Experts Call for Urgent Reforms to Overcome Resistance to Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration

Windhoek, Namibia — Despite growing global consensus around the need for more inclusive and affordable land systems, experts warn that Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration (FFPLA) is being stymied by outdated legal frameworks, professional resistance, and institutional inertia. In a webinar hosted on 31 July by the FIG Commission 7 FFPLA Working Group, these challenges were brought into sharp focus, offering practical strategies for redress.

Policy officials were notably present and engaged in high-level discussions at the 2025 World Bank Land Conference. This signalled a promising shift towards greater visibility and uptake of initiatives such as the FFPLA approach in national policy dialogues. (Photo: World Bank Cities)

A Promising Concept, Facing Uneven Uptake

FFPLA is widely seen as a flexible and scalable approach to land administration that prioritizes accessibility, affordability, and incremental improvement over traditional, high-cost surveying methods. Yet, as Professor Uchendu Eugene Chigbu of the Namibia University of Science and Technology explained, uptake is hindered when the three defining elements — flexibility, focus on purpose, and incremental improvement — are not all present.

“There is something unique about fit-for-purpose land administration. It is the three core elements that drive it… Flexibility, focus on purpose and incremental improvements,” said Professor Chigbu.

“However, what we do not talk about, is when all these elements are not completely present, or are present in different forms. Sometimes you see when there is a ‘Focus on Purpose’ and ‘Incremental Improvement’, but there is no ‘Flexibility’, we still expect that the improvement should be purposeful.”

Professor Chigbu emphasized that FFPLA did not emerge from a vacuum. “There were other land administration systems or quasi land administration systems or methods that predated it. [For example], the self-help land development and flexible land tenure system (Namibia, 2012).”

It was noted that while earlier tools are often underpinned by legal frameworks, FFPLA still lacks sufficient policy backing in most settings, which according to Professor Chigbu signals that the missing piece of the FFPLA, for now, is the policy angle.

In Uganda, the Uganda Community-Based Association for Women and Children’s Welfare (UCOBAC) has been piloting FFPLA with a focus on securing tenure for women and marginalized groups. Executive Director Frances Birungi stressed that the legal environment is a major hurdle.

“One of the challenges that is very critical that we face is around the legislative framework that we have. If you look at the land laws, the regulations and guidelines that we currently have, as a country — for example the Survey Act, the Registration of Titles Act — all of these are old laws that do not provide for non-conventional survey or non-conventional land administration processes,” she explained.

“We are doing something that is not supported by law, and that really challenges us in the sense that the product that comes from the fit-for-purpose land administration work that we do… is not recognized and supported as strongly by law because of the provisions that exist.”

Birungi also pointed out that Uganda’s national land information system “only captures data from the conventional surveying methods and only [looks] at three tenure systems, yet the country has four tenure systems… Most of the work that we are doing is under customary land.”

“Some of the products that come out in terms of the land certificates and certificates of customary ownership are not integrated into the national land information system, and that becomes a challenge for us,” she said.

“So we are doing a lot of advocacy, a lot of engagement with the Ministry of Lands to ensure that the national land administration system is adjusted in a way that will incorporate data from these non-conventional surveying systems that the FFPLA [uses].”

Professional Resistance: A Barrier Within

Panelists agreed that a significant source of resistance comes from within the land administration professions themselves.

“The surveyors really feel that fit-for-purpose land administration is a threat to their profession and it kind of transfers their role and their work to non-technical persons like the mapping teams, mapping assistants, and the area land committee that they feel do not have the technical capacity,” said Birungi. “There's a lot of resistance that is coming from the professionals through their [professional] body.”

UCOBAC's Women’s Land and Property Rights program (WLPR) aims to promote equitable land rights by strengthening women’s tenure security and decision-making. The FFPLA approach has proven applicable and beneficial as the organisation tackles discriminatory norms that hinder women and girls from owning or controlling land and productive resources. (Photo: UCOBAC)

She added that lawyers also resist FFPLA. “They feel that fit-for-purpose land administration brings in alternative dispute resolution, and that [this] takes the work that they would probably do, and also the resources… that they get from providing these services.”

These concerns were also echoed by Kees De Zeeuw, Principal Consultant at Esri Global. “It threatens business models… especially from surveyors, but also from lawyers. I think they foresee reduction in their business and in their income,” he said. “As long as we don’t provide a good alternative for the business model, I think they will remain resistant.”

Avoidance, Not Just Opposition

Dr. Rosalie Kingwill framed the issue not just as resistance but also as systemic avoidance. “It’s not so much conscious resistance as much as avoidance in my experience and very much South Africa focused,” she said.

Kingwill warned that FFPLA can fail when it overlooks entrenched power dynamics. “We must be just a little bit wary of this local participation where it’s only because it’s performative but doesn’t really dislodge the entrenched interests of elites,” she noted. “FFPLA approach [has] actually [done] quite a lot of harm, [where] it didn’t engage with those.”

She emphasized that FFPLA risks falling short unless it accounts for political realities. “There’s the political angle. It threatens vested interests in current systems and networks of power… even in families, there are particular patriarchs who control land administration.”

Strategies for Moving Forward

Despite the headwinds, the panelists proposed concrete solutions. Professor Chigbu urged the land sector to “sensitize and continue to create awareness – emphasizing on the flexibility, purposefulness and incrementality.” He also called for deeper “policy engagement with policymakers, politicians to ensure that FFPLA is accepted as a policy tool.”

Birungi emphasized mindset change through academic partnerships: “Makarere University… has adapted fit for purpose land administration in its course units… I hope that mindset change would be very critical in really reducing the resistance.”

De Zeeuw concluded by stating, “You have to develop the policy, the business model and the implementation approach and there’s a role for all of us… governments, but also… consultants, companies, academia, and… NGOs.”

He added that “FFPLA is not a static thing… We have to be aware that maybe the solutions of tomorrow are better than the solutions of yesterday. So I think we should update the fit-for-purpose approach as well and improve our implementations."

Hope for Broader Acceptance

Ms. Birungi closed her presentation with a message of cautious optimism: “There’s enough evidence that the traditional methods have not worked for many, especially the marginalised groups, the women, people with disability and the poor. So we really feel that fit-for-purpose should be something that is adapted and taken up by government… to scale land tenure security at country level.”