Panama - Context and Land Governance

^{Panama May 2014 photo by  Mi Chiel License CC BY-SA 2.0}

The Panamanian population is more than 4.3 million inhabitants¹ and, according to government sources, is composed of 67% mestizos, 14% blacks, 10% whites, 6% indigenous and 3% of mixed ethnic origins.² Seven indigenous peoples live in Panama: Ngäbe, Buglé, Guna, Emberá, Wounaan, Bri bri and Naso Tjërdi. Panama is one of the first countries in Latin America to recognize the autonomy of indigenous peoples with the creation of indigenous comarcas, territories governed by indigenous peoples, as reported below. 

Despite being the third most competitive economy in Latin America,³ Panama is also among the most unequal countries in the region -in 2019, its Gini index was 49.8, 4.5 points higher than the Latin American average-⁴ .One factor that explains such inequality is territorial imbalances as economic activity is mainly concentrated in the inter-oceanic zone. 

The construction of the Panama Canal, completed in 1914, directed the country's economy towards the service sector, leaving the agricultural sector in the background. The lack of development in the countryside, and of support for family agriculture in particular, explains the high levels of rural poverty and imbalances in the agricultural market, which prevent the adequate supply of domestic markets with national products. 

^{Panama Canal, photo by Enrique, Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0}

Land legislation

The 1972 Political Constitution of Panama guarantees private property to legal or natural persons (art. 47) and establishes the obligations of the owner (art. 48). ownera. to guarantee its social function (art. 48)⁵. Otherwise, or for reasons of public utility, the property may be expropriated.

References to rural lands in the Constitution revolve around the production of the agricultural sector. The State will not allow the existence of uncultivated, unproductive or idle lands and will promote their maximum productivity (art. 123). In this way, it seeks to avoid the underutilization and reduction of the productive potential of agricultural land, making the owner responsible for its correct use (art. 125). As part of the agrarian policy, the State undertakes to provide peasants with the necessary arable land and to regulate the use of water, to provide credit to help finance agricultural activity, to pay special attention to small and medium-sized producers, and to promote organization, training and technification, among other aspects (Art. 126). 
The first Civil Code, in 1917, recognized possessory rights that have made it possible to justify possession of land even in the absence of formal title deeds⁶.

In 1962, the Agrarian Code was approved with the objective of carrying out agrarian reform and abolishing land grabbing⁷. In 2011 a new Agrarian Code was approved through Law 55⁸. One of the main differences with respect to the previous code is the creation of an agrarian jurisdiction to address disputes arising in connection with agrarian activity⁹. In addition, the new code is coordinated with environmental regulations by emphasizing the importance of caring for the environment in the practice of agriculture. Thus, it establishes the farmer's duty to carry out his/her agricultural activity in harmony with the environment by promoting the use of organic fertilizers and inputs that do not weaken the soil or affect human, animal or plant health (art. 3). 

In 2020, Law 127 for the Development of Family Farming establishes the basis for the definition of differentiated policies and strategies to guarantee the preservation, promotion and development of family farming as a national priority and on a permanent basis¹⁰.
Other policies relevant to land have been environmental policies and policies for the protection of indigenous territories (see section Collective land rights). General Environmental Law 41 (1998) establishes that natural resources are of public domain and social interest (art. 62) and regulates the use of non-renewable resources¹¹. The law states that natural resources must be managed under the concepts of sustainability, rationality, and environmental protection. The use of soils must be compatible with their ecological vocation and aptitude, and must avoid practices with adverse environmental effects (art. 75); otherwise, they will be subject to sanctions and will include recovery or mitigation actions (art. 76). Clear-cutting or deforestation of natural forests will not be considered as evidence to request the recognition of the right of possession or land titling (art. 74). 

The main institutions for government land management are the National Land Administration Authority (ANATI), the National Environmental Authority (ANAM) and the Ministry of Agricultural Development (MIDA). 

Land tenure

In the last National Agricultural Census of 2011, the following four forms of land tenure are listed: occupied with title, occupied without title, leased and collective land or property.¹² The area occupied with property title is the area with legalized property title, i.e., registered in the land registry.¹³ Non-titled occupied area is land that has been occupied through some arrangement with the owner or without any arrangement at all, and on which no lease is paid. The land may belong to the State or to a private individual¹⁴ . As defined in the Census, it generally includes the Nation's land, over which the producer obtains permission or license for its occupation or work, which is called possessory right. The area occupied under leasehold is the land occupied and for the occupation of which payment is made either in money, in production or in service to another person¹⁵ .Collective ownership measured in the Census only corresponds to indigenous comarcas, although there are also collective lands outside the comarcas (see section on Collective land rights). The Census defines comarcas as a result of the State recognizing and guaranteeing indigenous peoples and communities their habitat and original rights over the ancestral land they traditionally occupy, as well as the collective ownership of these lands, which are necessary to guarantee their way of life. The lands of the indigenous peoples and communities are inalienable, imprescriptible, unseizable and non-transferable¹⁶ . Land ownership in the comarcas is of a collective nature, although private ownership prior to its creation is recognized¹⁷ .

