Customary practices of securing tenure

One of the problem framings of the dominant policy narrative was the existence of

‘massive demand’ for securing tenure, based on people seeking written recognition of their land holdings by signing petits papiers. Burnod, Andrianirina et al. (2014) found that some 83.8 percent of households relied only on petits papiers or tax receipts as proofs of ownership; 8.2 percent had made a demand for a certificate; 8 percent did not have any formal proofs thus relying on local social recognition; and 0.9 percent had made a demand for a title.⁵² In other words, some 91.8 percent of people trusted locally sourced tenure security (petits papiers and local recognition) and 9.1 percent had sought statutory recognition (Burnod, Andrianirina et al. 2014). I examine these customary practices of securing tenure here before analysing the motivation of farmers to adhere to the policy in the following section.

52 These are the figures given by the survey of Burnod, Andrianirina et al. (2014). However, when adding them up a total percentage of 100.9 is given. This is probably because people who had asked for a title had also asked for a certificate.

189

7.2.1. Appropriation and use of land visible in space

Ankazomiriotra used to be an agricultural frontier zone (Raison 1984). Today most of the land has been appropriated by individuals or households (Razafimahatratra et al.

2017) and the parcel structure has become clearly visible on the ground. The fact of labouring the soil is then considered as a sign of appropriation that others should respect:

If you grow it, it is because it is yours. You cannot farm on land that is not yours unless you rent it out, we cannot work or cultivate other's land.

Interview with a farmer (PEA020), 07.06.2016 In addition, some farmers use markers to signal their presence and delineate parcels (Image 7.1.). Fences and hedges are used to protect parcels from roads, tracks and pathways. On tanety, the markers can be trees growing at the extremities of the parcels and hay sticks placed on fallow land. They can be lines drawn on the ground with a plough, or hay, vetiver, sorghum and sisal growing on the borders, or rocks placed in the corners. Markers can also be placed at the centre of the parcel: something visible from far, like a hay stick at the middle of field of groundnuts. The plantation of trees is furthermore a way of reinforcing one’s presence. On bas-fond, the parcels are usually delineated by irrigation canals and terraces. People also grow sugar cane, banana trees and other fruit trees, and at the extremities of the parcels these can serve as boundary markers.

For example, two neighbouring parcels, one is ours and the other belongs to the neighbour, there is a canal that separates them. The neighbour does not dare to enter mine and I would not dare to cross the limit, each one occupies his plot even if people are not brothers and sisters. The neighbour does not dare trample my parcel and I will not dare trample his. The channel is the limit.

Interview with a farmer (PEA019), 07.06.2016 Image 7.1. Parcel structure visible in space

The border delimitations bring physical clarity and might facilitate everyday farming practices.

However, for many farmers they are just an add-in. The real difference is social recognition and knowledge of who holds what and where, as well as associated cultural and social norms that ensure knowledge is valued. The

190

rights of the first cultivators and their heirs are particularly respected (Evers 2013) and they can control the access of others to land (Raison 1984). In such contexts, the tomb of the ancestors becomes the concrete sign of family authenticity (Evers 2013) and belonging to a place guarantees security and continuity (Boué 2013). Families are thus starting to transfer tombs from their regions of origin to Ankazomiriotra as markers of long-term presence.

7.2.2. Social knowledge as guarantee of tenure rights

Social knowledge is gradually built on the tenure rights of the first arrivals and the more recent migrants as well as on subsequent transactions. This knowledge is maintained and passed on inside families, between elders and from one chief of fokontany to another.

Farmers mentioned that the knowledge of the holders of parcels is as common as information on the owners of houses. The role played by the elders is explained by one farmer:

The chief of fokontany is an elder in the village, he lived with others who are already dead. He is a referee in the village because he saw the history of the parcels in the village. Mr X cultivated on this land, it is his. We have not yet talked about the official papers, but the words of the elders are not to be discussed, it is they who say that it really belongs to X or it does not belong to X but to Mr Y.

Interview with a farmer (PEA034), 20.06.2016

Farmers call upon the elders and chiefs of fokontany if someone is contesting their presence, but also when parcels change hands. The elders and chiefs might invite family members and neighbours to join in to provide additional testimony. Together they agree on the owners, characteristics and limits of each parcel. The process can lead to signing petits papiers by the chiefs of fokontany. Observations and interviews indicate that a distribution of responsibilities existed between the elders and the chiefs. In fact, the chiefs, especially younger ones, explained allowing elders to find solutions, while they prefer to act as facilitators in the mediation process.

