Tenure & Common Property Resources

Ownership and access are the most fundamental keys to the wealth of nature. Unfortunately, many poor people do not own the land or fishing grounds which they rely on for income. This lack of secure tenure makes them vulnerable to being dispossessed of their homes and livelihoods, or, if they rent homes or land, subject to sometimes exorbitant rent payments. The importance of tenure—or the lack of it—to the ability to tap nature’s wealth can’t be over-emphasized. The rights to exploit, sell, or bar others from using a resource—the bundle of rights associated with tenure or ownership—are essential to legal commerce. Ownership also provides an incentive to manage ecosystems sustainably by assuring that an owner will be able to capture the benefits of long-term investments like soil improvements, tree planting, or restricting fishing seasons to keep fish stocks viable.

Tenure issues affecting the poor involve not only private ownership of land, but also the use of common lands. Many areas under state ownership provide the resource base for poor communities, but these communities often have no legal basis for their use of common pool resources. In many instances, these resources—whether they are forests, grazing areas, or fishing grounds—have been governed locally for centuries under traditional forms of “communal tenure,” in which resources are owned in common by a group of individuals, such as a village or tribe. Such customary arrangements are often not legally recognized, and conflicts between communal tenure and modern state-recognized ownership frequently threaten rural livelihoods. State recognition of such traditional ownership arrangements or new power-sharing agreements between local communities and the state that grant specific rights to use and profit from the state commons are often important ingredients in successful efforts to tap the wealth of natural systems.