There are also state lands, which may be uncultivated lands -all those comprising the national territory with the exception of those privately owned by natural or juridical persons- or patrimonial lands -all those acquired by the State under any title (purchase, exchange, donation, etc.)¹⁸ . State property is also divided between public property -which is for public use and therefore cannot be privatized- and patrimonial property -which, due to its economic purpose, can be disposed of as long as it is not destined to the satisfaction of a public good-¹⁹  .Thus, patrimonial lands may be acquired but only through an adjudication contract with the State and regardless of whether one has a certificate of possession. 

According to 2014 data, 26% of the land is untitled and is located mainly in the provinces of Bocas de Toro (52%), Darién (50%), Colón (43%), Coclé (36%) and Veraguas (33%)²⁰ . Owned land occupies the largest area (1,607,371 ha), followed by land occupied without title (811,297 ha), collective land (193,523 ha) and leased land (86,648 ha)²¹. Compared to the same data for 2000, it is worth noting the increase in titled land by 29.6 points (1,240,564 in 2000) and the decrease in untitled land by -43.7 points (1,441,658 in 2000) ²² .
Regarding the size of farms, out of a total of 248,560 farms registered in 2011, 82% were smaller than 10 hectares and 43% were smaller than half a hectare²³ .

The land titling process is regulated by Law 37 of the Agrarian Code and consists of the following 16 steps: 1) provision of application, 2) admission of application, 3) ocular inspection, 4) coupling and plan review, 5) institutional validation request, 6) institutional response, 7) publication of edicts, 8) opposition and proof of possession, 9) land payment, 10) plan approval and registration, 11) final file review, 12) adjudication resolution, 13) public registry registration, 14) cadastral update, 15) notification, and 16) title delivery. In total the process can take from 2 to 4 years²⁴ .The costs of the land titling process correspond to the interested party, except in cases of free adjudications, and include: the preparation of plans by qualified professional personnel; the inspection or evaluation services of the corresponding public institutions; the publication of the edict in the newspaper and in the Official Gazette; the payment of the land to be adjudicated²⁵ .

Collective land rights

In Panama there are two types of collective lands: collective lands within the indigenous comarcas and collective lands outside the indigenous comarcas.

The indigenous comarcas

The recognition of indigenous rights in Panama modified the administrative division of the country due to the creation of the indigenous comarcas. The comarcas are political-administrative organizations distinct and independent from the districts and corregimientos and are governed according to their own institutions²⁶. There are currently six recognized indigenous comarcas. Three of them have the category of provinces with their regional governors (Guna Yala, Emberá de Darién and Ngobe-Buglé), two have the category of corregimientos (Guna de Madugandi and Guna Wargandi) and the Naso Tjër-Di comarca is formed as a district divided into three corregimientos. The indigenous comarcas occupy an area of 1.7 million hectares²⁷. The creation of these administrative territorial figures is constitutionally supported by article 5, which authorizes the creation of other political divisions with special regimes, and by article 127, according to which "the State will guarantee to the indigenous communities the reservation of the necessary lands and the collective property of the same for the achievement of their economic and social welfare"²⁸.

The indigenous comarcas have their origin in the Guna Revolution of 1925, caused by the incursions of outsiders in search of natural resources and the abuses of the police authorities against the Guna -also called Kuna- people²⁹. The conflict ended with a peace treaty in which the government pledged to protect the customs and traditions of the Guna. This was the first step towards the recognition of Guna autonomy, which began with the legal establishment of the Comarca of San Blas in 1938 and matured with the definition of its boundaries and administration through Law 16 in 1953, currently known as the Guna Yala comarca. According to this law, the administrative authority of the comarca, whose limits are clearly established by law, is the intendant with the category of governor of the province (art. 3), the State recognizes the authority of the Guna Congress³⁰. (art. 13), the land is reserved for the Guna Yala comarca (art. 14), and the land is reserved for the Guna Yala comarca (art. 14). 13), the vacant lands within the comarca are reserved for agriculture and family patrimony of the comarca (art. 1) and no land within the indigenous reserves will be awarded to any person who is not part of the community unless the applications for the award are approved by two different Guna Congresses (art. 21)³¹.

This recognition was followed by similar agreements between the different indigenous peoples and the government of Panama through the following laws: Law 22 on the Emberá de Darién comarca (1983), Law 24 on the Guna de Madugandi comarca (1996),³². Law 10 on the Ngobe-Buglé comarca (1997) and Law 34 on the Guna Wargandi comarca (2000)³³. Some of these laws included certain advances and innovations³⁴. Law 22 of 1983, which created the Emberá de Darién comarca, for example, in addition to the collective ownership of the lands delimited by law for the indigenous (excluding private property) and establishing the priority of the comarca municipalities to acquire lands that are alienated or abandoned in their territory for two or more years (art. 5), includes the obligation to request the authorization of the cacique for the use of the resources (art. 19)³⁵. Likewise, for the exploitation of subsoil resources owned by the State, the State must guarantee the participation of the indigenous community in the economic and social benefits derived from the exploitation (art. 20). 

