col-xs-12
col-sm-12
col-md-12
col-lg-12
col-xs-12
col-sm-12
col-md-12
col-lg-12
videoType
dynamic-media
videoDmUrl
https://delivery-p136806-e1377785.adobeaemcloud.com/adobe/assets/urn:aaid:aem:1c4d94dc-83e8-4330-aa51-c95a47689bfe/play?assetname=World+Bank+Land+Conference+2024+-+Revolutionizing+Land+Administration.mp4
keyFrameImage
videoDescription
A video recording of the Revolutionizing Land Administration session at the World Bank Land Conference 2024, the premier forum for the land sector, bringing together participants from governments, development partners, civil society, academia, and the private sector to showcase research, discuss issues and good practice, and inform policy dialogue.
timestamp

00:00 Welcome.

00:03 Everybody to this session.

00:07 And uh

00:09 Congratulations for making it to this very remote room.

00:13 Um,

00:14 you can,

00:15 of course,

00:15 uh,

00:16 uh,

00:17 stay where you are if you want to come closer,

00:19 that would also be nice.

00:21 Um,

00:23 but,

00:23 uh,

00:23 we look forward

00:25 to a very interactive session,

00:27 uh,

00:28 and,

00:29 uh,

00:30 I think we'll,

00:30 uh,

00:31 we'll get started,

00:32 uh,

00:33 so we are

00:34 on time.

00:35 Um,

00:36 so,

00:38 Uh,

00:38 my name is Oreta Tempra.

00:40 I work with the Global Land Tool Network and UN Habitat.

00:44 Um,

00:45 I'm actually handling the Arab states and the land and conflict portfolio.

00:51 Um,

00:51 but it's my pleasure today to,

00:54 uh,

00:55 to stand in for my colleagues,

00:57 uh,

00:57 Julia Lavana and Jonathan

00:59 Yakutiel who actually,

01:01 uh,

01:02 work on the,

01:04 uh,

01:05 land,

01:05 uh,

01:05 finance portfolio at the Global Landfill Network,

01:09 um.

01:10 So,

01:11 I'll introduce our speakers and panelists,

01:14 but let's start with some,

01:15 uh,

01:16 you know,

01:16 introductory remarks.

01:17 Uh,

01:18 so welcome again to this,

01:19 uh,

01:20 session called

01:21 revolutionizing land Administration,

01:24 uh,

01:24 looking at Cadaster first versus property tax first approaches,

01:29 uh,

01:29 to achieve tenure security,

01:31 uh,

01:32 but also increase local finance and,

01:35 uh,

01:35 you know,

01:35 overall contribute to other

01:37 dividends.

01:39 Um,

01:40 this session is a collaborative effort between UN Habitat,

01:43 the Global Land Tool Network,

01:45 the International Center for Tax and Development,

01:48 particularly the Local Government Revenue Initiative or known as LOGLL.

01:54 Uh,

01:55 so as the urbanization accelerates and population increases,

01:59 environmental conservation and sustainable land use practices

02:03 become more and more urgent worldwide.

02:07 Uh,

02:07 we see that land administration systems actually,

02:10 uh,

02:10 struggle to keep pace to these evolving needs,

02:14 uh,

02:15 and particularly,

02:16 uh,

02:16 land rights recognition,

02:18 recordation,

02:19 and registration,

02:21 um,

02:21 is still far behind what we need to do to actually,

02:25 uh,

02:26 allow,

02:26 uh,

02:26 sustainable land use and land administration and

02:29 to protect the land rights of community.

02:32 Um,

02:35 So securing land tenure,

02:37 uh,

02:37 I mean,

02:37 and particularly this conference looks at climate

02:40 we saw in so many sessions how actually

02:43 is difficult really to address the climate and land,

02:46 uh,

02:46 nexus,

02:47 uh,

02:47 when there is no tenure securities for the communities,

02:50 um,

02:51 so.

02:52 Uh,

02:52 securing land tenure continues and becomes increasingly critical,

02:57 particularly in rapidly growing urban areas,

03:00 in peri-urban areas,

03:02 and also in location of high environmental and agricultural interest,

03:07 uh,

03:08 because that's of course where the,

03:09 you know,

03:10 the climate financing goes,

03:12 where agriculture need to be more

03:15 productive,

03:16 um,

03:16 and,

03:17 um,

03:18 and environmentally sustainable as well.

03:21 Uh,

03:22 so,

03:23 um,

03:24 that's what makes it really important to assess what really works

03:29 to protect land rights on one hand

03:31 and establish.

03:33 Uh,

03:33 functioning land administration systems

03:36 that can match the demographic,

03:38 economic,

03:39 social,

03:39 environmental challenges that we face,

03:42 and definitely,

03:43 you know,

03:43 this as an aspect of securing the land rights,

03:46 but it is also an aspect of

03:48 financing to allowing these systems to go to

03:51 scale and be sustainable and empower local authorities,

03:54 local community to actually address their

03:57 climate,

03:58 uh,

03:59 challenges,

03:59 their food security challenges,

04:01 etc.

04:03 So,

04:03 um,

04:04 sustainability and scalabilities here are,

04:07 are key,

04:08 and,

04:08 uh,

04:09 uh,

04:10 where,

04:10 that's where,

04:11 you know,

04:11 conventionalcadaster hasn't been doing so well and where we look at

04:16 fit for purpose land administration at the,

04:19 in this session.

04:20 Uh,

04:21 so fit for Purpose Land Administration,

04:22 I know you're all

04:24 familiar with it,

04:25 but was initially an approach developed by the World Bank and the

04:28 International Federation of Surveyors and then was widely adopted by a,

04:32 a range of partners and really championed,

04:35 uh,

04:36 as well on the ground,

04:37 uh,

04:38 by inhabited and the Global Land Tool network with their partners.

04:42 Um,

04:45 So this approach,

04:47 uh,

04:47 we'll hear more about it in the next,

04:49 uh,

04:49 presentation,

04:50 but recognizes that security land tenure requires innovative,

04:53 flexible,

04:54 and community-centered solutions

04:57 that are affordable and can go to scale,

05:00 including in area where land is customarily administered.

05:04 And secondly,

05:05 and really,

05:06 uh,

05:07 you know,

05:07 we'll have the challenge of making the linkages between this

05:10 more land administration focused perspective

05:13 and the more financing-focused perspective.

05:16 We'll look at,

05:16 we'll look at,

05:17 uh,

05:17 property tax first approaches,

05:19 uh,

05:19 spearheaded by the local government revenue initiative of

05:22 the International Center for Tax and Development.

05:26 Uh,

05:26 and other partners,

05:27 of course,

05:28 that are here with us today.

05:30 Uh,

05:31 which,

05:31 you know,

05:31 is an approach that allows the rapid registration of properties by,

05:36 uh,

05:37 also local governments for taxation purposes,

05:40 but also that have,

05:41 you know,

05:42 positive trickle-down effect to,

05:44 you know,

05:44 put together an information based

05:46 that can then also contribute to improve special plan

05:50 planning and land administration overall.

05:53 So we look at some case studies,

05:55 look at,

05:55 uh,

05:56 discuss implications,

05:57 uh,

05:58 you know,

05:58 at the local level particularly,

06:01 uh,

06:02 and then,

06:02 uh,

06:02 you know,

06:03 hopefully we'll also get questions from the floor.

06:06 We have a very capable,

06:08 knowledgeable,

06:08 and diverse panel who will also,

06:11 uh,

06:11 you know,

06:12 sure we,

06:13 uh,

06:13 intrigued by all your questions.

06:16 So with this,

06:17 let me welcome you again and uh

06:21 introduce uh the,

06:23 the two

06:24 presenters that we'll start with.

06:27 Uh,

06:28 the first one,

06:29 unfortunately has a parallel presentation in another session.

06:33 Uh,

06:33 so we'll introduce him on,

06:34 in his absence,

06:35 uh,

06:36 Simon Peters Musige,

06:38 which is a project coordinator with Inhabitat

06:41 and Global Land Tool Network in Uganda.

06:43 He leads the Inhabitat land portfolio in Uganda,

06:47 uh,

06:47 and also the land at scale work there.

06:50 Uh,

06:51 and he

06:52 has prepared a video for us summarizing,

06:55 uh,

06:55 the,

06:55 the work that,

06:56 uh,

06:57 he's leading in Uganda.

06:59 And then,

07:00 uh,

07:00 we have,

07:01 uh,

07:01 Doctor Wilson Pritchard here on my

07:04 left,

07:06 uh,

07:06 associate professor at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs,

07:10 Public Policy and Department of Political Science,

07:13 a research fellow at the Institute of Development Study,

07:16 and executive Director

07:18 of ICTD and chair of the Loy Program.

07:22 His research focuses on the political economy

07:24 of tax reform in lower income countries

07:28 and the relationship between taxation and citizen

07:31 demands for improved governance in sub-Saharan Africa.

07:35 Uh,

07:36 so

07:36 I would start with the first video,

07:39 uh,

07:41 Thank you

07:42 so much.

07:42 I work with UN Habitat and the Global Land Tool Network.

07:46 I coordinate,

07:47 um,

07:48 GLTN's program

07:50 on land rights in Uganda.

07:52 Um,

07:54 I'm

07:55 happy to be,

07:56 uh,

07:56 able to make a contribution to

07:59 this session on revolutionalizing land administration,

08:03 a debate on CASA first

08:05 and property first,

08:06 and property tax first approaches to achieve,

08:09 uh,

08:09 tenure security.

08:11 My specific,

08:12 uh,

08:13 contribution to this session,

08:15 uh,

08:16 is on GLTN's fit for purpose land administration approach,

08:20 and I will be sharing,

08:21 uh,

08:21 the specific case,

08:23 uh,

08:23 of Uganda.

08:25 Um,

08:31 So

08:33 So conventional systems.

08:35 are

08:36 fixated with,

08:37 um,

08:38 you know,

08:39 fixing the boundaries.

08:41 Um,

08:42 so

08:43 instead of,

08:44 you know,

08:44 general boundaries,

08:46 they're looking at,

08:47 um,

08:48 field surveys to be able to,

08:50 uh,

08:50 fix,

08:51 um,

08:52 or to

08:53 adjudicate

08:54 and,

08:55 uh,

08:56 uh,

08:57 uh,

08:57 record boundaries to the highest,

08:59 uh,

09:00 level of accuracy with high-end

09:03 and,

09:03 uh,

09:03 costly equipment.

09:06 And,

09:07 and the whole process,

09:08 um,

09:09 has implications for the three

09:12 factors that we talked about

09:14 in terms of

09:15 time,

09:15 in terms of cost,

09:17 and in terms of quality.

09:20 So the outcome of these conventional systems over,

09:24 over,

09:25 uh,

09:25 centuries

09:26 has been that,

09:27 um,

09:28 you have a very slow process of registering and recognizing land rights.

09:34 Um,

09:35 in many countries,

09:36 you have less than 20% of land rights,

09:38 um,

09:40 um,

09:40 included in the land administration systems.

09:43 Um,

09:44 while the rest remain informal

09:47 unrecognized.

09:48 So,

09:49 the key principles of this.

09:51 Uh,

09:52 fit for purpose land administration,

09:54 uh,

09:54 mainly for.

09:56 Uh,

09:56 one

09:57 on,

09:58 uh,

09:58 visual boundaries that I talked about before.

10:01 And then,

10:02 um,

10:03 That accuracy should relate to the purpose.

10:06 We do as little

10:08 as needed.

10:09 And then,

10:10 um,

10:11 also,

10:12 um,

10:13 being able to use aerial imageries rather than the field surveys,

10:18 uh,

10:18 where that,

10:19 uh,

10:20 will actually serve the purpose.

10:23 And lastly,

10:24 opportunities,

10:26 uh,

10:26 starting,

10:27 um,

10:28 starting,

10:29 um,

10:30 you know,

10:30 small and,

10:32 uh,

10:32 incrementally updating

10:34 or upgrading the system.

10:37 So,

10:38 um,

10:38 you know,

10:39 starting with a more affordable system

10:42 and then,

10:43 uh,

10:43 slowly,

10:44 um,

10:45 to be able to

10:47 improve it

10:48 as the need and conditions change.

10:51 So this is

10:53 really the four key principles of,

10:56 uh,

10:56 this new way of thinking about land administration.

10:59 And it is a paradigm shift.

11:01 Um,

11:02 it requires us,

11:04 um,

11:05 to be innovative.

11:07 Uh,

11:07 it requires us to think differently from the conventional way.

11:11 We have been thinking about.

11:13 Uh,

11:13 land administration,

11:14 it requires us

11:16 to be able to utilize,

11:18 um,

11:19 new and,

11:20 uh,

11:21 advances in technologies

11:23 and approaches.

11:24 It also requires leadership

11:27 as well as partnership and capacity development,

11:30 uh,

11:30 for it to be implemented.

11:32 Um,

11:33 now in terms of the key issues,

11:35 Uganda has a

11:37 multiple antenna system.

11:39 Um,

11:40 but the major

11:42 uh tenure system through which

11:44 the majority of the people

11:46 in both urban and rural areas access land is the customary land tenure system.

11:51 But

11:52 the,

11:52 the,

11:53 the,

11:53 the land under this system is largely unregistered.

11:57 Um,

11:57 there is also high,

11:59 uh,

12:00 disputes as a result

12:02 of the land,

12:03 uh,

12:03 being,

12:04 uh,

12:05 uh,

12:05 unregistered,

12:07 and so there is no transparent,

12:09 uh,

12:09 way,

12:10 uh,

12:11 of,

12:12 uh,

12:12 you know,

12:12 recognizing and verifying,

12:15 uh,

12:15 claims to the land.

12:19 The,

12:19 the,

12:19 the,

12:20 the other issue is that,

12:21 um.

12:23 The,

12:23 the land administration system or land services are also

12:27 decentralized.

12:28 Um,

12:29 so you have the lower,

12:31 uh,

12:33 level governments,

12:35 um,

12:35 local governments,

12:36 um,

12:37 being,

12:38 uh,

12:39 uh,

12:39 you know,

12:40 responsible for providing,

12:42 uh,

12:42 land services.

12:43 And the main challenge there is that the capacities are very low

12:46 in most of these,

12:48 uh,

12:49 local land administration offices.

12:53 So

12:53 GLTN

12:56 for more than 15 years has been working

12:58 with the government of Uganda

13:01 to

13:02 support the government

13:03 to be able to implement.

13:06 Uh,

13:06 and test the fit for purpose,

13:08 uh,

13:08 land administration,

13:10 um,

13:12 uh,

13:12 you know,

13:13 um,

13:14 uh,

13:15 thinking about,

13:16 you know,

13:16 going about land administration.

13:19 So,

13:19 um,

13:21 So one of the key interventions there has been community-based

13:25 land registration and land use planning on customary land.

13:29 The goal of this intervention has been to contribute

13:32 towards development of a structured and scalable approach

13:36 towards

13:37 improved tenure security and sustainable land use

13:40 for men,

13:41 women,

13:42 and youth on customary land in a participatory way.

13:47 The,

13:48 the outcome

13:49 um

13:50 of this has been,

13:51 um,

13:53 The issuance of certificates of customary ownership

13:57 to over 40,000 households

14:00 in Uganda.

14:02 using the fit for purpose land administration approach.

14:07 Um,

14:08 but also

14:10 several sub-counties and urban,

14:12 uh,

14:13 divisions

14:14 have had,

14:16 um,

14:16 you know,

14:17 uh,

14:18 physical development plans,

14:19 uh,

14:20 developed and supported,

14:21 and these plans

14:23 are climate smart.

14:26 And,

14:26 uh,

14:27 inclusive,

14:28 uh,

14:28 or developed in a participatory way.

14:31 And then also

14:33 the other outcome,

14:34 key outcome that we have,

14:36 uh,

14:36 through this intervention is the

14:39 supporting of,

14:40 uh,

14:40 wetland communities to develop wetland management plans

14:45 for

14:46 promoting,

14:46 um,

14:47 um,

14:48 wise use of the wetlands.

14:52 The other intervention,

14:54 um,

14:55 that is being implemented here is the scaling up of capacity

14:59 development,

15:00 recognizing that capacity development is very critical

15:04 for,

15:05 um,

15:05 implementation and scaling up of fit for purpose land administration.

15:10 So

15:11 we are building capacity

15:12 of,

15:13 uh,

15:14 land administration institutions,

15:17 um,

15:17 and also,

15:18 uh non-state actors,

15:19 including civil society and academia

15:21 at different levels.

15:23 Um,

15:24 and

15:25 We are also,

15:26 um,

15:27 building their capacity to be able to implement or support,

15:32 um,

15:32 promotion of,

15:33 uh,

15:33 gender-sensitive,

15:35 uh,

15:35 land governance.

15:40 And lastly,

15:41 um,

15:42 the other interventions are at national level,

15:45 uh,

15:46 working closely with the central government,

15:49 uh,

15:49 to implement the national land policy.

15:52 Uh,

15:53 first,

15:53 under this component,

15:54 um,

15:55 GLTN has supported the government,

15:57 uh,

15:58 to establish a factional land policy implementation unit.

16:02 I have supported the government to develop and implement a comprehensive

16:06 monitoring and evaluation system for implementation of the national land policy.

16:11 And we have also supported the government to develop

16:14 and implement

16:16 a national gender strategy on land.

16:19 As well as,

16:20 um,

16:21 we have supported establishment and strengthening

16:24 of

16:25 several multi-stakeholder

16:27 platforms

16:28 and partnerships on land and,

16:31 um,

16:32 uh,

16:32 uh,

16:33 on land issues.

16:36 So,

16:36 so,

16:37 so

16:37 one of the other

16:39 Um,

16:40 strategic intervention that we have also done

16:43 in order to be able to institutionalize

16:47 the fit for purpose land Administration.

16:50 We have supported the government to develop

16:52 a fit for purpose land administration implementation strategy.

16:56 Um,

16:57 and,

16:57 and this is informed by

16:59 many years of

17:01 testing

17:02 and implementing the fit for purpose land administration approach,

17:06 um,

17:07 as I mentioned,

17:08 um,

17:09 in the interventions that I highlighted before.

17:12 So

17:14 The overall objective of this strategy of government,

17:18 uh,

17:18 for implementing fit for purpose land administration

17:22 is

17:23 To result into

17:26 tenure security

17:28 for all land rights holders in Uganda.

17:31 At low cost

17:33 Um,

17:33 and appropriate

17:35 approaches,

17:37 um,

17:38 as,

17:38 as well as,

17:39 uh,

17:39 actions for land administration.

17:43 So

17:43 it has several specific objectives.

17:46 One is to identify key requirements

17:49 and priority actions for generating a consistent national spatial framework

17:53 within a period of 10 years.

17:56 And the other one is identify

17:59 requirements and priority actions for instituting a legal framework

18:02 that supports flexible recordation of land rights.

18:06 Number 3 is to identify requirements and priority

18:08 actions for capacity development for land administration institutions

18:12 to deliver affordable and accessible services in a transparent manner,

18:17 and then also provide,

18:20 uh,

18:20 cost estimates for operationalizing

18:23 the fit for purpose implementation strategy.

18:26 So as I conclude,

18:28 Um,

18:29 from this experience of,

18:31 um,

18:32 supporting,

18:33 uh,

18:33 the

18:34 implementation of the fit for purpose land Administration in Uganda,

18:38 we

18:39 conclude that this

18:41 The objective of securing land rights for all

18:45 within our generation is only possible,

18:48 um,

18:49 especially

18:50 in the context of Uganda.

18:52 Uh,

18:53 with,

18:54 uh,

18:54 with,

18:55 with only the fit for purpose land administration approach.

18:58 The conventional approaches

19:00 will not be able to,

19:01 uh,

19:02 deliver tenure security for all

19:04 within our generation.

19:07 Also,

19:08 um.

19:10 Um,

19:10 what we see

19:12 is that

19:14 Uh,

19:14 the fit for purpose land Administration approaches

19:18 significantly

19:19 reduces the cost,

19:21 uh,

19:21 of surveying,

19:23 um,

19:24 land parcels and,

19:25 and,

19:25 and formalizing,

19:27 uh,

19:27 the land rights,

19:29 um,

19:30 uh,

19:30 from

19:31 $1000 US dollars per parcel to $10

19:35 per parcel.

19:36 So,

19:37 so this is a significant,

19:39 uh,

19:39 drop in the cost.

19:41 And so this is really what makes it,

19:44 um,

19:45 makes it possible,

19:46 uh,

19:46 to be able to,

19:48 um,

19:49 achieve,

19:50 uh,

19:50 secu security of land tenure for all

19:53 within,

19:54 uh,

19:54 the shortest time possible.

19:57 But also

19:58 apart from

20:00 from

20:01 the cost of mapping and registering of individual and parcels.

20:07 Budget provisions need to be made

20:11 for

20:11 sensitization.

20:13 And mobilization of communities to be able to fully participate.

20:19 As

20:19 in,

20:20 for instance,

20:20 our context in Uganda,

20:22 um,

20:23 communities

20:24 usually

20:25 are suspicious when these processes start,

20:28 so there is a need for,

20:30 um,

20:31 for engagement with the communities,

20:33 um,

20:34 so that they are given assurance that

20:36 they will not lose their land rights in the process and all their concerns,

20:41 um,

20:41 need to be addressed.

20:44 But also,

20:46 uh,

20:46 budget provisions have to be met

20:48 for,

20:49 uh,

20:50 alternative dispute resolution.

20:52 Um,

20:53 mechanisms to be strengthened

20:55 and to be made operational.

