Attachment_J.1_Integrated_Land_and_Resource_Governance_(ILRG)_Task_Order_SOW.pdf

Solicitation No.: SOL-OAA-17-00012 Integrated Land and Resource Governance (ILRG) Task Order

ATTACHMENT J.1

INTEGRATED LAND AND RESOURCE GOVERNANCE (ILRG) TASK ORDER SOW

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATION/STATEMENT OF WORK

C.1 PURPOSE

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) seeks to award a five-year Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Term Type Task Order with a three-year base period and two one-year option periods under the Strengthening Tenure And Resource Rights II (STARR II) Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to provide technical assistance services to improve land and resource governance, strengthen property rights, and build resilient livelihoods for all members of society, especially women. This Task Order has a global focus and will likely be implemented in priority countries such as Mexico, Mozambique, Nepal, Zambia and/or others, as appropriate.

The purpose of the Integrated Land and Resource Governance (ILRG) Task Order is to provide support to the Land and Urban Office in the Bureau for Economic Growth, Education, and Environment (E3) to assist USAID Missions and Operating Units through the development of targeted interventions to remove the tenure-related barriers to achieving priority development objectives such as conflict prevention and mitigation, women’s empowerment and gender equality, biodiversity conservation, climate change mitigation and adaptation, inclusive economic growth, and increased agricultural productivity and food security.

In order to achieve the goals of improving land and resource governance, strengthening property rights, and building resilient livelihoods for all members of society, especially women, this Task Order seeks to:

(1) Support the development of inclusive land and resource laws and policies; (2) Assist law and policy implementation, including clarifying, documenting, registering, and administering rights to land and resources; (3) Support the capacity of local institutions to improve equitable and secure land and resource tenure; and (4) Facilitate responsible land-based investment that creates optimized outcomes for communities, investors, and the public.

C.2 IMPORTANCE TO USAID AND FOREIGN POLICY GOALS

Good land and resource governance (LRG) is a critical foundation for successful U.S. Foreign Assistance in all technical areas and regions. This Task Order will support the U.S. Government’s Global Hunger and Food Security Initiative and myriad USAID policies, strategies and goals: Biodiversity Policy, Climate Change and Development Strategy, Democracy, Human Rights and Governance Strategy, Gender Equality and Female Empowerment Policy, Urban Policy, and Vision for Ending Extreme Poverty. This Task Order further reflects the recommendations set forth in the 2015 Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review for the United States Government (USG) to work with indigenous peoples to “strengthen traditional resource management strategies, legalize and demarcate their territories, and improve their livelihoods.”1

1 USG, 2015. Ensuring Leadership in a Dynamic World: Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review. Accessed November 5, 2016 at http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/241429.pdf.

C.3 BACKGROUND

C.3.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Insecure or uncertain property rights is one of the most limiting factors to achieving economic growth and democratic governance throughout the developing world, where an estimated 70 percent of land is unregistered. A large proportion of the poor lack adequate access to land, and when they do have access, they have limited rights. For example, they might be able to use land for cultivation but cannot use it as collateral, rent or sell it, or hold the land for a long enough period to recoup labor and capital investments.

Others are unable to enforce the rights they do have because they are unaware of those rights, cannot afford the required paperwork, or because the legal or customary authorities do not recognize their rights.2 This is especially true for women who are often unable to enforce their rights because of community pressure to keep them dispossessed, differences in how the laws are applied to men and women, lack of bargaining power, and/or a lack of access to unbiased forums to resolve land disputes and claim inheritance.

Where property rights are ill defined or cannot be enforced at minimal cost, farmers, fishers, small business owners, and others who seek to invest productively must spend scarce resources defending their land and/or resources – whether by building fences or defending court cases – thus diverting valuable resources from investments that enhance productivity, such as soil and water conservation. This also prevents landholders from being able to supplement farm income with off-farm income, an important and necessary source of capital for rural families.

Weak land and resource governance is also linked to the unsustainable use of natural resources. For instance, the lack of clear and defined rights to land and resources by forest communities, has often resulted in disastrous long-term impacts locally and globally, including the reduction in ecosystem services such as food (fruits, nuts), fiber (building materials), erosion control, water regulation, coastal and storm protection, and carbon sequestration. Furthermore, weakened resource tenure institutions and ambiguous land policies are primary factors that have decreased traditional systems’ ability to benefit from and sustainably manage forest resources.

