Paper long abstract

>This paper draws on case studies from Ethiopia, Ghana and Mozambique. The

>research shows that land registration is not inherently anti-poor in its

>impacts and that the distributional consequences of land registration depend

>on the design of the process and institutions responsible for its

>management. Land registration systems can be designed to address the risks

>of bias against poorer and marginalised groups. To protect and secure the

>land rights of these groups, attention needs to be paid to procedures for

>registration, such as the language used, level of fees charged, and physical

>accessibility. Questions of recognising secondary rights are important, as

>well as establishing accountability and oversight of the institutions

>responsible for land registration. Above all, we need to avoid a "one size

>fits all" approach to securing rights to land.

>