20:58 Uh,

20:58 long term capacity development of national and low-level institutions.

21:03 So in our current context,

21:06 uh,

21:06 uh,

21:06 right now in Uganda,

21:08 um,

21:09 the fit for purpose Land Administration is mainly now

21:13 supported,

21:14 uh,

21:14 with the support

21:16 from,

21:17 uh,

21:18 development partners.

21:20 Um,

21:21 uh,

21:21 we,

21:21 we are mainly supporting that GLTN and UN Habitat,

21:25 together with other partners,

21:26 uh,

21:27 GIZ,

21:28 ZOA,

21:28 UNCDF and the World Bank and others.

21:33 But now

21:34 What we see is that there is a need

21:38 for a national program

21:40 to be able to

21:41 roll out

21:42 the fit for purpose land Administration.

21:45 And so for this national program to be rolled out,

21:49 uh,

21:49 there is need

21:50 for us to think about

21:52 a sustainable financing model,

21:55 uh,

21:55 for,

21:56 uh,

21:56 implementation of fit for purpose land administration.

22:00 Thank you very much

22:02 for listening to me.

22:04 Um,

22:05 it's a pity I'm not able to respond to your questions,

22:09 uh,

22:09 immediately.

22:11 But my colleagues,

22:12 uh,

22:12 in the room

22:13 can respond to some of them,

22:16 uh,

22:16 while others can be sent to my email address,

22:18 which will also be provided by the moderator.

22:22 Again,

22:22 thank you very much.

22:26 We can still clap in his absence.

22:29 Thank you,

22:30 Simon.

22:32 And now

22:33 I turn the floor to

22:35 Doctor Wilson Pritchard.

22:37 Uh,

22:37 you can

22:39 stay here or go to the podium as you prefer.

22:41 Yeah.

22:46 Uh,

22:47 all right,

22:47 uh,

22:48 good afternoon,

22:49 everyone.

22:50 Um,

22:51 so I wanna start by suggesting that the field of land administration,

22:54 which Simon is an expert in,

22:56 uh,

22:56 is very similar to the field of property taxation,

22:58 uh,

22:59 in which I work,

23:00 uh,

23:01 in a lot of important ways,

23:02 uh,

23:02 in both areas

23:04 systems historically have underperformed,

23:06 sometimes severely,

23:08 in part because of an inheritance of processes that were complex

23:12 and difficult to administer in the context of low income countries.

23:15 In turn,

23:16 in both fields,

23:17 we've seen a move in recent years towards

23:20 forms of fit for purpose administration,

23:23 trying to align administrative strategies

23:25 to real needs and capacities on the ground in order to make,

23:29 uh,

23:29 outcomes in practice much more successful,

23:32 right?

23:34 And in principle,

23:35 the two should be speaking close to each other,

23:37 because the foundation for effective land administration

23:40 and the foundation for effective property taxation

23:43 are the same thing,

23:44 a clear register and map of properties.

23:48 But yet these two fields very rarely speak to each other in practice.

23:51 Uh,

23:51 and so what I'm going to try to do in this presentation is talk about

23:55 how the two speak to each other,

23:56 how they can.

23:57 How they can be synergistic and mutually complementary

24:01 instead of existing in parallel,

24:03 uh,

24:03 as they often have in practice.

24:05 Uh,

24:05 to do that,

24:06 uh,

24:07 I'm gonna talk from the perspective of property taxation,

24:09 but I'm going to pose the question,

24:11 does the fit for purpose approach to land administration

24:14 that you've just had described to you

24:16 offer also a rate,

24:18 a route forward

24:19 for building effective comprehensive registers for property tax purposes,

24:23 or.

24:24 Is there a need for slightly different approaches

24:26 to building comprehensive property registers for tax purposes?

24:30 But if so,

24:32 can we also find ways that that property tax process

24:35 can reinforce

24:36 the land administrative process we've just heard about by strengthening tenure

24:40 and longer term land administration planning?

24:43 Uh,

24:44 as I do that,

24:44 I'll just say also it's nice to see in the room a lot of friends

24:47 who have contributed to some of the thinking I'm summarizing here,

24:50 uh,

24:51 people like Sioe,

24:51 Rosetta,

24:52 Kevin,

24:53 uh,

24:53 others,

24:54 uh,

24:54 Colette,

24:54 uh,

24:55 who we've talked about over the years about some of these ideas.

24:58 Um,

24:59 so I'm gonna start

25:00 from property tax and then try to bring it together with land administration.

25:03 Um,

25:04 when we think about the challenge of property taxation.

25:06 The fundamental building block

25:09 of property taxation is having a comprehensive map

25:11 of all properties in a given jurisdiction for tax purposes.

25:16 Yet,

25:17 we know that in most low-income countries,

25:19 those property registers are hugely incomplete

25:23 and are also undermined by unreliable addressing systems that

25:26 make it difficult to identify those properties in practice.

25:31 The effect of those incomplete property registers is

25:33 property tax systems that have limited revenue potential,

25:36 but perhaps even more importantly,

25:38 are hugely inequitable

25:40 because some properties are asked to pay,

25:42 while others remain outside the system.

25:44 And in a world where only some people are covered,

25:46 it's almost impossible to build a widely trusted system,

25:50 one that's viewed as fair

25:51 and which will and one which will enjoy the political support needed

25:55 to expand and flourish.

25:57 And so the central question I want to pose

26:00 is what might be more appropriate strategies

26:03 for registering properties for tax purposes

26:06 in order to ensure comprehensive registers

26:09 in the context of low-income countries.

26:11 But then in turn to ask,

26:12 how can such strategies be designed in a way that also

26:16 reinforces efforts to build more effective land titling and land administration

26:21 within those same countries.

26:24 I want to start from what I think has been the traditional approach

26:27 to this challenge of building property tax registers.

26:31 And this is what we've called in our work a cadaster first or titling first

26:35 approach.

26:36 The idea here is that governments first.

26:39 should register and title all land

26:42 to identify formal plot boundaries,

26:44 ownership,

26:44 and so forth.

26:46 And once land has been formally titled and registered,

26:49 it can then be eligible for taxation within the property tax system.

26:54 The challenge with these methods

26:56 is that in almost all countries,

26:57 as we've heard from Simon,

26:59 property,

27:00 property cadasters,

27:01 land titling is hugely incomplete.

27:04 But if cadasters are incomplete,

27:06 and you're running a cadaster first property tax system,

27:08 that means your property tax system is incomplete,

27:11 and it won't function either.

27:13 And so that raises the question,

27:15 how can we move beyond that to find cost-effective,

27:18 rapid ways of building property tax registers

27:21 to ensure

27:23 comprehensive systems.

27:26 I mean,

27:26 the importance of that question reflects the enormous costs

27:30 of the existing status quo

27:32 in which incomplete cadasters lead to incomplete property tax systems.

27:36 The obvious cost is limited revenue potential

27:39 and huge levels of inequality and a lack of public trust

27:43 within property tax systems.

27:45 The second consequence though is we also forego the possibility

27:49 of leveraging information

27:51 from building effective property tax systems.

27:54 In order to also strengthen effective land administration

27:58 and land titling efforts.

27:59 So we want to see if we can find that synergy

28:02 between property taxation and land administration.

28:06 So I would suggest that there's sort of two ways we might think about

28:10 how to build more comprehensive

28:13 property registers for property tax purposes.

28:17 Right.

28:17 The first is

28:19 to stick with existing cadaster first approaches,

28:22 but make them work better,

28:24 using the kind of fit for purpose approaches that we just heard

28:27 from Simon in the video.

28:29 Right?

28:29 So it may be that if we can bring down the cost

28:32 of building national cadasters

28:34 and building universal land titles,

28:37 then the cadaster can begin to act as a viable foundation

28:41 for comprehensive property taxation as well.

28:44 And,

28:44 so fit for purpose land Administration

28:46 may hold the key to more effective property taxation as well.

28:50 But the alternative possibility is that while fit for purpose land administration

28:54 makes building capacitors relatively more accessible,

28:58 it's still not quite the right answer

29:00 for building comprehensive property taxation.

29:03 And if that's the case,

29:04 then we might need strategies for building comprehensive property tax registers

29:09 that are slightly different,

29:10 even more simplified,

29:12 even more rapid,

29:13 but which in turn can be linked back to the challenge

29:16 of building effective land administration.

29:20 So I want to describe to you

29:22 how we've thought about what we have called property tax first approaches.

29:26 These approaches that start from the property tax system,

29:29 and then reflect on the relative advantages

29:31 and drawbacks of these different models.

29:33 So when we think about property tax first approaches,

29:36 it's really just 3 things,

29:38 uh,

29:38 at the top of this slide.

29:40 Step 1

29:41 is map

29:42 and address and measure

29:45 all properties or land plots in a given jurisdiction

29:48 using GIS

29:50 and either satellite or drone or other aerial imagery.

29:53 We know now that you can do this quickly with modern technologies,

29:56 right?

29:57 Simple,

29:58 fit for purpose mapping of plots and build properties is a straightforward,

30:02 quick,

30:03 low-cost exercise now.

30:05 Uh,

30:05 of course,

30:05 that wasn't true,

30:06 not that long ago.

30:07 Having mapped all of those rooftops and plots and measured them.

30:11 Actually

30:12 execute some kind of ground truthing exercise using surveyors

30:16 to identify key building types,

30:17 key characteristics of those properties that can be used for evaluation purposes,

30:22 and ensure the broad integrity of your data.

30:24 And then final step,

30:25 and this is key here to this model,

30:28 is sidestep the need for land titles and ownership information

30:32 by simply delivering tax bills

30:34 to the identifiable property with GIS coordinates with a picture.

30:39 And address it to the owner of the property,

30:41 whether you know their name or not.

30:43 In turn,

30:43 if they don't comply,

30:45 you still don't know who the owner is,

30:46 but levy penalties on the property itself.

30:50 Because we've always assumed

30:51 that you need a cadaster

30:53 in order to know the owner,

30:55 in order to be able to tax the owner.

30:57 But because properties themselves are visible and immovable,

31:00 you can tax the property

31:02 without actually knowing the name of the owner.

31:04 Right?

31:04 And so that opens up the possibility of a sort of shortcut

31:07 to building comprehensive tax registers much more quickly.

31:11 As I'll say in a minute,

31:12 that doesn't mean that knowing the owner isn't valuable.

31:14 It's just to say that there are paths to doing this more quickly.

31:19 This in turn has the potential,

31:20 I'd suggest,

31:21 to dramatically improve short-term outcomes in raising revenue,

31:25 but also potentially for land administration.

31:28 It allows for the rapid identification of properties

31:31 and making sure property tax registers are comprehensive.

31:34 Using aerial imagery means you can very easily fail,

31:36 make sure you don't miss anything.

31:38 And in turn then expands revenue raising,

31:40 but also equity

31:42 in those systems,

31:43 while also giving greater autonomy to local governments

31:46 in taking the lead in building property tax registers.

31:50 It tends to be local governments

31:52 who benefit from property tax revenues,

31:54 but national governments

31:56 who are responsible for building national cadasters,

31:59 making those who need the revenue

32:01 dependent on other agencies to make it possible.

32:04 This kind of approach can empower revenue agencies

32:07 to also map and register properties for tax purposes.

32:11 To take one example of this kind of method,

32:13 one of the projects our program has supported was in Freetown in Sierra Leone.

32:17 In that context,

32:18 we were able to GIS map.

32:20 And value,

32:22 150,000 properties in the city

32:24 in less than 6 months

32:26 and at a cost of less than $5 per property.

32:29 You can see the difference with that between that and what Simon described.

32:33 Right?

32:34 Simon described a cost of $10 per property

32:36 for assigning title,

32:37 that's separate from the challenge of valuation,

32:40 and he described that as a challenge

32:42 within a generation,

32:44 as opposed to being true within 6 months.

32:46 So this is an even more simplified kind

32:48 of approach to building those comprehensive registers.

32:51 But the key idea here,

32:53 but the one that I think is much less developed,

32:55 much less explored,

32:56 the one we hope to spark a bit with this discussion,

32:59 is the idea that doing this doesn't

33:01 necessarily undermine land administration and titling,

33:03 but instead can feed into it.

33:06 Because there's a world in which

33:07 building comprehensive registers for property taxation

33:10 and empowering local governments to gather data about

33:14 properties in their jurisdiction.

33:16 Can then feed into

33:18 strengthening land administration and land titling

33:20 by strengthening incentives

33:22 for property owners to register their properties,

33:25 by strengthening incentives and funding

33:28 for governments to register entitled properties,

33:31 and by improving the quality and updating of data collection over time.

33:36 So let me finish by saying a little bit

33:38 about trade-offs between these different kinds of approaches.

33:42 Right,

33:43 the fit for purpose approach

33:45 to land administration

33:46 has important advantages

33:48 as a way of getting towards better

33:50 property tax registration and property tax systems.

33:54 Relative to conventional approaches,

33:56 as we heard,

33:57 it entails much lower cost,

33:59 much increased speed,

34:00 and it does mean that you gather comprehensive ownership information and

34:04 provide security of tenure to those properties that have been titled.

34:08 In a perfect world,

34:09 building a cadaster

34:10 before you raise property taxes makes a lot of sense.

34:14 But in practice,

34:15 there are significant drawbacks to relying on

34:18 that kind of cadaster first approach,

34:20 even when it's fit for purpose.

34:22 One is about time and cost.

34:25 Fit for purpose land administration is much faster

34:28 than conventional approaches to titling land.

34:31 But it's still much slower and much more expensive

34:34 than the kind of simplified approach to property mapping for tax purposes

34:38 that I've just described,

34:40 because it still requires identifying clear boundaries,

34:43 identifying owners,

34:44 going through the registration process,

34:46 and so on.

34:48 Can,

34:48 are the resources available in the short term

34:51 to deliver that comprehensive cadaster?

34:53 If not,

34:54 can local governments afford to wait that long

34:57 before having comprehensive and viable property tax systems

35:01 to drive improved outcomes in urban development?

35:04 There are also questions about incentives and corruption.

35:08 Imagine a world in which

35:10 once you register your property on the cadaster,

35:13 you become eligible for property taxation.

35:15 But as long as you remain unregistered,

35:18 you don't need to pay.

35:20 All the incentives are against

35:22 getting property title.

35:24 In turn,

35:25 in a system in which

35:27 having title

35:28 is a precondition for paying taxes,

35:31 there's an easy loophole for corruption,

35:33 where people try to bribe their way

35:35 out of ending up on the property tax register.

35:38 That's much harder when you have a universal comprehensive map

35:41 that tells you if anyone's missing.

35:43 So in both ways,

35:44 this kind of approach potentially improves incentives

35:48 for effective land mapping

35:49 and registration.

35:51 Finally,

35:51 it gives local control

35:53 over the process to align control with revenue raising

35:56 and strengthens the role of local governments in updating data over time.

36:02 That said,

36:03 property tax first approaches have their own drawbacks,

36:06 and we should be straightforward about those because it speaks to how to build

36:10 the best kind of system.

36:11 The first is,

36:12 in a property tax system,

36:13 property tax first approach,

36:15 as I've described it,

36:16 you won't always know who the owners of properties are.

36:19 You're relying on delivering a bill to the property

36:22 and on the fact that it will then get to the owner.

36:24 There are reasonable reasons to think you're more likely to get compliance

36:27 if you can name the owner,

36:29 and if you can pursue the person,

36:30 not just the property.

36:31 Again,

36:32 knowing who the owner is,

36:33 is clearly

36:34 an advantage.

36:35 In turn,

36:36 if you know who the owner is,

36:38 that data is more valuable to you,

36:40 because you can use it for rental income taxes,

36:42 for identifying wealthy taxpayers,

36:44 and for all kinds of other purposes.

36:46 So knowing the owner is useful,

36:49 but it may not be necessary.

36:51 And that comes to the second point.

36:52 I think one of the concerns that's levied against

36:55 the kind of property tax first approach I've described

36:58 is that it could undermine

37:00 the drive for

37:02 more effective land titling and land administration.

37:04 You might be building two separate and parallel systems,

37:07 doing the same thing in different ways.

37:10 And so it becomes essential in the long term

37:12 that these two systems speak to each other.

37:15 If you are gathering all of this information for property tax purposes,

37:19 quick,

37:20 simple,

37:20 but effective,

37:21 that information needs to be gathered in a similar way

37:24 and shared with those who are building

37:27 longer term systems of land administration and pursuing land titling.

37:31 You want to leverage that local information

37:33 to strengthen that national system

37:35 as well.

37:36 If we can do that effectively,

37:38 then we effectively strengthen incentives

37:40 for land administration.

37:42 Uh,

37:43 strengthen incentives for registration,

37:45 strengthen revenue flows coming from land registration

37:48 and titling,

37:50 and try to improve the overall collection of data to feed into these systems.

37:55 But this,

37:55 I think,

37:55 is very much the next frontier in this discussion.

37:58 It's actually bringing these two fields together

38:00 to have those complementarities in practice,

38:03 because I think in practice,

38:04 they often remain separate.

38:06 But I think the potential is clearly there

38:08 to leverage simplified approaches to property taxation.

38:12 As a positive input towards

38:14 improvements in land administration as well.

38:17 So to conclude very quickly,

38:19 uh,

38:19 the core of this argument,

38:21 uh,

38:21 I think there's a growing understanding of the importance

38:23 of fit for purpose approaches to both land titling

38:27 and to property taxation.

38:29 For property taxation,

38:29 it's not just about land titling,

38:31 but about a broader range of activities that can be simplified

38:35 to fit the particular context of lower-income countries.

38:38 Something we'll hear more about among the next discussions.

38:41 Right?

38:42 Fit for purpose land administration holds potential also for property taxation

38:47 by strengthening land administration.

38:49 But it still poses challenge for those trying to build better property tax systems

38:55 because of costs,

38:56 timelines,

38:56 incentives,

38:57 administrative structures,

38:59 and so on.

39:00 Property tax first approaches potentially simplify the drive

39:04 towards better property tax systems today

39:06 at a time when cities need revenues

39:09 to fund the challenges of urbanization,

39:12 but can also be designed in a way that feeds into

39:15 trying to strengthen land administration and titling

39:18 as well.

39:19 So I'll stop there.

39:20 uh,

39:20 thank you very much for your attention.

39:29 me.

39:31 OK.

39:32 Thank you,

39:33 Wilson,

39:34 for this,

39:34 uh,

39:35 very

39:36 passionate

39:37 presentation.

39:39 And,

39:39 um,

39:41 and,

39:41 uh,

39:42 now,

39:42 I think uh we'll hear from our three panelists some reflections on this.

39:48 Uh,

39:48 let me introduce them first.

39:51 Um,

39:51 we have at the very,

39:53 uh,

39:54 left,

39:54 on my left,

39:55 uh,

39:56 Diane Dumashi,

39:57 the president of the International Federation of Surveyors,

40:00 which is a federation representing over 100 national member associations

40:05 from the whole range of professional fields related to land.

40:08 And property surveying.

40:11 Diane has expertise on land governance,

40:13 particularly in Africa,

40:14 land tenure,

40:15 land management,

40:15 natural resources,

40:17 water rights,

40:17 gender equality,

40:19 and infrastructure regeneration,

40:20 and many other fields that for time's sake we are not going to list.

40:26 Uh,

40:26 Diane is also director of Dumashi Limited and she's part of several boards

40:30 of professionals including the steering committee

40:32 of the Global Land Tool Network.

40:35 We then have,

40:37 uh,

40:37 Enid Slacks,

40:38 the director of the Institute of Municipal Finance and Governance

40:42 at the School of Cities at the University of Toronto,

40:45 which focuses on the fiscal health and governance challenges faced by

40:49 large cities and city regions in Canada and around the world.

40:54 And it has authored many papers and publication on property taxes,

40:58 municipal fiscal health,

41:01 intergovernmental transfer,

41:02 development charges,

41:04 financing municipal infrastructure,

41:06 and metropolitan governance.

41:09 Uh,

41:10 she's on the advisory board of the International

41:12 Property Tax Institute and chairs the advisory board

41:16 of the Local Public Sector Alliance.

41:19 In 2012,

41:20 she was awarded the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal for her work on cities.

41:25 Welcome.

41:27 And last but definitely not least,

41:29 uh,

41:29 Rahul Awashti,

41:31 um,

41:32 is a lead governance specialist and co-leads the domestic

41:36 resource mobilization Global Solution Group at the World Bank

41:40 where he is the focal point for property taxation.

41:43 Rajuul is based in Addis Ababa and leads

41:45 the World Bank governance agenda for Ethiopia,

41:48 Sudan,

41:48 South Sudan,

41:49 and tax reform in East African countries.

41:53 He has 15 years of experience in the bank,

41:55 leading tax reform programs in Africa,

41:57 South Asia,

41:58 Latin American and Caribbean,

42:00 Europe and Central Asia,

42:01 and before joining the bank,

42:03 uh,

42:03 worked as an advisor to the Finance Minister of India.

42:07 Uh,

42:07 Raju has several publication of his account,

42:10 including co-authoring the bank's flag

42:12 flagship Strengthening domestic revenue mobilization,

42:16 moving from theory to practice in low and middle-income countries.

42:20 So please join us and give a round of applause to our panelists to start with.

42:30 OK,

42:31 so.

42:33 First,

42:34 uh,

42:34 I think,

42:35 uh,

42:36 quite,

42:36 um,

42:37 smooth transition to perhaps more

42:41 difficult questions coming later,

42:44 uh,

42:44 you know,

42:45 starting with Diane,

42:46 uh,

42:46 maybe a first,

42:47 um,

42:49 reaction and consideration on these two presentations

42:52 and the diff the merits and shortcomings from your perspective.