Insecure land tenure and the associated uncertainty for long-term investment also creates incentives for landholders to employ inefficient crop production methods such as monocrop and/or annual crop agriculture rather than more sustainable agroforestry, silvopastoral, and other integrated cropping methods. Similarly, for marine areas and lakes, weak resource governance is a driving factor contributing to productivity declines in global fisheries, as well as biodiversity losses in coral reef and other ecosystems. In contrast, when land and resource rights are secure, fisheries’ productivity increases, agricultural productivity improves and incomes rise.3

Without secure land tenure, it can be more difficult to access credit. In contrast, where financial markets are accessible, secure property rights can also enable rights holders to access credit for additional investments and also act as an insurance substitute in case of shocks.4 Clear and well-administered property rights are also essential to the collection of revenue from property taxes, which can be an

2 USAID, 2013. Land Tenure and Food Security: USAID Issue Brief. Accessed October 21, 2016 at http://www.land-links.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Land-Tenure-and-Food-Security.pdf 3 See, for example, Lawry, S., et al, 2014. “The impact of land property rights interventions on investment and agricultural productivity in developing countries: a systematic review” (Campbell Systematic Reviews, 10(1)). Accessed October 21, 2016 at http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/lib/project/220/ 4 Deininger, K., 2003. Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction: A World Bank Policy Research Report. Washington, DC: The World Bank and Oxford University Press.

http://www.land-links.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Land-Tenure-and-Food-Security.pdf http://www.land-links.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Land-Tenure-and-Food-Security.pdf http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/lib/project/220/ important source of income for local governments.5 Effective land taxation can be an important driver of both local government revenue generation and accountability, particularly where land remains an important productive asset.6 If land and resource governance is poor, it can impede countries from effectively facilitating economic structural transformations.

It can also inhibit good land use planning and investment, which are important tools for countries to garner the most from land and resources, including ecosystem benefits, food security, and revenue, among others.

In urban areas, insecure property rights often prevent landholders from accessing critical services such as waste removal, electricity provision, and water access. Infrastructure projects in both urban and rural areas can negatively impact landholders through involuntary displacement and resettlement. Furthermore, even if landholders are compensated fairly for their lost property and livelihoods, few projects share benefits with local landholders. Large-scale investments for agriculture, forestry, energy generation and distribution, or others can also face substantial tenure-related constraints and risks, as a lack of clear land tenure and/or compensation for wayleaves7 may result in land speculation or movements of people onto the land in question and increased tenure insecurity for landholders.

In more rural areas, insecure land tenure, particularly in indigenous territories, is a significant threat to stability, cohesion, development and economic health.8 For example, failure to protect customary land rights in places like Africa, where an estimated 90 percent of rural land is undocumented, leaves communities vulnerable to infringements of their rights, which can lead to conflict. Additionally, the lack of recognition of informal land administrative systems not only deepens the vulnerability of indigenous peoples who inhabit those lands, it limits the effectiveness of efforts to mitigate climate change and protect biodiversity that appear to be most successful where indigenous peoples enjoy collective property rights.9

C.3.2 LAND AND RESOURCE CONSTRAINTS IN THE COUNTRIES OF INTERVENTION

This Task Order will focus on the countries in which there is the best opportunity to remove the tenure-related barriers to achieving important development objectives such as conflict prevention and mitigation, women’s empowerment and gender equality, biodiversity conservation, climate change mitigation and adaptation, inclusive economic growth, and increased agricultural productivity and food security.

5 USAID, July 9, 2013. “Property Taxes Can Encourage Government Transparency and Efficient Land Use.” Online article.

Accessed October 21, 2016 at http://usaidlandtenure.net/commentary/2013/07/property-taxes-can-encourage-government-transparency-and-efficient-land-use.

6 Deininger, 2003.

7 A wayleave is a right of way, usually in the nature of an express easement and granted by deed or by reservation in consideration of a rent or other charge being exacted.

8 Perch, F. “Common Ground: Securing land rights and safeguarding the earth.” Land Rights Now, International Land Coalition, OXFAM and Rights and Resources, March 2016.

9 Ibid.

http://usaidlandtenure.net/commentary/2013/07/property-taxes-can-encourage-government-transparency-and-efficient-land-use http://usaidlandtenure.net/commentary/2013/07/property-taxes-can-encourage-government-transparency-and-efficient-land-use

The Task Order has a global focus that could include work in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and/or Eastern Europe. Initially, the Task Order will likely focus on four priority countries: Mexico, Mozambique, Nepal and/or Zambia. In subsequent years, interventions in other countries will likely be added and could include, subject to Mission concurrence, any country in which USAID works but will likely focus on a subset of the following countries: Burkina Faso, Cote d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana, Guatemala, Haiti, Indonesia, Kenya, Niger, Paraguay, Peru, Senegal, and Vietnam. Additional countries may be proposed by the Contractor, USAID Missions or Operating Units and will likely reach 10 over the life of this five-year Task Order.

Land and resource issues in the four priority countries can be summarized as follows:

Mexico10 Mexico implemented a large-scale land reform that began after the revolution in 1917 and ended in 1992.

The reform distributed more than 100 million hectares from large farms to groups of households organized into ejidos (collective holdings). Indigenous groups also gained rights to their commonly held land during this period, which they organized into comunidades (forms of collective ownership). These comunidades, however, lagged behind the development of privately held farms, and collective owners were more likely to be poor. Also, many states still have highly complex and fragmented land tenure system dominated by overlapping ejido and customary tenure.

In 1992, Mexico fundamentally changed its land regime and allowed privatization and market transfers of ejidal land rights. This reform is now largely completed, though it has been hindered by inadequate state participation in the land certification and registration process, insufficient protection of women‘s land rights, and lack of credit or marketing mechanisms. A large part of Mexico’s rural population faces significant challenges in overcoming poverty and entering a future of broad-based, sustainable development in the countryside.

In the latter half of the twentieth century, Mexico experienced a fundamental shift from a rural to an urban society. This dramatic urbanization has strained the ability of the Government of Mexico (GOM) to build urban infrastructure, including housing. The lack of affordable housing has meant that rural-urban migrants cluster along the periphery of urban centers. The failure of state-funded urban housing to meet demand has led to the proliferation of informal settlements.

Women in Mexico were largely excluded from land redistribution programs and men hold most ejidal land. Most women are not voting members (ejidatarios) of ejidos and do not hold use-rights. The 1992 reforms have in some cases further eroded women’s rights on ejidos, as only ejidatarios were allowed to vote on new regularization and tenure regimes, and only ejidatarios’ land rights were strengthened through these processes.

Mexico faces a number of environmental challenges. Thirty-three percent of Mexico’s land area is forested, and the average annual deforestation rate is 0.4 percent. Deforestation contributes to soil erosion and desertification. Deforestation is driven by uncontrolled forest fires and illegal cutting, which primarily occur in contexts of poor social capital and scarce opportunities for economically viable and legal forest use.

Wind and solar clean energy are new opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and bring economic development to Mexico’s rural areas. However, efforts to increase renewable energy production have resulted in land conflicts with local ejidos and communidades. Already in Oaxaca ,violent conflicts

10 USAID Property Rights and Resource Governance Country Profile: Mexico. Accessed November 25, 2016 at https://www.land-links.org/country-profile/mexico/.

https://www.land-links.org/country-profile/mexico/ have erupted with local communities and indigenous peoples around the siting and construction of wind farms and the social and environmental impacts of these projects. Conflict appears to be driven by two major factors: a lack of community consultation and involvement in project scoping, design, and execution; and inequitable distribution of rent payments and social benefits associated with projects. The GOM has responded to these emerging social risks by mandating that all energy projects conduct Social Impact Assessments (SIAs), which is an important step in the right direction.

Mozambique11 Mozambique’s independence from Portugal in 1975 was followed by 16 years of civil war. The war displaced millions of people, destroyed infrastructure and prevented significant investment in various sectors, including agriculture and mining. As the country entered a period of national reconstruction in the early 1990s, the government gave substantial attention to creating legal frameworks governing land, and these frameworks recognized traditional community rights while encouraging investment.

The resulting legislation was progressive: land is owned by the state, and communities and good faith occupants have perpetual use-rights to land. Grants of 50-year renewable use-rights are available at almost no cost for investors and others seeking land, subject to approved exploitation plans. Investors are required to consult with communities before obtaining concessions for agribusinesses and other development.

To date, most of the population is not yet benefiting adequately from the legal reforms, and more than half are poor. Most of the country’s producers are small farmers primarily growing crops for their own consumption. Mozambique’s farmers have an average of 1.8 hectares of rain fed land and limited access to quality inputs. Most irrigated land is used by a small number of large commercial farmers primarily for sugarcane. The law requires government approval of land uses and transactions in land use rights, which restricts development of a formal land market. Former colonial farms and large tracts of long-term land use rights purchased for investment have generally not been parceled out. In many cases, private investors purchased rights under very favorable terms and hold large portions of land for future use or speculation.

The government’s failure in many instances to require investors to prepare exploitation plans and demonstrate their ability to develop the land, coupled with lax enforcement of the Land Law’s audit provisions, have contributed to the underutilization of land. The state has also maintained large holdings intact, hoping to attract large commercial enterprises.

The dual objectives of Mozambique’s progressive land law – support for rural community land rights and encouragement of private investment – have been unevenly implemented. The legal framework provides communities with some degree of tenure security over their land, but the majority of rural residents are unaware of their land rights as communities and as individuals, despite significant public awareness building efforts. Those who are aware of their rights almost uniformly lack the financial and technical support necessary to effectively assert those rights. Communities who lack that support are ill-equipped to delimit their land, prepare development plans, consider investment opportunities, or meaningfully engage in negotiations with prospective investors. Smallholders who lack such support are unable to demarcate and register their land rights, limiting their ability to participate in programs, access credit, and defend their rights against third parties.