Law 10 (1997) creating the Ngäbe-Buglé comarca includes the creation of a Commission for the promotion of the integral development of the comarca in which both ministerial authorities and the comarca authorities will participate (art. 46). It also contemplates the possibility of relocation or relocation of populations or persons due to development projects, cases that must be compensated by the State and in which consultation, communication and participation of the authorities of the comarca will be promoted (art. 47). For the exploitation of natural resources, there is an additional requirement to carry out a prior environmental impact study that includes the social impact on the affected population in accordance with their culture (art. 48). Law 24 (2000) that creates the Guna Wargandi comarca goes a step further and prohibits intensive logging or other activities that threaten biodiversity because it is recognized as a natural reserve (art. 13)³⁶.

In 2020, the last Naso Tjër Di indigenous comarca was created through Law 656 after more than 40 years claiming their ancestral lands³⁷. At the jurisprudential level, the creation of this comarca was particularly relevant since the approved bill of Law 656, which in 2018 proclaimed its creation, was vetoed by the then President of the Republic, Juan Carlos Valera, in response to the concern of environmental sectors that it was unconstitutional as the comarca was in a protected area. The case was taken to Panama's Supreme Court of Justice, which ruled in favor of the creation of the comarca because it did not consider it to be against the Constitution³⁸.  

The autonomous status of indigenous peoples in Panama has not prevented conflicts and pressures on indigenous communities over resource exploitation. The conflicts in the Ngäbe-Buglé comarca over mining concessions and hydroelectric projects are a case in point. In 2011, the government approved Law 8 that reformed the Mineral Resources Code and made possible the exploitation of the Cerro Colorado mining deposit³⁹. The indigenous people objected and the conflict culminated in the San Felix Agreement. The government repealed Law 8 and dialogue was initiated with the indigenous authorities to produce a new mining law. In 2012, draft Law 415 was presented that would create a regime for the protection of mining, water and environmental resources in the Ngäbe-Buglé comarca, but it did not include Article 5 of the San Félix Agreement cancelling existing concessions. The indigenous people protested against the bill for not complying with the San Felix agreement and for not having consulted with the owners of the comarca for said concessions, for which they were severely repressed. After a public debate, Bill 415 was approved in 2012 with the articles agreed between the government and the indigenous people, including the prohibition and cancellation of mining concessions granted in the comarca. Law 415 leaves, however, an open door to hydroelectric projects by indicating that they must have the approval of the full congress of the constituency where they are planned and be submitted to a referendum⁴⁰.

It should be noted that Panama has not ratified Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization that regulates the rights of participation and prior and informed consultation. Instead, there is Law 37 (2016) that establishes "the exercise of the right to prior, free and informed consultation and consent to indigenous peoples, whenever legislative and administrative measures are envisaged that affect their collective rights, understanding as these their lands, territories, resources, ways of life and culture" with due anticipation and according to customary procedures⁴¹. Although the norm is also applied in the creation of laws that may affect indigenous peoples, indigenous participation was absent in the approval in 2021 of Law 196⁴². on the establishment of agro-park operators and developers⁴³. Agroparks are spaces where different agri-food activities are grouped together to minimize production costs and increase productivity⁴⁴. Their development is intended for the entire national territory without mentioning the exclusion of protected environmental territories or indigenous territories⁴⁵.

Another type of conflict is caused by cattle ranching and extensive agriculture activities by settlers in indigenous comarcas, collective lands and untitled lands. Examples of this are the conflicts between Wounaan Indians and logging settlers in the Darién region,⁴⁶. and between Indians and cattle ranchers in Titrí⁴⁷.

Collective lands outside indigenous comarcas

For indigenous people who are not in the comarcas, Law 72 (2008) regulates the titling of collective lands, which are imprescriptible, non-transferable, non-seizable and inalienable⁴⁸. The law provides for the creation of a community conciliation and mediation mechanism to resolve possible conflicts that the recognition of such titles could generate (art. 11), and the enforcement of such rights in case of usurpation or invasion of land (art. 12). According to the law, both governmental and private entities shall coordinate with indigenous authorities on plans and projects in their area in order to guarantee the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous communities (art. 14). It is worth mentioning the role that the National Coordinating Body of Indigenous Peoples of Panama (COONAPIP), created in 1991 and of which the 12 indigenous congresses and councils are active members, has played as a platform for the recognition of the territorial, social and cultural rights of the indigenous population⁴⁹. In 2019, the government recognized 25 indigenous territories by title⁵⁰.

Regardless of ethnic identity, Law 23 (1983), which regulates peasant organizations, establishes the allocation of land free of charge to peasant settlements (organizations formed by low-income peasants) under the collective property regime (art. 38)⁵¹. Such lands are not subject to any tax lien and are indivisible, except for areas for housing construction. The adjudicated lands may not be leased or sold (art. 44). There are currently more than 150 peasant settlements without title deeds⁵².

^{Darien National Park, Panama, photo by Harvey Barrison, Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0}

Trends in land use and natural resource use

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 25% of Panamanian soils are suitable for agricultural use⁵³. Agriculture has not been a priority sector in the Panamanian economy as reflected by the continuous decline in its contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) since 1950, when it was over 25%, falling to 2.1% in 2015⁵⁴. At the same time, the development of the agricultural sector is key considering that most of the poverty in Panama is located in rural areas -39.8% of the rural population lives in poverty compared to 9.3% of the urban population-⁵⁵.

A diagnosis of the sector carried out by the Panamanian government in 2014 points out among the main problems the inefficient use of production factors due to the use of medium or low fertility soils, low quality seeds and low irrigation utilization⁵⁶. Among the challenges affecting productivity are the lack of a high quality seed bank; the concentration of input sales in a small number of companies; deficient information systems in relation to the market, prices and technology; high fuel prices; pests and diseases; poor infrastructure for post-harvest tasks such as storage, drying and storage facilities, as well as for marketing; and low educational level of producers. 

The government also points out the asymmetry between traditional products such as rice, corn, coffee, milk, yams and tomatoes, and emerging products such as cucurbits, roots and tubers and beef cattle⁵⁷. While the former have experienced problems such as low competitiveness and productivity, the latter have developed a strong momentum. This asymmetry has meant that the low productivity of traditional products has been insufficient to meet domestic demand, thus increasing dependence on food imports, which increased by 20% per year, while foodstuffs became more expensive by an average of 7% per year⁵⁸. On the other hand, exports of emerging items are limited and in recent years have suffered a drop from US$420 million in 2007 to US$200 million in 2012. The only products that escaped this decline were beef cattle and unrefined sugar. 

At present, as the government recognizes, public policies have supported crops and farmers with the capacity to compete in the markets, relegating medium and small producers to a welfare-oriented support aimed at mitigating poverty, but not at improving their productivity⁵⁹. In addition, financial support for the rural sector, such as agricultural credit, is inaccessible to small producers because it requires an initial economic solvency that they lack. The lack of land titles is also an impediment to accessing credit or commercial and financial activities.

In view of this situation, the Chamber of Commerce, Industries and Agriculture of Panama (CCIAP) demands that the agricultural and import sectors be harmonized, as it considers it inappropriate to authorize the importation of products coinciding with the country's harvest cycles⁶⁰. According to CCIAP, the policy of cyclical subsidies to farmers has in the long run encouraged the desertion of the countryside and migration to urban centers, and considers them ineffective to respond to the structural problems in the agricultural sector⁶¹.
The Panamanian Peasant Union, for its part, demanded, in a communiqué in 2017, more policies, resources and opportunities for the production and commercialization of peasant products, as well as practices and exchanges on sustainable agriculture and food sovereignty, in opposition to monocultures, transgenics and agrotoxics⁶².

Cattle ranching was boosted by policies for the colonization of forests in certain areas such as the Darien promoted during the military dictatorship (1968-1989). One study argues that the ideological motivation of these policies considered forests as a symbol of underdevelopment and as a resource without economic benefit⁶³.  These policies, supported by international financial entities and influential national groups, reinforced the migratory movements that were already occurring by peasants from Los Santos province to the Azuero peninsula and the provinces of Coclé, Panama, Colón and Darién. Among the causes of the migratory movements were the increase in demand for land and food due to population growth, the liberal reforms that replaced communal property with private property resulting in "enclosure" of land and land grabbing, and the promotion of the industrialization of agriculture and commercial livestock⁶⁴.

More than half of Panama's territory -according to FAO, around 60%- is covered by forests⁶⁵. The National Forestry Development Plan stated in 2008 that 75% of the land is suitable for forestry and should preferably be used for agroforestry and forestry activities⁶⁶. Protected areas cover approximately 40% of Panama's territory⁶⁷. According to data from 2000, protected areas contain 50% of the country's forests⁶⁸. Another 20% of the forests are located in the indigenous comarcas and the remaining 30% are located in lands with different forms of tenure, including state, individual and collective indigenous lands outside the comarcas⁶⁹. A study on the effect of land tenure type on forest conservation indicates that private property has contributed to the deforestation of between 1750 and 3650 km² of mature forest in the period 1990-2020, while protected areas and indigenous comarcas are estimated to have protected 1700-3900 km² and 500-1250 km² of mature forest respectively⁷⁰. The study also points to the paradox that private ownership can accelerate deforestation while encouraging investment in reforestation. This is because deforestation helps to secure land title and having a title is a precondition for participating in forest conservation programs⁷¹.