42:57 Thank you,

42:58 Umretta.

42:59 Good afternoon,

43:00 ladies and gentlemen.

43:01 Um,

43:01 I am hoping my voice will actually hold out for this session,

43:05 but I'll do my best.

43:06 The first thing to say

43:08 is I'm sitting on this panel as a critical friend,

43:12 because I sit there with the knowledge of fit for purpose approach,

43:16 but the property tax first

43:19 approach

43:19 is relatively new to me,

43:21 uh,

43:21 and so I'm going to be the one that perhaps just flags up some ideas and thoughts.

43:27 So,

43:27 um,

43:28 just wanted though to,

43:29 because there's a lot of people in this room that know fit for purpose.

43:32 I'm not about to go into detail there,

43:35 but just a couple of things to mention that Simon

43:37 perhaps didn't say in a in a

43:41 a theme,

43:41 and that is

43:42 fit for purpose

43:44 is all about

43:46 the land parcel

43:47 that links

43:49 the system

43:50 to

43:50 people.

43:51 So it's a people relationship.

43:54 That's what it is about.

43:56 And uh you know,

43:57 you know the framework,

43:58 we heard about that,

43:59 uh,

44:00 but that

44:01 it's been around for about 10 years now,

44:04 from conception to

44:05 listening to Simon,

44:07 um I think it was 2014

44:09 when it was launched in the in the World Bank and Jolene I see is nodding,

44:13 so

44:13 cos you were certainly around then for this.

44:16 So,

44:17 there is

44:18 an awful lot of evidence base that sits with fit for purpose.

44:23 This people

44:24 to land

44:25 relationship,

44:26 and I,

44:27 I'll underscore that for a good reason.

44:29 But just quickly to say,

44:31 it has guiding principles,

44:34 uh,

44:34 not absolutely

44:36 rock solid.

44:37 You that you will do A,

44:39 B,

44:39 or C

44:41 in order to be flexible,

44:42 as we all know.

44:44 So,

44:45 I,

44:45 I started,

44:46 uh,

44:46 when I was listening to you,

44:47 Wilson,

44:48 I did scribble some thoughts down and they're a little random,

44:51 but

44:52 hopefully they'll they'll come together later.

44:54 Uh,

44:55 and,

44:55 and the first thing is,

44:56 of course,

44:57 we're all starting

44:59 at the same point.

45:00 The tapestry is,

45:02 it's not working quick enough,

45:04 uh,

45:04 uh,

45:05 land administration.

45:06 We know that,

45:07 and that's what both of these approaches

45:10 are trying to overcome.

45:12 And

45:13 I suppose,

45:14 I think it's fair to say the cadaster approach,

45:16 as you call it.

45:18 Doesn't get the income stream flowing

45:21 immediately,

45:22 but the whole concept

45:24 of the people relationship

45:27 is that they

45:28 get the land

45:30 registered,

45:31 uh,

45:31 be it customary or not,

45:34 and that they then

45:36 have a part in society,

45:38 gain businesses,

45:39 livelihoods,

45:39 and guess what?

45:40 Income starts flowing

45:42 and then the taxation would follow.

45:44 I,

45:44 I hear what you say though,

45:46 Wilson,

45:46 later on.

45:48 So,

45:48 the pragmatism that you mentioned,

45:51 uh,

45:52 mapping,

45:52 identification is exactly the same for fit fit for purpose land administration.

45:58 Uh,

45:58 the ground truthing is there too.

46:01 So again,

46:01 the two approaches,

46:02 they're still together,

46:04 they haven't gone in a separate way.

46:07 But then,

46:08 to start

46:09 mentioning perhaps that

46:12 you take a,

46:12 a tax

46:14 on a property that you haven't got a title for.

46:17 Um,

46:18 I just wonder

46:19 about the sensibility of that

46:22 if I was that person.

46:24 You know,

46:24 I'm really chuffed if I've got fit for purpose land administration,

46:28 uh,

46:28 situation,

46:29 and I think I'd rather go that way,

46:30 but,

46:30 you know,

46:30 I,

46:31 this is the debate.

46:33 Um,

46:34 so,

46:34 you know,

46:34 the aerial imagery you mentioned,

46:36 obviously so does fit for purpose.

46:39 I also,

46:40 er,

46:41 when I,

46:41 I,

46:41 there was,

46:41 I'm afraid,

46:42 uh Wilson,

46:42 I've only read one paper,

46:44 but there's the issue about value,

46:46 and I understand,

46:46 and

46:47 I'm sure you'll clarify later,

46:49 I understand that the value is based

46:51 just on

46:52 the block

46:53 that you see from the aerial imagery.

46:56 And

46:57 whilst I'm not steeped in valuation,

47:00 uh,

47:00 value isn't just about the external envelope of a building,

47:05 um,

47:05 and I don't need to tell you that on this,

47:07 this panel here.

47:08 So,

47:08 you know,

47:09 there,

47:09 there's just a question in my mind

47:11 over that.

47:12 And

47:13 what I see and hear

47:15 is that,

47:16 yes,

47:16 it is empowering,

47:18 but it's empowering of local

47:20 governance.

47:21 Uh,

47:21 don't have a problem with that,

47:22 you know,

47:22 we've got local government needs to

47:24 be empowered and,

47:25 and,

47:25 and move the whole agenda on,

47:28 but what about the people?

47:30 How are you going to empower them?

47:32 Uh,

47:32 is this really a top slice to rent?

47:35 I,

47:35 I don't know.

47:36 So,

47:37 yeah,

47:38 we're all after the perfect world,

47:40 and we all realize the practical world,

47:43 and

47:43 I suppose,

47:44 uh,

47:45 she says,

47:45 trying to get to one of the first comments I wrote down,

47:48 I suppose for me,

47:51 because both approaches need this identification

47:54 and and the people sitting on the land.

47:58 It's not an either or discussion

48:02 in my mind.

48:03 I think there is something in between the two.

48:07 call it hybrid,

48:08 call it what you will.

48:10 Um,

48:11 and both support land governance and sustainable land governance.

48:15 A couple of posing questions as I come to a close,

48:19 is that

48:20 if then

48:21 you can tax government local governments can tax that property,

48:26 so it is probably in an urban area,

48:28 or is there a shack on a

48:29 a a rural farmstead,

48:30 I don't know.

48:32 If it's uh taxing the

48:34 property,

48:35 then

48:36 that assumes

48:38 that

48:39 local government is actually

48:42 um recognizing tenure,

48:44 even though you haven't registered it.

48:46 Uh,

48:46 and so therefore if it's recognized,

48:49 does this mean that person

48:51 can go out and get a mortgage,

48:53 for instance.

48:54 So I just see lots of gaps in this sofa,

48:57 you know,

48:57 things going

48:59 down

49:00 the,

49:00 the side of the sofa

49:01 cushions,

49:02 and,

49:02 and it comes from,

49:03 you know,

49:03 not fully understanding perhaps what you said,

49:05 although thank you,

49:07 Wilson for that,

49:08 um,

49:08 presentation.

49:10 Uh,

49:11 yeah.

49:12 Remember,

49:12 my closing word,

49:13 remember in the 1700s,

49:16 uh,

49:16 the good old

49:18 royal kings of England,

49:20 when they wanted to go to war,

49:22 taxed

49:23 the land,

49:24 uh,

49:24 and that's how tax came around.

49:26 So,

49:27 uh,

49:28 yeah,

49:28 I'll leave it there.

49:29 Critical friend though,

49:30 Wilson,

49:31 I promise you.

49:33 Thank you,

49:34 Diane.

49:35 Uh,

49:35 I think any of you who have an idea to panel beat,

49:38 you know now where to go for

49:41 difficult questions.

49:43 Um,

49:44 thanks.

49:45 So let's,

49:46 let's move now to Enid,

49:48 um,

49:49 your first,

49:50 uh,

49:50 reflections on,

49:51 on these two approaches also from your perspective and professional expertise.

49:56 Um,

49:57 well,

49:57 thank you very much and,

49:59 uh,

49:59 thank you,

50:00 uh,

50:00 for the invitation to be on this panel.

50:03 Um,

50:03 I do have a few friends in the audience,

50:05 and they know I'm

50:06 a property tax person,

50:08 not necessarily a land titling person.

50:11 Uh,

50:11 so of course I'm gonna say property tax first,

50:14 although I'm,

50:15 I'm,

50:16 um,

50:16 uh,

50:17 uh,

50:17 I,

50:18 I really liked the way,

50:20 uh,

50:20 Will finished his talk by saying you really do

50:23 have to do these things together

50:25 and talk to each other,

50:26 and I'll say a bit more about that later.

50:29 Um,

50:30 but,

50:30 but I go for the property tax first approach,

50:33 not necessarily because,

50:35 um,

50:36 it,

50:36 it's,

50:37 it's better at,

50:38 at,

50:38 at getting,

50:39 uh,

50:39 land titling,

50:40 but

50:41 because municipal local governments really need

50:44 to have a good source of revenue,

50:47 and the property tax is a good source of revenue for local governments.

50:52 Uh,

50:53 let me just give you a few reasons,

50:55 um.

50:56 There's a connection between what local government services

51:00 are provided and the value of your property.

51:03 So for example,

51:04 if,

51:04 if there's a road next to your property,

51:06 if there's lighting,

51:08 uh,

51:08 if there's a park,

51:09 if there are any amenities that the local government has provided,

51:12 that will increase your property value.

51:14 Isn't that a good way

51:16 to pay for it by taxing

51:18 based on the value of your property?

51:20 Uh,

51:21 another reason the property tax is a good tax

51:23 for local government is that property doesn't move.

51:26 You know,

51:26 if you tax people's income,

51:28 they can leave and go into another jurisdiction.

51:30 You can't actually move your property,

51:33 so it's a good source of revenue

51:35 for local governments.

51:37 Generally,

51:37 the revenues are stable and predictable.

51:40 We've certainly seen the economy change,

51:43 income

51:43 tax revenues change,

51:45 value added tax revenue change,

51:47 but

51:48 property taxes tend to remain

51:50 stable and predictable.

51:53 It's a very visible tax.

51:55 People know what they pay in property taxes.

51:57 They generally don't know what they pay in income taxes.

52:00 They may know what they pay in value added taxes,

52:03 12%,

52:03 13%,

52:04 but

52:05 over the course of a year,

52:06 people don't know what they pay in value added taxes,

52:09 but they do know what they pay in property tax,

52:11 uh,

52:12 whether it's on the owner or

52:13 just on the property,

52:15 there,

52:15 there is an amount that,

52:16 that's very visible,

52:17 but that makes local governments very accountable.

52:20 I paid so much in my property tax and the street lights aren't lit.

52:24 You know,

52:25 there's a,

52:25 there's an accountability there,

52:27 uh,

52:27 that makes it a good tax.

52:30 It's a fairly progressive tax.

52:32 I think the tax relative to income

52:34 on average is,

52:36 is,

52:36 um,

52:37 uh,

52:38 higher,

52:38 um,

52:40 on,

52:40 on,

52:41 uh,

52:41 high income households.

52:42 I mean there are some people who think it's a regressive tax.

52:45 I think on average

52:47 richer people live in more expensive homes.

52:50 Uh,

52:51 so I think it's a progressive tax.

52:53 Um,

52:54 economists have written that it's least

52:56 the least detrimental tax to economic growth

53:00 because it doesn't really affect

53:02 people's working,

53:03 their consumption,

53:05 um,

53:06 and so it's the least.

53:08 Detrimental to economic growth

53:10 and there's potential for local autonomy and accountability.

53:13 So

53:14 if it's a local government property tax,

53:16 uh,

53:17 that empowers,

53:17 we talked about empowering local governments,

53:20 property tax is a good revenue,

53:22 uh,

53:22 to empower local governments.

53:25 Um,

53:26 so the property tax,

53:27 that's why I'm going for property tax first,

53:29 because we really do need good property tax systems,

53:34 um,

53:35 around the world to finance local government services

53:38 and infrastructure.

53:40 As an academic economist,

53:42 we've written many times about what that ideal property tax looks like.

53:46 So you know all of this,

53:48 you know,

53:48 all the properties are registered and we know all the owners and,

53:51 and,

53:52 uh,

53:52 there's no exemptions everybody pays all the properties are included

53:57 we don't provide tax incentives

53:59 we use market value because that's the gold standard

54:02 um in reality,

54:04 um,

54:04 I've learned over the years having written all that for so many years

54:08 that in reality that's not practical,

54:11 you know,

54:11 a fit for purpose.

54:14 Property tax is more practical in a lot of countries.

54:18 And,

54:19 uh,

54:19 you know,

54:20 Will and some of his,

54:21 his other work has written about a,

54:24 a good enough property tax or a fit for purpose property tax.

54:28 And,

54:28 and what do we mean?

54:29 Well,

54:29 again,

54:31 um,

54:33 both Simon and Will talked about,

54:35 you know,

54:35 it's great to have a cadaster first before we

54:38 implement a property tax,

54:40 but it may not be practical.

54:41 It takes a long time.

54:43 It's very costly

54:45 and as Will mentioned also there's very little involvement of local governments.

54:50 I mean,

54:51 local governments are the ones from a property tax point of view,

54:54 um,

54:55 who,

54:55 who know

54:56 the properties,

54:57 who,

54:57 who know who's there,

54:58 who knows,

54:59 who know what these properties look like,

55:01 but a national cataster

55:03 is at a government level far removed,

55:05 uh,

55:06 from local communities,

55:07 so,

55:08 um.

55:10 Ideally,

55:11 again,

55:11 you'd want a catastrophe first,

55:12 but,

55:13 but it may not be possible.

55:15 Um,

55:16 and,

55:16 and we'll also talked about,

55:18 you know,

55:18 when you go property tax first,

55:21 uh,

55:21 you can use technology to assist you.

55:23 We talked about drones and,

55:25 um,

55:26 aerial imagery and,

55:28 you know,

55:28 all of the things,

55:29 uh,

55:30 you can do,

55:31 um.

55:33 And this can be done fairly quickly.

55:34 It may not be fully accurate,

55:37 um,

55:38 we may not find the owner.

55:39 It is not perfect,

55:41 but it is a way to get started.

55:43 It is a way for people to

55:46 learn what a property tax is,

55:48 to understand that that property tax is being used to pay for local services,

55:53 um.

55:55 You know,

55:55 we,

55:55 we can,

55:56 we can get to a better system,

55:57 but we have to,

55:58 we have to start somewhere and we can't start with a

56:01 perfect system.

56:02 Uh,

56:02 we talked a little bit about value.

56:04 Diane talked a little bit about value.

56:06 So,

56:07 you know,

56:07 for so many years I wrote market value,

56:10 that's the fairest system,

56:12 right?

56:12 Um,

56:13 it,

56:13 it's,

56:14 uh,

56:14 the most progressive,

56:16 it,

56:16 it reflects the services you're receiving because I said they were,

56:20 they get capitalized into the value of your property.

56:23 Um,

56:25 but as you know,

56:26 market value is defined as the price that would be struck between

56:29 a willing buyer and a willing seller in an arm's length transaction.

56:33 Great,

56:34 but what if the property hasn't sold or isn't selling?

56:37 Then you have to estimate it.

56:39 We call it a presumptive tax.

56:41 You have to estimate the value of that property,

56:44 and that,

56:45 as many of you who are valuers in this room

56:48 know,

56:49 is a very sophisticated system.

56:51 And it requires a lot of resources and a lot of manpower,

56:55 person power,

56:56 I should say,

56:57 um,

56:57 a lot of resources.

56:59 So,

56:59 yes,

56:59 that may be.

57:02 The gold standard,

57:03 but we,

57:04 we can't use it everywhere and,

57:07 uh,

57:07 many years ago I talked about an area-based system,

57:10 a modified area-based system.

57:12 Uh,

57:12 Will talks about a points-based system,

57:15 uh,

57:16 where you,

57:17 again,

57:17 you do that aerial imagery,

57:18 you get a sense of the size of the property

57:21 and you add some factors that you know

57:23 will affect the value of the property,

57:25 like how big is it?

57:27 Um,

57:28 what's the location,

57:29 um,

57:30 uh,

57:30 what's around it,

57:31 you know,

57:32 you,

57:32 you can sort of

57:33 put in a number of factors

57:36 that you add to the area,

57:37 and over time you can make that more sophisticated.

57:41 Um,

57:41 I used to say 10 years,

57:42 now I hear it's 20 or 30 years,

57:45 decades,

57:45 not one decade,

57:47 uh,

57:47 but turning that system into something closer to market value.

57:51 Um,

57:52 but to think that you can start with market value,

57:55 um,

57:55 is,

57:55 is much more,

57:56 more difficult.

57:58 Um,

57:59 so

58:00 all of these things can be updated when the circumstances change.

58:04 We can have what we call continuous improvement.

58:06 We start with an area-based system,

58:08 we can slowly move that up and make it more sophisticated.

58:12 Um,

58:13 at the same time

58:14 we're building capacity,

58:16 so over time we can build up capacity and the resources,

58:20 uh,

58:20 to be able to come up with a,

58:21 a more sophisticated system.

58:23 I think Simon said

58:25 as little as possible,

58:26 but I think

58:27 he meant as little as possible,

58:29 as much as necessary,

58:31 um,

58:31 at this stage.

58:32 So

58:33 again,

58:34 uh,

58:34 property tax first because property tax is so important.

58:37 A fit for purpose property tax.

58:40 Uh,

58:41 but I still agree with Will that the two systems,

58:43 the land,

58:44 uh,

58:44 uh,

58:44 registration and

58:46 the property tax first are,

58:48 are both needed.

58:50 Thank you,

58:51 thank you,

58:52 Eid.

58:52 I think,

58:52 uh,

58:53 this was a,

58:54 a very powerful pitch as well

58:58 for the property tax.

58:59 First,

58:59 I have a lot of questions,

59:01 but I will hold them and,

59:03 uh,

59:03 passing over to,

59:05 to Raul for your reflection and,

59:08 uh,

59:08 you know,

59:09 perspective on this,

59:10 um,

59:11 maybe we'll source the mic from the other side.

59:14 Thanks.

59:19 Thank you very much,

59:20 um,

59:21 um Breta.

59:22 So it's,

59:23 uh,

59:23 it's really easy to come in at the,

59:25 at the end of a,

59:26 a group of very erudite speakers.

59:28 I don't have much to add.

59:30 Um,

59:31 of course,

59:31 I,

59:32 as,

59:33 as,

59:33 uh,

59:34 Umreta introduced me,

59:35 she mentioned I also work on tax issues.

59:38 So again,

59:39 I'm going to be a votary for the property tax first approach.

59:43 Uh,

59:43 just with the,

59:44 maybe give a couple of,

59:45 uh,

59:46 11,

59:47 from the tax law perspective,

59:50 um,

59:51 which is that

59:53 even,

59:53 um.

59:55 Illegal income

59:56 is taxable.

59:58 So,

59:58 even if you don't hold a title,

1:00:01 you know,

1:00:02 there,

1:00:02 there's nothing to,

1:00:04 in the,

1:00:04 in the overall

1:00:05 legal framework to prevent.

1:00:08 Tax being collected,

1:00:10 the tax is on the property,

1:00:12 which is the tax base,

1:00:13 not on the person,

1:00:15 whichever

1:00:15 person is occupying or using the property

1:00:19 is the one who is liable to pay,

1:00:21 uh,

1:00:22 in the case of,

1:00:23 for example,

1:00:24 if I'm a,

1:00:25 if I'm leasing a property as a tenant,

1:00:28 I wouldn't pay the,

1:00:29 I may not pay the property tax.

1:00:31 It depends on the agreement with the landlord.

1:00:34 Uh,

1:00:34 I might be,

1:00:35 I might pay if I have an agreement with the landlord that I would pay

1:00:38 the property tax.

1:00:39 So I think the,

1:00:40 the legal issue here is,

1:00:42 is not an impediment.

1:00:45 Uh,

1:00:45 the fact that I don't have a title

1:00:48 somehow entitles me

1:00:50 to not pay the property tax,

1:00:53 despite the fact that I'm using all the

1:00:55 services and facilities that.

1:00:59 A local government's providing

1:01:01 for the owner or occupier of that property,

1:01:04 whoever they may be.

1:01:05 So I think,

1:01:06 I think that the legal position is pretty clear on this.

1:01:09 I just want to give you a couple of numbers from

1:01:14 Uh,

1:01:14 from Zambia.

1:01:17 So,

1:01:18 they had a,

1:01:19 they had a census in 2022,

1:01:21 so it's very recent.

1:01:22 And again,

1:01:24 there's an impediment,

1:01:25 a legal impediment in Zambia,

1:01:26 which is that

1:01:28 the Ratings Act does not apply.

1:01:30 To those

1:01:32 properties that are untitled or unregistered or unnumbered.

1:01:36 So for example,

1:01:37 in the city of Lusaka,

1:01:39 the population is about 2.2 million people.

1:01:44 With the,

1:01:44 uh,

1:01:45 the

1:01:45 average household size is estimated at 4.5.

1:01:49 So you're talking about

1:01:51 just residential.

1:01:53 An estimated 489,000+

1:01:58 properties,

1:01:59 residential properties.

1:02:01 The ones that are on the

1:02:03 property roll.

1:02:06 76,044.

1:02:09 So the gap is a huge

1:02:11 410,000.

1:02:13 So 5 or 6 times

1:02:16 the number of properties that are on the valuation roll

1:02:19 are actually the ones that should be.