In numerical terms, local conflict resolution mechanisms seem to work. The chief of one of the target fokontanys confirmed that some 95 percent of conflicts are solved locally and amicably. If the conflict is not resolved, it is passed up to the municipal council and the mayor, and the gendarmerie might be involved in the case of suspected criminal acts.

As discussed earlier (section 6.2.2.3.), the local land office tends to stay out of these

191

cases. As a final recourse, conflicts are transferred to the court in Antsirabe. Farmers felt that the court is only for people with connections and money who are able to go through administrative processes and pay fees.

Nonetheless, local society also evolves, changing the cultural and social basis on which tenure relations have been established. Some elderly people were preoccupied by the lack of trust among families, neighbours and community members. For them, the solidarity and confidence on which social relations had relied on was fading away. For them, the fact of writing written contracts such as petits papiers was a concrete demonstration of this lack of trust.

7.2.3. Writing down holdings and transactions: the practice of petits papiers

Petits papiers are recurrent in Ankazomiriotra. Farmers explained that the physical presence on the ground (especially as regards the most distant parcels) and oral knowledge were not enough to guarantee security. Farmers preferred signed agreements because they considered paper proofs as more tangible. One chief expressed this by a proverb: “Words fly but the written stays”. According to farmers, written contracts are means to manage the scenarios of tenure insecurity that are linked to betrayal, dishonest practices and the risk that one of the parties denies the existence of a transaction.

The first reason for making acts of purchase is the change in people's mentality and the current situation where there is no longer absolute confidence, some even deny a sale. That is a reason and we have to make an act with witnesses and it goes to the fokontany. Another reason is that sometimes it is land belonging to another person that someone sells, if it is simply oral or secret, and not necessary in the eyes of the society, the buyer may lose his money, he will farm and the real owner will show up. When it is written and passed on to the leaders, people can confirm that it really belongs to him.

Intervention in a Focus Group discussion, 02.06.2016

Three different type of petits papiers exist in Ankazomiriotra: act of purchase or lease, act of inheritance and an attestation of the use of land. The practice draws on existing social knowledge. Together, neighbours, elders, the chief of fokontany and other people enumerate on paper the parcels concerned in a transaction; describe their characteristics such as the estimated length, width and use; provide indications on borders; name the neighbours; record the identities of right-holders; and state the period of rental if

192

relevant. These pieces of information seem important for the interviewed farmers – they are tangible, descriptive and relevant.

First, the family and grandparents know the land delimited by the children. And then we make a list at the sale, when you buy land, the dimensions are mentioned:

100m long and the width is as follows. And there are witnesses on the side of the seller and the buyer. We make the bill of sale, but it is not printed, and we go through the committee, the quartier mobile [responsible for security issues], the president and so on.

Interview with a farmer (PEA024), 10.06.2016

The petits papiers are furthermore signed off by the chiefs of fokontany or by the chief of the arrondissement. This guarantee was valued by farmers and is shown via a red stamp on the petits papiers. The documents are most often produced in three copies: one for the chief of fokontany and/or arrondissement (depending on the authority of the signatory), one for the current owner and one for the buyer. The process costs 3 percent of the value of the parcel when the papers are signed by the fokontany and 14 percent when signed by the arrondissement. They can be kept in a registry in the fokontany or arrondissement. However, to keep their validity, these registries need updating on the initiative of the holder of the parcel.

Some chiefs of fokontany considered that the local registries would be sufficient to keep track of transactions and land-holdings, and thus secure tenure locally in addition to social knowledge. They found it problematic, however, that these registries have not been valued by the state. For them, this lack of recognition can cause tenure insecurity if more powerful and connected people claim parcels regardless of the existence of petits papiers, as expressed by one chief: “a simple paper does not stand against the power of money”. Consequently, they would like to see local registries given proper legal value so that these could serve as reference points.

I have demonstrated above that the customary practices of securing tenure focus on confirming existing situations on the ground, establishing common shared knowledge on tenure, mediating differences, removing opportunities for dishonesty and seeking more tangible paper proofs of land-holdings. These practices bring together different authorities with a diversity of power. Starting from the families, men hold power as the heads of the household. In village communities, first arrivals are respected, and elders are regarded as sources of social knowledge and authority. The elders give some space

193

to chiefs of fokontany with the practice of petits papiers, facilitation of social relations and distribution of information. The chiefs are solicited to provide additional guarantees as local representatives of the state (Omrane 2008). These authorities retain power, and can use it to confirm their tenure, or to empower others through the mediation of differences and facilitation of access to land. Therefore, the practices of securing tenure alone do not remove the inherent power dynamisms and social variety that create sources of and conditions for tenure (in)security, but rather the way in which power is used by these authorities. The certificate then brings along a new set of authorities without, however, removing the socio-economic and power imbalances between farmers.