Editorial - A new year brings new possibilities, and we are energised by what lies ahead. Yet we enter 2026 acutely aware of the challenges before us: A weakening multilateral system, growing insularity among traditional donor countries, rising geopolitical tensions, and the lingering embers of global economic fallout.

None of this bodes well for global efforts to advance secure housing, land and property rights – or for the wider development agenda. More importantly, it is a stark reminder of how easily the people we ultimately serve can be left in limbo when systems fail to deliver results that truly matter.

For the first time in nearly six years, I spent Christmas 2025 at home in the Caribbean. The experience was unexpectedly restorative. There is something profoundly grounding about returning to a place that holds your history, your people, and your sense of belonging.

Six years is a long time to be away from home. Yet no matter how far I travel – or how many borders I cross in search of new horizons – I carry the quiet assurance that I have a place to return to.

That certainty, however, remains out of reach for hundreds of millions of people worldwide. Even during what should be festive seasons, many continue to live without the security, dignity or stability that a home provides.

From widespread evictions across North America and Europe driven by spiralling housing costs, to conflict-induced displacement across Latin America; from the devastating impact of climate-related disasters on the Caribbean’s housing sector, to the harrowing reality of millions uprooted across Africa, Asia and the Middle East by protracted crises – it is increasingly difficult to believe that we are doing enough. The scale, complexity and persistence of displacement and housing insecurity demand far more than fragmented responses or episodic attention.

There is no doubt in my mind that secure housing, land and property rights are foundational to development. The evidence is overwhelming. Yet beyond data, metrics and policy frameworks lies a simpler truth: Having a place to call home is fundamental to the human experience.

Home is the anchor for dignity, opportunity, safety and belonging. If we are serious about human development, this truth must sit at the centre of our collective action.

I draw deep inspiration from those who have dedicated their lives and careers to strengthening data, evidence, advocacy, policy and governance in the land and housing sector. Their perseverance – often in the face of limited resources, political inertia and shifting global priorities – has kept this agenda alive.

Without their commitment, I may well have stepped away from this work long time ago. Because of them, however, the path forward feels clearer today than it ever has.

As we look ahead to 2026, the task before us is formidable. Yet I hold a firm conviction that this can be the year we begin to bridge the long-standing divide between rights-based and market-based approaches to land.

Post-conflict, post-disaster and post-recession contexts present some of the most complex challenges for land and property governance. These environments are often marked by widespread displacement, institutional fragility, contested land rights, disrupted markets and weakened state capacity. At the same time, they can become moments of accelerated transformation – when new legal frameworks, investment flows and planning paradigms are introduced at scale.

Over the past two decades, global development and humanitarian actors have advanced rights-based approaches to housing, land and property, emphasising tenure security, restitution and legal recognition as foundations for peacebuilding, recovery and social cohesion. These efforts have delivered important normative gains, particularly in conflict- and displacement-affected settings. Yet they have often struggled to scale, attract sustained investment or meaningfully influence macroeconomic and urban development policy.

In parallel, market-based approaches – including land value capture, real estate finance, urban redevelopment instruments and private sector-led reconstruction – have gained prominence in recovery frameworks supported by the World Bank, the IMF, regional development banks and major investors.

While these approaches prioritise efficiency, fiscal sustainability and capital mobilisation, they too often operate in isolation from social protection mechanisms, tenure systems and local institutional realities.

The result is a persistent disconnect between rights-based recovery objectives and market-driven reconstruction processes – one that frequently leads to exclusion, speculative displacement, uneven urban recovery and protracted crises.

Over the coming year, LPN Global will focus much of its time and resources on post-crisis contexts. We believe these settings present a critical opportunity to rethink how land and property markets can be structured to support tenure security, inclusive growth and long-term economic stability – simultaneously, not sequentially.

If we succeed, housing, land and property rights can finally be elevated to their rightful place among the most pressing development challenges of our time – not as a peripheral concern, but as a foundation for inclusive, resilient and sustainable futures.