African Land Rights Systems

Conclusion

147 Conclusion The preceding evaluation provided a general picture surrounding land distribution, ownership, and management. We discovered that disputes emerge because of unequal distribution, mismanagement, lack of unified land law, and institutionalized corruption.The first chapter showed that claims of identity, belonging, and self-determination are limited because they tend to ignore the rights of others. A recourse to examine the link between land, morality, and market in the second chapter unveiled several weakness confirming the argument that the free market focuses on the interest of the minority with a possibility of undermining collective rights. The third chapter, from the perspective of migration, resettlement, and integration, revealed tendencies of marginalization and exclusiontoward migrants. Arbitration of land-related disputes is difficult because one party of the claimants rely on statutory land rights system while the other rely on the customary land rights system. Experience shows that compromise is not forthcoming because land rights systems represent specific value systems accompanying ideologies of mutual exclusion. There cannot be a fair judgment because land rights systems function as competing value systems. As a way of moving forwardwe have to identify the root causes of land disputes as we did in the discussion. Its relevance arises from the argument that African land rights systems must be studied with a view of trying to correct inherited inequalities from the past. Such a need cannot be ignored because the past is a part of us. It is a perspective that must be taken seriously because collective grievances are 148 passed from one generation to anotherwith a possibility of obstructing any initiative geared toward reform. If past mistakes are not corrected, as a process of healing, they could linger on forever. However, the initiative of going forwardshouldnot be limited to legal systems. The existing legal systems, most of which were inherited from colonial masters,are limited. The systemic weakness of the court systems arises from the fact that they are slow to reach decisions, intensify confusion, vulnerable to political manipulation, and underestimate the role of the African moral traditions. Legal approaches intensify confusion because they tend to lean more toward the tendency of applying outdated legal systems than creating systems that can address modern challenges. Successful land reforms require effective methodologiesof implementing decisions we make. It is a process that requires dialogue as a means of bringing together parties concerned. On this account it is important to note that there are smallscale solutions that could be attained at the grassroots level. But permanent solutions, as our objective, will emerge from the process of establishing long-term structures ofgovernance.The process of building consensus must involve grassroots communities and participation of all institutions. This is an important aspect becauseland disputes touch the lives of all citizens. Varied experiences and contributions emerging from different institutions must be taken into account. Problems that have made land reform initiatives ineffective include limited capability to implement agreedupon resolutions, building institutions that can handle modern problems, formation of land commissions that can oversee the process of implementation, and inability to avoid 149 politicization of land reforms. Addressing land disputes requires ability of balancing private and public interests.In this case, methodologies that seem to be effective include consensus-building, mutual-gain approach, and collaborative problem-solving. The weakness surrounding land commissions include the fact that they are unable to formulate methodologies that can enhance implementation as well as identify competent persons to take the responsibility of implementing the project. The task of implementation and management cannot be left to well-wishers, free market, or persons vying for political office. Land reform programs can overcome poverty insofar as there is flexibility in the process of allocating land to people who need it to create wealth. This perspective entails surveying the land, formal documentation, and encouraging people to invest on land as a means of increasing production. In order to succeed we must move away from rigid legal standards and cultural traditions by adopting flexible possibilities that meet today’s needs. We have to be practical in search for solutions that fit to the modern world, needs, and conditions of life. This perspective requires us to go beyond organizational regulations that obstruct reform and creativity. Governance must focus on performance rather than merely upholding tradition, uniformity, and authority. In this case the mindsets and attitudes of those administering land distribution and management must change. One could argue that going beyond the disputes surrounding land...