Land Reforms and the Tragedy of the Anticommons—A Case Study from Cambodia

Abstract

Most of the land reforms of recent decades have followed an approach of "formalization and capitalization" of individual land titles (de Soto 2000). However, within the privatization agenda, benefits of unimproved land (such as land rents and value capture) are reaped privately by well-organized actors, whereas the costs of valorization (e.g., infrastructure) or opportunity costs of land use changes are shifted onto poorly organized groups. Consequences of capitalization and formalization include rent seeking and land grabbing. In developing countries, formal law often transpires to work in favor of the winners of the titling process and is opposed by the customary rights of the losers. This causes a lack of general acknowledgement of formalized law (which is made responsible for deprivation of livelihoods of vulnerable groups) and often leads to a clash of formal and customary norms. Countries may fall into a state of de facto anarchy and "de facto open access". Encroachment and destruction of natural resources may spread. A reframing of development policy is necessary in order to fight these aberrations. Examples and evidence are provided from Cambodia, which has many features in common with other countries in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa in this respect.

A curious case of property privatization: two examples of the tragedy of the anticommons in Ho Chi Minh City-Vietnam

“…Apparently, the ambiguous allocation of property rights over urban land has created opportunities in the development process for various actors who have been able to capture resources that have been left in the public domain. Loehr (2012b) points to a different issue: 'in contrast to the viewpoint of the property rights theorists, private property in land may also result in a decoupling of benefits and costs of land use' (p. 776). The owners of ambiguous property rights sometimes receive all the benefits from the ownership of these rights, but do not contribute to public costs.…”

“…As shown by Bagdai, van der Molen, and Tuladhar (2012) in the case of Russia, the restrictions for individuals to use the land are aggravated by the lack of access to land information and inefficient land administration systems. Li (1996) and Jieming (2002) have observed problems with ambiguous property rights in China, while (Loehr, 2012a(Loehr, , 2012b refers to the same phenomenon in Cambodia. Li (1996) argues that ambiguous property rights lead to high transaction costs and increased uncertainties in the market place.…”

“…Eminent domain is often used as a way to solve the problems of the tragedy of the anticommons on land and property markets (Buchanan & Yoon, 2000;Loehr, 2011Loehr, , 2012bSim, Lum, & Malone-Lee, 2002;Zhu, 2012). Heller (1998) specifically called for an intervention of the central government in such cases, for instance by abolishing the rights that were previously granted, eliminating lower levels of government or by expropriating the existing rights.…”

“…Although privatization can lead to a more economical use of natural resources (including land) and is generally considered a desirable step in pushing the evolution of an area along (De Soto, 2001;Loehr, 2012b;Sjaastad & Cousins, 2009), it can also bring forward new issues related to land development processes. One such issue -that has also been experienced by other transitional countries (Loehr, 2012a) -is the existence of ambiguous and fragmented property rights over land or properties, which in the long run could eventually cause a counterproductive effect, namely the underuse of land resources.…”

Les communs fonciers à l’ère d’internet au Cambodge, une approche par les conflits

“…Les effets de cette contre-réforme foncière sont de mieux en mieux documentés, que ce soit par les ONG et les organisations internationales qui se focalisent plutôt sur l'actualité (par exemple Adhoc, 2013;Sperfeldt et al, 2012) ou par les chercheurs qui s'intéressent aussi au long terme et à ce qui rend les réformes possibles (par exemple Luna, 2016 ;Hall et al, 2011 ;Gironde et Gay, 2015 ;Touch and Neef, 2015 ;Loehr, 2012). Ces travaux font le constat de violences exercées sur les biens fonciers et les personnes, de déplacements forcés, de dynamiques de précarisation et d'appauvrissements, de destructions environnementales, etc.…”