About a quarter of Mozambique is forested, and the country’s legal framework supports traditional uses of forest and forest resources, the harvesting of timber and non-timber forest products, and the creation of community-based forest enterprises. However, the regulatory framework tends to favor national and international companies over small and medium businesses, and rural populations have high incentives to operate informal forest-product-based businesses and engage in unsustainable exploitation practices.

11 USAID Property Rights and Resource Governance Country Profile: Mozambique. Accessed November 25, 2016 at https://www.land-links.org/country-profile/mozambique/

As global demand for food, biofuel, forest, and horticultural products rises, more and more companies are investing — and will continue to invest — in agricultural land in Africa. But with the potential benefits of such private sector investments come several risks, including land tenure risks: the risks associated with acquiring rights to land. In Mozambique, land-related risks appear to be especially acute: allegations of land grabbing are rife, and both domestic and foreign investors are scrambling to find ways to invest in a more responsible manner, while communities are fighting to make sure that they can benefit from the investment that is streaming into the country. The lack of reliable land records and cadastral maps exacerbates the situation, as the Government allocates ‘empty’ land to investors that, in fact, is being used or occupied by communities.

With improved land administration and management, agricultural growth and production could be further stimulated and potential conflict situations between developers, investors, and communities could be ameliorated.

Nepal12 The ten-year conflict (1996–2006) between the Government of Nepal (GON) and the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists) slowed economic growth and displaced tens of thousands of Nepalese. The government of the newly created Federal Democratic Republic faces many challenges in preserving the peace and delivering development in a context of great geographical, ethnic, and social diversity. The country has abundant water resources, well-distributed forestland, and a relatively concentrated area of cultivable land, but is challenged by weak institutions that oversee the management of its land and natural resources. Nepal’s highly stratified and hierarchical social structure has tended to limit access to resources and economic opportunity. Consequently, Nepal remains a low-income economy, highly dependent upon agriculture, with a third of its 28 million people below the national poverty line. The poorest are those in the lower castes, Muslims, and agricultural laborers.

With 83 percent of the population living in rural areas, land is a critical resource in Nepal. Poverty is highly correlated to the size and quality of landholdings. Five percent of the population controls 27 percent of the land while almost half the population holds only about 17 percent of the land. Land productivity is low due to lack of irrigation, inconsistent use of inputs, and inadequate infrastructure. A high percentage of agricultural land is idle. At least 10 percent of the rural population is absolutely landless.

Despite numerous efforts at land reform, Nepal has been largely unsuccessful at equalizing highly skewed land holdings, reducing the significant level of landlessness, improving security of land tenure, and eliminating exploitative tenancy relationships. These chronic land issues helped to fuel the years of conflict between the Government of Nepal and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), whose rhetoric includes a strong element of social justice and retribution. Land reform is on the agenda of the current government, which has recognized the relation between land access and tenure security and the achievement of agricultural productivity and economic growth. Better land records maintenance – including via image-based land mapping and records keeping – is also needed, especially in the wake of the 2015 earthquake.

Rapid urbanization is occurring as a result of displacement from conflict-stricken areas and lack of opportunity in rural areas. The need for housing outpaces availability; the majority of urban residents live in substandard housing in informal settlements. The settlements are mostly unserviced, at risk from outbreaks of disease, and vulnerable to earthquakes and flooding.

12 USAID Property Rights and Resource Governance Country Profile: Nepal. Accessed November 25, 2016 at https://www.land-links.org/country-profile/nepal/

Nepal’s land and other natural resources are threatened. Much of the forestland between the Himalayas and the lowland plateaus has been cleared for crops, livestock, and human settlement. Landslides, erosion, and soil degradation are common. Nepal’s abundant surface water resources have been harnessed to provide energy to many areas but are increasingly polluted by the discharge of untreated human and industrial waste. Nepal’s community forest program, which is implemented by almost 15,000 Community Forest User Groups (CFUGs) countrywide, has been credited with reversing the pace of degradation in some of the country’s forests.

Zambia Despite a decade of economic growth, two-thirds of Zambia’s population is poor; half live in extreme poverty. A majority of the country’s rural population is dependent on subsistence and small-scale rain fed farming on customary land. Drought and flooding are common and agricultural productivity is low.

Historically, land in Zambia has been perceived as abundant and widely available. However, changing demographics, a growing middle class, and increased allocation of land for investment opportunities are resulting in pockets of land scarcity and land conflict in some cases. These dynamics are compounded by a lack of documentation, transparency, and robust administration in both state land and customary land systems. As a result, land conflicts are ubiquitous across the country among households, between households and traditional leaders, between government and traditional leaders, and between private enterprises and all of the above stakeholders.

