Justice for the Poor

1
Justice for the Poor

• Land Administration Mini-Retreat
• November 19-20, 2007

2
What is Justice for the Poor?

• A program that focuses on the role of legal and
  regulatory frameworks and institutions in
  development processes-
• Sees justice as a cross-sectoral concern.
• Understands that legal institutions have the
  potential to both perpetuate and break
  inequality traps
• Recognizes that legal institutions are inherently
  contextual is built on detailed understanding of
  social and cultural realities at the local level
• Engages with legal pluralism
• Focuses on the viewpoint of the user
  particularly concerned about the rights of the
  poor and marginalized
• Recognizes the importance of demand in the
  development of equitable justice systems and
  processes of institutional reform

3
Program Rationale Motivation

• Growing understanding that equitable justice
  systems are key to sustainable development
• Recognition of the need for complementary demand
  side initiatives to more conventional approaches
  to justice reform
• Increased focus on
• - broader governance issues
• - decentralization and community driven
  development
• - participation, transparency and accountability
• - security and stability
• -human rights and development
• At same time, missing law in development more
  generally and limited engagement with issue of
  development causing conflict

4
Goals

• J4Ps aims are
• To address the immediate justice-related needs of
  the poor (recognising that the development of
  more equitable formal legal systems may be a
  multi-generational endeavour).
• To enhance the effectiveness of other development
  efforts by supporting them to address the justice
  and conflict management related aspects of their
  work.
• In the long-term, to bring about incremental
  systemic change to justice sector institutions
  and systems of governance by supporting demand
  side pressures for reform.

5
Objectives

• To fulfil the above aims, J4P has the following
  objectives
• Build a solid, empirically founded knowledge base
  of the dynamics of local level decision making
  and dispute resolution processes and inequality
  traps.
• Enhance the capacity at the local level to
  conduct policy research and undertake evidence
  based policy reform.
• Support existing locally driven initiatives, and
  help design, implement and evaluate new pro-poor
  justice initiatives (piloting), and including
  activities as part of broader programs
  (mainstreaming).
• Enhance local ownership and citizen engagement in
  reform processes
• Contribute to global dialogue on pro-poor justice
  issues.

6
Approach

• Principles-
• Programmatic
• Not just sectoral/project specific work
• Mainstreaming justice initiatives
• Multi-country/comparative work
• Empirical
• Based on ongoing research and engagement with
  theories of social change
• Conflict model of development
• Understanding development is inherently contested
  and often about redistribution of power/resources
• Practice-
• facilitated or funded mainstreaming, through
  use of trust funds etc

7
Program Trajectory
8
Focus on Land Natural Resource Management
Rationale

• Land reform and natural resource management are
  inherently political and conflict prone
  endeavours. (In all countries we currently work
  in biggest cause of conflict)
• Lack of good theory on how to design land and
  natural resources management processes in
  situations of legal pluralism
• Disconnect between socio-legal understandings of
  the context in which decisions about land and
  natural resources are made and the understanding
  and practice of policy makers
• Single individuals or communities often
  simultaneously hold conflicting ideas about the
  role of land, ranging from a marker of identity
  to a tradable commodity
• State regulation can be an important mechanism to
  improve security yet the state can also be a
  source of tenure insecurity.

9
Land Natural Resource ManagementResearch Areas

• Processes of Formalization
• Dispute resolution
• Public land management
• Plural land orders

10
Example of Country Work Cambodia

• Research Findings
• Collective action in response to land disputes is
  prevalent and can be effective key factors
• - villagers needed to be able to organize as a
  group
• - villagers needed to be able to attract the
  attention of higher-level decision makers
• - success hinged on villagers ability to
  persuade sufficiently influential administrative
  decision makers of the merit of their cases
• The gap between law and practice in land
  management is a key trigger for disputes
• Predominance of patrimonial over
  legal/bureaucratic forms of power
• Impacts of the current system uncertainty,
  frustration and political pressure

11
Example of Country Work Cambodia

• Recommendations
• Development of grassroots leaders with high-level
  facilitation and coalition-building skills by
  supporting collective action around livelihoods,
  governance and common pool resource management.
• Enhancement of access to information and advocacy
  resources from trusted sources.
• Countering the fear of speaking out by supporting
  dialogue among citizens, government and political
  parties through, for example, more interactive
  media and local public forums.
• More effort should be invested in prevention of
  collective land disputes. Support for
  consultative land use planning processes should
  be considered.
• An integrated approach to state land mapping and
  possible regularization of
• current usage rights through social land
  concessions or other instruments may be a useful
  way to resolve and prevent disputes.