prevention as a strategic objective in national plans. Finally, possible initiatives include the establishment of eviction units and identifying and putting in place dedicated focal points to lead eviction prevention efforts.

We need to move fast and provide the assistance needed to keep everyone home. Refugees in Jordan are 81% in urban communities and the lockdown has been one of the strictest in the world.  In Jordan we quickly coordinated a standard Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance package with more than 30 humanitarian organizations and agencies who teamed up and agreed on a coordinated response. The collaboration between these diverse group members allowed us to respond strategically and systematically and with a clear the assistance criteria and operation. As part of the developed package, we also designed an exit strategy to ensure that these previously resilient populations would be able to recover to their status pre-COVID19. At sector coordination level, we have been discussing a referral pathway from unconditional Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance (basic needs) to conditional cash for rent assistance (shelter), which would allow continued assistance for the most impacted families in the mid/long term.

What are some practical tools and approaches that practitioners can advocate for or deploy on the ground to keep people housed? What are some of the limitations, risks, and challenges around these approaches?In the short term, we have seen many governments adopting creative solutions including the identification of land for self-building, the re-purposing of buildings and the provision of emergency shelter for isolation or re-housing. In many instances, even some of the poorest communities have sought to develop their own adaptations of these solutions, such as the use of schools and support to particularly vulnerable households or individuals. Each solution, and each context, will present opportunities and challenges but we must remain focused on the point that the right to life is the most basic of all rights.

Displaced communities directly or indirectly depend on humanitarian assistance for subsistence, including but not limited to payment of rent. A reduction in humanitarian operations, combined with health-related restrictions, means that they will be unable to pay rent. As a result, they will remain at the highest risk of eviction, and exposure to the virus should that happen. Possible scenarios include: violence from members of host communities, discrimination based on unfounded suspicion, and the risk of evicted populations being unable to secure alternative space, and being left homeless.

Hi Elizabeth,

Thank you for your post, broadening the discussion by bringing in the landlord perspective.

There are many reports of people in countries ranging from the United States to Kenya to India of people depopulating urban centers.  And this depopulation is for an indeterminate time.  I wonder to what extent the urban centers that were formally areas of high liquidity for renters have become less liquid.   

Robert,

I wonder if you might be able to elaborate a little on the international legal provisions bearing on eviction.  Is this exclusively from International Human Rights Law, or are there other bodies of international law that apply here?  And what provisions?

Many thanks!

Carl

In situations where vulnerable tenants and occupants in jurisdictions where no measures have been put in place to secure their tenure, we have been advocating for unconditional multi-purpose cash assistance with my colleagues from Basic Needs Sector. We have identified a pool of more than 48,000 families that until the COVID-19 response were not receiving basic needs assistance as these were identified as families with potential of income generation. The multi-purpose cash assistance calculation takes into consideration costs related to rent, utility bills, water consumption and food and family size. 

These are families that were impacted by the lockdown imposed at country level - which strict measures aimed at restricting movements within the country -, and as consequence have prevented previously resilient families from having any chance of income generation. 

In terms of approaches to tackle the issue of inequality in livelihood and housing being exacerbated by the COVID-19 crisis, one of these is applying moratorium. We must consider the potential abuse of moratorium with the deliberate refusal by tenants with capacity to pay rent. Furthermore, we must take adequate consideration for the economic impact on property owners. One of the most urgent risks remains the lack of post-moratorium strategies to deal with accumulated rent. Other approaches include advocacy through diplomatic channels, as well as monitoring and reporting of evictions. 

Anticipating that inequality in terms of livelihoods and housing is being exacerbated by the COVID-19 crisis, what should we encourage in terms of the evolution of law, policy and practice on this issue both in the immediate term and the long term? In the long term, there needs to be a more inclusive approach to access to land and shelter in many countries. That should also be linked to stronger approaches to public finance, particularly at the local level. Every tax or fee that isn’t collected, or that is under-rated, is money taken away from public services, including housing and basic services such as water and sanitation. This applies as much in low income countries as in wealthier ones. As such, while we have to accept that the right to an adequate standard of living will remain a right that can only be progressively realised, we must also accept that housing is central to the achievement of many other social, economic and public health objectives. As such it has to be prioritised.

Great question, Robert!  And I think there are some synergies between what you are asking/saying and Theresa's comments re inequality in Brazil.

I don't have a good answer, but I wonder if this might be something that the OHCHR Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing might pick up.  This seems like a very important issue.  And we will probably be struggling with it not only for the duration of the pandemic, but also for some years after.  As the pandemic forces people to spend their savings and sell assets to survive, there will be enduring effects.  Are there principles of international law that could be developed to provide normative guidance (or even protections)?   

Hello MasieMemo,

Thank you so much for this rich contribution from Kenya! It is interesting that the government is passing measures to ease the bruden on landlords - I was wondering if there were any efforts to ensure that landlords are also passing down this relief to their tenants by waiving or reducing rental fees? Otherwise, it seems like they are protecting the capital of the wealthiest while continuing to ensure the extraction of rent from the poorest!?

Hello!

Thank you so much for this fascinating contribution! It seems like this informal practice is in some way giving tenants more secure tenure during these difficult times. However, the question therefore remains - for those who do not have access to a lot of capital, providing 2 years of advance rent does not seem feasible - how are the poorest and most vulnerable able to access this level of cash to pay in advance? Are there informal credit schemes in operation that these people access? What kind of interest rates do these credit schemes have - and what consequences does this have in terms of creating unsustainable debt burdens?

It would be great if the governments of the Latin American nations most affected by the Venezuelan displaced and refugees could discuss any of those creative solutions on the table, such as implementing the use of schools for sheltering the homeless and taking into account the people who are at highest risk for COVID-19. But, unfortunately, several nations have faced severe health public issues by the COVID-19 in which even the streets became place to release cadavers. On another hand, the initiative of creating an unconditional Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance is very good, and it would be very useful to mitigate the crisis. However, it requires a lot of political input, as the conflict is centred on the legitimacy of the Venezuelan government, and that undermines the effort to bring inclusive solutions to the displaced and refugees. Perhaps the Lima Group meeting can be the arena to introduce a proposal to the extent of the humanitarian aid to the provision of emergency shelter or to protect households and individuals who do not have a signed tenant-contract.

Hello Everyone,

Thank you for your rich contributions to this week’s discussion about Evictions during and after COVID – 19. Reaching through these contributions, the following themes seem to emerge: 

The need for better data– much of the conversation around the risk of evictions in the era of COVID remains anecdotal – with some exceptions like Somalia. These assumptions about evictions being a major risk are attributed to the following:

• that vulnerable populations all over the world were chronically facing threats of eviction before this crisis hit. 
• with the economic crisis compounding the health crisis, the concern is that not only are vulnerable households who faced chronic tenure insecurity at higher risk, but the pool of vulnerable populations will expand because of the economic crisis. 
• Previous economic shocks have often led to evictions and land consolidation by the wealthiest.

However, these assumptions do not necessarily take into account the full range of calculations being made by landlords, tenants, and potential solidarities that already exist or might emerge through this health crisis. Some landlords rely on rent for their subsistence so the loss of rent may be devastating to them. Others may prefer to keep properties occupied with a formerly reliable tenant rather than evict in a situation where there may not be a renter to replace them. Policies and initiatives should take into account these local dynamics– and where possible, to not harm healthy relationships between landlords and tenants where they exist.

Limits of government policies where relationships are informal– in many countries relationships between landowners and tenants are informal, which often render them invisible to the state. While a moratorium may be a point of leverage for advocacy (or even used as a threat to punish landlords who continue evictions), they will remain largely ineffective without a community-based strategy.

People who make wages from daily labor (the majority of whom are women) and with micro-enterprises are exceptionally vulnerable to increased and unsustainable debt burdens as their opportunities to generate income are curtailed by government restrictions on different kinds of work. Many of these day-laborers are renters for their homes, and even if their tenure is currently ensured by a moratorium on evictions, there is the looming problem of increased and unsustainable debt. Without some form of debt relief, debt can have devastating legal consequences and force households to adopt negative coping mechanisms such as child labor and sex work, and expose them to predatory actors who will extract debt payments through debt bondage, and/or sexual violence. Owners of micro-enterprises are also at high risk of eviction – with that coming the loss of potentially reviving their livelihoods once lockdown measures ease. 

Forced relocations: For camps and informal settlements, one of the rising risks is that landowners and governments will use the health crisis as a justification to deconcentrate & relocate populations – often without consulting these communities nor seeking their consent.

That being said, there are solutions emerging across the world which seem to be able to remake the landscape for the most vulnerable populations post-COVID-19 – these include creating social housing for migrant workers, to land trusts for informal settlements in Brazil. On the emergency front, solutions have emerged in Somalia and Jordan to monitor evictions and to attempt to keep the most vulnerable tenants housed.

For those who are interested, here are some resources for guidance on this:  

Evictions & Relocations Toolkit

Model decree/edict to secure tenure during COVID-19

Mapping of initiatives to secure tenure during COVID -19

If there are additional resources that you would like to contribute to the toolkit, please email me at alexandre.bourque(at)nrc.no.

Best regards,

Alex

Thank you Nana for flagging this up. Particularly in the context of economic difficulties globally and more limited resources for development in general - it is indeed a worrying trend that attention to Covid-19 immediate impacts and then to post-pandemic planning are likely to put seemingly-less important advocacy and research initiatives onto the back burner. And as you say with this example from Ghana, it is already happening. We must see best how to keep advocacy for women's land rights alive in the coming months and years, as we have fought hard already to get this on the global development agenda. This discussion provides a great forum for brainstorming and networking to develop sound strategies for this as we go forward.

I agree with both Victoria here (re Aceh after the tsunami) and Ellen above (re Liberia after ebola). These are both good cases to look to in seeing how to incorporate attention to gender in general and to women's property rights in particular in all post-pandemic planning and recovery processes. Even though Covid-19 is a different situation, we are not starting from scratch and there are many important lessons we can learn from these models.

Hello and welcome everyone to this third session of the online debate focus on  Migration, Displacement, and De-urbanization in the Context of COVID-19.  The discussion statement for this week is “Mass urban-rural migration threatens rural stability Increasing land conflicts are inevitable, which may overwhelm rural communities.” 

What is your response to this statement?

The COVID crisis has millions of people on the move, and tens of thousands stranded far from their homes. Most notably, as economies shut down and lockdowns proliferate, de-urbanization has emerged as a serious challenge throughout the developing world. As people leave cities they are leaving properties behind, and they must also be integrated into rural communities which may not have the resources to accommodate them. Another emerging challenge  is the dropping levels of remittances, which people in rural areas, in LAC and also in Asia rely on to build homes, maintain homes, and invest in local businesses.

As we just have a few days for this session, allow me to pose the first questions:

1. As global lockdowns take effect, we see massive amounts of people moving from cities back to their hometowns. What are the broad property rights implications of this migration? What lessons can be drawn from other epidemics (ebola?) and natural disasters?

2. How do we protect the properties people are leaving behind?  For example, from  developers or squatters? How do we ensure these people  can return once lockdowns lift, and how can we avoid inequalities resulting from the lockdown lift?

Of course, if you have general responses to the overall statement you are welcome to post those as well. We look forward to an engaging discussion!

To present day, June 13, 2020, Mali have had 1776 cases of COVID19, 1058 healed, and  104 death ( Source: Statement number 103 of 13 June 2020 of the Ministry of Health of Mali). Related to our Session 3 discussion statement, before , during and after the ongoing pandemic of COVID19 Malian population are experiencing an unprecedent rural-urban migration. This shows the reverse of reality in other countries or continents as the discussion statement reveals. 

The issue here, is the people are leaving the rural area for the cities creating pression on urban and peri-urban areas and land because of the lack of basic social services(school, healthcare center, road, communication services etc.) in rural area  people are moving to cities. For instance, people are buying plots of construction land in neighbor cities to move their parents or relatives meaning to them leaving hell, village, to Paradis, cities. To give an example, I will take the case of my home locality, the Rural Commune of Oualia, in Kayes Region, where all emigrants  and other well financial resourced people are trying to buy housing land in the main village, capital-city of the Commune, Oualia, to move their parents to.In other words, emigrant , outside the country are and other who have some financial resources are building houses in cities, towns or bigger closest villages with some basic commodities . 

A key concern is the availability of basic public services in rural area and the lack of jobs for people leaving their rural home area. In sum , the instability is for both rural an urban areas. It is an harm for urban stability because they are not qualify for urban jobs without no professional qualification and the bearing capacity of the public services are also limited . The other harm is related to the rural instability. These rural residents who are changing their attached environment without guarantee to have land to borrow to produce for the living in the context of land scarcity. If they borrow this year and produce well , next year the owners will retake their land. And the land there are leaving behind are cultivated by relatives who are staying in the villages because the land is communitarian in case they want to return it can be source of conflicts with the one using the land after they have left. It means if they want to go back home they do not have land anymore, raising a risk of conflict amongst family members. And in Oualia, they have to borrow land from founding lineage families’ member. To avoid subsequent land conflicts, some concerned people are sharing their time between city and village. During raining season the come back to their home village to produce crops and during the dry season they will move to the city. This is not sustainable and during a pandemic, like COVID 19 context, it is dangerous as wide spreading factor.

 As post-pandemic, COVID19, priority to support land governance stakeholders, to my view, the recommendation is to bring some basic social services in rural areas and do more researches on the topic of land and pandemic and the capitalization of the results in rural and urban logic. Putting accent on rural development and rural-urban related land studies can inverse the orientation of urban-rural migration and factor of stability for urban and rural areas.

Our evidence sees a mixed picture on urban-rural migration. In Uganda and Kenya it is negligible as lockdowns have precluded significant exit from cities. This has meant food security challenges more for the urban poor than the rural poor. On the other hand, we are seeing significant return of young women and adolescent girls from Accra, Ghana – to their northern homeland. This is posing risks of exploitation and abuse and causing strain on already resource-poor households in the north.

Firstly, I don’t think this necessarily the case across all countries. From what I have seen and contacts I have spoken to this seems to be more the case in South Asia, in particular, and less so in Africa, for example. There has also been a significant return of migrants in some countries, e.g. in Myanmar, whereas in others they seem to be largely unable to return. So what we are lacking at present is a more nuanced and differentiated overview of how the pandemic is playing out in different countries so we can predict and then hopefully validate what is happening in practice.

But where this is occurring, we could of course expect to see increased pressure on land in rural areas with greater intra-household tension if not conflict over how land is managed (raising particular concerns for women’s rights and negotiating power within the HH) and rising disputes between households and within communities, e.g. over the use of communal land. Another risk or dimension to this is how these pressures combined with a roll-back in governance and oversight can lead to unlawful land acquisitions or seizures or people taking advantage of distress sales of land. So far, I have not heard of any anecdotal evidence of these kinds of things occurring but it would take time for this kind of localised pressure and conflict to erupt or become more visible. What we do have is reports of private land grabs in cities as well as reports of unscrupulous companies seizing land or pushing through concessions without due process in forests and rural lands.

Anthropologist Leslie Bank has written about how Covid-19 reveals the migration links in the South African human economy.  Bank uses the analogy of adding dye to water to reveal the circularity of migrant flows in South Africa and to tracks the reverse flows from urban to rural triggered by Covid 19. He observes that:

The spread of Covid 19 thus tells a great deal about the hidden human economy of South Africa and the persistence of circular migration in the country. The evidence of the dye in the water suggest that, while the lives and livelihoods of the rich are territorially enclosed in a middle-class suburbs those of the poor are inherently unstable, mobile and trans-local.

 My own research with informal settlement and hostel dwellers in Langa, Cape Town reveals how migrant visits home provide relief from the dismissive and often hostile social attitudes which continue to be projected onto informal settlement dwellers within the township who many of those born in the city associate with crime land invasion. (This of course is also true for the hundreds of thousands of migrants from neghbouring countries who confront a double alienation.)

For many of the migrants, the rural village continues to represent a place of meaning whether social value, essential dignity and belonging of the individual are reaffirmed; where family members are buried and fundamental continuities between past and present are maintained and expressed through rites of passage and acts of ritual. While the narratives of rural migrants confirm the general collapse and the deagrarianisation of rural livelihoods and the widespread dependence on social grants and urban remittances, rural homesteads continue for many as repositories for intergenerational investment. Such investment is not simply material but is a marker of the continuing construction of meaning and identity. Interview transcripts draw important distinctions between the concepts and meanings associated with home and those associated with a shack constructed as a transcendent bridgehead into the economy.

Bank provides further insights into the meaning of home in the face of the pandemic:

People are reflecting on the social and cultural identities and significance of home at this critical time, especially for people who have essentially never been welcomed in, and gained full citizenship in the city. They reflect on questions of their own belief systems, issues of moral integrity and security; kinship and close-knit social relations; and cultural identity, as well as the historical experiences of migration in the face of the increasing rapid spread of Covid-19 across the country.

In this context, home is a kind of heartland, a crucial reference to a moral community, which comes sharply into focus in times of danger. It is not an abstract place or space that is adequately defined by western science as a site of germs and disease, nor merely a spatial container of economic opportunities and structural impediments. An appreciation of the “people’s science” of home in South Africa requires that we recognise that trans-local is a national reality as households and social groups are stretched across space to ensure both survival and social reproduction.

In this context land conflicts are unlikely in rural settings as most people are not returning to farm. While there may be increasing pressure on grazing and other natural resources,  by and large land conflicts will remain focused on the cities and towns where people seek access to economic opportunities. And these conflicts will play out in many different ways. The systematic and thorough going nature of land dispossession in South Africa and the failure of land reform to gain traction has laregly delinked access to land in rural areas from meaningful economic opportunities. Access to land in urban spaces remains the primary site of struggle. 

An important thing to consider when designing national social assistance plans lies in the need to investigate risks and vulnerabilities which are specific to a particular national or local setting. In the case of natural disaster - related crises, such a strategy should include several major risk management components: risk reduction (such as ensuring microfinance for communities prone to suffer from drought due to their location or incapacity to access water sources) and risk mitigation as ex ante preventive measures. Risk mitigation may include measures such as the provision of insurance systems for communities at risk of drought, given the assumption that national social protection such as pensions are already in place. Risk reduction programs may for instance foresee securing safe delivery of water in areas known as prone to drought, before a full-fledged water crisis starts. Timely information campaigns in targeted communities should be in place and make use of both conventional and non-conventional social venues such as school and local civil networks or organisations to secure access to information, especially in case further measures such as programmed evacuation of population towards areas not impacted by drought is foreseen. The approach proposed above would facilitate the implementation and monitoring of the proposed measures. Furthermore, local authorities and organisations are very important in ensuring accurate monitoring and reporting of actions already mentioned. Co-participation and empowerment of local organisations is essential to achieving these objectives as well as to guarantee the programs’ legitimacy.

Very useful and thought provoking speech. Bravo.

Lockdown in Bolivia has coincided with the anual harvest period in the regions with bigger population: the highlands and the valleys. Quechua and Aymara migrants in the cities have a “dual-residence”, as they have not broken their links to their communities, returning to them during sowing and harvest seasons and fulfilling their role in natural organisations; by keeping those relationships alive this return to the rural has not increased pressure for land ownership. The migrants also return to their communities to exert political positions in different levels of government, from the local to the national.  

Rural migration has predominantly occupied poor neighbourhoods in cities, usually as tenants rather tan owners and in precarious conditions, including overcrowding, and without essential services (there is an analysis saying that Bolivia has not gone through an urbanisation process, but the ruralisation of cities). As for employment, most of them work in the informal sector (around 70% of the Economically Active Population), as Street vendors, public transport drivers or masons, without access to social security systems, hence they do not have assets to leave behind.

Usually these migrants settle in areas where other people from their communities, reproducing a logic of occupying a space and of maintaining a social network. This could be a contribution to the discussion, by highlighting the importance of recovering and strengthening communal solidarity roots among those who migrate to the cities.

In Bolivian experience, “double residence” has been used as a strategy to keep communities levels of recorded population, as they are registered in these rural communities in the national census. This inflates population numbers but has helped rural municipalities increase their budgets. An issue would be about children going to school, as rural schools do not have enough students and therefore do not have the infrastructure or staff to receive those returning.

This growth in population in the communities should be seen as a challenge to promote projects of a return to the rural areas in better conditions. Investing in housing projects, improving education and health systems, internet access, through ambitious plans of food production for short market circuits in nearby cities.

A way to do this would be to improve irrigation systems to make the soil more productive, to promote innovations to give a better profit margin such as greenhouses, reforestation and soil recovery plans, technical assistance and training in production among other initiatives.

Remittances in Bolivia are two-way, migrants in urban areas cover unexpected expenses and buy assets for the rural home (tools, cars, stoves, etc.) and get food in return to compensate their low income. 

Dear Yuliya Panfil. Thank you so much for your insightful comment on Mali experiences unprecendent rural-urban migration! To answer your question I can say that in Mali, rural-urban migration is key current concern and the trend will continue until we will have some basic public falicities in rural areas. For sure, this trend will maitain in Malian context. For example for the diagnosis of COVID19 patients or suspected cases have to move into cities to know their status. In most cases even the cities' hospital have to send the blooth in the Capital-city to be cheched.  According to general census of the population in Mali of 2009, 10% of Malian citizen are living in Bamako, the Capital-city. I tooked just the case of Oualia to show the small scale where people are migrating from neighboring villages to the biggest one.People who have money in Oualia want to move also in Bamako.  In fact, most of people  want to live in the Capital-city, Bamako, if they have thre possibility because of the lack public commodities eslwhere in the country. People said, Mali is only Bamako. For instance, all of the civil servants in Mali want to stay in Bamako.And those who did not managed to stay in Bamako are doing their best to buy house for their family to stay .The pandemic is now a good reason for people to migrate into the cities because of the lack of health care facilities.To sum up, the migrants will not return to rural area . We have some neighborhoods in Bamako Ditrict where the people suffiring from one illness have setled near the hospital by occopying illegaly before the regularization.

In recent history, urbanization has been one of the most significant driving factors in global development. From 1950 to the present day the global urban population has more than quadrupled, with current estimates of over 4 billion people living in cities. Some of the fastest-growing cities in the world are the rapidly developing cities of Asia and Africa, as millions in developing nations seek the economic opportunity and relative stability of urban life.[1] However, in 2020 the trend of urbanization is rapidly reversing in many communities. With the onset of COVID-19 people across the world have been fleeing urban zones to rural communities where the risk of disease transmission is significantly less. For vulnerable populations, especially widows, this counterurbanization often carries significant risk. 

The Post-Covid urban to rural migratory trend poses increased risk to widows living in rural contexts. 

Disinheritance, or property grabbing, the most ubiquitous of human rights and economic crimes perpetrated against widows, (usually perpetrated with impunity) can be expected to escalate. It is entirely foreseeable that migrant workers returning to their home villages with no prospect of income, and no remittances, can be compelled to pursue doctored claims to land and property from vulnerable widows.   Disinherited widows who may have found shelter in their paternal homes or with immediate family may now find themselves uprooted -even homeless - to make room for returnees.  

Hunger will be exacerbated as food supply chain disruptions, shifts in population demand, and consequent rising local prices will invariably disproportionately impact disadvantaged widows. In India, we expect long term implications to the food chain, as lockdown and migration resulted in a missed planting season. This will have devastating impact on food stocks, supply chains, and food prices in the upcoming months, and widows will be among the most vulnerable.

Deepening health crisis is expected. Counterurbanization puts rural communities at increased risk of COVID-19. Rural communities already suffer from weak health care systems, and impoverished and ostracized widows often are the last to have access to health care. Additionally, COVID-19 is a widow maker, and could devastate rural communities, creating widows in its wake. COVID-19 widows will likely bear the debt burden of the cost of treatment of their late husbands, exacerbating their predicament.

To mitigate the human rights implications of ongoing counterurbanization, initiatives to ensure the protection of human rights and consider the needs of vulnerable populations MUST be prioritized in rural communities. It is especially important that widows property rights, inheritance rights, freedom to remarry, access to economic opportunity, and freedom from harmful traditional practices be protected. These rights are not only required by international obligations, they are critical to preventing intergenerational poverty and ensuring compliance with the Sustainable Development Goals.  

[1] https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/2018-revision-of-....

Thank you very much for this perspective, Roxana.  Your point that urban migrants settle in areas with other people from their communities is very interesting, and deserves more exploration.  I can see how this pattern would ease the burden and increase the cohesiveness of any urban-rural migration caused by COVID. I wonder what the long-term impacts will be, as certain members of communities decide to return to urban areas, and others choose to stay behind for longer. Will this result in teh fraying of the social fabric in these urban migrant communities? 

At present, I don’t think this will come down to a question of shelter as many will, somehow, be accommodated within rural homes as they are during public holidays. The question is how long does the lockdown last and what decisions do household start to make about how much land they need and how they use it.

To respond meaningfully in any country there need to be systems in place already now, ie from before the crisis, to be able to resolve disputes, etc. The work Namati and its partners in the global legal empowerment network is particularly relevant and important here. This builds bottom up with a network of paralegals based in communities who can monitor what is going on, intervene to use the law to protect rights, and escalate up to the national level where necessary. In the long-run, this kind of network and legal empowerment is needs to be supported and resources in every country so there is standing capacity to respond to crisis like this but also deal with the usual caseload of disputes and unlawful practices.

Thank you for these observations, Oumou. Indeed, the risk of returning migrants infecting their home communities is a serious one, particularly since rural areas are not equipped to deal with influxes of infections. This is a problem here in the United States as well - we saw that during the peak of infections in New York Cities, young people were leaving to stay with family in other parts of the country. Unfortunately, they ended up spreading the disease, in some cases, to rural areas. In other cases, some people have second homes near the beach or in the mountains, and have decided to relocate there for the time being. However, some parts of the country have taken aggressive measures to ban everyone other than fulltime residents (even those who legally own property in these places). There are questions about whether this is legal, since these part-time residents are still paying property taxes and are the rightful owners of the homes. However, from the standpoint of public health, it makes sense.  

Nicaragua is one of the few countries in the world that has hardly acknowledged the presence of the pandemic in their territory. Hence, there are very few cases reported, and mostly they are categorised as “atypical pneumonia”. Thus, those who believe to be infected might be reluctant to come forward, afraid of being stigmatised. This is particularly relevant for those who have been opposing the current government, as coming forward might pose a threat to their lives.

Nicaragua relies heavily on its seasonal migration to Costa Rica, which is particularly characterised by the gender division of labour: men work in agriculture (pineapple, banana, coffee plantations) and women in domestic employment. With COVID19 most Nicaraguans were forced to leave Costa Rica, and there is no certainty when/if they will be allowed into the country again.

This has several implications: i. Decrease on remittances and access to daily cash for relatives in Nicaragua; ii. Increased pressure on the rural population who are already food insecure as relatives move back home; iii. More pressure over resources, particularly land, which could bring forest clearance and land degradation.

There is a feeling of uncertainty and frustration, particularly in rural areas, that hunger might spread across the country. However, local and grassroots organisations are working in innovative ways, aiming to reduce the negative implications of Covid 19 and avoid a bigger disaster. Partners are concentrating in increasing investment in native seeds; strengthening community bank seeds; investing in water catchments; and transferring products from the humid regions to feed the dry corridor. It is important to highlight that while Costa Rica has focused in the past in increasing its exports, Nicaragua decreased them and increase the production of basic grains (corn and beans), which is welcome news at the moment.

While advocacy might be a challenge in the country with the current situation, it is important now more than ever to strengthen the lobbying efforts around two laws that were approved a decade ago but still pending its full implementation: i. Law 717 creator of the fund to purchase land with gender equity for rural women; ii. Law 765 which promotes agroecological or organic production.

This is related to the impact of urban rural immigration and potential heightened disputes in search of alternative coppying mechanism.    Urban population are encroaching on limited resurces in the rural, that was the main source of livelihood of the rural.   With more urban rural immigration in search of alternative livelihood, land, that is already too scarce, that was being suplimented by remittances of urban that has dried given reduced jobs in the informal sector.   The only assumed alternative is depending on family rural land that is unlikely to support the existing rural in addition to urban rural immigrants.   There is a need to seek for alternative financial support to the population in informal sector that continue to become jobless, yet are the main source of family support in rural and extended families in the urban.  This intervention will reduce family disputes eminating from sharing the already scarce land related resources as the only family source of livelihood.   In most cases it is the weak, women and children that will suffer the most.

We can speculate about this but I think we need to start with better data on which countries this applies to and also do some rapid assessments to get a better sense of how long returnees expect to say and how it is impacting on their lives and access to services. Then we can also get a better sense of the impact on food systems as this will depend critically on what the current season is, how well food moves around the country, etc.

Shipra, thank you for your contribution, and your observation that a drop in remitances may lead to an increased demand for insurance. Insurance products rely on an assessment of the insured asset's condition / stability / reliability. For crops / farmland, such an exercise may necessitate understanding the tenure situation on the land in question. Do you think this will in turn increase demand for land documentation? 

This is a really interesting case Shipra, and I would be interested to get your view on how the strong gender equity you mention would be affected by the coronavirus returns of all the (mostly male?) migrant workers from the urban areas? Will it challenge the strong participation of women in Kerala if there is a big influx of men, who might expect to take up their place as heads of families?

Let us turn to our final two questions. How do we protect the properties people are leaving behind?  For example, from squatters? How do we ensure these people can return once lockdowns lift?  We are also seeing increasing mobility restrictions that leave people stranded far from their homes. What are the property rights implications of this?

Not specific to long distance but we have evidence that school closures and restricted access to health services is leading to increased domestic care burdens for women. This has immediate implications on production as many rural women are also responsible for on-farm cultivation activities. Reduced time in productive activity is resulting in land lying fallow and may lead to the appropriation of that land by others

We are also concerned that the gender gap in access to information and technology (due to social and cultural norms, affordability, literacy etc) will lead to further marginalisation of women regarding access to productive resources – including land. Accessing and interpreting land titles, for example, will be more difficult for women for a number of reasons.

Thank you for higlighting Svamitva and how it holds the potential to improve households' titles to land, unless I am understanding this wrong. This is also important since land-holding data is often lacking on many aspects. 

Thank you for highlighting the need to focus on women's land and inheritance rights and the increased domestic violence they face during the time of COVID-19. I would like to highlight this issue in the context of India, where much like the rest of the world, the country has seen an increase in domestic violence (DV) and intimate partner violence (IPV) during the time of COVID.

In India, inheritance rights for Hindus is governed by the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 and now the seemingly more gender equal Hindu Succession Amendment Act of 2005. Other religions are governed by their own set of inheritance rules, I only highlight the Hindu version since I have some knowledge of it.  The amendment allows for women to have equal rights as their male siblings over their natal ancestral property, which often is in the form of land. However, depsite these rules, documented evidence suggests that women continue to be discrimated against what is rightfully theirs. Work by Bina Agarwal has extensively highlighted these inequalities in access to ancestral property. A large part of this is entrenched in religious, social, and patriarchal norms. For example, a strong and persistent son-preference among households renders it difficult for women to claim their share of property since parents continue to favor sons over daughters when it comes to dividing the property. The patrilocal nature of marriages increases the exclusion of women from their natal household's property.

A lack of financial assets exacerbated by a lack of well-implemented property rights makes it harder for women to leave their marital households when faced with DV and IPV. Often, women in India themselves voluntarily relinquish their right to natal household property to continue to have access to their natal households in dire circumstances. However, a woman facing DV/IPV is not waived from social tabboo, rendering it difficult for her to go back to her natal household. So the issue becomes twofold - a woman now has no financial assets to fall back upon, neither does she have help from her families. COVID and the nationwide lockdown in India, causing large-scale loss of employment and increased financial stress, will only add to these problems.

Large-scale mobilization to improve women's information about their rights is a first step in helping them recognize their options, women in India quite often lack the knowledge of what they are entitled to.

Hello everyone and welcome to the last session of the Online Discussion on the Land Rights Implications of Covid-19. In this session we will focus on the impact of Covid-19 on land administration systems and the impacts this has on the quality and fairness of land governance. The discussion statement of this week is: Covid-19 has upended land administration systems: Communities will suffer as elites take advantage of the governance gap.

What is your opinion on this statement?

In several countries the lockdown measures to prevent the spread of Covid-19 have led to the closing of the land administration services (e.g. in