Rural Land Security Programme (PSFMR2): Social Impact Study
- Recording who holds a parcel necessarily decides who does not, so titling can entrench whoever is best placed at registration.
- Prepared by Land Alliance for the IDB as a safeguards instrument and a condition of financing, not an academic study.
- It is the counterweight to the Camp-Perrin field records, examining the same program from the side of claims a survey may miss.
Land titling is not a neutral act. Recording who holds a parcel necessarily decides who does not, and in a setting of undivided inheritance, tenant farming and unwritten custom, formalization can strengthen the position of whoever is best placed to assert a claim at the moment of registration. This study is the assessment of those risks for the second phase of Haiti's Rural Land Security Programme, prepared by Land Alliance under contract to the Inter-American Development Bank and dated June 2017. Its function in the program is as a safeguards instrument: it is the document that identifies who could be disadvantaged by the intervention and what should be done about it, and it is a condition of the financing rather than an academic exercise. Read against the Camp-Perrin field records in this same collection, it is the counterweight to them, examining the same program from the side of those whose claims the survey might not capture.
How to cite
Inter-American Development Bank (IDB); Government of Haiti; Interministerial Committee for Territorial Planning (CIAT), 2017, Rural Land Security Programme (PSFMR2): Social Impact Study, http://ciat.gouv.ht/sites/default/files/articles/files/HAITI%20-%20IDB%20-%20CIAT%20Social%20Impact%20Assessment%20%28Etude%20du%20%20impacts%29Jun17.pdf