1:02:21 So this is a huge gap,

1:02:23 and this is all across Zambia for all the cities and

1:02:26 all the city councils and municipal councils across the country.

1:02:29 So when you have these kinds of gaps.

1:02:33 How is Lusaka City Council expected to raise the revenues that are

1:02:37 necessary not only to provide for the day to day maintenance of,

1:02:41 of various services

1:02:43 but also

1:02:44 to uh to to plan for and strategize for

1:02:49 all the development that's going to happen

1:02:51 that is happening with the with the rapid urbanization that's happening.

1:02:57 And with all the implications and all the challenges

1:03:00 that climate change is posing for so many cities

1:03:03 around the world,

1:03:04 so I think revenues are critical,

1:03:07 are absolutely critical.

1:03:11 Now,

1:03:12 we talked about uh

1:03:14 how technology,

1:03:16 which is now becoming more and more accessible and more and more affordable,

1:03:21 can really help to bridge this gap.

1:03:24 So you may start with

1:03:27 Really preparing a map of properties.

1:03:31 Using

1:03:32 Satellite imagery using drone-based images.

1:03:38 But then you have to undertake the ground truth thing.

1:03:41 You have to have

1:03:43 door to door

1:03:44 surveys where you capture.

1:03:47 Other attributes and other details necessary for taxation,

1:03:51 the usage of the property.

1:03:54 Again,

1:03:54 who's the owner or the occupier?

1:03:57 Um,

1:03:58 etc.

1:03:58 etc.

1:03:59 So,

1:03:59 so all of that

1:04:00 is necessary.

1:04:02 Now,

1:04:02 once you have that,

1:04:04 And I think this is,

1:04:05 this is something that we,

1:04:08 that Nigeria has done very well recently,

1:04:10 supported with the World Bank project.

1:04:13 Where

1:04:13 36 states,

1:04:15 all the 36 states of Nigeria.

1:04:18 They were able to use

1:04:20 satellite imagery supplemented by ground truthing.

1:04:24 Which was incentivized by a World Bank performance

1:04:27 for results program.

1:04:31 More than 50,

1:04:32 uh,

1:04:32 actually many,

1:04:33 many,

1:04:33 um,

1:04:34 cities,

1:04:35 urban centers did

1:04:37 75 to 80% coverage

1:04:39 of the properties.

1:04:42 Um,

1:04:43 have,

1:04:43 um,

1:04:44 the properties with electricity connections.

1:04:46 So they're,

1:04:46 you know,

1:04:47 they're,

1:04:47 they're

1:04:48 not the,

1:04:48 the shacks,

1:04:49 uh,

1:04:50 or the slums.

1:04:52 They have managed to do this,

1:04:53 so there's a tremendous now

1:04:56 property register that's available in Nigeria for all

1:04:59 of these cities in the 36 states.

1:05:02 That's a fantastic foundation

1:05:05 for now moving from there

1:05:07 to

1:05:08 CEOOO cer certificates of occupancy,

1:05:10 certificates of ownership.

1:05:12 So,

1:05:14 technology can really help bridge

1:05:16 these gaps.

1:05:18 And I think

1:05:19 When cities and when urban

1:05:22 local governments

1:05:24 actually are able to raise revenues

1:05:26 and start to use them.

1:05:29 They

1:05:29 are then even more

1:05:31 able

1:05:33 to expedite some of those other,

1:05:35 uh,

1:05:36 you know,

1:05:36 things that they need to do for,

1:05:38 for registration and for,

1:05:40 um,

1:05:40 for titling.

1:05:41 Let me stop there.

1:05:42 Thanks.

1:05:45 Thank you.

1:05:46 Thank you,

1:05:47 Rajuul.

1:05:47 This is a very,

1:05:48 uh,

1:05:48 you know,

1:05:49 very clear trends and,

1:05:51 uh,

1:05:52 um.

1:05:54 Uh,

1:05:54 you know,

1:05:55 highlights,

1:05:55 um.

1:05:57 I want to maybe.

1:05:59 Bring a little bit of,

1:06:00 um,

1:06:02 you know,

1:06:02 our experience from,

1:06:03 from the Arab region and I see some colleagues here who might want to

1:06:08 come in later on as well on that.

1:06:11 Um,

1:06:11 we just did,

1:06:12 uh,

1:06:12 at the Global Land Tool Network,

1:06:14 it will be published soon,

1:06:16 hopefully,

1:06:16 um,

1:06:17 uh an assessment of land administration in 11 countries in the Middle East and Gulf.

1:06:24 And actually we found that um

1:06:28 Uh,

1:06:30 uh,

1:06:31 we looked

1:06:32 across actually the,

1:06:34 the land administration topics taught in the universities,

1:06:38 in the training,

1:06:38 uh,

1:06:39 institutions,

1:06:40 and actually,

1:06:41 uh,

1:06:42 valuation and taxation is the least

1:06:46 taught,

1:06:46 uh,

1:06:47 and therefore understood,

1:06:49 uh,

1:06:49 you know,

1:06:50 there is a lot of capacity knowledge courses in terms of planning,

1:06:54 land,

1:06:54 land use planning,

1:06:55 land development.

1:06:57 Very little actually on land dispute resolution,

1:06:59 land tenure,

1:07:01 and the minimum record on taxation and,

1:07:04 and,

1:07:05 and valuation.

1:07:06 And,

1:07:07 uh,

1:07:07 so definitely,

1:07:08 first of all,

1:07:09 you know,

1:07:10 we'll,

1:07:11 we'll be hopefully working with many of you also in the region to fill that gap.

1:07:16 Um,

1:07:17 there are of course some universities,

1:07:20 uh,

1:07:20 and countries championing this,

1:07:22 uh,

1:07:22 Lebanon,

1:07:23 you know,

1:07:24 one,

1:07:25 Morocco I think is the one doing the best in terms of,

1:07:28 um,

1:07:30 property taxes,

1:07:31 um,

1:07:32 from that region,

1:07:33 um.

1:07:35 And

1:07:36 you know,

1:07:37 one question maybe is why,

1:07:39 why,

1:07:39 why is that,

1:07:40 uh,

1:07:41 and,

1:07:42 uh.

1:07:43 Um,

1:07:44 one of the challenges we looked at,

1:07:47 and I,

1:07:47 I'm,

1:07:48 I don't have an answer,

1:07:48 but is that is definitely is the political aspect,

1:07:52 you know,

1:07:52 like the appetite and the capacity of maybe government to introduce a type

1:07:58 of taxation that hasn't not been historically used in such a context.

1:08:02 And also,

1:08:03 uh,

1:08:04 you know,

1:08:05 exactly perhaps the,

1:08:06 the linkage with people,

1:08:08 we saw that for example,

1:08:09 even in Libya,

1:08:10 um,

1:08:11 now I'm looking at the pre,

1:08:13 you know,

1:08:13 pre-fall of Gaddafi,

1:08:15 uh,

1:08:16 well,

1:08:16 of course,

1:08:17 the overall management of land and property was a little bit,

1:08:21 um,

1:08:22 driven by,

1:08:24 I mean let's say not purely

1:08:26 fit for purpose land administration considerations,

1:08:29 but,

1:08:29 um,

1:08:30 there were a lot of

1:08:32 Decisions and different treatment of different property depending on needs,

1:08:37 uh,

1:08:39 special

1:08:40 groups that would receive special treatment,

1:08:42 people who would have priorities,

1:08:45 uh,

1:08:45 families,

1:08:46 you know,

1:08:46 low-income families,

1:08:47 families of martyrs or maybe fam

1:08:51 categories that were

1:08:52 perceived as more,

1:08:54 uh,

1:08:55 needing in support.

1:08:56 So

1:08:57 definitely,

1:08:57 I mean,

1:08:58 I mean,

1:08:58 I think we discussed a lot of

1:09:02 The technical,

1:09:03 uh,

1:09:04 on the technical side,

1:09:05 but what's the impact,

1:09:06 um,

1:09:07 really of other considerations,

1:09:09 particularly,

1:09:10 you know,

1:09:10 when we want to introduce

1:09:12 this type of tools in context that haven't been using them so much before.

1:09:17 And then,

1:09:17 I mean,

1:09:18 let's move,

1:09:19 for example,

1:09:20 in this,

1:09:20 uh,

1:09:22 Direction asking any,

1:09:23 uh,

1:09:24 you know,

1:09:26 why,

1:09:26 uh,

1:09:27 do property tax do not generate much revenue in low-income countries?

1:09:31 Is it a tool that is more friendly to some type of,

1:09:35 you know,

1:09:36 economic system administration systems,

1:09:39 um,

1:09:41 and what would be needed,

1:09:42 uh,

1:09:42 to make it,

1:09:43 uh,

1:09:44 more fit for purpose,

1:09:46 uh,

1:09:46 you know.

1:09:48 more fit for purpose going forward.

1:09:51 Well,

1:09:51 you're right.

1:09:52 Um,

1:09:52 I mean,

1:09:52 if you look at the OECD,

1:09:54 I'm sorry.

1:09:56 I'm so casual,

1:09:57 like,

1:09:57 I just started talking,

1:09:59 it's like a little salon here,

1:10:01 um.

1:10:03 You're right.

1:10:04 I mean,

1:10:04 in OECD countries,

1:10:06 uh,

1:10:07 property taxes bring in over 1% of GDP.

1:10:10 In,

1:10:10 uh,

1:10:10 low-income countries,

1:10:11 it's like 0.1% of GDP.

1:10:14 So it's quite,

1:10:14 quite a bit less.

1:10:16 Um,

1:10:16 it,

1:10:17 it's for some of the reasons we've talked about already,

1:10:19 which is,

1:10:20 um,

1:10:21 it requires a lot of information and even,

1:10:24 even a,

1:10:25 uh,

1:10:25 a fit for purpose property tax first system still needs a lot of information and,

1:10:30 uh,

1:10:30 technical capacity.

1:10:32 Um,

1:10:33 there's problems with enabling legislation.

1:10:35 We haven't talked much about legislation,

1:10:37 but

1:10:38 in a lot of countries,

1:10:39 the legislation

1:10:40 doesn't permit this kind of taxation or puts a lot of restrictions on it.

1:10:44 Um,

1:10:45 it's partly the visibility of the tax,

1:10:47 which I talked about before.

1:10:49 People know what their property taxes are.

1:10:51 That makes it,

1:10:52 it makes it hard to increase them in,

1:10:54 in the,

1:10:55 in high income countries,

1:10:57 you know,

1:10:58 if the taxes go up more than a few percentage points,

1:11:00 people get upset.

1:11:01 So imagine introducing a new tax

1:11:04 that's very visible,

1:11:05 um,

1:11:06 but I think lack of political will

1:11:08 is,

1:11:08 is a big component that we haven't talked about.

1:11:11 And,

1:11:11 and that's largely because people don't wanna pay taxes.

1:11:17 So to introduce a new tax,

1:11:19 um,

1:11:20 yeah,

1:11:21 particularly,

1:11:22 uh,

1:11:22 you know,

1:11:23 I,

1:11:23 I think there's a lack of public trust in,

1:11:25 in governments and institutions,

1:11:28 and they don't wanna pay taxes,

1:11:30 uh,

1:11:30 they perceive them,

1:11:31 uh,

1:11:32 to be unfair.

1:11:33 Um,

1:11:34 in terms of

1:11:35 trying to make this,

1:11:37 uh,

1:11:38 property tax fit for purpose work well,

1:11:42 uh,

1:11:42 there's a couple of elements I'd like to talk about.

1:11:44 One is

1:11:45 the need to build public

1:11:46 trust,

1:11:47 um,

1:11:48 and the other is

1:11:49 about governments working together,

1:11:51 especially because Will talked about

1:11:53 national cadasters and local property tax registers and,

1:11:57 and,

1:11:57 and how to work together on those.

1:11:59 So,

1:12:01 I think,

1:12:01 I think whether people will pay property taxes depends on a lot of things,

1:12:05 and one is their perception of

1:12:07 how fair that tax is.

1:12:09 I mean,

1:12:09 if me and my neighbor have similar houses and we're charged different things,

1:12:14 there's,

1:12:14 we feel it's unfair.

1:12:16 I'm not gonna wanna pay

1:12:17 if I don't think I'm treated fairly.

1:12:20 Um,

1:12:21 I think,

1:12:22 I think we need to link the taxes to the services.

1:12:25 I think people have to understand that.

1:12:27 And,

1:12:28 and you can do this with the property tax so much more

1:12:30 easily with than with income or sales tax or consumption taxes.

1:12:34 You sort of say these are the services we're providing

1:12:37 and these are the taxes you're paying and by making that link,

1:12:40 I think people understand

1:12:42 that they're actually getting something

1:12:44 um

1:12:45 for their taxes.

1:12:47 I think

1:12:48 we really need.

1:12:50 And I'm gonna say meaningful

1:12:52 public education and communication

1:12:54 and consultation with people.

1:12:56 I think people have to understand how the tax works,

1:13:01 how

1:13:02 their,

1:13:02 the tax base was assessed,

1:13:04 whether it's an area base,

1:13:06 a points based,

1:13:07 a value based,

1:13:08 how was my,

1:13:09 the,

1:13:09 the base of the tax determined for my property.

1:13:13 Uh,

1:13:13 what am I getting for it?

1:13:15 Uh,

1:13:16 some countries use what's called participatory budgeting where they

1:13:19 bring people in and say,

1:13:21 here's our budget,

1:13:22 and

1:13:23 would you spend it differently?

1:13:24 Like they give a little bit of it and say,

1:13:27 you know,

1:13:27 how would you like to spend this little bit of the budget,

1:13:29 but engage the public,

1:13:31 uh,

1:13:32 in a discussion about what they're getting,

1:13:34 uh,

1:13:34 and what they're paying.

1:13:36 I think they need the ability

1:13:37 to appeal

1:13:38 their taxes,

1:13:39 so,

1:13:40 or,

1:13:40 or the assessed value of their property.

1:13:42 Um,

1:13:43 I think

1:13:44 fairness requires the ability to appeal

1:13:47 the value,

1:13:48 um,

1:13:49 and I think fairness requires that it's collected and enforced.

1:13:52 Again,

1:13:53 if,

1:13:53 if I don't pay my taxes,

1:13:55 but,

1:13:56 um,

1:13:56 other people do,

1:13:57 they're gonna say,

1:13:58 well,

1:13:58 why should we pay?

1:13:59 You know,

1:13:59 you're not enforcing this anyway.

1:14:01 So what do I care?

1:14:02 Like,

1:14:02 I'm not gonna pay either.

1:14:03 So,

1:14:04 there's a lot of elements

1:14:06 to getting

1:14:06 the public on side

1:14:08 and,

1:14:09 and with,

1:14:10 and I keep using the word meaningful consultation,

1:14:13 because we see a lot of consultation,

1:14:15 but a lot of it isn't that meaningful.

1:14:17 It doesn't really engage people

1:14:18 in understanding

1:14:20 how that property tax system works and what they're getting.

1:14:24 I also think

1:14:25 um there's a need for intergovernmental coordination both within government

1:14:30 so within department across departments

1:14:32 within governments like the local government

1:14:34 but also between governments so

1:14:36 we need to share information.

1:14:38 The national government has some

1:14:40 information local governments have other information

1:14:42 they can inform each other.

1:14:44 Um,

1:14:45 you need to share data with departments that issue building permits

1:14:49 because issuing a building permit gives you information about that property.

1:14:52 Uh,

1:14:53 we need that that would be helpful for creating a national cadaster.

1:14:57 Um,

1:14:58 we need to share information on other taxes like

1:15:00 the stamp duty or the land transfer tax.

1:15:03 I mean,

1:15:03 there's a tax that's paid on the sale of the property,

1:15:06 presumably there's a sale price there,

1:15:08 uh,

1:15:08 that gives us information.

1:15:10 Uh,

1:15:11 business registration,

1:15:12 if business are being registered,

1:15:13 then we have a sense of,

1:15:15 of what that business is,

1:15:16 where it is,

1:15:17 um,

1:15:18 if we have a tax on rental income,

1:15:19 and there,

1:15:20 there are lots of other taxes,

1:15:22 capital gains taxes that,

1:15:23 that have information

1:15:25 that can be used,

1:15:26 um,

1:15:27 for determining the property tax base,

1:15:29 and

1:15:30 local governments have information that can inform,

1:15:32 uh,

1:15:33 national cadasters,

1:15:34 but getting

1:15:35 governments to work together,

1:15:37 I'm hoping you're not gonna ask me how to do that.

1:15:40 Because that's a challenge to,

1:15:41 to get everybody working together.

1:15:43 But,

1:15:43 but as Will says,

1:15:44 you need,

1:15:45 you need everybody working on it and,

1:15:47 and sharing information

1:15:49 to get

1:15:49 what you need.

1:15:52 Thanks.

1:15:53 Um,

1:15:54 I would like to ask a last quick question to Rajul,

1:15:57 and then we'll open,

1:15:58 uh,

1:15:59 from question to the floor.

1:16:00 I mean,

1:16:00 um,

1:16:00 the inhabitat worked,

1:16:02 uh,

1:16:02 quite extensively both in Somalia and

1:16:04 Afghanistan to introduce a property taxation,

1:16:08 um,

1:16:08 and which was a successful experience overall,

1:16:11 of course,

1:16:11 now

1:16:12 with Afghanistan having moved slightly differently.

1:16:17 It's a struggle a little bit to build on the achievements,

1:16:20 but it was a good.

1:16:23 A positive,

1:16:24 um,

1:16:26 experience that uh was exactly coming from the perspective of

1:16:31 Property taxation as a way to

1:16:35 Create the condition for some participatory planning

1:16:38 and building trust of the authorities also

1:16:40 as a peace building as well,

1:16:42 uh,

1:16:42 an institution building,

1:16:44 uh,

1:16:45 engagement,

1:16:45 but,

1:16:46 uh,

1:16:46 one of the discussion we had

1:16:49 was that,

1:16:50 uh,

1:16:50 you know,

1:16:50 when you introduced a new tax,

1:16:52 of course you need to keep your your taxation very low and then.

1:16:57 More or less the.

1:17:00 The cost of collecting the taxes was somehow

1:17:04 balanced out on the tax that you do collect,

1:17:07 uh.

1:17:08 What is your experience in this area?

1:17:11 Uh,

1:17:12 is it a challenge?

1:17:13 Uh,

1:17:13 there are some solutions,

1:17:15 um.

1:17:16 Oh,

1:17:16 thanks.

1:17:16 Uh,

1:17:17 that's a very important question,

1:17:18 right?

1:17:19 So a lot of uh

1:17:20 local governments and local bodies tend to impose.

1:17:24 A number of fees

1:17:25 and charges.

1:17:27 And those are actually

1:17:29 um

1:17:30 really,

1:17:30 really

1:17:31 uneconomical from the point of view of the cost of collection being much higher.

1:17:36 Than the than the amounts are,

1:17:38 you know,

1:17:39 not proportional to the amounts that are collected,

1:17:41 that's where I think the property tax is one that can.

1:17:45 Really

1:17:46 be much more economically viable

1:17:49 and replace

1:17:50 a very large number of charges and fees that create all kinds of frictions

1:17:55 for small businesses for

1:17:58 uh

1:17:58 you know,

1:17:59 individuals in in local governments and again I'm,

1:18:02 I'm really focusing on and and looking at all of this from the perspective of,

1:18:06 of developing countries and low income developing countries in particular.

1:18:11 And I think there's,

1:18:12 this is where,

1:18:12 again,

1:18:13 that uh the technology solutions

1:18:16 uh can be really,

1:18:17 really helpful,

1:18:18 where we are able to use uh uh even,

1:18:22 even uh

1:18:23 in

1:18:23 poorer countries.

1:18:25 Now,

1:18:26 telecommunications and the use of cellphones has spread

1:18:30 remarkably,

1:18:31 and it's,

1:18:32 it continues to increase more and more.

1:18:35 So,

1:18:35 the more we're able to use

1:18:37 accessible,

1:18:38 affordable technologies,

1:18:39 that is really helpful.

1:18:41 But the other thing is,

1:18:42 and I think this is where some of the examples that,

1:18:45 that Enid mentioned,

1:18:46 one of them was

1:18:48 Using,

1:18:49 say,

1:18:49 uh,

1:18:50 an area-based

1:18:52 valuation,

1:18:53 so for a particular area in a city or a zone,

1:18:57 there is a certain rate

1:18:58 that is used per square foot or per square

1:19:01 meter,

1:19:02 and then that's

1:19:03 supplemented

1:19:05 with other kinds of factors and many,

1:19:07 uh,

1:19:07 many cities,

1:19:08 uh,

1:19:09 city governments in developing

1:19:11 countries,

1:19:11 including,

1:19:12 uh,

1:19:13 you know,

1:19:13 for example,

1:19:13 in Lahore and,

1:19:14 you know,

1:19:15 and other cities in Pakistan.

1:19:17 Has been pretty,

1:19:18 pretty useful and has been quite

1:19:20 uh transparent for people because you actually can go online and look at your

1:19:25 uh

1:19:25 where your property is situated

1:19:28 and based on that you know exactly what's gonna be your

1:19:31 amount uh assessed in terms of the tax you have to pay

1:19:34 and

1:19:34 you can then go and pay online immediately

1:19:37 so that there the costs of collections are uh collection are really low

1:19:41 and I think so again.

1:19:42 The design of the tax and the use of technology,

1:19:46 these things can really,

1:19:48 uh,

1:19:48 really help in reducing the costs of collection and administration.

1:19:52 I just wanted to add one thing on the,

1:19:54 on the whole question of trust.

