Michael Kirk (1996):
Land Tenure Development and Divestiture in Lao P.D.R.

VII. Recommendations for Future Development Cooperation

1. Specific Requirements for Countries in the Process of Transformation

It is not a priority objective of this study to work out detailed recommendations for the next steps of the reform of resource tenure regimes and the future shape of the land policy in Laos alone. Laos is seen rather more as prototypical for other countries in the process of transformation: there are lessons to be learned in this case. