This brief discusses a pilot intervention in Rwanda led by the Belgian
NGO, RCN Justice & Démocratie, with support from the International
Development Law Organization (IDLO) and the Belgian Government. A
more detailed and complete discussion of the pilot is given in Lankhorst
and Veldman (2011a). The pilot aimed to transform the customary
resolution of disputes involving women’s land claims concerning
inheritance or marital relations. The intervention examined whether
and to what extent it was possible to increase the scope for acceptance

In Rwanda, for many years ago, rights over land for women and female orphans were not
recognized. The main causes were the inexistence of efficient land administration systems and
the prevalence of traditional system of land tenure which were complex and did not favor
women and female descendants. In 2004, the Government of Rwanda had adopted a new land
policy which was complemented by the 2005 Organic Land Law and a series of laws and
regulations with regard to access to land, land management perspectives, and to the modalities

Looks at property rights and returnees, the situation of women in relation to property rights, consequences of women’s lack of access to land, initiatives taken by national authorities to improve women’s property rights, and initiatives taken by UNHCR.

Women constitute the majority of small farmers, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Yet, in countries around the world, they continue to be denied the right to own the ground that they cultivate and on which they raise their families. This publication, “Women’s Land and Property Rights in Situations of Conflict and Reconstruction,” presents a diversity of views and experiences that describe the multiple strategies being used in countries worldwide to secure women's rights to land and property.

For decades, policymakers and development practitioners have debated benefits and threats of property rights formalization and private versus customary tenure systems. This paper provides insights into the challenges in understanding and empirically analyzing the relationship between tenure systems and agricultural investment, and formulates policy advice that can support land tenure interventions. We focus on Ghana, based on extensive qualitative fieldwork and a review of empirical research and policy documents.

In this brief, we explore the role that social institutions -specifically property rights and collective action - may play in the development of agroforestry.... In the future, property rights and collective action will play increasingly pivotal roles in defining rights and responsibilities over the externalities of tree management practices.

Agricultural growth will prove essential for improving the welfare of the vast majority of Africa’s poor. Roughly 80 percent of the continent’s poor live in rural areas, and even those who do not will depend heavily on increasing agricultural productivity to lift them out of poverty. Seventy percent of all Africans— and nearly 90 percent of the poor—work primarily in agriculture. As consumers, all of Africa’s poor—both urban and rural—count heavily on the efficiency of the continent’s farmers.

Las instituciones de acción colectiva y los sistemas de derechos de propiedad moldean la forma en que la gente usa los recursos naturales.A su vez, estos patrones de uso afectan los resultados de los sistemas de producción agrícola de la gente. Juntos, los mecanismos de acción colectiva y los sistemas de derechos de propiedad definen los incentivos a los que la gente accede por llevar a cabo estrategias de gestión sostenible y productiva, y afectan el nivel y distribución de los beneficios de los recursos naturales.

This brief defines property rights and collective action and discusses the links to sustainability of natural resource management and agricultural systems and to poverty reduction, as well as the implications for policy and practice.

There is renewed interest in the intrahousehold allocation of welfare, particularly among economists studying poor countries where even slight differences in the allocation of household resources can have dramatic consequences on child and female nutrition, morbidity, and mortality (Haddad and Hoddinott 1994; Rose 1999; Dercon and Krishnan 2000). The evidence collected so far tends to demonstrate that the allocation of consumption and leisure among household members varies systematically with their relative contributions to household total income (Thomas 1990; Alderman et al.