The current national discourse on land issues largely focuses on the lack of transparency in land allocation and administration on both customary and state lands, which affects stakeholders from subsistence farmers to large investors. At independence, 94 percent of Zambia was under customary land, with state land largely restricted to municipalities, protected areas and forests, and areas bordering railroad lines.13 Since 1995, the Zambian legal framework has promoted the conversion of customary land to state land through a one way, non-reversible process. Over the past 20 years, conversion has been met with significant distrust by chiefs, many of whom see conversion as a means of diminishing the power of traditional authorities.

As a result, it is unknown how much land has been converted and who the main actors have been in this conversion process (smallholder farmers, traditional authorities, national or international investors).

Estimates suggest that 30 to 40 percent of Zambian land has been converted or is in the process of conversion to Indaba Agricultural Policy Research Institute (IAPRI).14 A large amount of this area is likely only partially converted to state land, as many land holders have gained approvals from traditional authorities and local councils (who believe the land to be converted), but have not completed all legally required procedures with the Ministry of Lands (who still believe the land to be under customary management) for a variety of reasons, including taxes, administrative fees, and lack of access to Ministry of Lands offices. This lack of information on the portion of the country that falls under customary versus statutory land or to whom land has been allocated allows stakeholders to continue to place blame on others for land conflicts and disputes.

Traditional authorities have long been responsible for allocating land within chiefdoms through an established customary administration system that includes chiefs, headpersons, and chiefs’ advisors (indunas). Structures exist for traditional authorities to vet applicants and subsequently allocate land, yet

13 Sitko, Nicholas, Chamberlain, J., Hichaambwa, M., 2015. "The Geography of Customary Land in Zambia: Is Development Strategy Engaging with the Facts?" (Indaba Agricultural Policy Research Institute Working Paper No.

98).

14 Ibid.

these processes are largely undocumented and are not downwardly accountable to local community members. Though traditional authorities currently lack transparency or tools to document and administer land, they possess a cultural legitimacy and a right to manage land on behalf of the President. Given the legitimacy and the strength of customary authorities in Zambian culture and the difficulty faced by central government in reaching stakeholders in rural lands, the active engagement of traditional institutions is indispensable in land administration.

The current land administration system, as well as the application of the Decentralization Act, is perceived by many as creating ambiguities between the roles and functions of traditional authorities over land and people within chiefdoms. While the Decentralization Act has placed more autonomy at the District level, to date, the engagement of the 108 Districts has largely been focused on municipalities.

Rather unfortunately, the District and Ward boundaries do not overlap easily with Chiefdom boundaries, further complicating coordination of service provision in Chiefdoms. However, the Patriotic Front Manifesto recognizes this weakness and calls for the creation of Chiefs Councils at the District and Provincial levels to enhance coordination with government.

The Decentralization Act, as well as the Town and Villages Act, also empowers District Councils to play a substantive role in rural development issues, including land use and management. As Districts begin to play these roles and as municipalities expand their service delivery and management into peri-urban customary land, numerous conflicts have emerged. As decentralized capacities build, these conflicts will likely spread further into rural customary lands.

C.3.3 IMPORTANCE OF GOOD LAND AND RESOURCE GOVERNANCE TO ACHIEVE CRITICAL

DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES

Strong land and resource governance can help achieve positive development outcomes, such as: 1) Inclusive economic growth and food security; 2) Provide a critical foundation for biodiversity conservation, climate mitigation and adaptation, and sustainable natural resource management; 3) Good governance, conflict mitigation, and disaster mitigation and relief; and 4) Empowerment of women and other vulnerable populations.

1) Increase Inclusive Economic Growth and Food Security

Evidence from across the globe shows that when land and resource rights are secure, agricultural productivity improves and incomes rise. For instance, in Thailand, land titling was positively correlated with economic growth, leading to increased investment, input use, and yields, especially when credit was available.15 In Ethiopia, land certification led to land productivity increases of 40-45 percent in the Tigray Region, and soil and water conservation investments rose by 30 percent in the Amhara Region.16,17

Fisheries’ productivity – a key to achieving food security in many developing countries – also increases with secure tenure and access rights and improved governance structures.18 As women produce a

15 Feder, G. and A. Nishio, 1999. “The Benefits of Land Registration and Titling: Economic and Social Perspectives” (Land Use Policy 15(1): pp. 25-43.)

