Land in the Balance: The World Bank’s Evolving Investment in Tenure and Governance

Editorial — The World Bank once stood at the forefront of global land reform. For decades, its loans financed registration campaigns, cadastral modernisation and land titling programmes across dozens of countries. Today, however, land is less visible in the Bank’s portfolio. Projects are fewer, budgets smaller, and investments often embedded within broader frameworks such as climate resilience, digital governance and fiscal reform.

The World Bank’s investment approach with respect to land has evolved significantly over the last 50 years — from agrarian reform and titling drives to governance and fit-for-purpose approaches. With mixed results and shifting priorities, land is now treated as a cross-cutting issue, woven into climate, fiscal and digital agendas rather than as a standalone sector. (Photo: World Bank Group)

The evolution reflects lessons from past decades. While once a headline sector, land now assumes a quieter role — integrated into other agendas, but still essential to poverty reduction, climate adaptation and sustainable growth.

From redistribution to property rights

In the 1960s and 1970s, the Bank’s engagement on land mirrored the global focus on food security and rural development. Loans backed agrarian reforms and settlement schemes across Asia, Africa and Latin America. Governments sought to redistribute land and modernise agriculture, efforts often justified as bulwarks against instability during the Cold War.

The outcomes were mixed. In many cases, elite capture and weak capacity limited reforms. By the 1980s, the institution shifted course. Guided by the Washington Consensus and structural adjustment programmes, it promoted privatisation and market efficiency. Land registration and titling became central to growth strategies.

Flagship efforts such as Thailand’s multi-phase titling project and major Latin American programmes in Peru, Bolivia and Nicaragua symbolised this approach. Secure property rights were framed as essential for investment, credit and economic dynamism.

Governance and the boom years

The 1990s and early 2000s marked the Bank’s most active period on land. The collapse of the Soviet Union created urgent demand for privatisation across Eastern Europe and Central Asia. At the same time, the Bank’s governance agenda emphasised transparent registries and modern cadastral systems.

With rapid advances in geospatial technology, large-scale land administration projects multiplied. From Ethiopia to Vietnam, governments rolled out titling and registration campaigns with Bank support. By the early 2000s, land administration had become one of the Bank’s largest lending areas, accounting for billions in commitments worldwide.

A tempered approach

But the results were not always as expected. Evaluations showed that titling did not guarantee access to credit, reduce poverty or prevent displacement. In some cases, formalisation favoured elites while marginalising vulnerable groups.

By the 2010s, the Bank began tempering its approach. The 2012 Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure, endorsed by the G20, reinforced a rights-based and inclusive lens. Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration offered cost-effective, participatory alternatives to costly national surveys.

At the same time, climate change, urbanisation and digital governance rose to the top of the Bank’s agenda. Land administration was recast as an enabler of resilience, property taxation and e-government, rather than a standalone driver of development.

Quiet presence, persistent risks

From outside, the shift can look like retreat. The Bank funds fewer dedicated land projects today, with less political weight and visibility than in the past. Investment volumes are smaller, and land is rarely a headline sector.

The risks are real. A less visible profile could reduce attention to land governance at the country level. Communities facing tenure insecurity may struggle to find support if land is not prioritised. There is also a concern that embedding land too tightly into other frameworks could sideline the rights-based dimension.

Why integration makes sense

Inside the Bank, however, the change is cast as pragmatism. Land remains politically sensitive, tied to sovereignty, indigenous rights and elite interests. Large-scale titling campaigns can provoke resistance. And evidence that titling alone delivers broad economic benefits is mixed.

The 2025 World Bank Land Conference, land was framed as integral to wider priorities. Discussions reinforced tenure security as a driver of climate resilience, tax revenue and gender equity. Delegates also highlighted its role in advancing digital efficiency and governance reforms. (Photo: World Bank Cities)

Integrating land into cross-cutting priorities allows the Bank to maintain investment while lowering political exposure. It positions tenure security as a contributor to measurable outcomes: climate adaptation, tax revenue, gender equity and digital efficiency.

This quiet assertion of land is not a withdrawal, but a recalibration. By linking land to strategic priorities, the Bank aligns with its broader mandate and secures continued financing for programmes that might otherwise lose ground.

A path forward

For the Bank to balance pragmatism with leadership, several steps stand out. First, it must explicitly recognise tenure security as a development goal in its own right, even when embedded in wider programmes. This ensures that the issue retains visibility and priority alongside climate, fiscal and governance agendas.

Second, the Bank can scale up fit-for-purpose approaches that are participatory and low-cost, enabling millions to secure their rights where the cost of traditional cadastral surveys prove prohibitive. These methods have proven both practical and politically viable in diverse settings.

Third, digital inclusion is essential. As land registries are increasingly integrated into national digital platforms, safeguards must be in place to ensure that poor and vulnerable groups are not excluded from access to their rights.

Finally, the Bank can strengthen global visibility by keeping land governance firmly on the agenda at climate and governance summits. This would secure land’s place in international dialogue and underline its role in resilience, justice and sustainable growth.

Business model with upside

The Bank’s current approach represents a business model with significant upsides. By embedding land within climate, digital and fiscal agendas, it reduces political risk and mobilises resources. It also links tenure security to outcomes that resonate with shareholders and borrowing governments.

The danger lies in invisibility. If land fades from view, communities with insecure tenure could be left behind. But with careful positioning, the Bank can assert land’s importance while keeping it integrated into its core frameworks.

Land may no longer occupy the same spotlight it once did. Yet as climate change intensifies and urbanisation accelerates, the case for secure, transparent and inclusive land governance is only growing stronger.