1:19:57 That is obviously,

1:19:58 you know,

1:19:58 that's the big elephant in the room

1:20:00 as far as,

1:20:01 uh,

1:20:02 uh,

1:20:03 uh,

1:20:03 you know,

1:20:03 developing countries are concerned because yes,

1:20:06 theoretically

1:20:08 a property tax is one where you can say look,

1:20:10 it's very visible and you can say look this is what I'm doing for you

1:20:14 and these services are what you're getting for

1:20:16 the tax that you pay

1:20:18 but if you're in a city

1:20:19 in a in a in a in a country where.

1:20:23 There's nothing to offer.

1:20:24 There are no services.

1:20:25 The roads are broken.

1:20:26 There are hardly any street lights.

1:20:28 The sewage is spilling over

1:20:30 and then you ask them to pay property taxes.

1:20:32 Yes,

1:20:32 it's extremely difficult.

1:20:34 The question of trust doesn't arise,

1:20:36 OK?

1:20:37 It's a,

1:20:37 it's a bridge really way too far.

1:20:40 So it's,

1:20:41 that's the real reason I think you asked another question about why are.

1:20:44 Uh,

1:20:45 why property taxes are low in many developing countries,

1:20:48 this is one of the big reasons,

1:20:50 uh,

1:20:50 because it is something that links very well and very clearly

1:20:54 to the delivery of services.

1:20:56 And if those services are not,

1:20:59 well,

1:20:59 then you don't have the political will in the people to pay it.

1:21:03 Thanks.

1:21:05 So I know

1:21:06 there are,

1:21:07 I need to get back to you,

1:21:09 but we have quite little time.

1:21:13 So I'm going to take 6 questions.

1:21:17 Uh,

1:21:18 so please,

1:21:19 uh,

1:21:20 don't make me choose

1:21:21 who,

1:21:21 who,

1:21:21 who,

1:21:22 the one who has the highest hand.

1:21:26 Uh,

1:21:27 I learned one technique this morning which is I will hold the mic so that

1:21:31 you don't feel empowered when you ask your question to take a long time.

1:21:35 So I will hold the mic

1:21:37 and take

1:21:39 Maybe 12.

1:21:44 Fight it out among

1:21:45 345,

1:21:48 and then we'll give a round of answers and

1:21:51 the concluding remarks all at once to the panelists.

1:21:55 Uh,

1:21:56 I feel very bad,

1:21:59 introduce yourself briefly before you put the question.

1:22:04 Compliments for the fantastic,

1:22:06 inspiring,

1:22:07 uh,

1:22:07 panel and presentation.

1:22:09 Uh,

1:22:09 two cases

1:22:12 in Saudi Arabia they don't have the taxes,

1:22:15 uh,

1:22:16 but they are introducing them,

1:22:18 but not on the built area but on the white lands because they don't like white lands,

1:22:22 unused land.

1:22:23 Case 2,

1:22:24 we are in an

1:22:25 urbanizing world.

1:22:28 The majority of the people will live in apartments,

1:22:30 so how will you

1:22:32 find the apartments in the buildings?

1:22:36 Good.

1:22:37 Uh,

1:22:39 thanks.

1:22:40 Thanks,

1:22:40 thanks very much.

1:22:41 Uh,

1:22:42 oh,

1:22:42 OK,

1:22:42 you can hold,

1:22:43 OK,

1:22:43 that's fine,

1:22:43 that's good.

1:22:44 Uh,

1:22:44 John Meadows,

1:22:45 Land Equity International,

1:22:46 uh,

1:22:46 thanks very much again to Simon and to Will for really,

1:22:48 uh,

1:22:49 informative presentation and to the panel discussion.

1:22:52 I just want to reinforce a couple of things just based on my own experience,

1:22:54 I think.

1:22:55 I,

1:22:55 I,

1:22:56 I use this term,

1:22:57 the social contract,

1:22:58 when it comes to taxation,

1:23:00 and I think some of the panel have said that this is extremely difficult

1:23:04 to build that social contract in the context of developing countries where it's,

1:23:09 it's,

1:23:10 it's not easy sometimes to deliver services and infrastructure

1:23:14 maybe into areas that have been grown up.

1:23:17 Informally and so on.

1:23:18 So I thank you for that.

1:23:20 It's just reinforcing that.

1:23:22 I think we're now opened up a conversation.

1:23:24 It's like the chicken and egg,

1:23:25 which comes first?

1:23:26 Do we tax or do we build the cadata,

1:23:28 which is

1:23:29 also interesting.

1:23:30 And maybe one just the final observation as well on this

1:23:34 issue of

1:23:35 you're taxing

1:23:36 the land and not the owner.

1:23:39 Just experienced a gain

1:23:40 uh from a jurisdiction which I won't name,

1:23:42 but I've lived in,

1:23:43 where they try to levy

1:23:45 fines for bad driving

1:23:47 on the owner of the car without naming the driver,

1:23:51 and then there's mass civil disobedience,

1:23:53 no one pays it.

1:23:55 So um

1:23:55 let's see how that will work with taxation.

1:23:58 Thank you very much.

1:23:58 And as a parent that really paints

1:24:02 as an example.

1:24:05 Thank you.

1:24:05 Uh,

1:24:06 we've been,

1:24:07 uh,

1:24:07 talking together about our questions,

1:24:09 so we're gonna share the same questions.

1:24:11 Um,

1:24:13 uh,

1:24:13 uh,

1:24:13 that's,

1:24:13 uh,

1:24:14 it's a very interesting approach,

1:24:15 uh,

1:24:16 this,

1:24:16 um,

1:24:17 fit for purpose,

1:24:18 uh,

1:24:18 property tax first.

1:24:20 Uh,

1:24:20 I hadn't come across that before.

1:24:22 uh,

1:24:23 and my mind's just been racing with questions and going,

1:24:26 but,

1:24:26 but,

1:24:27 but

1:24:27 how could this work in Solomon Islands where I'm from,

1:24:31 um.

1:24:32 But,

1:24:32 uh,

1:24:33 we do actually have something,

1:24:34 uh,

1:24:35 which is not a property tax or a rent.

1:24:37 Um,

1:24:38 my

1:24:39 part of my answer was also that we don't have the legislation to allow for people to

1:24:45 have to be charged something when they don't own the land title yet,

1:24:48 but we do actually have something in legislation called

1:24:51 a temporary occupation license,

1:24:53 and that's something where,

1:24:55 um,

1:24:55 thousands of informal settlements,

1:24:58 uh,

1:24:58 do have those,

1:25:00 um.

1:25:01 But I'm getting to our shared question now.

1:25:04 It,

1:25:04 it is.

1:25:06 How would you then still make sure that people pay that?

1:25:09 So if you have a temporary occupation license or a property tax,

1:25:13 a land tax of some sort,

1:25:15 how would you ensure that that is paid every year

1:25:18 or every 3 years or whatever the term is?

1:25:21 Uh,

1:25:22 just the same way as how do we make sure people pay an offer of a land title?

1:25:26 I sign offers of land title all the time,

1:25:29 and it's frustrating that it,

1:25:32 it can take a very long time to get to the grant stage where I'm signing the grant off.

1:25:37 Um,

1:25:38 but the same thing could happen in the Freetown example.

1:25:41 Uh,

1:25:42 I'll pass quickly.

1:25:45 Yeah,

1:25:47 mine,

1:25:47 mine's really quick.

1:25:48 I think you gave an example in Freetown and I just

1:25:50 wondered what the percentage of compliance in terms of payment was

1:25:53 when you just sent the letter to the owner.

1:25:55 Um,

1:25:56 so was it 5% or 100% payment?

1:25:58 Thanks.

1:25:59 Thank you.

1:26:00 Um,

1:26:02 yes,

1:26:02 there were people on this side.

1:26:06 I remember your hand was higher,

1:26:08 but,

1:26:09 uh,

1:26:09 let's first uh

1:26:11 let me hold.

1:26:12 Thank you.

1:26:13 Uh,

1:26:13 my name is Ty Weley.

1:26:15 I'm the head of the,

1:26:16 uh,

1:26:17 fiscal Policy commission for Nigeria.

1:26:20 Um,

1:26:20 so I think this is quite fascinating,

1:26:22 and I thought that fit for purpose,

1:26:25 the way I see it,

1:26:27 needs to have three attributes.

1:26:28 One is fairness.

1:26:31 The second one is driving the right behaviors,

1:26:34 and the 3rd is the outcomes.

1:26:36 Um,

1:26:36 and I think that it has to be both ways,

1:26:39 both for the taxpayers

1:26:41 as well as the government.

1:26:43 So the question as to whether it should be property tax first.

1:26:47 All the land registration first needs to balance that and here's how I see it,

1:26:52 and I'd like to get your perspective.

1:26:54 So if um

1:26:57 the government

1:26:59 does not provide land registration,

1:27:01 I feel like it's mostly the responsibility of government to make it happen.

1:27:05 What we see in places like Rwanda

1:27:08 is the people are still the same people,

1:27:10 but you have a government that behaves differently and they have almost 100%

1:27:15 registration.

1:27:17 So does it make sense,

1:27:19 and that's my question,

1:27:20 to say

1:27:22 Even though it's property tax first,

1:27:25 then government should collect less from me

1:27:28 if I have no title.

1:27:30 Also,

1:27:31 because

1:27:32 rental value may be the same,

1:27:34 but I can't get a mortgage,

1:27:36 I can't get a few other things,

1:27:38 and therefore government should have the incentive

1:27:40 to want to provide the registration.

1:27:43 Why for me,

1:27:44 I shouldn't have the incentive not to pay the tax just because I have no title?

1:27:48 I hope it's clear.

1:27:50 Thank you.

1:27:50 Yeah,

1:27:51 very,

1:27:51 very clear.

1:27:54 One and then last one and OK thank you uh I'm ready.

1:27:58 Oh,

1:27:58 I'm gonna hold.

1:27:59 OK.

1:27:59 Hi,

1:28:00 Kevin Barthelll from Millennium Challenge Corporation and Global Land Alliance.

1:28:03 Will,

1:28:03 um,

1:28:03 you're ready for this question?

1:28:05 The question is basically we heard at the end about trust,

1:28:07 right?

1:28:08 But what do we do about how do we do,

1:28:10 how do we get that trust,

1:28:11 right?

1:28:11 We've heard about information campaigns.

1:28:13 We talked about,

1:28:13 you know,

1:28:14 kind of talking to people and things like that.

1:28:15 What's the role of institutional and social behavior change

1:28:18 in making people pay their taxes?

1:28:20 Thank you.

1:28:21 Great,

1:28:22 thank you.

1:28:24 And last.

1:28:27 It's more a general comment.

1:28:29 Uh,

1:28:30 uh,

1:28:31 there are many examples of successful land registration project in the world,

1:28:35 in all the region of the world.

1:28:37 And now

1:28:38 we are using more and more the fit for purpose approach

1:28:42 and

1:28:43 making sure that we use satellite imagery,

1:28:46 even,

1:28:46 uh,

1:28:47 artificial intelligence to prepare,

1:28:49 uh,

1:28:50 uh,

1:28:50 uh,

1:28:51 preliminary plans for,

1:28:53 and we can speed it up,

1:28:56 uh,

1:28:57 very,

1:28:57 very well,

1:28:59 and

1:28:59 maybe it will take

1:29:00 20 years,

1:29:01 30 years to.

1:29:03 Have a

1:29:04 complete

1:29:05 coverage of a country in land registration,

1:29:08 but at least

1:29:09 if you are going in this good right the right direction,

1:29:13 making

1:29:13 maybe 100 communes or municipalities and projects and having

1:29:18 many projects

1:29:20 collected.

1:29:23 I,

1:29:23 I don't believe

1:29:24 that people will.

1:29:27 Agree to be involved in the taxation

1:29:30 projects.

1:29:31 So I,

1:29:32 I have worked in some countries where there was some fiscal catastrophe,

1:29:36 but people are not

1:29:37 you,

1:29:37 I,

1:29:38 you,

1:29:38 you asked me to,

1:29:39 to contribute to.

1:29:42 Have you collecting me tax so

1:29:44 we cannot make the economy of

1:29:47 land in your security,

1:29:49 and I think this is fundamental

1:29:52 and

1:29:52 I think it's possible now to work

1:29:56 fast

1:29:57 faster than ever

1:29:58 and,

1:29:59 and make sure that we have,

1:30:01 uh,

1:30:02 uh,

1:30:02 systematic

1:30:03 land registration in the municipality in the,

1:30:05 in the

1:30:07 province and,

1:30:08 and then.

1:30:09 Right after that,

1:30:11 put in place

1:30:12 a mass valuation,

1:30:13 uh,

1:30:15 project,

1:30:15 it,

1:30:16 it,

1:30:16 it,

1:30:16 and this is can be also,

1:30:18 uh,

1:30:19 be made very quickly

1:30:21 but with

1:30:22 standards

1:30:24 because I don't believe

1:30:25 that

1:30:26 the

1:30:27 to have people adhere to taxation

1:30:30 you have to,

1:30:31 you need to have an equitable

1:30:34 way

1:30:34 to collect tax

1:30:35 and

1:30:36 comprehensive all people must pay.

1:30:39 Not only.

1:30:45 Your,

1:30:45 uh,

1:30:45 your name and organization Daniel Roberjos,

1:30:48 uh,

1:30:49 former chair of Commission 7 and a former World Bank,

1:30:52 uh,

1:30:53 specialist,

1:30:53 and now I'm,

1:30:54 uh,

1:30:55 also working for,

1:30:56 uh,

1:30:56 a guest professor at Laval University.

1:30:58 Thank you.

1:31:00 All right,

1:31:00 so quite a handful.

1:31:02 Uh,

1:31:03 I would,

1:31:04 uh,

1:31:07 Let's give first the,

1:31:08 the word to you and then briefly to

1:31:10 um

1:31:14 oh.

1:31:16 OK,

1:31:17 so

1:31:18 Diane,

1:31:18 you,

1:31:20 OK,

1:31:21 alright,

1:31:23 sure,

1:31:24 um.

1:31:27 Oh I see.

1:31:29 with.

1:31:30 OK.

1:31:31 Uh,

1:31:31 I'm gonna go really fast,

1:31:33 uh,

1:31:33 as best I can.

1:31:34 Um,

1:31:35 so first I wanna say I think we were unfair to Diane.

1:31:38 Uh,

1:31:38 you were outnumbered on this panel with Simon not here,

1:31:40 3 property experts,

1:31:41 uh,

1:31:42 to 1,

1:31:44 but I liked what you said as much as what everyone else said.

1:31:46 Uh,

1:31:47 so.

1:31:48 A few things to say.

1:31:49 I think the first thing I wanna stress is just,

1:31:51 you know,

1:31:51 myself,

1:31:52 Rahul,

1:31:52 Enid,

1:31:53 we all start from property tax,

1:31:54 but I think the one thing we all said was

1:31:56 if you're gonna do these things for property tax,

1:31:59 they have to also contribute to effective land administration and land titling.

1:32:03 I really believe even as a property tax,

1:32:05 you know,

1:32:06 guy,

1:32:06 uh,

1:32:07 if we pursue a simplified approach to property tax,

1:32:09 but that undermines the drive for effective land administration,

1:32:13 you know,

1:32:13 we're solving one problem by creating another one.

1:32:16 They have to sit,

1:32:17 fit together.

1:32:18 I think to the point at the end,

1:32:19 uh,

1:32:20 from Daniel.

1:32:21 You know

1:32:22 that might mean that you don't always start

1:32:24 from the property tax first approach,

1:32:25 right?

1:32:26 If you're working in,

1:32:27 you know,

1:32:28 in,

1:32:28 in some country and you say look,

1:32:29 we have an ongoing process

1:32:31 to do a fit for purpose land administration land titling drive

1:32:35 and in 18 months

1:32:36 we're gonna have titles for 90% of the properties in all of the big cities,

1:32:40 well then let's use that,

1:32:42 right?

1:32:42 We don't need the property tax first approach there

1:32:44 because we're gonna actually have a comprehensive cadaster.

1:32:47 I'm not yet convinced

1:32:49 that most countries will pull that off,

1:32:51 and in those countries I think you need property tax first,

1:32:53 but some countries will.

1:32:55 Rwanda's done it.

1:32:55 Rwanda has quite comprehensive registration,

1:32:58 so use the candaer,

1:32:59 right?

1:32:59 So I think

1:33:00 we wanna be flexible.

1:33:01 Each country is different.

1:33:02 The key is that they work together

1:33:04 and we be strategic and pragmatic about what works,

1:33:07 I think,

1:33:08 um.

1:33:10 I think the points about trust here were

1:33:13 fundamental,

1:33:13 but I won't say anything more.

1:33:14 I think Enid and Raju have said

1:33:16 so much about them that I don't wanna expand.

1:33:18 I'm sorry,

1:33:18 Kevin,

1:33:19 but I'm also gonna see you later,

1:33:20 um,

1:33:20 so we'll talk more.

1:33:21 Um,

1:33:22 the,

1:33:23 I wanted to pick up a couple of things that Diane said though that I

1:33:25 think are important and actually our friend from

1:33:27 Nigeria said one of the same things.

1:33:29 Um,

1:33:30 there's this question

1:33:31 if you do property tax first,

1:33:32 you're saying we'll bring everyone into the tax net where they have title or not.

1:33:36 Is it fair that people who don't have title

1:33:38 should pay just like people who do?

1:33:41 My honest view is

1:33:42 probably not entirely.

1:33:44 Um,

1:33:44 now,

1:33:45 if a person's chosen not to get title,

1:33:47 well,

1:33:48 that's their own problem.

1:33:48 They should pay just like everyone else.

1:33:50 But if people can't get title because the government's not providing it,

1:33:54 then yes,

1:33:54 the people with title are better off than the people without.

1:33:57 Ideally they would be treated differently,

1:33:59 but

1:34:00 I think leaving them entirely out of the system

1:34:03 is worse than taxing everyone the same.

1:34:05 That's my personal judgment.

1:34:07 And so I think the property tax first approach is better than the alternative,

1:34:10 but it's imperfect.

1:34:12 If you could know who has title and who doesn't,

1:34:13 maybe you'd levy slightly different taxes on those two groups,

1:34:16 um,

1:34:17 but I think acknowledging that that question is complicated,

1:34:20 I think is part of

1:34:21 what's important about having an honest

1:34:23 debate and discussion about what the right strategy is,

1:34:25 um.

1:34:26 It's really important in Nigeria it's a particularly important question I think um

1:34:30 you also asked,

1:34:31 does paying taxes give you land tenure,

1:34:34 right?

1:34:34 Because that's a big problem.

1:34:35 Governments talking about this approach always ask that question.

1:34:39 If people start paying,

1:34:40 does that mean they get tenure?

1:34:41 If they think the answer is yes,

1:34:43 they don't wanna do it.

1:34:44 Our view is,

1:34:45 look,

1:34:45 if the government writes on your tax bill this does not grant tenure,

1:34:48 then it doesn't grant tenure,

1:34:50 so that,

1:34:51 that's an easy problem to solve,

1:34:53 but

1:34:54 being clear about it it's important because a lot

1:34:55 of people imagine that paying taxes does give them tenure

1:34:59 and you ideally aren't gonna mislead your taxpayers

1:35:01 in going through a process like this.

1:35:03 Um,

1:35:03 again I know that's an issue in Nigeria among other places,

1:35:06 um.

1:35:07 So it's an important question.

1:35:08 Uh,

1:35:09 last thing,

1:35:10 um,

1:35:10 the social contract idea,

1:35:12 right?

1:35:12 Diane,

1:35:13 I think you made a good point,

1:35:14 right?

1:35:15 The idea of fit for purpose land administration is

1:35:18 give people a title to give them a role,

1:35:20 a position in society,

1:35:21 to empower them.

1:35:23 And your worry is when you go property tax first and you start from tax,

1:35:26 you don't do that.

1:35:28 You make demands on people rather than

1:35:30 than empowering them,

1:35:31 um.

1:35:32 I think it's possible that that's.

1:35:35 That raising taxes can also be empowering and I think that's the ambition,

1:35:38 right?

1:35:39 Um,

1:35:40 you know,

1:35:40 and I think this is what we heard back here,

1:35:41 right?

1:35:42 The idea actually when you go and tax someone

1:35:44 you're also giving them a sort of connection to government

1:35:47 ideally in taxing them you're also bringing them into a dialogue with government

1:35:52 about what they get in return.

1:35:54 Ideally that is an entry point also for building the social contract in my view,

1:35:57 um.

1:35:58 But that only works if

1:36:00 you've set up mechanisms for people to do that,

1:36:02 if the system is fair,

1:36:03 if there are points of engagement with government,

1:36:05 if you have participatory budgeting,

1:36:06 and so I think

1:36:07 the bigger story for me would be if you're gonna do property tax first approaches,

1:36:11 make sure you're also putting in place structures to build trust,

1:36:15 to build engagement,

1:36:16 to make that empowering

1:36:18 rather than extractive,

1:36:19 um,

1:36:19 because other,

1:36:20 other,

1:36:20 if not,

1:36:21 I think your criticism is absolutely right,

1:36:23 um.

1:36:23 And we should be honest about that too when we think about how we do this in practice.

1:36:26 Uh,

1:36:27 I'll stop there.

1:36:28 Thanks,

1:36:29 Wilson.

1:36:30 Um.

1:36:32 How do we go next?

1:36:34 Uh,

1:36:34 well,

1:36:35 I'll just say

1:36:36 two sentences really,

1:36:37 and that is,

1:36:38 uh,

1:36:38 because we could be here a long time because it's very interesting,

1:36:41 but,

1:36:42 uh,

1:36:42 we talked about trust.