The progressive increase in urban population, from 41% in 1960 to 69% in 2021,⁷². suggests an increase in urbanization in Panama. No data have been found on the size of the urbanized area at the country level, but it is estimated that Panama City increased by 12,000 hectares between 2000 and 2010⁷³.b.c.

^{Guna Yala indigenous region, Panama, photo by 'descubriendoelmundo', Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0} 

Investments in land

Since 1994, when Law 8 declared tourism as an industry of public utility and national interest,[⁷⁴. the tourism sector has been supported with different laws and programs until it became a State policy in the Master Plan for Sustainable Tourism Development of Panama 2020-202575. Subsequent laws such as Law 80 (2012) have encouraged tourism activity through tax incentives. Such support has been reflected in the increase in tourism's contribution to GDP from 8.5% in 2007 to 11.1% in 2018⁷⁶. Between 1995 and 2007 most of the investment (83%) and tourism projects (58.7%) took place in the province of Panama and the least (0.7%) in Los Santos⁷⁷.
According to Law 2 (2006), which regulates tourism concessions and the alienation of island territory for tourism purposes, "in areas destined for tourism development located in indigenous comarcas, due approval must be obtained from the corresponding traditional comarca authorities" (art. 1)⁷⁸. The law also indicates that concessions granted on state lands will not affect possessory rights granted by the authorities prior to the law's entry into force. There are restrictions with respect to areas declared for special development for tourism use, among which are that they are not less than 10 km from the borders, that they have not been declared national historical heritage or world heritage, that they are not dedicated to environmental or forest conservation, and that they are not part of the indigenous comarcas (art. 20). There are also limits to their extension, which may not exceed 30% of the total area of each island.  
In some cases, the development of tourism projects has led to land dispossession and conflicts with the local population. An example of this is Pedro González Island, in the Las Perlas archipelago, whose possession was claimed by the Eleta Group, belonging to one of the country's wealthy families, on the basis of a property title dated 1971 for the purpose of building a mega tourism project consisting of five-star hotels, luxury residences and an airport⁷⁹. The distribution of land on the island, inhabited by 300 inhabitants, was modified by the Group leading to the dispossession of land, often with violence in the face of resistance from the locals, and an allocation of 9 hectares for the population of El Cocal and 5 hectares for locals interested in cultivating the land⁸⁰.

But tourism is also the source of income that allows the indigenous comarcas to maintain their autonomy. Entrance fees to the protected areas, to the islands and tourism taxes in general account for about 80% of the US$2 million generated in Guna Yala per year⁸¹. On the other hand, the internal regulations of some indigenous comarcas, such as Guna Yala, prohibit non-Guna people from investing in the comarca, which has prevented the construction of tourist resorts by "foreigners" in the past⁸². The current tourism projects are managed by the Gunas themselves. An added situation is that tourism revenues are higher and faster than those generated by other activities such as fishing or agriculture, which leads the local population to abandon this type of activities⁸³.

Mining is another investment sector in Panama, although its development has been limited by legislation, as most of the mines are located in areas of biodiversity or in indigenous areas. Hence, in 2013 a Mesa de Diálogo por el Desarrollo Responsable de los Recursos Minerales en Panamá (Roundtable for the Responsible Development of Mineral Resources in Panama) was created⁸⁴. In 2019, the Canadian company First Quantum Minerals invested USD 6.3 billion in the Cobre Panama project, which President Juan Carlos Varelá called "the largest foreign investment in the country's history."⁸⁵. According to data from the 2019 Registry of Applications for Concessions of the National Directorate of Mineral Resources (DNRM), for the metallic sector, there are 15 mining contracts granted and 142 applications for exploration and exploitation; for the non-metallic sector there are 154 contracts granted and 265 applications for exploration and exploitation⁸⁶.

Women's land rights

The 1972 Constitution establishes equal rights without sex discrimination, but does not incorporate gender language when referring to property rights and rights related to agricultural land. Equal rights are also recognized between spouses (art. 57). Affecting both married and cohabiting couples, Law 68 (2001) guarantees joint land titling and modifies the agrarian code by including gender-differentiated language⁸⁷. Other public initiatives leading to gender equality have been Law 4 (1999) establishing equal opportunities, the explicit decision to incorporate the gender approach in national statistics in 2002, the design of public policies for equal opportunities for women (PPIOM), and Law 127 (2020) for the development of family agriculture. 
An FAO analysis, conducted in 2014 using its Gender-Equitable Land Tenure Legal Assessment Tool (LAT), identifies as one of the main gaps the lack of provisions in Panama for women's participation in national and local institutions responsible for implementing land legislation⁸⁸.

