NGOs cooperate to influence the policies and practices of governments, donors, investors and relevant stakeholders to ensure that land rights and tenure security of the poor and vulnerable groups are recognized and respected.

Since 2004, the Land Action Network for Development (LAND) , which consists of various NGOs working on land issues, have been working together to assist poor and vulnerable people affected by land issues in Cambodia. The network builds upon the knowledge, skills, lessons learnt and experience of its members with regard to land problems, seeking to work more effectively through joint advocacy and through coordi-nation with relevant institutions. The network commits itself to work together under a mutually agreed Terms of Reference. Many NGO Forum members are engaged in work that is directly or indirectly related to land rights and during the 2008 Annual General Meeting they again reiterated that poor governance of land remains one of Cambodia’s most critical threats to poverty reduction and livelihood security. In year 2006, LAND successfully coordinated NGOs and Civil society organizations to work together to co-ordinate strategy to work with the new government mechanism to address the land is-sues – National Authority for Land Dispute Resolution. The Terms of Reference of working with NALDR was developed and sent to the authority. However, since 2006 no response has been received from the authority. During the next 2-year NGO Forum will support the LAND members to approach the Donors of the TWG-Land and Poverty Reduction Growth Operation (PRGO) donors as an additional strategy for building relations with this institution.

During the 2006-2008 Action Plan, the Land Issues Project focused building upon the existing projects of LAND members such as:

a) awareness raising of the Land Law to local NGOs and communities;
b) advocating on specific land dispute cases both in terms of negotiation at the lo-cal level, but also lobbying for effective resolution at the national level;
c) working with human rights groups to document dispute cases involving specific rights violations and submit reports to the Prime Minister and media groups;
d) awareness raising and monitoring of the LMAP project in its provinces selected for systematic titling;
e) working to systematically update the land dispute database which was estab-lished by Oxfam GB;
f) conduct research into the relationship between land titling and poverty reduc-tion;
g) influence pro-poor policy change by the Government and Donors.

The Land Issues Project continues to assume that LAND members are doing good work, and that during 2010-2011 the NGO Forum should aim at further strengthening their effectiveness. This is being achieved by providing these NGOs with information and networking services and a means for doing joint advocacy. These services are also enabling the mobilization of a broader range of NGOs and other stakeholders, especially in the provinces. In addition, during 2010 the Land Issues Project has been selected to be one of two across the entire organisation which will be piloting a more focused and comprehensive gender mainstreaming approach to NGO Forum’s advocacy work.

After many years of war, Cambodia has made major strides in rebuilding its political, economic, social infrastructure and human capital. Despite gains in these areas, the country remains to be one of the poorest in the region. An estimated 30% of its popula-tion live below the poverty line, 90% of whom are in the rural areas. Land is one of the most important resources in Cambodia because agriculture employs 60% of total labour force and contributes to 33% of GNP. The enhancement of this sector (within which land reform is pursued) is one of four priority areas in the government’s National Stra-tegic Development Plan. Land reform policies became a key campaign issue during the July 2008 National Elections and the number of NGOs and Donors working within the land reform sector grows annually. Government attempts to reduce poverty through land reform are based on a Land Management and Administration Project (LMAP) implemented by the Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction (MLMUPC) and supported by the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the Ko-rea International Cooperation Agency and the governments of Germany, Canada, Japan, Denmark, Sweden and Finland. LMAP has just had its “Phase One” extended from 2007 to the end of 2009 and key elements of it address regulation of the land policy en-vironment; institutional development; registration of land and issuance of titles; resolv-ing land conflicts and land management. NGO Forum and the LAND members have been specifically focused on three components of LMAP, namely:

1. Systematic land titling – which aims to give title to all land in Cambodia, during 2007 the one millionth title was issued, and during 2009 the target Communes will expand from 11 to 15 provinces;
2. Cadastral Commissions – mechanisms established from the District to National levels to resolve land disputes between those who do not have LMAP titles, therefore disputes arising during the titling process and also in areas outside of the systematic titling target Communes;
3. Social Land Concessions – a mechanism for transferring private state land into the private ownership of poor landless people.

Unfortunately, however, government efforts to reduce poverty through land reform have resulted in uneven distribution of benefits, discriminating against the poor and other disadvantaged groups, like women. The most serious challenges faced by the country are the widening gap between the rich and poor; the uneven development between rural and urban areas; and the gender inequities that persist within those other imbalances. The country has one of the region’s highest labour force participation at 82%, however 53% of economically active women work as unpaid family labour in agriculture, compared to 32% for men. Additionally, in employment outside agriculture, only 33% of women are able to take up waged employment compared to 61% of men. Men are able to choose from a wider range of better paid positions while women are limited to the garment industry and the informal sector. Forty-five percent 45% of women are completely illiterate compared to only 25% of the men. As farmers, women have little control over a very important resource; land. Within the context of increasing landlessness from 1997 to 2008 and the decreasing land size of more and more people, women, especially war widows, still own less land than the general population. Women are more likely to be landless or end up having significantly smaller plots, because their lack of knowledge on land rights and land titling procedures are taken advantage of by government implementers and other unscrupulous parties. Almost twenty years after the reintroduction of private ownership of land in 1989 and seven years after the adoption of the 2001 Land Law, there continues to be inadequate monitoring of land ownership which could provide a comprehensive picture of trends. This is further complicated by a complex and often ambiguous legal framework . The situation of land tenure security for the poor and vulnerable in 2008, especially women, is overwhelmingly dispiriting and unsuccessful. This can be summarised as follows :