16 Holden, S. and K. Otsuka, 2014. “The Roles of Land Tenure Reforms and Land Markets in the Context of Population Growth and Land Use Intensification in Africa” in Food Policy “Boserup and Beyond: Mounting Land Pressures and Development Strategies in Africa” 48 edited by T. Jayne, D. Headey and J. Chamberlin, Elsevier pp. 88-97. Accessed October 21, 2016 at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919214000451 17 Deininger, K. et al, 2008. “Impacts of Land Certification on Tenure Security, Investment and Land Markets: Evidence from Ethiopia” (World Bank Policy Research Working paper 4764 [subsequently published in Land Economics 87(2) pp. 312-34 2011]. Accessed October 21, 2016 at http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/507061468315363246/pdf/WPS4764.pdf 18 USAID, June 2013. Sustainable Fisheries and Responsible Aquaculture: A Guide for USAID Staff and Partners. Accessed October 21, 2016 at https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1865/FishAquaGuide14Jun13Final.pdf http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919214000451 http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/507061468315363246/pdf/WPS4764.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1865/FishAquaGuide14Jun13Final.pdf significant amount of food grown in the developing world, including being substantially involved in the fishing industry,19 securing property rights for women is especially paramount. Also, pastoral livestock systems play an important role in food security and economic growth across many African countries -e.g., in Tanzania, the traditional livestock sector produces 70 percent of the country’s milk, and the livestock and associated products in just Kenya and Ethiopia amount to more than $900 million per year.20

Secure property rights are critical for broad and inclusive economic growth. Clear and secure property rights for landowners and users reduce the potential for conflict and the threat of eviction, which provides incentives to conserve and improve both natural and built assets and implement land-related investments.

Secure property rights also contribute to vibrant markets by incentivizing productivity-enhancing and climate-resilient investments and facilitating credit access where other enabling conditions are present.21,22 Clear and well-administered property rights are essential to the collection of revenue from property taxes, which can be an important source of income for local governments.23 As the world grows increasingly more urban, and the nature of this growth is often informal – e.g., the urban slum population is projected to increase to two billion people by 2030 – it is essential that land and resource governance issues are addressed in order for this population to access services (waste removal, water, electricity, etc.)

and economic opportunities.

2) Provide a Foundation for Biodiversity Conservation, Sustainable Natural Resource Management, and Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation

Secure and clear resource tenure – including reducing unchecked open access to resources – is essential for sustainable and climate-resilient natural resource management and biodiversity conservation.

Clarifying property rights reduces threats to biodiversity by reducing confusion and conflict over access, use and management of biological resources.

The impacts from global climate change, including increased variability in rainfall, the incidence of extreme weather events, rising temperatures and sea levels all have implications for resource availability and food production in both terrestrial and aquatic environments, as well as the way that natural resources are managed and benefits of these resources are distributed. And given the mass displacement and migration that is expected to occur because of weather and climate variability, it is important to secure land rights now.

Secure property rights can incentivize people to invest in their land and resources for the long term, including reducing deforestation or the degradation of ecosystems that provide various and valuable ecosystem services. Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation plus carbon sequestration from forest enhancement (REDD+) can play an important role in mitigating climate change, and secure property rights is essential for incentivizing REDD+ actions at the local, regional or even national level. Furthermore, renewable energy projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions are most likely to succeed when local landholders’ property rights are secure, allowing them to more effectively negotiate with project developers for compensation, among other benefits.

19 In a study of nine wild fisheries, women comprised 46 percent of those engaged in pre- and post-harvesting activities; and overall, nine out of ten persons engaged in fisheries’ secondary activities are women. In USAID, April 2016. Fishing for Food Security: The Importance of Wild Fisheries for Food Security and Nutrition.

20 Helen de Jode, ed., 2010. Modern and bobileMobile: the future of livestock production in africa’s Africa’s drylands. Published by the International Institute for Environment & Development (IIED) and SOS Sahel International UK.

21 Deininger, 2003.

22 Lawry et al, 2014.

23 USAID, July 9, 2013.

3) Promote Good Governance, Conflict Mitigation, and Disaster Mitigation and Relief

Conflict over land is more likely to escalate and become violent when land tenure and resource rights are weak or insecure; when landholders are vulnerable after natural disasters; and when the existing land governance systems are ineffective, corrupt, or otherwise dysfunctional. Typically, the poor and other vulnerable groups, notably women, suffer disproportionately from such competition and the ensuing conflict. These problems contribute to the incidence of violence in many countries and to instability and insecurity, some of which may threaten US national security interests.

Precisely because land-related issues cause, or contribute to, conflict, it is critical that development interventions work to mitigate those likely social impacts.In conflict, post-conflict, or post-disaster situations, tenure and property rights are critical to meet demands for security, peace, protection, restoration of property and livelihoods, and the reestablishment of functioning institutions and commitment to reform—all pre-conditions for broader reconstruction and development. Efforts to protect land records, mediate land disputes between and among displaced persons and settlers, and rebuild the capacity of land governance systems can help reduce tension, stabilize a locale, and set the stage for productive investments and growth. These, in turn, can help break the conflict trap and promote US national security interests.

