Suchergebnisse

The use of land consolidation on customary lands has been limited, though land fragmentation persists. Land fragmentation on customary lands has two main causes—the nature of the customary land tenure system, and the somewhat linked agricultural system. Since attempts to increase food productivity on customary lands have involved fertilisation and mechanisation on the small and scattered farmlands, these approaches have fallen short of increasing food productivity. A study to develop a responsible approach to land consolidation on customary lands using a design research approach is undertaken and reported here. Based on a comparative study, it is found that three factors inhibit the development of a responsible land consolidation approach on customary lands—the coverage of a land administration system, a land valuation approach, and a land reallocation approach the fits the customary land tenure system. To fill these gaps, firstly, this study developed the participatory land administration that brought together traditional land administration approaches with emerging bottom-up approaches, as well as technological advances that drive these approaches together with the growing societal needs. Secondly, a valuation approach was developed to enable the comparison of the farmlands in rural areas that are without land markets. Finally, a land reallocation approach was developed based on the political, economic and social, as well as technical and legal characteristics of rural customary farmlands. This study concludes that though the land consolidation strategy developed is significantly able to reduce land fragmentation, both physical and land tenure, the local customs are an obstruction to the technical processes to achieve the best form of farmland structures.

The use of land consolidation on customary lands has been limited, though land fragmentation persists. Land fragmentation on customary lands has two main causes—the nature of the customary land tenure system, and the somewhat linked agricultural system. Since attempts to increase food productivity on customary lands have involved fertilisation and mechanisation on the small and scattered farmlands, these approaches have fallen short of increasing food productivity. A study to develop a responsible approach to land consolidation on customary lands using a design research approach is undertaken and reported here. Based on a comparative study, it is found that three factors inhibit the development of a responsible land consolidation approach on customary lands—the coverage of a land administration system, a land valuation approach, and a land reallocation approach the fits the customary land tenure system. To fill these gaps, firstly, this study developed the participatory land administration that brought together traditional land administration approaches with emerging bottom-up approaches, as well as technological advances that drive these approaches together with the growing societal needs. Secondly, a valuation approach was developed to enable the comparison of the farmlands in rural areas that are without land markets. Finally, a land reallocation approach was developed based on the political, economic and social, as well as technical and legal characteristics of rural customary farmlands. This study concludes that though the land consolidation strategy developed is significantly able to reduce land fragmentation, both physical and land tenure, the local customs are an obstruction to the technical processes to achieve the best form of farmland structures.

We compare institutions of pastoral-cum-tourist commons in Europe (Tyrol) and southern Africa (Namibia). Membership of European pastoral single village commons was less than one hundred enumerated farms. In Namibia, membership was more numerous, unregistered and open-ended. Tyrolean commons included huntable game, owned by either the collective or the municipality. Namibian commons, inclusive of huntable game, were national property.Tyrolean commoners privately held enumerated pastoral rights, whereas the stock numbers of Namibian commoners were open-ended. While herding in Europe is undertaken collectively, Namibians herd individually. Tyrolean commoners' collectives were public law associations of ancestral farm-with-field owners with a statute prescribing internal democracy. Namibian pastoral commons operated under local, unwritten, customary law. In Namibia, conditionaluse rights for huntable game was recently devolved to public law associations of commoners, that is, Conservancies. Namibian Conservancies hold use rights for game without jurisdiction over land, similar to hunting associations in Tyrol. Capital investment in tourism on Tyrolean commons was from within the village, in Conservancies (inter)national. Unlike definite commons boundaries in Tyrol, Namibian equivalents are often disputed. ; We compare institutions of pastoral-cum-tourist commons in Europe (Tyrol) and southern Africa (Namibia). Membership of European pastoral single village commons was less than one hundred enumerated farms. In Namibia, membership was more numerous, unregistered and open-ended. Tyrolean commons included huntable game, owned by either the collective or the municipality. Namibian commons, inclusive of huntable game, were national property.Tyrolean commoners privately held enumerated pastoral rights, whereas the stock numbers of Namibian commoners were open-ended. While herding in Europe is undertaken collectively, Namibians herd individually. Tyrolean commoners' collectives were public law associations of ancestral farm-with-field owners with a statute prescribing internal democracy. Namibian pastoral commons operated under local, unwritten, customary law. In Namibia, conditionaluse rights for huntable game was recently devolved to public law associations of commoners, that is, Conservancies. Namibian Conservancies hold use rights for game without jurisdiction over land, similar to hunting associations in Tyrol. Capital investment in tourism on Tyrolean commons was from within the village, in Conservancies (inter)national. Unlike definite commons boundaries in Tyrol, Namibian equivalents are often disputed.