TY - JOUR
T1 - Land Titling and Litigation
AU - Arruñada, B.
AU - Fabbri, M.
AU - Faure, M.G.
N1 - Funding Information:
Arruñada is also affiliated with the Barcelona Graduate School of Economics. We are grateful to Dennis Carlton and a referee for comments and suggestions that greatly improved the article. We are indebted to Deo-Gracias Houndolo for his support during the fieldwork and to Csoban Gocze, Charles Ibikounle, and Kevine Kindji, who provided detailed information on the protection of land in Benin. Ametonou Charmelle, Dossou Fiogbe, Gaston Gnonlonfoun, Issifou Gounou, Nice Houngbegnon, Dorothee Lokossou, Aissath Salifou, Mohamed Sedou, and Israelia Zannou provided excellent research assistance. The usual disclaimer applies. Arruñada acknowledges financial support from the Spanish Research Agency (projects ECO2017-85763-R and PID2020-115660GB-I00) and the Severo Ochoa Program for Centers of Excellence in Research and Development (CEX2019-000915-S). Fabbri acknowledges financial support from a Marie Curie Research Grant (H2020-MSCA-IF-2017-789596) and from the Spanish Research Agency’s Severo Ochoa Program for Centers of Excellence in Research and Development (CEX2019-000915-S). Faure acknowledges financial support from the Erasmus Trustfonds and from a Rotterdam Institute of Law and Economics Behavioral Approach to Contract and Tort research grant.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022/2
Y1 - 2022/2
N2 - We study a land-titling reform implemented as a randomized control trial to isolate its effects on litigation. The reform consisted of demarcating land parcels, registering existing customary rights, and granting additional legal protection to right holders. Ten years after implementation, the reform doubled the likelihood of households experiencing land-related litigation, but disputes did not escalate into more frequent violent episodes. We suggest that this increase in litigation reflects the complementarity of land titling by registration and by judicial procedures aimed at further clarifying property rights, as the reform registered titles to all parcels but left many titles subject to adverse claims. This raised the demand for complementary litigation aimed at perfecting titles for low-value parcels that, under the customary system, were optimal to keep unclarified. Consistent with this explanation, we find that the increase in litigation took place among households that plausibly own land of lower value.
AB - We study a land-titling reform implemented as a randomized control trial to isolate its effects on litigation. The reform consisted of demarcating land parcels, registering existing customary rights, and granting additional legal protection to right holders. Ten years after implementation, the reform doubled the likelihood of households experiencing land-related litigation, but disputes did not escalate into more frequent violent episodes. We suggest that this increase in litigation reflects the complementarity of land titling by registration and by judicial procedures aimed at further clarifying property rights, as the reform registered titles to all parcels but left many titles subject to adverse claims. This raised the demand for complementary litigation aimed at perfecting titles for low-value parcels that, under the customary system, were optimal to keep unclarified. Consistent with this explanation, we find that the increase in litigation took place among households that plausibly own land of lower value.
U2 - 10.1086/716756
DO - 10.1086/716756
M3 - Article
SN - 0022-2186
VL - 65
SP - 131
EP - 156
JO - Journal of Law & Economics
JF - Journal of Law & Economics
IS - 1
ER -