The protection of HLP rights requires the verification of land ownership, or rightful claims to housing, land or property, through an investigative due diligence process. In most contexts where humanitarians work, there is no reliable land registry to check and confirm who owns or has a “rightful” claim to the land (customarily or legally). Verifying who has use rights or ownership, as recognized by the community, local governing body, or national government and which claims are most secure and widely recognized, is crucial to establishing IDP sites, collective and individual shelters, WASH facilities, and boreholes. It is also a key factor in trying to address disputes and negotiate peace. HLP is about information. In contexts where there is no reliable property registry, verifying the tenure (or ownership) of a target property will depend on identifying alternative sources of information.
Conducting HLP due diligence is important for CCCM practitioners to effectively provide critical infrastructural support and services while protecting the HLP rights of landowners or rightsholders and reducing the likelihood that CCCM interventions result in or contribute to land or property disputes. The due diligence process can also enable CCCM practitioners to identify rights holders to natural resources and mitigate the environmental impact of CCCM projects.
CCCM practitioners encounter HLP issues in several scenarios: spontaneous sites occur on land that can be private, public or have unclear ownership or use rights. Therefore, when establishing planned camps or expanding IDP sites, CCCM practitioners must ensure that the land is available and unencumbered by claims from other parties. They must secure the land by properly identifying the owner or rightful tenant, verifying that there are no competing claims over it and obtaining the proper authorization to use it, under terms and conditions that are suitable for the establishment or expansion of the site.
Due diligence verification processes must be completed before interventions begin for the CCCM actor to determine if there is enough legal certainty for the selection of a site to carry out a project or determine if a new location is required. Additionally, to prevent or mitigate risk of eviction, HLP disputes and violations, and plan for camp transition and closure, due diligence monitoring and analysis should occur throughout the program cycle. As stated by due diligence guidance prepared by the CCCM cluster, the due diligence process should focus on (1) Identifying rightful landowner(s) of the land and obtaining consent prior to intervention, and (2) Providing the greatest degree of tenure security to beneficiaries feasible in the given context. HLP due diligence processes are foundational components of CCCM site selection, site planning, camp or collective center transition and closure, and planning eviction responses.
Tools
Context
Tool for verifying land ownership and administration in informal, self-settled IDP sites, including sites on land in need of infrastructure work where occupants do not have a legal claim based on findings from CCCM interventions in northwest Syria. Key challenges covered are 1) lack of authorization of landowner(s) to use the land, 2) threats of evictions of beneficiaries, 3) levying of fees by ‘fake’ owners or armed groups for land use. Context is in Syria, but guidance is transferrable to informal settlement contexts.
Summary
Due Diligence Tool includes step-by-step guidance for conducting due diligence through the following project phases: preparedness and planning, before implementation, during implementation, and monitoring and evaluation1. Annex I outline and describes key HLP dynamics in a conflict context with IDPs and informal settlements2. Annex II provides a community-level checklist to help identify potential land-related concerns and challenges in the community as early as possible. Guidance on who the questions should be directed at is provided. Due diligence checklist questions are general and can be applied to different contexts, provided answers should be adapted to specific contexts. The themes covered are ownership, land administration, documentation, disputes and resolution, and safety and security3. Annex III provides a due diligence checklist for a specific plot of land. This checklist is generalizable to many different contexts4. The themes covered are ownership, disputes, safety and security, Host/IDP relations, documentation, disputes and dispute resolution, and beneficiary security of tenure, including a template for documenting a recommended course of action5. Annex IV includes a Land Use Agreement Template comprised of ten articles and guidance on the types of signatures to receive6.
View tool
1International Organization for Migration (IOM). Supporting HLP-Sensitive Interventions in Informal Sites in NW Syria HLP Due Diligence Guidance. (2019), p. 2-3.
2IOM Due Diligence, Annex I.
3IOM Due Diligence, Annex II.
4IOM Due Diligence, Annex III.
5IOM Due Diligence, Annex III.
6IOM Due Diligence, Annex IV
Context
The objective is to provide a framework for practitioners to efficiently understand relevant local legal, regulatory, and customary practices of security of tenure, and to acknowledge more diverse forms of tenure to enable the adoption of flexible approaches. Useful for contexts where individuals and families do not possess formal legal proof of ownership but need shelter assistance or services within camps and settlements. Questions provided are aimed to assist responders in understanding applicable legal and customary frameworks and provide guidance on how to apply them if a disaster occurs. Ideally, the assessment will take place before a disaster occurs by a legal adviser or HLP expert, but priority questions are highlighted for when this is not possible. Particularly useful for urban environments where a variety of tenure arrangements exist.
Summary
Questions are grouped under six categories: (1) general overview of land and property1, (2) how are land and property administered and managed2, (3) access to land, how are land and property occupied?3, (4) evidence of Security of tenure, how do people prove they live somewhere?4, (5) compulsory purchase and relocation5, and (6) how are land and property disputes resolved?6
Each category contains a concise overview explaining the purpose of the questions, key considerations for the category, and a list of specific questions to be answered for the assessment. Annex II provides a chart detailing the common forms of tenure; freehold, delayed freehold, registered leasehold, public rental, private rental, shared equity, shared ownership/cooperative tenure, customary ownership, religious tenure systems, and non-formal tenure systems, which is useful to understand the varied characteristics, advantages, and limitations of each7.
View tool
1International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). Rapid Tenure Assessment Guidelines for Post-disaster Response Planning. (2015), p. 20-21.
2IFRC Rapid Tenure Assessment Guidelines, p. 21-22.
3IFRC Rapid Tenure Assessment Guidelines, p. 23-24.
4IFRC Rapid Tenure Assessment Guidelines, p. 24-25.