1:36:44 We heard in the opening,

1:36:45 uh,

1:36:45 a fantastic little formula,

1:36:47 which was power,

1:36:49 accountability,

1:36:50 and governance.

1:36:51 And I think when those three fall in line,

1:36:54 as we heard,

1:36:55 as I say yesterday,

1:36:56 Then you've got trust,

1:36:58 and then this system

1:36:59 potentially might have

1:37:00 some legs.

1:37:01 But I think for me,

1:37:03 the big

1:37:04 issue still is,

1:37:06 where is the benefit to the people to land relationship?

1:37:10 And if you don't have street lights

1:37:11 or roads,

1:37:12 then there is none.

1:37:13 So what do we do?

1:37:15 Thank you.

1:37:16 Thank you,

1:37:16 Diane.

1:37:19 Yeah,

1:37:19 I'll just make one comment and because I think

1:37:22 I,

1:37:22 I think Will and Diane have,

1:37:24 have covered most of the questions.

1:37:25 I just,

1:37:26 we started by talking about the,

1:37:28 the wide lands in Saudi Arabia,

1:37:30 and I thought that was fascinating because it reminds me that,

1:37:33 you know,

1:37:33 taxes often have two purposes.

1:37:35 One is to bring in revenue,

1:37:37 the other To change behavior

1:37:39 and that's a case of wanting to change behavior.

1:37:42 uh,

1:37:42 I don't think the property tax

1:37:44 is the best

1:37:46 mechanism,

1:37:47 the best tool

1:37:48 to change behavior,

1:37:50 um,

1:37:50 but,

1:37:50 but some governments do use it for that purpose.

1:37:55 Thanks.

1:37:55 Definitely.

1:37:56 I mean,

1:37:56 I think it has its uh.

1:37:59 It's value,

1:38:00 uh,

1:38:00 particularly in countries where they have a very large amount of

1:38:05 vacant land,

1:38:06 uh,

1:38:06 because there is no taxation,

1:38:08 and that's really a challenge in,

1:38:09 in many countries in the Gulf,

1:38:11 for example.

1:38:12 Raul,

1:38:13 you want to say last word of wisdom.

1:38:18 All right,

1:38:19 so with this,

1:38:20 sorry we're a bit late,

1:38:21 but I would like to close this session.

1:38:24 Please give a round of applause to panelists and speakers.

1:38:28 And to yourself

1:38:30 for enduring until the end of day two and uh have a great evening.

1:38:34 Thank you.

1:38:35 Thank you also for the

1:38:37 technical support team.

1:38:39 Thank you.