4) Empower Women, Indigenous Peoples, Pastoralists and Vulnerable Populations

Securing land and resource tenure for vulnerable populations,24 including women, indigenous peoples, pastoralists, and others, can have outsized benefits. For instance, when women have secure rights to land, they make investments to improve land and acquire better quality inputs, participate in land rental markets, and “earn up to 3.8 times more income.”25 These decisions improve the food security and nutrition of the entire household: children whose mothers own land are up to 33 percent less likely to be severely underweight and 10 percent less likely to be sick.26 Female farmers – if they had equal access to resources and knowledge – could produce enough additional food to reduce the number of the world’s hungry by 150 million.27

Likewise, improving tenure security for indigenous peoples (including through collective title), who have historically been important stewards of forests, can have important conservation outcomes, since areas in which indigenous peoples have secure tenure are often better protected than state-controlled protected areas.28,29 A growing body of evidence indicates that when communities hold collective rights to forestland, deforestation rates within those indigenous and community forests are significantly lower than in forests outside of those areas.30 For instance, the economic benefits from averted emissions as well as

24 There are five categories of population groups whose vulnerability is potentially increased by land tenure and property rights interventions: women; households that have been directly affected by HIV/AIDS; pastoralist communities; indigenous populations; and people who have been displaced during violent conflicts (refugees, Internally Displaced Persons, and demobilized combatants) or who are threatened to be displaced by natural disasters or climate change (climate refugees). For more information, see http://www.land-links.org/document/ltpr-for-vulnerable-populations-report/ 25 Landesa, Infographic “A Better World: Strengthening Women’s Land Rights”. Accessed October 21, 2016 at http://www.landesa.org/press-and-media/landesa-releases-new-womens-land-rights-infographic-at-trust-women-conference/ 26 Ibid.

27 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2014. Building a common vision for sustainable food and agriculture: Principles and approaches.

28 Ricketts, T. H. et al., 2010. “Indigenous lands, protected areas, and slowing climate change.” PLoS Biol 8 (3):e1000331.doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1000331.

29 Stickler, C., et al., 2008. Forest carbon monitoring and landscape modeling in support of REDD: The Xingu River headwaters of the SE Amazon. Woods Hole Research Center, IPAM and UFMG Policy Brief for Poznan UNFCCC Conference of the Parties, Fourteenth Session.

30 USAID, February 2016. Land Resource Tenure and Social Impacts. Accessed November 6, 2016 at https://www.land-links.org/issue-brief/land-and-resource-tenure-and-social-impacts/ http://www.land-links.org/document/ltpr-for-vulnerable-populations-report/ http://www.landesa.org/press-and-media/landesa-releases-new-womens-land-rights-infographic-at-trust-women-conference/ carbon capture in secure forests in indigenous peoples’ and customary communities’ lands in Guatemala and Brazil will surpass USD 160 billion and greatly outweigh the costs of securing their tenure.31 Similarly, securing tenure for pastoralists can have important economic and ecological benefits, since they have adapted over the centuries to often harsh, dry ecosystems and typically manage their livestock in sustainable ways that make the most of – but do not overexploit – water and other important resources.

In arid and semi-arid rangeland, pastoral systems can be even more productive and viable (in terms of protein production per hectare and environmental benefits) than ranching or sedentary livestock production systems,32 especially if a holistic understanding of sustainable pastoral systems and green economy is brought to bear.33,34

C.4 OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this Task Order is to:

• Improve land and resource governance (LRG), strengthen property rights, and build resilient livelihoods for all members of society, especially women.

Strong land and resource governance is important within the broader context of reaching myriad USAID goals. In particular, successful implementation of this Task Order will enable USAID to achieve four broad objectives that will contribute to ending extreme poverty:

1) Increase inclusive economic growth and food security;

2) Provide a critical foundation for biodiversity conservation, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and sustainable natural resource management;

3) Promote good governance, conflict mitigation, and disaster mitigation and relief; and

4) Empower women and other vulnerable populations.

C.5 STATEMENT OF WORK

This Task Order aims to provide catalytic, targeted technical assistance to USAID Missions and Operating Units to improve land and resource governance, strengthen property rights, and build resilient livelihoods for all members of society, especially women, in USAID priority countries such as Mexico, Mozambique, Nepal, Zambia and/or others.

Successful performance under this Task Order will require adaptive management, as it is critical to build on lessons learned during implementation to maximize the likelihood of success. It will also require engaging a diverse set of stakeholders and partners – especially governments at the national, regional, and local levels, civil society, communities, and businesses, as well as marginalized groups often left out of decision-making and consultative processes – in creative ways to carry out strategic land and resource governance interventions.

The Contractor must have a deep understanding of country development objectives for which secure land and resource tenure are paramount. For example, Contractors must understand that countries’ Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to mitigating and adapting to climate change, as agreed to at the

31 Gray, E., et al. 2015. “The Economic Costs and Benefits of Securing Community Forest Tenure: Evidence from Brazil and Guatemala.” Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. Accessed October 21, 2016 at http://www.wri.org/forestcostsandbenefits.