5IFRC Rapid Tenure Assessment Guidelines, p. 26-27.
6IFRC Rapid Tenure Assessment Guidelines, p. 28-29.
7IFRC Rapid Tenure Assessment Guidelines, Annex II, p. 33-36.
Context
The chief objective of the Land Tenure and Property Rights (LTPR) Framework and its corresponding tools is to improve LTPR programming and capacity building. This would be helpful for CCCM projects that have a focused HLP component as the content is highly detailed in comprehensive. The corresponding LTPR Matrixes provide a methodology for identifying constraints and opportunities for various land tenure and property rights interventions. There is a particular focus on natural resources, and how this contributes to land conflicts and options for interventions. The intended audience is those who need to understand how HLP issues affect program outcomes, how to design interventions that address these issues, and how to evaluate the impacts of these interventions to inform new programs. This framework and tools can be used during the due diligence process to help process and understand the information gained while conducting due diligence.
Summary
To understand the background of land tenure and property rights the first section of the framework provides a detailed description of overarching themes1 that are affected by land tenure and property rights, this information could be useful when developing long-term HLP interventions. The first matrix is a base matrix for visualizing the LTPR landscape2, which contains a template for mapping out different interventions and potential constraints. It can be used with the following five provided overlays: 1) Land tenure and Property Rights, 2) Natural Resources-Water, 3) Natural Resources-Minerals, 4) Natural Resources-Trees and Forests, and 5) Women, Land, and Resources. Explanations for the matrix and how to use the overlays are provided3. An explanation of the six categories of LTPR constraints is also provided4. A table visually displaying the intersection of three main categories of LTPR interventions (1) institutions and governance, 2) legal and regulatory frameworks, 3) rights awareness and empowerment) with the six categories of land tenure constraints concisely explaining what each intervention could entail and how they interact with the constraints5. A table showing this intersection is provided for the five overlays: 1) Land tenure and Property Rights6, 2) Natural Resources-Water7, 3) Natural Resources-Minerals8, 4) Natural ResourcesTrees and Forests9, and 5) Women, Land, and Resources10. This be useful when conducting a risk assessment of LTPR interventions. Annex A explains in detail the categories of LTPR constraints and provides examples of how they serve as constraints in different country contexts11.
view tool
1Land Tenure and Property Rights Framework. USAID. (2013). P. 11-26.
2Land Tenure and Property Rights Framework. USAID. (2013). P. 27
3Land Tenure and Property Rights Framework. USAID. (2013). P. 28-30.
4Land Tenure and Property Rights Framework. USAID. (2013). P. 30-31.
5Land Tenure and Property Rights Framework. USAID. (2013). P. 33.
6Land Tenure and Property Rights Framework. USAID. (2013). P. 68.
7Land Tenure and Property Rights Framework. USAID. (2013). P. 71.
8Land Tenure and Property Rights Framework. USAID. (2013). P. 75.
9Land Tenure and Property Rights Framework. USAID. (2013). P. 79.
10Land Tenure and Property Rights Framework. USAID. (2013). P. 82.
11Land Tenure and Property Rights Framework. USAID. (2013). P. 49-61
Context
The guidelines are an adaptation of the broader “Land Rights and Shelter: The Due Diligence standard” and are specific to the operating context of the Turkey x-border Shelter/NFI Cluster. The objective of the guidelines is to support shelter actors that ensure the HLP rights of beneficiaries and land/property owners in Northern Syria. The guidelines define HLP as the full spectrum of rights to housing, land and property held according to statutory or customary law or informally; both public and private housing, land and/or property rights1.
Summary
Section A of the document provides General Considerations of HLP2, section B provides phase-specific requirements3, section C provides intervention-specific requirements, and section D provides guidance on when due diligence cannot be conducted (such as in the cases of instability or risk)4. In the shelter program cycle, the document states that the following phases should be integrated generally into programming: 1) ensure awareness of interlinkages between HLP and shelter among the project team, 2) understand and map key HLP actors, 3) be aware of local conflict dynamics, 4) identify risks of HLP violations, 5) integrate HLP rights verification and monitoring into all shelter activities, and 6) seek clear agreements in supporting beneficiaries’ rights to shelter5.
The documents provide checklists for the implementation of preparedness and planning6, before implementation7, during implementation8, and during evaluation. The document provides intervention-specific requirements tables based on the intervention types, such as transitional shelter or permanent shelter construction, and the phases of response with HLP-relevant eligibility or exclusion criteria9. This also provides for shelter repairs - private housing10, collective centers11, shelter rehabilitation of unfinished buildings12, and household rental support13. For each of the interventions, details of a Shelter Beneficiary Agreement are also included, and further guidance is listed in section B.3. In cases where due diligence cannot be conducted, the document also provides suggestions for basic minimum shelter assistance that may not require due diligence, such as the provision of emergency shelter/sealing off kits and minimum basic repairs. Annex 1 contains HLP issues in pre-2011 Syria14 and Annex 2 contains common HLP issues that may be caused by conflict and displacement15.
view tool
1Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.4.
2Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.5.
3Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.6.
4Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.4.
5Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.5.
6Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.6.
7Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.7.
8Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.8.
9Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.9.
10Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.10.
11Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.11.
12Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.12.
13Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.13.
14Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.15.
15Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines. Shelter/NFI Cluster X-Border Operation – Turkey. P.16
Resources
| TITLE | DATE | RESOURCE |
|---|---|---|
| Emergency Shelter Actors in South Sudan Due Diligence Guidelines | 2015 | View resource |
| Demystifying 'Tenure' for Humanitarian Practitioners | 2021 | View resource |
| Natural Resource Due Diligence in NRC | 2021 | View resource |
| Housing, Land and Property Rights in Shelter Due Diligence Guidelines | 2022 | View resource |