1:38:44 I think

showAllTimestamps
no
transcript
Welcome. Everybody to this session. And uh Congratulations for making it to this very remote room. Um, you can, of course, uh, uh, stay where you are if you want to come closer, that would also be nice. Um, but, uh, we look forward to a very interactive session, uh, and, uh, I think we'll, uh, we'll get started, uh, so we are on time. Um, so, Uh, my name is Oreta Tempra. I work with the Global Land Tool Network and UN Habitat. Um, I'm actually handling the Arab states and the land and conflict portfolio. Um, but it's my pleasure today to, uh, to stand in for my colleagues, uh, Julia Lavana and Jonathan Yakutiel who actually, uh, work on the, uh, land, uh, finance portfolio at the Global Landfill Network, um. So, I'll introduce our speakers and panelists, but let's start with some, uh, you know, introductory remarks. Uh, so welcome again to this, uh, session called revolutionizing land Administration, uh, looking at Cadaster first versus property tax first approaches, uh, to achieve tenure security, uh, but also increase local finance and, uh, you know, overall contribute to other dividends. Um, this session is a collaborative effort between UN Habitat, the Global Land Tool Network, the International Center for Tax and Development, particularly the Local Government Revenue Initiative or known as LOGLL. Uh, so as the urbanization accelerates and population increases, environmental conservation and sustainable land use practices become more and more urgent worldwide. Uh, we see that land administration systems actually, uh, struggle to keep pace to these evolving needs, uh, and particularly, uh, land rights recognition, recordation, and registration, um, is still far behind what we need to do to actually, uh, allow, uh, sustainable land use and land administration and to protect the land rights of community. Um, So securing land tenure, uh, I mean, and particularly this conference looks at climate we saw in so many sessions how actually is difficult really to address the climate and land, uh, nexus, uh, when there is no tenure securities for the communities, um, so. Uh, securing land tenure continues and becomes increasingly critical, particularly in rapidly growing urban areas, in peri-urban areas, and also in location of high environmental and agricultural interest, uh, because that's of course where the, you know, the climate financing goes, where agriculture need to be more productive, um, and, um, and environmentally sustainable as well. Uh, so, um, that's what makes it really important to assess what really works to protect land rights on one hand and establish. Uh, functioning land administration systems that can match the demographic, economic, social, environmental challenges that we face, and definitely, you know, this as an aspect of securing the land rights, but it is also an aspect of financing to allowing these systems to go to scale and be sustainable and empower local authorities, local community to actually address their climate, uh, challenges, their food security challenges, etc. So, um, sustainability and scalabilities here are, are key, and, uh, uh, where, that's where, you know, conventionalcadaster hasn't been doing so well and where we look at fit for purpose land administration at the, in this session. Uh, so fit for Purpose Land Administration, I know you're all familiar with it, but was initially an approach developed by the World Bank and the International Federation of Surveyors and then was widely adopted by a, a range of partners and really championed, uh, as well on the ground, uh, by inhabited and the Global Land Tool network with their partners. Um, So this approach, uh, we'll hear more about it in the next, uh, presentation, but recognizes that security land tenure requires innovative, flexible, and community-centered solutions that are affordable and can go to scale, including in area where land is customarily administered. And secondly, and really, uh, you know, we'll have the challenge of making the linkages between this more land administration focused perspective and the more financing-focused perspective. We'll look at, we'll look at, uh, property tax first approaches, uh, spearheaded by the local government revenue initiative of the International Center for Tax and Development. Uh, and other partners, of course, that are here with us today. Uh, which, you know, is an approach that allows the rapid registration of properties by, uh, also local governments for taxation purposes, but also that have, you know, positive trickle-down effect to, you know, put together an information based that can then also contribute to improve special plan planning and land administration overall. So we look at some case studies, look at, uh, discuss implications, uh, you know, at the local level particularly, uh, and then, uh, you know, hopefully we'll also get questions from the floor. We have a very capable, knowledgeable, and diverse panel who will also, uh, you know, sure we, uh, intrigued by all your questions. So with this, let me welcome you again and uh introduce uh the, the two presenters that we'll start with. Uh, the first one, unfortunately has a parallel presentation in another session. Uh, so we'll introduce him on, in his absence, uh, Simon Peters Musige, which is a project coordinator with Inhabitat and Global Land Tool Network in Uganda. He leads the Inhabitat land portfolio in Uganda, uh, and also the land at scale work there. Uh, and he has prepared a video for us summarizing, uh, the, the work that, uh, he's leading in Uganda. And then, uh, we have, uh, Doctor Wilson Pritchard here on my left, uh, associate professor at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs, Public Policy and Department of Political Science, a research fellow at the Institute of Development Study, and executive Director of ICTD and chair of the Loy Program. His research focuses on the political economy of tax reform in lower income countries and the relationship between taxation and citizen demands for improved governance in sub-Saharan Africa. Uh, so I would start with the first video, uh, Thank you so much. I work with UN Habitat and the Global Land Tool Network. I coordinate, um, GLTN's program on land rights in Uganda. Um, I'm happy to be, uh, able to make a contribution to this session on revolutionalizing land administration, a debate on CASA first and property first, and property tax first approaches to achieve, uh, tenure security. My specific, uh, contribution to this session, uh, is on GLTN's fit for purpose land administration approach, and I will be sharing, uh, the specific case, uh, of Uganda. Um, So So conventional systems. are fixated with, um, you know, fixing the boundaries. Um, so instead of, you know, general boundaries, they're looking at, um, field surveys to be able to, uh, fix, um, or to adjudicate and, uh, uh, uh, record boundaries to the highest, uh, level of accuracy with high-end and, uh, costly equipment. And, and the whole process, um, has implications for the three factors that we talked about in terms of time, in terms of cost, and in terms of quality. So the outcome of these conventional systems over, over, uh, centuries has been that, um, you have a very slow process of registering and recognizing land rights. Um, in many countries, you have less than 20% of land rights, um, um, included in the land administration systems. Um, while the rest remain informal unrecognized. So, the key principles of this. Uh, fit for purpose land administration, uh, mainly for. Uh, one on, uh, visual boundaries that I talked about before. And then, um, That accuracy should relate to the purpose. We do as little as needed. And then, um, also, um, being able to use aerial imageries rather than the field surveys, uh, where that, uh, will actually serve the purpose. And lastly, opportunities, uh, starting, um, starting, um, you know, small and, uh, incrementally updating or upgrading the system. So, um, you know, starting with a more affordable system and then, uh, slowly, um, to be able to improve it as the need and conditions change. So this is really the four key principles of, uh, this new way of thinking about land administration. And it is a paradigm shift. Um, it requires us, um, to be innovative. Uh, it requires us to think differently from the conventional way. We have been thinking about. Uh, land administration, it requires us to be able to utilize, um, new and, uh, advances in technologies and approaches. It also requires leadership as well as partnership and capacity development, uh, for it to be implemented. Um, now in terms of the key issues, Uganda has a multiple antenna system. Um, but the major uh tenure system through which the majority of the people in both urban and rural areas access land is the customary land tenure system. But the, the, the, the land under this system is largely unregistered. Um, there is also high, uh, disputes as a result of the land, uh, being, uh, uh, unregistered, and so there is no transparent, uh, way, uh, of, uh, you know, recognizing and verifying, uh, claims to the land. The, the, the, the other issue is that, um. The, the land administration system or land services are also decentralized. Um, so you have the lower, uh, level governments, um, local governments, um, being, uh, uh, you know, responsible for providing, uh, land services. And the main challenge there is that the capacities are very low in most of these, uh, local land administration offices. So GLTN for more than 15 years has been working with the government of Uganda to support the government to be able to implement. Uh, and test the fit for purpose, uh, land administration, um, uh, you know, um, uh, thinking about, you know, going about land administration. So, um, So one of the key interventions there has been community-based land registration and land use planning on customary land. The goal of this intervention has been to contribute towards development of a structured and scalable approach towards improved tenure security and sustainable land use for men, women, and youth on customary land in a participatory way. The, the outcome um of this has been, um, The issuance of certificates of customary ownership to over 40,000 households in Uganda. using the fit for purpose land administration approach. Um, but also several sub-counties and urban, uh, divisions have had, um, you know, uh, physical development plans, uh, developed and supported, and these plans are climate smart. And, uh, inclusive, uh, or developed in a participatory way. And then also the other outcome, key outcome that we have, uh, through this intervention is the supporting of, uh, wetland communities to develop wetland management plans for promoting, um, um, wise use of the wetlands. The other intervention, um, that is being implemented here is the scaling up of capacity development, recognizing that capacity development is very critical for, um, implementation and scaling up of fit for purpose land administration. So we are building capacity of, uh, land administration institutions, um, and also, uh non-state actors, including civil society and academia at different levels. Um, and We are also, um, building their capacity to be able to implement or support, um, promotion of, uh, gender-sensitive, uh, land governance. And lastly, um, the other interventions are at national level, uh, working closely with the central government, uh, to implement the national land policy. Uh, first, under this component, um, GLTN has supported the government, uh, to establish a factional land policy implementation unit. I have supported the government to develop and implement a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation system for implementation of the national land policy. And we have also supported the government to develop and implement a national gender strategy on land. As well as, um, we have supported establishment and strengthening of several multi-stakeholder platforms and partnerships on land and, um, uh, uh, on land issues. So, so, so one of the other Um, strategic intervention that we have also done in order to be able to institutionalize the fit for purpose land Administration. We have supported the government to develop a fit for purpose land administration implementation strategy. Um, and, and this is informed by many years of testing and implementing the fit for purpose land administration approach, um, as I mentioned, um, in the interventions that I highlighted before. So The overall objective of this strategy of government, uh, for implementing fit for purpose land administration is To result into tenure security for all land rights holders in Uganda. At low cost Um, and appropriate approaches, um, as, as well as, uh, actions for land administration. So it has several specific objectives. One is to identify key requirements and priority actions for generating a consistent national spatial framework within a period of 10 years. And the other one is identify requirements and priority actions for instituting a legal framework that supports flexible recordation of land rights. Number 3 is to identify requirements and priority actions for capacity development for land administration institutions to deliver affordable and accessible services in a transparent manner, and then also provide, uh, cost estimates for operationalizing the fit for purpose implementation strategy. So as I conclude, Um, from this experience of, um, supporting, uh, the implementation of the fit for purpose land Administration in Uganda, we conclude that this The objective of securing land rights for all within our generation is only possible, um, especially in the context of Uganda. Uh, with, uh, with, with only the fit for purpose land administration approach. The conventional approaches will not be able to, uh, deliver tenure security for all within our generation. Also, um. Um, what we see is that Uh, the fit for purpose land Administration approaches significantly reduces the cost, uh, of surveying, um, land parcels and, and, and formalizing, uh, the land rights, um, uh, from $1000 US dollars per parcel to $10 per parcel. So, so this is a significant, uh, drop in the cost. And so this is really what makes it, um, makes it possible, uh, to be able to, um, achieve, uh, secu security of land tenure for all within, uh, the shortest time possible. But also apart from from the cost of mapping and registering of individual and parcels. Budget provisions need to be made for sensitization. And mobilization of communities to be able to fully participate. As in, for instance, our context in Uganda, um, communities usually are suspicious when these processes start, so there is a need for, um, for engagement with the communities, um, so that they are given assurance that they will not lose their land rights in the process and all their concerns, um, need to be addressed. But also, uh, budget provisions have to be met for, uh, alternative dispute resolution. Um, mechanisms to be strengthened and to be made operational. Uh, long term capacity development of national and low-level institutions. So in our current context, uh, uh, right now in Uganda, um, the fit for purpose Land Administration is mainly now supported, uh, with the support from, uh, development partners. Um, uh, we, we are mainly supporting that GLTN and UN Habitat, together with other partners, uh, GIZ, ZOA, UNCDF and the World Bank and others. But now What we see is that there is a need for a national program to be able to roll out the fit for purpose land Administration. And so for this national program to be rolled out, uh, there is need for us to think about a sustainable financing model, uh, for, uh, implementation of fit for purpose land administration. Thank you very much for listening to me. Um, it's a pity I'm not able to respond to your questions, uh, immediately. But my colleagues, uh, in the room can respond to some of them, uh, while others can be sent to my email address, which will also be provided by the moderator. Again, thank you very much. We can still clap in his absence. Thank you, Simon. And now I turn the floor to Doctor Wilson Pritchard. Uh, you can stay here or go to the podium as you prefer. Yeah. Uh, all right, uh, good afternoon, everyone. Um, so I wanna start by suggesting that the field of land administration, which Simon is an expert in, uh, is very similar to the field of property taxation, uh, in which I work, uh, in a lot of important ways, uh, in both areas systems historically have underperformed, sometimes severely, in part because of an inheritance of processes that were complex and difficult to administer in the context of low income countries. In turn, in both fields, we've seen a move in recent years towards forms of fit for purpose administration, trying to align administrative strategies to real needs and capacities on the ground in order to make, uh, outcomes in practice much more successful, right? And in principle, the two should be speaking close to each other, because the foundation for effective land administration and the foundation for effective property taxation are the same thing, a clear register and map of properties. But yet these two fields very rarely speak to each other in practice. Uh, and so what I'm going to try to do in this presentation is talk about how the two speak to each other, how they can. How they can be synergistic and mutually complementary instead of existing in parallel, uh, as they often have in practice. Uh, to do that, uh, I'm gonna talk from the perspective of property taxation, but I'm going to pose the question, does the fit for purpose approach to land administration that you've just had described to you offer also a rate, a route forward for building effective comprehensive registers for property tax purposes, or. Is there a need for slightly different approaches to building comprehensive property registers for tax purposes? But if so, can we also find ways that that property tax process can reinforce the land administrative process we've just heard about by strengthening tenure and longer term land administration planning? Uh, as I do that, I'll just say also it's nice to see in the room a lot of friends who have contributed to some of the thinking I'm summarizing here, uh, people like Sioe, Rosetta, Kevin, uh, others, uh, Colette, uh, who we've talked about over the years about some of these ideas. Um, so I'm gonna start from property tax and then try to bring it together with land administration. Um, when we think about the challenge of property taxation. The fundamental building block of property taxation is having a comprehensive map of all properties in a given jurisdiction for tax purposes. Yet, we know that in most low-income countries, those property registers are hugely incomplete and are also undermined by unreliable addressing systems that make it difficult to identify those properties in practice. The effect of those incomplete property registers is property tax systems that have limited revenue potential, but perhaps even more importantly, are hugely inequitable because some properties are asked to pay, while others remain outside the system. And in a world where only some people are covered, it's almost impossible to build a widely trusted system, one that's viewed as fair and which will and one which will enjoy the political support needed to expand and flourish. And so the central question I want to pose is what might be more appropriate strategies for registering properties for tax purposes in order to ensure comprehensive registers in the context of low-income countries. But then in turn to ask, how can such strategies be designed in a way that also reinforces efforts to build more effective land titling and land administration within those same countries. I want to start from what I think has been the traditional approach to this challenge of building property tax registers. And this is what we've called in our work a cadaster first or titling first approach. The idea here is that governments first. should register and title all land to identify formal plot boundaries, ownership, and so forth. And once land has been formally titled and registered, it can then be eligible for taxation within the property tax system. The challenge with these methods is that in almost all countries, as we've heard from Simon, property, property cadasters, land titling is hugely incomplete. But if cadasters are incomplete, and you're running a cadaster first property tax system, that means your property tax system is incomplete, and it won't function either. And so that raises the question, how can we move beyond that to find cost-effective, rapid ways of building property tax registers to ensure comprehensive systems. I mean, the importance of that question reflects the enormous costs of the existing status quo in which incomplete cadasters lead to incomplete property tax systems. The obvious cost is limited revenue potential and huge levels of inequality and a lack of public trust within property tax systems. The second consequence though is we also forego the possibility of leveraging information from building effective property tax systems. In order to also strengthen effective land administration and land titling efforts. So we want to see if we can find that synergy between property taxation and land administration. So I would suggest that there's sort of two ways we might think about how to build more comprehensive property registers for property tax purposes. Right. The first is to stick with existing cadaster first approaches, but make them work better, using the kind of fit for purpose approaches that we just heard from Simon in the video. Right? So it may be that if we can bring down the cost of building national cadasters and building universal land titles, then the cadaster can begin to act as a viable foundation for comprehensive property taxation as well. And, so fit for purpose land Administration may hold the key to more effective property taxation as well. But the alternative possibility is that while fit for purpose land administration makes building capacitors relatively more accessible, it's still not quite the right answer for building comprehensive property taxation. And if that's the case, then we might need strategies for building comprehensive property tax registers that are slightly different, even more simplified, even more rapid, but which in turn can be linked back to the challenge of building effective land administration. So I want to describe to you how we've thought about what we have called property tax first approaches. These approaches that start from the property tax system, and then reflect on the relative advantages and drawbacks of these different models. So when we think about property tax first approaches, it's really just 3 things, uh, at the top of this slide. Step 1 is map and address and measure all properties or land plots in a given jurisdiction using GIS and either satellite or drone or other aerial imagery. We know now that you can do this quickly with modern technologies, right? Simple, fit for purpose mapping of plots and build properties is a straightforward, quick, low-cost exercise now. Uh, of course, that wasn't true, not that long ago. Having mapped all of those rooftops and plots and measured them. Actually execute some kind of ground truthing exercise using surveyors to identify key building types, key characteristics of those properties that can be used for evaluation purposes, and ensure the broad integrity of your data. And then final step, and this is key here to this model, is sidestep the need for land titles and ownership information by simply delivering tax bills to the identifiable property with GIS coordinates with a picture. And address it to the owner of the property, whether you know their name or not. In turn, if they don't comply, you still don't know who the owner is, but levy penalties on the property itself. Because we've always assumed that you need a cadaster in order to know the owner, in order to be able to tax the owner. But because properties themselves are visible and immovable, you can tax the property without actually knowing the name of the owner. Right? And so that opens up the possibility of a sort of shortcut to building comprehensive tax registers much more quickly. As I'll say in a minute, that doesn't mean that knowing the owner isn't valuable. It's just to say that there are paths to doing this more quickly. This in turn has the potential, I'd suggest, to dramatically improve short-term outcomes in raising revenue, but also potentially for land administration. It allows for the rapid identification of properties and making sure property tax registers are comprehensive. Using aerial imagery means you can very easily fail, make sure you don't miss anything. And in turn then expands revenue raising, but also equity in those systems, while also giving greater autonomy to local governments in taking the lead in building property tax registers. It tends to be local governments who benefit from property tax revenues, but national governments who are responsible for building national cadasters, making those who need the revenue dependent on other agencies to make it possible. This kind of approach can empower revenue agencies to also map and register properties for tax purposes. To take one example of this kind of method, one of the projects our program has supported was in Freetown in Sierra Leone. In that context, we were able to GIS map. And value, 150,000 properties in the city in less than 6 months and at a cost of less than $5 per property. You can see the difference with that between that and what Simon described. Right? Simon described a cost of $10 per property for assigning title, that's separate from the challenge of valuation, and he described that as a challenge within a generation, as opposed to being true within 6 months. So this is an even more simplified kind of approach to building those comprehensive registers. But the key idea here, but the one that I think is much less developed, much less explored, the one we hope to spark a bit with this discussion, is the idea that doing this doesn't necessarily undermine land administration and titling, but instead can feed into it. Because there's a world in which building comprehensive registers for property taxation and empowering local governments to gather data about properties in their jurisdiction. Can then feed into strengthening land administration and land titling by strengthening incentives for property owners to register their properties, by strengthening incentives and funding for governments to register entitled properties, and by improving the quality and updating of data collection over time. So let me finish by saying a little bit about trade-offs between these different kinds of approaches. Right, the fit for purpose approach to land administration has important advantages as a way of getting towards better property tax registration and property tax systems. Relative to conventional approaches, as we heard, it entails much lower cost, much increased speed, and it does mean that you gather comprehensive ownership information and provide security of tenure to those properties that have been titled. In a perfect world, building a cadaster before you raise property taxes makes a lot of sense. But in practice, there are significant drawbacks to relying on that kind of cadaster first approach, even when it's fit for purpose. One is about time and cost. Fit for purpose land administration is much faster than conventional approaches to titling land. But it's still much slower and much more expensive than the kind of simplified approach to property mapping for tax purposes that I've just described, because it still requires identifying clear boundaries, identifying owners, going through the registration process, and so on. Can, are the resources available in the short term to deliver that comprehensive cadaster? If not, can local governments afford to wait that long before having comprehensive and viable property tax systems to drive improved outcomes in urban development? There are also questions about incentives and corruption. Imagine a world in which once you register your property on the cadaster, you become eligible for property taxation. But as long as you remain unregistered, you don't need to pay. All the incentives are against getting property title. In turn, in a system in which having title is a precondition for paying taxes, there's an easy loophole for corruption, where people try to bribe their way out of ending up on the property tax register. That's much harder when you have a universal comprehensive map that tells you if anyone's missing. So in both ways, this kind of approach potentially improves incentives for effective land mapping and registration. Finally, it gives local control over the process to align control with revenue raising and strengthens the role of local governments in updating data over time. That said, property tax first approaches have their own drawbacks, and we should be straightforward about those because it speaks to how to build the best kind of system. The first is, in a property tax system, property tax first approach, as I've described it, you won't always know who the owners of properties are. You're relying on delivering a bill to the property and on the fact that it will then get to the owner. There are reasonable reasons to think you're more likely to get compliance if you can name the owner, and if you can pursue the person, not just the property. Again, knowing who the owner is, is clearly an advantage. In turn, if you know who the owner is, that data is more valuable to you, because you can use it for rental income taxes, for identifying wealthy taxpayers, and for all kinds of other purposes. So knowing the owner is useful, but it may not be necessary. And that comes to the second point. I think one of the concerns that's levied against the kind of property tax first approach I've described is that it could undermine the drive for more effective land titling and land administration. You might be building two separate and parallel systems, doing the same thing in different ways. And so it becomes essential in the long term that these two systems speak to each other. If you are gathering all of this information for property tax purposes, quick, simple, but effective, that information needs to be gathered in a similar way and shared with those who are building longer term systems of land administration and pursuing land titling. You want to leverage that local information to strengthen that national system as well. If we can do that effectively, then we effectively strengthen incentives for land administration. Uh, strengthen incentives for registration, strengthen revenue flows coming from land registration and titling, and try to improve the overall collection of data to feed into these systems. But this, I think, is very much the next frontier in this discussion. It's actually bringing these two fields together to have those complementarities in practice, because I think in practice, they often remain separate. But I think the potential is clearly there to leverage simplified approaches to property taxation. As a positive input towards improvements in land administration as well. So to conclude very quickly, uh, the core of this argument, uh, I think there's a growing understanding of the importance of fit for purpose approaches to both land titling and to property taxation. For property taxation, it's not just about land titling, but about a broader range of activities that can be simplified to fit the particular context of lower-income countries. Something we'll hear more about among the next discussions. Right? Fit for purpose land administration holds potential also for property taxation by strengthening land administration. But it still poses challenge for those trying to build better property tax systems because of costs, timelines, incentives, administrative structures, and so on. Property tax first approaches potentially simplify the drive towards better property tax systems today at a time when cities need revenues to fund the challenges of urbanization, but can also be designed in a way that feeds into trying to strengthen land administration and titling as well. So I'll stop there. uh, thank you very much for your attention. me. OK. Thank you, Wilson, for this, uh, very passionate presentation. And, um, and, uh, now, I think uh we'll hear from our three panelists some reflections on this. Uh, let me introduce them first. Um, we have at the very, uh, left, on my left, uh, Diane Dumashi, the president of the International Federation of Surveyors, which is a federation representing over 100 national member associations from the whole range of professional fields related to land. And property surveying. Diane has expertise on land governance, particularly in Africa, land tenure, land management, natural resources, water rights, gender equality, and infrastructure regeneration, and many other fields that for time's sake we are not going to list. Uh, Diane is also director of Dumashi Limited and she's part of several boards of professionals including the steering committee of the Global Land Tool Network. We then have, uh, Enid Slacks, the director of the Institute of Municipal Finance and Governance at the School of Cities at the University of Toronto, which focuses on the fiscal health and governance challenges faced by large cities and city regions in Canada and around the world. And it has authored many papers and publication on property taxes, municipal fiscal health, intergovernmental transfer, development charges, financing municipal infrastructure, and metropolitan governance. Uh, she's on the advisory board of the International Property Tax Institute and chairs the advisory board of the Local Public Sector Alliance. In 2012, she was awarded the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal for her work on cities. Welcome. And last but definitely not least, uh, Rahul Awashti, um, is a lead governance specialist and co-leads the domestic resource mobilization Global Solution Group at the World Bank where he is the focal point for property taxation. Rajuul is based in Addis Ababa and leads the World Bank governance agenda for Ethiopia, Sudan, South Sudan, and tax reform in East African countries. He has 15 years of experience in the bank, leading tax reform programs in Africa, South Asia, Latin American and Caribbean, Europe and Central Asia, and before joining the bank, uh, worked as an advisor to the Finance Minister of India. Uh, Raju has several publication of his account, including co-authoring the bank's flag flagship Strengthening domestic revenue mobilization, moving from theory to practice in low and middle-income countries. So please join us and give a round of applause to our panelists to start with. OK, so. First, uh, I think, uh, quite, um, smooth transition to perhaps more difficult questions coming later, uh, you know, starting with Diane, uh, maybe a first, um, reaction and consideration on these two presentations and the diff the merits and shortcomings from your perspective. Thank you, Umretta. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Um, I am hoping my voice will actually hold out for this session, but I'll do my best. The first thing to say is I'm sitting on this panel as a critical friend, because I sit there with the knowledge of fit for purpose approach, but the property tax first approach is relatively new to me, uh, and so I'm going to be the one that perhaps just flags up some ideas and thoughts. So, um, just wanted though to, because there's a lot of people in this room that know fit for purpose. I'm not about to go into detail there, but just a couple of things to mention that Simon perhaps didn't say in a in a a theme, and that is fit for purpose is all about the land parcel that links the system to people. So it's a people relationship. That's what it is about. And uh you know, you know the framework, we heard about that, uh, but that it's been around for about 10 years now, from conception to listening to Simon, um I think it was 2014 when it was launched in the in the World Bank and Jolene I see is nodding, so cos you were certainly around then for this. So, there is an awful lot of evidence base that sits with fit for purpose. This people to land relationship, and I, I'll underscore that for a good reason. But just quickly to say, it has guiding principles, uh, not absolutely rock solid. You that you will do A, B, or C in order to be flexible, as we all know. So, I, I started, uh, when I was listening to you, Wilson, I did scribble some thoughts down and they're a little random, but hopefully they'll they'll come together later. Uh, and, and the first thing is, of course, we're all starting at the same point. The tapestry is, it's not working quick enough, uh, uh, land administration. We know that, and that's what both of these approaches are trying to overcome. And I suppose, I think it's fair to say the cadaster approach, as you call it. Doesn't get the income stream flowing immediately, but the whole concept of the people relationship is that they get the land registered, uh, be it customary or not, and that they then have a part in society, gain businesses, livelihoods, and guess what? Income starts flowing and then the taxation would follow. I, I hear what you say though, Wilson, later on. So, the pragmatism that you mentioned, uh, mapping, identification is exactly the same for fit fit for purpose land administration. Uh, the ground truthing is there too. So again, the two approaches, they're still together, they haven't gone in a separate way. But then, to start mentioning perhaps that you take a, a tax on a property that you haven't got a title for. Um, I just wonder about the sensibility of that if I was that person. You know, I'm really chuffed if I've got fit for purpose land administration, uh, situation, and I think I'd rather go that way, but, you know, I, this is the debate. Um, so, you know, the aerial imagery you mentioned, obviously so does fit for purpose. I also, er, when I, I, there was, I'm afraid, uh Wilson, I've only read one paper, but there's the issue about value, and I understand, and I'm sure you'll clarify later, I understand that the value is based just on the block that you see from the aerial imagery. And whilst I'm not steeped in valuation, uh, value isn't just about the external envelope of a building, um, and I don't need to tell you that on this, this panel here. So, you know, there, there's just a question in my mind over that. And what I see and hear is that, yes, it is empowering, but it's empowering of local governance. Uh, don't have a problem with that, you know, we've got local government needs to be empowered and, and, and move the whole agenda on, but what about the people? How are you going to empower them? Uh, is this really a top slice to rent? I, I don't know. So, yeah, we're all after the perfect world, and we all realize the practical world, and I suppose, uh, she says, trying to get to one of the first comments I wrote down, I suppose for me, because both approaches need this identification and and the people sitting on the land. It's not an either or discussion in my mind. I think there is something in between the two. call it hybrid, call it what you will. Um, and both support land governance and sustainable land governance. A couple of posing questions as I come to a close, is that if then you can tax government local governments can tax that property, so it is probably in an urban area, or is there a shack on a a a rural farmstead, I don't know. If it's uh taxing the property, then that assumes that local government is actually um recognizing tenure, even though you haven't registered it. Uh, and so therefore if it's recognized, does this mean that person can go out and get a mortgage, for instance. So I just see lots of gaps in this sofa, you know, things going down the, the side of the sofa cushions, and, and it comes from, you know, not fully understanding perhaps what you said, although thank you, Wilson for that, um, presentation. Uh, yeah. Remember, my closing word, remember in the 1700s, uh, the good old royal kings of England, when they wanted to go to war, taxed the land, uh, and that's how tax came around. So, uh, yeah, I'll leave it there. Critical friend though, Wilson, I promise you. Thank you, Diane. Uh, I think any of you who have an idea to panel beat, you know now where to go for difficult questions. Um, thanks. So let's, let's move now to Enid, um, your first, uh, reflections on, on these two approaches also from your perspective and professional expertise. Um, well, thank you very much and, uh, thank you, uh, for the invitation to be on this panel. Um, I do have a few friends in the audience, and they know I'm a property tax person, not necessarily a land titling person. Uh, so of course I'm gonna say property tax first, although I'm, I'm, um, uh, uh, I, I really liked the way, uh, Will finished his talk by saying you really do have to do these things together and talk to each other, and I'll say a bit more about that later. Um, but, but I go for the property tax first approach, not necessarily because, um, it, it's, it's better at, at, at getting, uh, land titling, but because municipal local governments really need to have a good source of revenue, and the property tax is a good source of revenue for local governments. Uh, let me just give you a few reasons, um. There's a connection between what local government services are provided and the value of your property. So for