• Most Cambodians own some land, but only 1% have official titles. Most occupy their land without legal documents. This situation is worse in rural areas, espe-cially among female-headed households;
• Common property resources such as forestry and fishery resources have been sold, whether legally or illegally, for private use as concessions, consequently restricting access to products and benefits derived from that property by the rural poor;
• Rural landlessness has increased 2% annually, from 12% in 1997 to between 20 and 25% in 2006. In 2005 one in every 15 households were estimated to be in-volved in a land dispute;
• In 2007, over 150,000 people were identified as being under threat of forced evictions across Cambodia and forced evictions of people (even if they have rightful claim to land ownership) are increasing with an additional trend of au-thorities using violence, looting belongings of the evicted households and arrest-ing those being evicted;
• During 2007 at least 121 villagers were arrested over land disputes, 38 are still held in detention, this is despite Hun Sen’s promise that no arrests would be made in relation to land conflicts;
• In the early 2000s the average size land holding was 1ha per family and distribu-tion of land was highly unequal, with only 40-50% of landless and marginal landholders owning 10-15% of all agricultural land in rural areas;
• Since then there has been increased concentration of land ownership by the elite: in 2006 research revealed that 39% of the population own less than 0.5ha (and therefore classified as “land-poor”) in total 3.4% of all land; 30% of the popula-tion own between 0.5 and 1ha of land in total 5% of all land; 21% of the popula-tion own between 1-3 ha of land, 19% of all land; whereas only 12% of the population own 72% of all land;
• In one case study of the subsequent transfer of title following LMAP systematic titling, only 1% of titles were updated on the Land Register meaning that it does no longer reflect the reality of land holdings on the ground, and causing potential future confusion over legal ownership in the law courts;
• Female-headed households owned less land than male-headed households. In two of the surveys, female-headed households owned just over half a hectare on the average. This was attributed to their lack of adult labor to acquire more agri-cultural land and to do heavy farm work such as land preparation or inability to pay the high cost of hiring additional help, increasing the pressure to sell their land. This same reason was used to explain female-headed households’ generally higher incidence of landlessness,

Two recent case studies by the NGO Forum and the Cambodian Cooperation Commit-tee in Khan Prey Nob, Sihanouk Ville and by GAD-Cambodia and Heinrich Boll Foun-dation in Kampong Thom and Kandal provinces looked at the impact of LMAP system-atic land titling . Although both studies reported that overall the process was being im-plemented successfully, there were some specific areas of concern. The first is that ti-tling is not leading to the expected increase in access to formal credit by the poorest sec-tors of society, due to the fact that the majority of households use “group-credit” schemes (such as those offered by AMRET) which require no title as collateral. The second is that the majority of land plots transferred subsequent to systematic titling are not being updated at the Land Registry by the purchasers, nor are they paying the re-quired land tax. Thirdly, the promotion of a “land market” (one objective of titling) is evident, but appears to be disproportionately benefiting richer social groups, whereas the primary reason for land sales amongst poorer households is to pay for health-care costs. In order for systematic titling to achieve its goal of poverty reduction, it therefore must be supported by a broader package of rural reforms including support to healthcare, edu-cation, micro-finance and livelihood diversification. Fourthly, women reported not being able to read the necessary documents and being forced to pay extra charges to local officials to ensure that their rights are respected according to the LMAP policy. Fifthly, some women who are divorced, separated or abandoned are being discriminated against during the titling process because they are not being given equal opportunity to register the land plots under single ownership, under their own names.

These problems have been attributed to several factors that tend to reinforce each other. Despite protection in the legal framework for the equitable allocation of resources throughout society, as well as between spouses, this law is not adequately disseminated or enforced. Many farmers remain without titles, especially the ones who live in dis-puted areas and are not covered by LMAP and land concentration by the elite is a clear indicator of Cambodia’s increasing social stratification. The rich engage in speculation and accumulate idle property even as the poor get evicted because they lack resources to keep or invest on their land. Within that context, LAND members from the provincial levels indicate that women, whether as household head or co-head, are systematically disadvantaged during the process of acquiring or selling land, because of gender dis-crimination. Women’s lower literacy rates in comparison to men also restrict their access to information, including those pertaining to the land law and their rights, making them vulnerable to exploitation.