Resource information
The following recommendations are made in this report:
1. The continuum of land rights is a metaphor, not a theory. A metaphor can be applied in a number of theoretical contexts, whereas a theory has an ideological perspective.
2. When applying the continuum, establish a position on the role of the state and then define the terms formal and informal. The state cannot always be the sole steward and arbiter over land tenure, but a number of documents imply this. Associated with this issue is that the rights recognized by the state are considered formal rights and other rights, such as customary rights, are often considered to be informal. Customary systems are hardly informal and a number of countries recognize customary tenure systems.
3. When using the continuum of land rights for analysis purposes consider also adopting the metaphors of a constellation of land interests and the bundle of rights to complement the continuum of land rights metaphor in order to develop a broader analytical framework based on three main sub-systems, the ideological, legal and actual relations. Further, develop frameworks for specific applications or purposes of the continuum, particularly at country level.
4. The current graphic needs to be revised. What might be considered is having no standard graphic at all, but to use graphical aids that are suited to a particular situation.
