Leap’s Conceptual framework
Institutional arrangements
Institutions are made up of structures and systems.
Structures are groups of people whose activities are geared towards the same aims or objectives, and who meet frequently to carry those aims forward, often in the same place such as an office or a building.
Examples of structures: the Thobelani Communal Property Association; the committee of the Thobelani Communal Property Association; the general meeting of the Thobelani Communal Property Association; the Weenen Development Forum.
The way structures or their members pursue aims, organize themselves and relate to other structures is determined by the systems governing the structure. Systems include rules, which might be spoken or unspoken, written or unwritten, recognized by law and a broader society or unrecognized. Systems also include ethos or culture or norms, the rules governing the way that this or that group of people usually behave or do things.
Rules can operate at many levels. They include rules governing the set up of a structure, the operational requirements and specific activities of the structure, or other aspects of relations between people within and without the structure. Rules which have an impact on tenure security include those which govern who can get land, what procedures people must follow to get land and what they can do with it.
The indicators and land rights administration processes suggest that there are many actors involved in securing tenure. For instance, having access to recourse means there are structures outside of the immediate group that a member of a communal property institution can go to if he or she has been treated wrongly. Applying for a land right means that there is a person or structure to whom one applies, and rules about who can apply for what. All these structures are part of the institutional web that makes tenure security possible. The web must have appropriate and effective linkages to secure tenure.
institutional arrangements for tenure
Institutional arrangements underpin tenure security for members and groups. The tenure security of any one group or member of a group will depend on where they are located in the institutional arrangements and thus what other institutions have an impact on them.
Any one institution is nested within a range of other institutions. For example, a rural family in KwaZulu-Natal might live in an isigodi (tribal ward), which in turn is located within a tribal authority, which is part of a traditional authority within a municipal area or province. The tenure security of families in different izigodi or different tribal authorities might be different because of different local institutional arrangements.
A good question to help us understand institutional arrangements is Which structure has what authority over which space? The answers help us to identify relevant structures and the systems they operate by. "What space" is relevant because tenure is an issue of control over specific space.
Putting together an understanding of institutional arrangements with the LEAP indicators gives us an understanding of the answers to important tenure questions like:
- Who can get ownership of land or use this natural resource? Married men? Single men? Men and women? Unmarried women? Only wealthy people?
- Who do people go to for help when there is a boundary dispute? are there differences in the kind of help different categories of people can get?
- What aspects of institutional arrangements help or hinder tenure security for particular people in particular situations? for example, what role would recognized public records of land holdings play in securing use rights under communal ownership?
and so on...
Concept Menu