example, if, if there's a road next to your property, if there's lighting, uh, if there's a park, if there are any amenities that the local government has provided, that will increase your property value. Isn't that a good way to pay for it by taxing based on the value of your property? Uh, another reason the property tax is a good tax for local government is that property doesn't move. You know, if you tax people's income, they can leave and go into another jurisdiction. You can't actually move your property, so it's a good source of revenue for local governments. Generally, the revenues are stable and predictable. We've certainly seen the economy change, income tax revenues change, value added tax revenue change, but property taxes tend to remain stable and predictable. It's a very visible tax. People know what they pay in property taxes. They generally don't know what they pay in income taxes. They may know what they pay in value added taxes, 12%, 13%, but over the course of a year, people don't know what they pay in value added taxes, but they do know what they pay in property tax, uh, whether it's on the owner or just on the property, there, there is an amount that, that's very visible, but that makes local governments very accountable. I paid so much in my property tax and the street lights aren't lit. You know, there's a, there's an accountability there, uh, that makes it a good tax. It's a fairly progressive tax. I think the tax relative to income on average is, is, um, uh, higher, um, on, on, uh, high income households. I mean there are some people who think it's a regressive tax. I think on average richer people live in more expensive homes. Uh, so I think it's a progressive tax. Um, economists have written that it's least the least detrimental tax to economic growth because it doesn't really affect people's working, their consumption, um, and so it's the least. Detrimental to economic growth and there's potential for local autonomy and accountability. So if it's a local government property tax, uh, that empowers, we talked about empowering local governments, property tax is a good revenue, uh, to empower local governments. Um, so the property tax, that's why I'm going for property tax first, because we really do need good property tax systems, um, around the world to finance local government services and infrastructure. As an academic economist, we've written many times about what that ideal property tax looks like. So you know all of this, you know, all the properties are registered and we know all the owners and, and, uh, there's no exemptions everybody pays all the properties are included we don't provide tax incentives we use market value because that's the gold standard um in reality, um, I've learned over the years having written all that for so many years that in reality that's not practical, you know, a fit for purpose. Property tax is more practical in a lot of countries. And, uh, you know, Will and some of his, his other work has written about a, a good enough property tax or a fit for purpose property tax. And, and what do we mean? Well, again, um, both Simon and Will talked about, you know, it's great to have a cadaster first before we implement a property tax, but it may not be practical. It takes a long time. It's very costly and as Will mentioned also there's very little involvement of local governments. I mean, local governments are the ones from a property tax point of view, um, who, who know the properties, who, who know who's there, who knows, who know what these properties look like, but a national cataster is at a government level far removed, uh, from local communities, so, um. Ideally, again, you'd want a catastrophe first, but, but it may not be possible. Um, and, and we'll also talked about, you know, when you go property tax first, uh, you can use technology to assist you. We talked about drones and, um, aerial imagery and, you know, all of the things, uh, you can do, um. And this can be done fairly quickly. It may not be fully accurate, um, we may not find the owner. It is not perfect, but it is a way to get started. It is a way for people to learn what a property tax is, to understand that that property tax is being used to pay for local services, um. You know, we, we can, we can get to a better system, but we have to, we have to start somewhere and we can't start with a perfect system. Uh, we talked a little bit about value. Diane talked a little bit about value. So, you know, for so many years I wrote market value, that's the fairest system, right? Um, it, it's, uh, the most progressive, it, it reflects the services you're receiving because I said they were, they get capitalized into the value of your property. Um, but as you know, market value is defined as the price that would be struck between a willing buyer and a willing seller in an arm's length transaction. Great, but what if the property hasn't sold or isn't selling? Then you have to estimate it. We call it a presumptive tax. You have to estimate the value of that property, and that, as many of you who are valuers in this room know, is a very sophisticated system. And it requires a lot of resources and a lot of manpower, person power, I should say, um, a lot of resources. So, yes, that may be. The gold standard, but we, we can't use it everywhere and, uh, many years ago I talked about an area-based system, a modified area-based system. Uh, Will talks about a points-based system, uh, where you, again, you do that aerial imagery, you get a sense of the size of the property and you add some factors that you know will affect the value of the property, like how big is it? Um, what's the location, um, uh, what's around it, you know, you, you can sort of put in a number of factors that you add to the area, and over time you can make that more sophisticated. Um, I used to say 10 years, now I hear it's 20 or 30 years, decades, not one decade, uh, but turning that system into something closer to market value. Um, but to think that you can start with market value, um, is, is much more, more difficult. Um, so all of these things can be updated when the circumstances change. We can have what we call continuous improvement. We start with an area-based system, we can slowly move that up and make it more sophisticated. Um, at the same time we're building capacity, so over time we can build up capacity and the resources, uh, to be able to come up with a, a more sophisticated system. I think Simon said as little as possible, but I think he meant as little as possible, as much as necessary, um, at this stage. So again, uh, property tax first because property tax is so important. A fit for purpose property tax. Uh, but I still agree with Will that the two systems, the land, uh, uh, registration and the property tax first are, are both needed. Thank you, thank you, Eid. I think, uh, this was a, a very powerful pitch as well for the property tax. First, I have a lot of questions, but I will hold them and, uh, passing over to, to Raul for your reflection and, uh, you know, perspective on this, um, maybe we'll source the mic from the other side. Thanks. Thank you very much, um, um Breta. So it's, uh, it's really easy to come in at the, at the end of a, a group of very erudite speakers. I don't have much to add. Um, of course, I, as, as, uh, Umreta introduced me, she mentioned I also work on tax issues. So again, I'm going to be a votary for the property tax first approach. Uh, just with the, maybe give a couple of, uh, 11, from the tax law perspective, um, which is that even, um. Illegal income is taxable. So, even if you don't hold a title, you know, there, there's nothing to, in the, in the overall legal framework to prevent. Tax being collected, the tax is on the property, which is the tax base, not on the person, whichever person is occupying or using the property is the one who is liable to pay, uh, in the case of, for example, if I'm a, if I'm leasing a property as a tenant, I wouldn't pay the, I may not pay the property tax. It depends on the agreement with the landlord. Uh, I might be, I might pay if I have an agreement with the landlord that I would pay the property tax. So I think the, the legal issue here is, is not an impediment. Uh, the fact that I don't have a title somehow entitles me to not pay the property tax, despite the fact that I'm using all the services and facilities that. A local government's providing for the owner or occupier of that property, whoever they may be. So I think, I think that the legal position is pretty clear on this. I just want to give you a couple of numbers from Uh, from Zambia. So, they had a, they had a census in 2022, so it's very recent. And again, there's an impediment, a legal impediment in Zambia, which is that the Ratings Act does not apply. To those properties that are untitled or unregistered or unnumbered. So for example, in the city of Lusaka, the population is about 2.2 million people. With the, uh, the average household size is estimated at 4.5. So you're talking about just residential. An estimated 489,000+ properties, residential properties. The ones that are on the property roll. 76,044. So the gap is a huge 410,000. So 5 or 6 times the number of properties that are on the valuation roll are actually the ones that should be. So this is a huge gap, and this is all across Zambia for all the cities and all the city councils and municipal councils across the country. So when you have these kinds of gaps. How is Lusaka City Council expected to raise the revenues that are necessary not only to provide for the day to day maintenance of, of various services but also to uh to to plan for and strategize for all the development that's going to happen that is happening with the with the rapid urbanization that's happening. And with all the implications and all the challenges that climate change is posing for so many cities around the world, so I think revenues are critical, are absolutely critical. Now, we talked about uh how technology, which is now becoming more and more accessible and more and more affordable, can really help to bridge this gap. So you may start with Really preparing a map of properties. Using Satellite imagery using drone-based images. But then you have to undertake the ground truth thing. You have to have door to door surveys where you capture. Other attributes and other details necessary for taxation, the usage of the property. Again, who's the owner or the occupier? Um, etc. etc. So, so all of that is necessary. Now, once you have that, And I think this is, this is something that we, that Nigeria has done very well recently, supported with the World Bank project. Where 36 states, all the 36 states of Nigeria. They were able to use satellite imagery supplemented by ground truthing. Which was incentivized by a World Bank performance for results program. More than 50, uh, actually many, many, um, cities, urban centers did 75 to 80% coverage of the properties. Um, have, um, the properties with electricity connections. So they're, you know, they're, they're not the, the shacks, uh, or the slums. They have managed to do this, so there's a tremendous now property register that's available in Nigeria for all of these cities in the 36 states. That's a fantastic foundation for now moving from there to CEOOO cer certificates of occupancy, certificates of ownership. So, technology can really help bridge these gaps. And I think When cities and when urban local governments actually are able to raise revenues and start to use them. They are then even more able to expedite some of those other, uh, you know, things that they need to do for, for registration and for, um, for titling. Let me stop there. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you, Rajuul. This is a very, uh, you know, very clear trends and, uh, um. Uh, you know, highlights, um. I want to maybe. Bring a little bit of, um, you know, our experience from, from the Arab region and I see some colleagues here who might want to come in later on as well on that. Um, we just did, uh, at the Global Land Tool Network, it will be published soon, hopefully, um, uh an assessment of land administration in 11 countries in the Middle East and Gulf. And actually we found that um Uh, uh, we looked across actually the, the land administration topics taught in the universities, in the training, uh, institutions, and actually, uh, valuation and taxation is the least taught, uh, and therefore understood, uh, you know, there is a lot of capacity knowledge courses in terms of planning, land, land use planning, land development. Very little actually on land dispute resolution, land tenure, and the minimum record on taxation and, and, and valuation. And, uh, so definitely, first of all, you know, we'll, we'll be hopefully working with many of you also in the region to fill that gap. Um, there are of course some universities, uh, and countries championing this, uh, Lebanon, you know, one, Morocco I think is the one doing the best in terms of, um, property taxes, um, from that region, um. And you know, one question maybe is why, why, why is that, uh, and, uh. Um, one of the challenges we looked at, and I, I'm, I don't have an answer, but is that is definitely is the political aspect, you know, like the appetite and the capacity of maybe government to introduce a type of taxation that hasn't not been historically used in such a context. And also, uh, you know, exactly perhaps the, the linkage with people, we saw that for example, even in Libya, um, now I'm looking at the pre, you know, pre-fall of Gaddafi, uh, well, of course, the overall management of land and property was a little bit, um, driven by, I mean let's say not purely fit for purpose land administration considerations, but, um, there were a lot of Decisions and different treatment of different property depending on needs, uh, special groups that would receive special treatment, people who would have priorities, uh, families, you know, low-income families, families of martyrs or maybe fam categories that were perceived as more, uh, needing in support. So definitely, I mean, I mean, I think we discussed a lot of The technical, uh, on the technical side, but what's the impact, um, really of other considerations, particularly, you know, when we want to introduce this type of tools in context that haven't been using them so much before. And then, I mean, let's move, for example, in this, uh, Direction asking any, uh, you know, why, uh, do property tax do not generate much revenue in low-income countries? Is it a tool that is more friendly to some type of, you know, economic system administration systems, um, and what would be needed, uh, to make it, uh, more fit for purpose, uh, you know. more fit for purpose going forward. Well, you're right. Um, I mean, if you look at the OECD, I'm sorry. I'm so casual, like, I just started talking, it's like a little salon here, um. You're right. I mean, in OECD countries, uh, property taxes bring in over 1% of GDP. In, uh, low-income countries, it's like 0.1% of GDP. So it's quite, quite a bit less. Um, it, it's for some of the reasons we've talked about already, which is, um, it requires a lot of information and even, even a, uh, a fit for purpose property tax first system still needs a lot of information and, uh, technical capacity. Um, there's problems with enabling legislation. We haven't talked much about legislation, but in a lot of countries, the legislation doesn't permit this kind of taxation or puts a lot of restrictions on it. Um, it's partly the visibility of the tax, which I talked about before. People know what their property taxes are. That makes it, it makes it hard to increase them in, in the, in high income countries, you know, if the taxes go up more than a few percentage points, people get upset. So imagine introducing a new tax that's very visible, um, but I think lack of political will is, is a big component that we haven't talked about. And, and that's largely because people don't wanna pay taxes. So to introduce a new tax, um, yeah, particularly, uh, you know, I, I think there's a lack of public trust in, in governments and institutions, and they don't wanna pay taxes, uh, they perceive them, uh, to be unfair. Um, in terms of trying to make this, uh, property tax fit for purpose work well, uh, there's a couple of elements I'd like to talk about. One is the need to build public trust, um, and the other is about governments working together, especially because Will talked about national cadasters and local property tax registers and, and, and how to work together on those. So, I think, I think whether people will pay property taxes depends on a lot of things, and one is their perception of how fair that tax is. I mean, if me and my neighbor have similar houses and we're charged different things, there's, we feel it's unfair. I'm not gonna wanna pay if I don't think I'm treated fairly. Um, I think, I think we need to link the taxes to the services. I think people have to understand that. And, and you can do this with the property tax so much more easily with than with income or sales tax or consumption taxes. You sort of say these are the services we're providing and these are the taxes you're paying and by making that link, I think people understand that they're actually getting something um for their taxes. I think we really need. And I'm gonna say meaningful public education and communication and consultation with people. I think people have to understand how the tax works, how their, the tax base was assessed, whether it's an area base, a points based, a value based, how was my, the, the base of the tax determined for my property. Uh, what am I getting for it? Uh, some countries use what's called participatory budgeting where they bring people in and say, here's our budget, and would you spend it differently? Like they give a little bit of it and say, you know, how would you like to spend this little bit of the budget, but engage the public, uh, in a discussion about what they're getting, uh, and what they're paying. I think they need the ability to appeal their taxes, so, or, or the assessed value of their property. Um, I think fairness requires the ability to appeal the value, um, and I think fairness requires that it's collected and enforced. Again, if, if I don't pay my taxes, but, um, other people do, they're gonna say, well, why should we pay? You know, you're not enforcing this anyway. So what do I care? Like, I'm not gonna pay either. So, there's a lot of elements to getting the public on side and, and with, and I keep using the word meaningful consultation, because we see a lot of consultation, but a lot of it isn't that meaningful. It doesn't really engage people in understanding how that property tax system works and what they're getting. I also think um there's a need for intergovernmental coordination both within government so within department across departments within governments like the local government but also between governments so we need to share information. The national government has some information local governments have other information they can inform each other. Um, you need to share data with departments that issue building permits because issuing a building permit gives you information about that property. Uh, we need that that would be helpful for creating a national cadaster. Um, we need to share information on other taxes like the stamp duty or the land transfer tax. I mean, there's a tax that's paid on the sale of the property, presumably there's a sale price there, uh, that gives us information. Uh, business registration, if business are being registered, then we have a sense of, of what that business is, where it is, um, if we have a tax on rental income, and there, there are lots of other taxes, capital gains taxes that, that have information that can be used, um, for determining the property tax base, and local governments have information that can inform, uh, national cadasters, but getting governments to work together, I'm hoping you're not gonna ask me how to do that. Because that's a challenge to, to get everybody working together. But, but as Will says, you need, you need everybody working on it and, and sharing information to get what you need. Thanks. Um, I would like to ask a last quick question to Rajul, and then we'll open, uh, from question to the floor. I mean, um, the inhabitat worked, uh, quite extensively both in Somalia and Afghanistan to introduce a property taxation, um, and which was a successful experience overall, of course, now with Afghanistan having moved slightly differently. It's a struggle a little bit to build on the achievements, but it was a good. A positive, um, experience that uh was exactly coming from the perspective of Property taxation as a way to Create the condition for some participatory planning and building trust of the authorities also as a peace building as well, uh, an institution building, uh, engagement, but, uh, one of the discussion we had was that, uh, you know, when you introduced a new tax, of course you need to keep your your taxation very low and then. More or less the. The cost of collecting the taxes was somehow balanced out on the tax that you do collect, uh. What is your experience in this area? Uh, is it a challenge? Uh, there are some solutions, um. Oh, thanks. Uh, that's a very important question, right? So a lot of uh local governments and local bodies tend to impose. A number of fees and charges. And those are actually um really, really uneconomical from the point of view of the cost of collection being much higher. Than the than the amounts are, you know, not proportional to the amounts that are collected, that's where I think the property tax is one that can. Really be much more economically viable and replace a very large number of charges and fees that create all kinds of frictions for small businesses for uh you know, individuals in in local governments and again I'm, I'm really focusing on and and looking at all of this from the perspective of, of developing countries and low income developing countries in particular. And I think there's, this is where, again, that uh the technology solutions uh can be really, really helpful, where we are able to use uh uh even, even uh in poorer countries. Now, telecommunications and the use of cellphones has spread remarkably, and it's, it continues to increase more and more. So, the more we're able to use accessible, affordable technologies, that is really helpful. But the other thing is, and I think this is where some of the examples that, that Enid mentioned, one of them was Using, say, uh, an area-based valuation, so for a particular area in a city or a zone, there is a certain rate that is used per square foot or per square meter, and then that's supplemented with other kinds of factors and many, uh, many cities, uh, city governments in developing countries, including, uh, you know, for example, in Lahore and, you know, and other cities in Pakistan. Has been pretty, pretty useful and has been quite uh transparent for people because you actually can go online and look at your uh where your property is situated and based on that you know exactly what's gonna be your amount uh assessed in terms of the tax you have to pay and you can then go and pay online immediately so that there the costs of collections are uh collection are really low and I think so again. The design of the tax and the use of technology, these things can really, uh, really help in reducing the costs of collection and administration. I just wanted to add one thing on the, on the whole question of trust. That is obviously, you know, that's the big elephant in the room as far as, uh, uh, uh, you know, developing countries are concerned because yes, theoretically a property tax is one where you can say look, it's very visible and you can say look this is what I'm doing for you and these services are what you're getting for the tax that you pay but if you're in a city in a in a in a in a country where. There's nothing to offer. There are no services. The roads are broken. There are hardly any street lights. The sewage is spilling over and then you ask them to pay property taxes. Yes, it's extremely difficult. The question of trust doesn't arise, OK? It's a, it's a bridge really way too far. So it's, that's the real reason I think you asked another question about why are. Uh, why property taxes are low in many developing countries, this is one of the big reasons, uh, because it is something that links very well and very clearly to the delivery of services. And if those services are not, well, then you don't have the political will in the people to pay it. Thanks. So I know there are, I need to get back to you, but we have quite little time. So I'm going to take 6 questions. Uh, so please, uh, don't make me choose who, who, who, the one who has the highest hand. Uh, I learned one technique this morning which is I will hold the mic so that you don't feel empowered when you ask your question to take a long time. So I will hold the mic and take Maybe 12. Fight it out among 345, and then we'll give a round of answers and the concluding remarks all at once to the panelists. Uh, I feel very bad, introduce yourself briefly before you put the question. Compliments for the fantastic, inspiring, uh, panel and presentation. Uh, two cases in Saudi Arabia they don't have the taxes, uh, but they are introducing them, but not on the built area but on the white lands because they don't like white lands, unused land. Case 2, we are in an urbanizing world. The majority of the people will live in apartments, so how will you find the apartments in the buildings? Good. Uh, thanks. Thanks, thanks very much. Uh, oh, OK, you can hold, OK, that's fine, that's good. Uh, John Meadows, Land Equity International, uh, thanks very much again to Simon and to Will for really, uh, informative presentation and to the panel discussion. I just want to reinforce a couple of things just based on my own experience, I think. I, I, I use this term, the social contract, when it comes to taxation, and I think some of the panel have said that this is extremely difficult to build that social contract in the context of developing countries where it's, it's, it's not easy sometimes to deliver services and infrastructure maybe into areas that have been grown up. Informally and so on. So I thank you for that. It's just reinforcing that. I think we're now opened up a conversation. It's like the chicken and egg, which comes first? Do we tax or do we build the cadata, which is also interesting. And maybe one just the final observation as well on this issue of you're taxing the land and not the owner. Just experienced a gain uh from a jurisdiction which I won't name, but I've lived in, where they try to levy fines for bad driving on the owner of the car without naming the driver, and then there's mass civil disobedience, no one pays it. So um let's see how that will work with taxation. Thank you very much. And as a parent that really paints as an example. Thank you. Uh, we've been, uh, talking together about our questions, so we're gonna share the same questions. Um, uh, uh, that's, uh, it's a very interesting approach, uh, this, um, fit for purpose, uh, property tax first. Uh, I hadn't come across that before. uh, and my mind's just been racing with questions and going, but, but, but how could this work in Solomon Islands where I'm from, um. But, uh, we do actually have something, uh, which is not a property tax or a rent. Um, my part of my answer was also that we don't have the legislation to allow for people to have to be charged something when they don't own the land title yet, but we do actually have something in legislation called a temporary occupation license, and that's something where, um, thousands of informal settlements, uh, do have those, um. But I'm getting to our shared question now. It, it is. How would you then still make sure that people pay that? So if you have a temporary occupation license or a property tax, a land tax of some sort, how would you ensure that that is paid every year or every 3 years or whatever the term is? Uh, just the same way as how do we make sure people pay an offer of a land title? I sign offers of land title all the time, and it's frustrating that it, it can take a very long time to get to the grant stage where I'm signing the grant off. Um, but the same thing could happen in the Freetown example. Uh, I'll pass quickly. Yeah, mine, mine's really quick. I think you gave an example in Freetown and I just wondered what the percentage of compliance in terms of payment was when you just sent the letter to the owner. Um, so was it 5% or 100% payment? Thanks. Thank you. Um, yes, there were people on this side. I remember your hand was higher, but, uh, let's first uh let me hold. Thank you. Uh, my name is Ty Weley. I'm the head of the, uh, fiscal Policy commission for Nigeria. Um, so I think this is quite fascinating, and I thought that fit for purpose, the way I see it, needs to have three attributes. One is fairness. The second one is driving the right behaviors, and the 3rd is the outcomes. Um, and I think that it has to be both ways, both for the taxpayers as well as the government. So the question as to whether it should be property tax first. All the land registration first needs to balance that and here's how I see it, and I'd like to get your perspective. So if um the government does not provide land registration, I feel like it's mostly the responsibility of government to make it happen. What we see in places like Rwanda is the people are still the same people, but you have a government that behaves differently and they have almost 100% registration. So does it make sense, and that's my question, to say Even though it's property tax first, then government should collect less from me if I have no title. Also, because rental value may be the same, but I can't get a mortgage, I can't get a few other things, and therefore government should have the incentive to want to provide the registration. Why for me, I shouldn't have the incentive not to pay the tax just because I have no title? I hope it's clear. Thank you. Yeah, very, very clear. One and then last one and OK thank you uh I'm ready. Oh, I'm gonna hold. OK. Hi, Kevin Barthelll from Millennium Challenge Corporation and Global Land Alliance. Will, um, you're ready for this question? The question is basically we heard at the end about trust, right? But what do we do about how do we do, how do we get that trust, right? We've heard about information campaigns. We talked about, you know, kind of talking to people and things like that. What's the role of institutional and social behavior change in making people pay their taxes? Thank you. Great, thank you. And last. It's more a general comment. Uh, uh, there are many examples of successful land registration project in the world, in all the region of the world. And now we are using more and more the fit for purpose approach and making sure that we use satellite imagery, even, uh, artificial intelligence to prepare, uh, uh, uh, preliminary plans for, and we can speed it up, uh, very, very well, and maybe it will take 20 years, 30 years to. Have a complete coverage of a country in land registration, but at least if you are going in this good right the right direction, making maybe 100 communes or municipalities and projects and having many projects collected. I, I don't believe that people will. Agree to be involved in the taxation projects. So I, I have worked in some countries where there was some fiscal catastrophe, but people are not you, I, you, you asked me to, to contribute to. Have you collecting me tax so we cannot make the economy of land in your security, and I think this is fundamental and I think it's possible now to work fast faster than ever and, and make sure that we have, uh, uh, systematic land registration in the municipality in the, in the province and, and then. Right after that, put in place a mass valuation, uh, project, it, it, it, and this is can be also, uh, be made very quickly but with standards because I don't believe that the to have people adhere to taxation you have to, you need to have an equitable way to collect tax and comprehensive all people must pay. Not only. Your, uh, your name and organization Daniel Roberjos, uh, former chair of Commission 7 and a former World Bank, uh, specialist, and now I'm, uh, also working for, uh, a guest professor at Laval University. Thank you. All right, so quite a handful. Uh, I would, uh, Let's give first the, the word to you and then briefly to um oh. OK, so Diane, you, OK, alright, sure, um. Oh I see. with. OK. Uh, I'm gonna go really fast, uh, as best I can. Um, so first I wanna say I think we were unfair to Diane. Uh, you were outnumbered on this panel with Simon not here, 3 property experts, uh, to 1, but I liked what you said as much as what everyone else said. Uh, so. A few things to say. I think the first thing I wanna stress is just, you know, myself, Rahul, Enid, we all start from property tax, but I think the one thing we all said was if you're gonna do these things for property tax, they have to also contribute to effective land administration and land titling. I really believe even as a property tax, you know, guy, uh, if we pursue a simplified approach to property tax, but that undermines the drive for effective land administration, you know, we're solving one problem by creating another one. They have to sit, fit together. I think to the point at the end, uh, from Daniel. You know that might mean that you don't always start from the property tax first approach, right? If you're working in, you know, in, in some country and you say look, we have an ongoing process to do a fit for purpose land administration land titling drive and in 18 months we're gonna have titles for 90% of the properties in all of the big cities, well then let's use that, right? We don't need the property tax first approach there because we're gonna actually have a comprehensive cadaster. I'm not yet convinced that most countries will pull that off, and in those countries I think you need property tax first, but some countries will. Rwanda's done it. Rwanda has quite comprehensive registration, so use the candaer, right? So I think we wanna be flexible. Each country is different. The key is that they work together and we be strategic and pragmatic about what works, I think, um. I think the points about trust here were fundamental, but I won't say anything more. I think Enid and Raju have said so much about them that I don't wanna expand. I'm sorry, Kevin, but I'm also gonna see you later, um, so we'll talk more. Um, the, I wanted to pick up a couple of things that Diane said though that I think are important and actually our friend from Nigeria said one of the same things. Um, there's this question if you do property tax first, you're saying we'll bring everyone into the tax net where they have title or not. Is it fair that people who don't have title should pay just like people who do? My honest view is probably not entirely. Um, now, if a person's chosen not to get title, well, that's their own problem. They should pay just like everyone else. But if people can't get title because the government's not providing it, then yes, the people with title are better off than the people without. Ideally they would be treated differently, but I think leaving them entirely out of the system is worse than taxing everyone the same. That's my personal judgment. And so I think the property tax first approach is better than the alternative, but it's imperfect. If you could know who has title and who doesn't, maybe you'd levy slightly different taxes on those two groups, um, but I think acknowledging that that question is complicated, I think is part of what's important about having an honest debate and discussion about what the right strategy is, um. It's really important in Nigeria it's a particularly important question I think um you also asked, does paying taxes give you land tenure, right? Because that's a big problem. Governments talking about this approach always ask that question. If people start paying, does that mean they get tenure? If they think the answer is yes, they don't wanna do it. Our view is, look, if the government writes on your tax bill this does not grant tenure, then it doesn't grant tenure, so that, that's an easy problem to solve, but being clear about it it's important because a lot of people imagine that paying taxes does give them tenure and you ideally aren't gonna mislead your taxpayers in going through a process like this. Um, again I know that's an issue in Nigeria among other places, um. So it's an important question. Uh, last thing, um, the social contract idea, right? Diane, I think you made a good point, right? The idea of fit for purpose land administration is give people a title to give them a role, a position in society, to empower them. And your worry is when you go property tax first and you start from tax, you don't do that. You make demands on people rather than than empowering them, um. I think it's possible that that's. That raising taxes can also be empowering and I think that's the ambition, right? Um, you know, and I think this is what we heard back here, right? The idea actually when you go and tax someone you're also giving them a sort of connection to government ideally in taxing them you're also bringing them into a dialogue with government about what they get in return. Ideally that is an entry point also for building the social contract in my view, um. But that only works if you've set up mechanisms for people to do that, if the system is fair, if there are points of engagement with government, if you have participatory budgeting, and so I think the bigger story for me would be if you're gonna do property tax first approaches, make sure you're also putting in place structures to build trust, to build engagement, to make that empowering rather than extractive, um, because other, other, if not, I think your criticism is absolutely right, um. And we should be honest about that too when we think about how we do this in practice. Uh, I'll stop there. Thanks, Wilson. Um. How do we go next? Uh, well, I'll just say two sentences really, and that is, uh, because we could be here a long time because it's very interesting, but, uh, we talked about trust. We heard in the opening, uh, a fantastic little formula, which was power, accountability, and governance. And I think when those three fall in line, as we heard, as I say yesterday, Then you've got trust, and then this system potentially might have some legs. But I think for me, the big issue still is, where is the benefit to the people to land relationship? And if you don't have street lights or roads, then there is none. So what do we do? Thank you. Thank you, Diane. Yeah, I'll just make one comment and because I think I, I think Will and Diane have, have covered most of the questions. I just, we started by talking about the, the wide lands in Saudi Arabia, and I thought that was fascinating because it reminds me that, you know, taxes often have two purposes. One is to bring in revenue, the other To change behavior and that's a case of wanting to change behavior. uh, I don't think the property tax is the best mechanism, the best tool to change behavior, um, but, but some governments do use it for that purpose. Thanks. Definitely. I mean, I think it has its uh. It's value, uh, particularly in countries where they have a very large amount of vacant land, uh, because there is no taxation, and that's really a challenge in, in many countries in the Gulf, for example. Raul, you want to say last word of wisdom. All right, so with this, sorry we're a bit late, but I would like to close this session. Please give a round of applause to panelists and speakers. And to yourself for enduring until the end of day two and uh have a great evening. Thank you. Thank you also for the technical support team. Thank you. I think
showAllTranscripts
no
duration
PT1H38M51S
scene7File
worldbank/World Bank Land Conference 2024 - Revolutionizing Land Administration
scene7Domain
https://worldbank.scene7.com/
scene7FileAvs
worldbank/World Bank Land Conference 2024 - Revolutionizing Land Administration-AVS
title
World Bank Land Conference 2024 Revolutionizing Land Administration
description
World Bank Land Conference 2024 - Revolutionizing Land Administration
showTimestampAndTranscript
yes
col-xs-12
col-sm-12
col-md-3
col-lg-3
col-xs-12
col-sm-12
col-md-7
col-lg-7
  • add-style
  • lp-body-content

A video recording of the Revolutionizing Land Administration session of the 2024 World Bank Land Conference, comparing cadaster-first versus fit-for-purpose and property tax-first systems.

The World Bank Land Conference is the premier forum for the land sector, bringing together participants from governments, development partners, civil society, academia, and the private sector to showcase research, discuss issues and good practice, and inform policy dialogue.

Chair: Wilson Prichard, Research Fellow at the Institute of Development Studies

Speakers:

  • Enid Slack, Director of the Institute on Municipal Finance and Governance
  • Giulia Lavagna, Associate Human Settlement Officer, United Nations Human Settlement Programme
  • Diane Dumashie, President, International Federation of Surveyors
  • Simon Mwesigye, Land Tenure Specialist, United Nations Human Settlements Programme
  • Ombretta Tempra, Human Settlements Officer, United Nations Human Settlements Programme
  • Awasthi Rajul, Senior Public Sector Specialist, The World Bank
lp-heading-top-medium
lp-heading-bottom-medium
col-xs-12
col-sm-12
col-md-2
col-lg-2