Some studies denounce that the regulations do not include sufficient measures aimed at encouraging women's participation and access to land⁸⁹. This is evidenced by the decrease in the participation of economically active women in the agricultural sector, from 61,862 women in 2018 to 29,184 women in 2021⁹⁰. While it is true that such period coincides with the Covid pandemic, the patriarchal culture continues to influence the limited role of rural women and their ability to generate income⁹¹. According to data from the 2011 Agricultural Census, the provinces with the highest female participation in agricultural production are Panama (43%), Colón (35%) and Coclé and the Ngäbe-Buglé region (both 32%). The provinces with the lowest participation were Darién (17%) and the Emberá-Wounaan (10%) and Guna Yala (8%) comarcas⁹². Another characteristic is that among women's agricultural properties, landholdings of less than 0.5 hectares predominate (65% compared to 32.74% of men's)⁹³.

Formal access to land for women has grown progressively from 278 titles in the 1960s to 14,485 titles between 2010 and 2019⁹⁴. Data from the 2011 agricultural census show a gender gap with respect to land titles: 62.4% of farms belong to men and 38.6% to women. Among the explanations for this difference are male preference in inheritance, men's privileges in marriage and male bias in state land distribution programs⁹⁵.

Gender inequality has also been reflected in the granting of aid. Data from the 2011 Agricultural Census show that only 10.9% of loans were granted to women compared to 89% directed to men⁹⁶. The inequality was even greater in the counties where 100% of loans went to men⁹⁷. The same is true for the low (9.8%) access of women to technology and machinery. Experts explain these inequalities in the cultural conceptions regarding the roles of men and women and the consequent perception of lack of guarantees that women can fulfill the commitments acquired with a financial entity. Recent programs such as Tú Puedes Mujer seek to redress this inequality by offering training and technical assistance to rural women, as well as making visible their contribution to economic development and food security, benefiting more than 700 women⁹⁸. Other government efforts to change perceptions about the role of rural women in society include a study on the contribution of rural women during the Covid pandemic, scheduled for publication in March 2023⁹⁹.

Where to go next?

Author's suggestions to learn more,
In 2017, Panama hosted a meeting organized by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in which Central American countries addressed the challenges concerning land tenure governance and achievements. The Report of the Dialogue on Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests contains the results of the analysis of opportunities and challenges for responsible governance in the region, information on access to land for women, indigenous peoples and youth, and roadmaps for each country. It is important that initiatives such as the Guidelines do not remain good intentions, hence materials such as the People's Manual on the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (2016) are of great relevance. This manual is a pedagogical and practical guide for the promotion, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of these Guidelines developed by members of the International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty (IPC), formed by more than 800 organizations of small-scale food producers, with technical assistance from FAO. It includes chapters on how to incorporate the Guidelines into daily life, what to do when conflicts arise, and how to use the Guidelines. The experiences and myths of some of Panama's indigenous peoples serve as examples and inspiration in the manual. 

Climate change is presented as a threat to Central American countries due to its expected multiple impacts on the population and productive sectors. The report Panama. Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture, a publication in which ECLAC, CCAD and DFID participated, examines how climate change may affect agricultural production and land rent, considering the forecasts for the year 2100. 

In order to determine the extent to which actions to strengthen the FLEGT Program (forest law enforcement, governance and trade) can contribute to climate change mitigation in the context of REDD+ (strategy for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation), FAO and the Tropical Agricultural Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE) prepared the study Strengthening forest governance in Panama. Contribution of FLEGT actions to strengthen the options of the National REDD+ Strategy in Panama.  The study analyzes these programs, pointing out challenges and synergies, as well as concrete proposals to improve the latter.  

One of the aspects that is gaining increasing importance is how resource tenure may affect the implementation of climate change adaptation and mitigation measures. The report Assessing Sustainable Landscapes and Resource Tenure in Panama published by USAID in 2014 discusses this issue. It presents a framework for assessing the impact of land tenure and land use on climate change mitigation activities applied to four successful interventions. 

To learn more about the indigenous comarcas from the indigenous peoples' point of view, please consult the newsletter and documents on the COONAPIP website. 

Timeline - milestones in land governance

1904-1914 - Construction of the Panama Canal
The construction of what is considered one of the most important infrastructures in the world will largely determine Panama's economic orientation towards the service sector, leaving other sectors such as agriculture in the background. 

1963 - Entry into force of the Agrarian Code
One of the objectives of the Agrarian Code was to ensure the equitable distribution of land. To this end, land was awarded to the dispossessed, to those over 21 years of age who did not have sufficient land, and to heads of families. 

1963-1968 - Boosting of the organized peasant movement
During these years, peasant organizations, such as the so-called peasant leagues, were consolidated with expressly defined political and social objectives, among which was to be active actors in the agrarian reform. The settlements are the centers of peasant organization led by the National Confederation of Settlements (CONAC). 

1973 - Creation of the Ministry of Agricultural Development (MIDA)
This Ministry brings together the agricultural entities existing up to that time. It also created the National Directorate of Agrarian Reform (DINRA) to replace the Agrarian Reform Commission. 

1989 - Invasion of Panama by the United States
The U.S. invasion ended the dictatorship of Manuel Noriega, in power since 1983. 

1980s-1990s - Structural Adjustment Policies and Market Liberalization
In the 1980s and 1990s, international financial organizations promoted structural adjustment policies that resulted in market liberalization. 