32 Kipuri, N., and C. Sørensen. 2008. Poverty, pastoralism, and policy in Ngorongoro. IIED: London.

33 McGahey, D., Davies, J., Hagelberg, N., and Ouedraogo, R., 2014. Pastoralism and the Green Economy – a natural nexus?

Nairobi: IUCN and UNEP. Accessed October 21, 2016 at http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/wisp_green_economy_book.pdf 34 Helen de Jode. 2014. The Green Quarter: A decade of progress across the world in sustainable pastoralism. Nairobi: IUCN.

http://www.wri.org/forestcostsandbenefits http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/wisp_green_economy_book.pdf

Conference of the Parties in Paris in 2015, include commitments to source more energy from renewable sources and to decrease emissions from changing land use, including deforestation. Land-use planning and regulations will also be an important contributor to low emissions development and adaptation to climate variability. The Contractor must work towards strengthening land and resource governance in ways that utilize and/or further such government objectives.

This Task Order requires an understanding of local systems, including resources, roles, relationships, rules and results, as set forth in the USAID Local Systems Framework.35 Furthermore, as land and resource rights have wealth and power implications, this Task Order requires analysis and understanding of the political economy of the target countries, including who benefits from reform and more secure land and resource rights, who benefits from the status quo and may oppose reform, and what political or other interests are at stake. Political economy analysis, when undertaken iteratively throughout project implementation, may help to focus interventions, achieve results, and avoid untoward consequences.

The Contractor must also have comprehensive knowledge of the main constraints to secure land and resource tenure so as to provide clear and innovative approaches or solutions to those constraints that are guided by local dynamics.

To achieve the Task Order’s objective and associated results, the Contractor must work collaboratively with the Land Team (within the Office of Land and Urban) and USAID Missions and Operating Units to engage host country governments, civil society, academia, communities, and businesses through four interrelated components:

• Component 1: Support the development of inclusive land and resource laws and policies;

• Component 2: Assist law and policy implementation, including clarifying, documenting, registering, and administering rights to land and resources;

• Component 3: Support capacity of local institutions to improve equitable and secure land and resource tenure; and

• Component 4: Facilitate responsible land-based investment that creates optimized outcomes for communities, investors, and the public.

These Components and their related tasks and deliverables are described below.

Component 1. Support The Development Of Inclusive Land And Resource Laws And Policies

The Contractor must provide targeted technical assistance to USAID Missions and Operating Units to support land and resource law and policy reform in countries such as Mexico, Mozambique, Nepal, Zambia and/or others. The purpose of this Component is to create inclusive legal and policy frameworks that provide equitable access to and security for land and resources while also providing a foundation for sustainable land management. It is critical that laws reflect the interests and concerns of stakeholders who will be most affected by them.

The Contractor is expected to understand and, where appropriate, take advantage of changing political landscapes or recent shifts in development priorities that signal new opportunities for legislative or policy change to advance the development of inclusive land and resource laws and policies. It is important for the Contractor to understand the relationship between land and natural resource rights and policies (e.g., 35 USAID, April 2014. USAID’s Local Systems: A Framework for Supporting Sustained Development. Accessed October 7, 2016 at https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/LocalSystemsFramework.pdf https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/LocalSystemsFramework.pdf rights to the trees, carbon stored, etc.) to determine how laws and policies can be changed or strengthened to incentivize sustainable land management. Finally, the Contractor must be aware of laws or policies that attach land rights to productive land uses so the Contractor can assist in revising such laws and policies to reduce incentives to deforest or degrade ecosystems and instead create incentives for environmental conservation and sustainable land management.

The Contractor must work to clarify and strengthen policy and legal frameworks that protect legitimate rights (including customary or informal tenure rights) to land and resource ownership, primary and secondary use and transfer. The Contractor may be required to undertake the following activities:

• Conduct assessments of land and policy constraints to secure land and resource tenure;

• Provide technical assistance to national land policymakers;

• Provide legal or comparative analysis of draft land and resource policies and laws;

• Provide research support to enable data-driven land and resource policy decision-making;

• Support the legal recognition of customary or traditional tenure systems;

• Adapt traditional or customary tenure systems to ensure that women or other vulnerable populations have equitable legal rights to own, inherit, and transfer land;

• Support engagement mechanisms that align with international standards for consultation with indigenous peoples.

In pursuit of inclusive and environmentally sustainable land and resource law and policy development, the Contractor must incorporate consultative processes with stakeholders, including women and other vulnerable populations, and apply a gender lens to the activities listed above.

Component 2. Assist law and policy implementation, including clarifying, documenting, registering, and administering rights to land and resources

Component 2a. Assist in the implementation of inclusive land and resource policies, including clarifying, documenting, registering and administering rights for all, especially women and other vulnerable populations

Under Component 2a, the Contractor will be required to assist USAID Missions and Operating Units in facilitating the implementation of inclusive land and resource laws and policies, particularly as it relates to the protection of women…