Reforms in land governance are assumed to significantly enhance the security of tenure in conflict-affected countries, through stimulating the resolution of land disputes, contributing to better... Show moreReforms in land governance are assumed to significantly enhance the security of tenure in conflict-affected countries, through stimulating the resolution of land disputes, contributing to better control of property rights and reorganising the institutional framework for land management. Yet, this paper highlights the ambiguous outcomes of such reforms in situation of institutional multiplicity. Fieldwork in Ngozi province in northern Burundi points out how land-related reforms such as decentralising the administrative authority at the communal and hill levels and policy reforms in the formalisation of property rights have positive impacts in terms of dealing with specific land disputes and fostering local feelings of tenure security in the aftermath of the 2000 Arusha Peace Agreement. However, land governance reforms have also fuelled the proliferation of land governing institutions and fostered confusion among state and non-state authorities about which rules to apply and their roles in mitigating tensions over landownership and enforcing property rights. Actually, while introducing new laws, policies, institutions and practices, land governance reforms have produced mixed effects in securing local tenure for most community members and increased contestations against the authority of government representatives at the local level. Show less
Tchatchoua Djomo, R.; Haar, G. van der; Dijk, J.W.M. van; Leeuwen, M. van 2018
This paper explores claim-making to land in Burundi, where civil war and multiple waves of displacement and return have resulted in complex disputes over land. Zooming in on two different regions,... Show moreThis paper explores claim-making to land in Burundi, where civil war and multiple waves of displacement and return have resulted in complex disputes over land. Zooming in on two different regions, the paper shows that, as people articulate their claims and defend their interests in land disputes, they strategically draw on a diversity of arguments, related to legal categories, notions of belonging and citizenship, social categories derived from (land) policy, but also victimhood, security concerns, and political loyalty. Post-peace agreement land policies play an important role in this, as they instrumentalise war-based categories of identity and victimhood, privileging certain groups of displaced people for political purposes. As we show in two case studies, claim-making tactics follow shifting political discourses and policy changes, as people seek to secure the support of (powerful) allies. A perspective on processes of making claims to land allows us to explore the entanglements between multiple waves of displacement, policy implementation and the instrumentalisation of identities in conflict-affected settings. Show less