1990s-2000s - Weaknesses in land governance
In the 1990s the land situation in Panama presented four main problems: 1) high informality (at the beginning of the 21st century the lack of land titles affected 60% of the population), 2) high land concentration, 3) low capacity of the institutions in charge of land adjudication and cadastre, 4) inadequate legal frameworks (obsolete provisions and absence of national policies).^100.In response, the government launched initiatives such as the Land Administration and Regularization Program (PRONAT) (2002) and the Metropolitan Region Cadastre and Land Administration Modernization Program (PRONAT-CRM) (2007). 

2010 - Creation of the National Land Administration Authority (ANATI)
ANATI is created by Law 59. Among its functions are to facilitate and reduce time in the procedures for obtaining land titles and delimitations of comarcas, to facilitate with indigenous authorities the establishment of land policies and to mediate in land disputes. The institution brings together the National Directorate of Cadastre, the National Directorate of Agrarian Reform, the National Land Administration Program (PRONAT) and the Tommy Guardia National Geographic Institute. 

2011 - New Agrarian Code
The Agrarian Code promotes and regulates an agricultural activity that protects the environment and the health of consumers through the use of organic fertilizers and the sustainable production of healthy food. Food security is also a priority of the Code, for which purpose the State may reserve land in its name.

References

[1] World Bank. Total population Panama 2021.

[2] Government of Panama. Cultures and Ethnic Groups. 

[3] ADEN. (2022). "ADEN Competitiveness Ranking: What is the reality of Latin America?" ADEN Business Magazine.

[4] Garcimartín, C., Astudillo, J. and Rodríguez, R. (2022). Poverty and inequality in Panama after two years of pandemic. The role of Panama Solidario and conditional cash transfer programs. Inter-American Development Bank. 

[5] Office of the Attorney General of the Nation (2016). Political Constitution of the Republic of Panama.

[6] Walker, K. L. (2021). "Effect of land tenure on forest cover and the paradox of private titling in Panama". Land Use Policy. Vol. 109.

[7] Legislative Assembly (1962). Law 37 by which the Agrarian Code of the Republic is approved.

[8] National Assembly (2011). Law 55 adopting the Agrarian Code of the Republic of Panama.

[9]Fuller Yero, R. (2012). "Attention: Panama has a new Agrarian Code". La Estrella. 

[10] National Assembly (2020). Law 127 that dictates measures for the development of family agriculture in Panama.

[11] Legislative Assembly (1998). Law 41 General of Environment.

[12] National Institute of Statistics and Census (INEC). (2011). VII National Agricultural Census.

[13] National Institute of Statistics and Census (INEC). (2011). VII National Agricultural Census. Definitions and Explanations.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Rivera Polo, F. and Meza-Lopehandía, M. (2022). Indigenous territorial autonomy in Panama: the indigenous comarcas. Library of the National Congress of Chile.

[18] Office of the Attorney General of the Administration Republic of Panama. State Lands.

[19] Office of the Attorney General of the Administration Republic of Panama. State assets.

[20] Government of Panama (2014). Strategic Plan of Government 2015-2019. One country.

[21]National Institute of Statistics and Census (INEC). (2011). VII National Agricultural Census. Table 2.

[22] Ibid. 

[23] Government of Panama (2014). Strategic Plan of Government 2015-2019. One country. 

[24] UNDP (2022). Women's access to land and property in Panama.

[25] Ibid. 

[26] Government of Panama (2014). Strategic Plan of Government 2015-2019. One country.

[27] IWGIA. Indigenous Peoples in Panama. 

[28] Office of the Attorney General of the Nation (2016). Political Constitution of the Republic of Panama.

[29] Government of Panama. Ministry of Government. Government of the Guna Yala Region.

[30]The official document uses the term Kuna to refer to the Guna people, a term more commonly used by the Guna people.

[31]Legislative Assembly (1953). Law 16 by which the comarca of San Blas is organized. 

[32] The official title of the law uses the term kuna.

[33] The official title of the law uses the term kuna.

[34] Meza-Lopehandía, M. (2014). Indigenous autonomy in Panama: the indigenous comarcas. Library of the National Congress of Chile. 

[35] Legislative Assembly (1983). Law 22 by which the Embera de Darien comarca is created.

[36] Legislative Assembly (2000). Law 34 that creates the Kuna de Wargandi comarca.

[37] Ministry of the Presidency (2020). "Presidente Cortizo sanciona ley que crea la comarca Naso Tjër-Di".

[38] Aparicio, G. A. (2020). "Pueblos originarios celebran fallo de la Corte que avala creación de comarca Naso Tijer Di". La Estrella de Panamá.

[39]  Indigenous Territory and Governance. Ngäbe-Buglé: The exercise of their rights to their own institutions and to Free, Prior and Informed Consultation and Consent.

[40] Ibid.

[41] National Assembly (2016). Law 37 that establishes consultation and free, prior and informed consent to indigenous peoples.

[42] National Assembly (2021). Law 196 which creates the Special Regime for the establishment of companies operating and developing Agroparks and dictates provisions for their operation.

[43] López Hernández, H. (2022). The Indigenous World 2022: Panama. IWGIA.

[44]  Ministry of Agricultural Development (2021). "Agroparques, an initiative to promote opportunities for the agricultural sector".

[45]López Hernández, H. (2022). The Indigenous World 2022: Panama. IWGIA.
[46] Bilbao, G. (2019). "Panamanian indigenous people's strategy to protect the forests of the Darien Gap". Mongabay.

[47] Somarriba Hernández, J. (2008). "Tortí, land conflict zone". La Prensa.

[48]  National Assembly (2008). Law 72 which establishes the special procedure for the adjudication of collective land ownership of indigenous peoples who are not within the comarcas.

[49] National Coordinator of Indigenous Peoples of Panama (COONAPIP).

[50] López Hernández, H. (2020). The Indigenous World 2020: Panama. IWGIA.

[51] National Council of Legislation (1983). Law No. 23 Regulates the peasant organizations of the Republic of Panama. 

[52]Panama 24 Horas (2022). "Asamblea Nacional atiende a productores de asentamientos campesinos".

[53] Ministry of Agricultural Development (2021). Administration Sheet.

[54]Chacón, A. et. al. (2019). Analysis of Agricultural Policies in Panama. Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). 

[55] Ibid.

[56]Government of Panama (2014). Strategic Plan of Government 2015-2019. One country.

[57] Ibid. 

[58] Ibid. 

[59] Government of Panama (2014). Strategic Plan of Government 2015-2019. One country.

[60] Chamber of Commerce, Industries and Agriculture (CCIAP). (undated). The agricultural sector requires sustainable government policies.

[61] Ibid. 

[62] Via Campesina (2017). Panama: Communiqué of the Panamanian Peasant Union on the International Day of Peasant Struggles. 

[63] Heckadon Moreno, S. (2009). From jungles to pastures: Santeño colonization in Panama 1850-1980. Excedra Books. Panama.

[64] Ibid.

[65] Ministry of Agricultural Development (2021). Administration Sheet.

[66] National Environmental Authority (2008). National Forestry Development Plan: Sustainable Forestry Model. National Government.

[67] Ministry of Environment (2022). Panama Forestry Reference Level. National Government. 

[68] Walker, K. L. (2021). "Effect of land tenure on forest cover and the paradox of private titling in Panama". Land Use Policy. Vol. 109.

[69] Ibid.

[70] Ibid.

[71] Ibid.

[72] World Bank. Urban population (% of total) Panama.

[73] Gordón, C. A. (2021). "Panama and the growth of the city during the 21st century". La Estrella de Panamá.

[74] Legislative Assembly (1998). Decree Law 4 by means of which Law No. 8 of 1994 is modified, promotes tourism activities in Panama.

[75] Panama Tourism Authority (no year). Master Plan for Sustainable Tourism 2020-2025.

[76] Ibid. 

[77] VV. AA. (2008). General Diagnostic Analysis of Tourism in Panama. Panama Sustainable Tourism Master Plan 2007-2020. Panama Tourism Institute, IDB, UNWTO, Tourism & Leisure, UNDP, Panama Tourism Master Plan 2007-2020.

[78] National Assembly (2006). Law 2 which regulates the concessions for tourism investment and the alienation of insular territory for purposes of tourism use and dictates other provisions.

[79] Lauría, S. (2021). "Panama: Pedro Gonzalez S.A." Mongabay.

[80] Ibid.

[81] Durget, J. and Salin, E. (2018). "Conversation with Iniquipili Chiari on tourism in the Gunayala community in Panama". Idées d'Amériques.

[82] Ibid.

[83] Ibid.

[84] Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Sustainable Development (2020). Evaluation of the Mining Policy Framework Panama.

[85] Hernández, M. C. (2019). "Panama Copper Project: 'the largest foreign investment in the country's history'". France 24. 

[86] Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Sustainable Development (2020). Evaluation of the Mining Policy Framework Panama.

[87] Legislative Assembly (2001). Law 68 that establishes joint titling as a way to acquire land and modifies articles of the agrarian code. 

[88] FAO. (2014). LAT Assessment - Panama.

[89] UNDP (2022). Women's Access to Land and Property in Panama.

[90] Ibid. 

[91] Ibid.

[92] Ibid.

[93] Ibid.

[94] Ibid.

[95] Ibid.

[96] Ibid.

[97] Ibid.

[98] Panama 24 Horas (2018). "Panamá impulse agenda in favor of rural women".

[99] El Capital Financiero (2022). "Panama to present study of rural women's contribution during Covid 19 pandemic".

[100] Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). (2014). Comparative Evaluation: Land Regularization and Administration Projects. Panama, Case Study # 3. Washington, D.C.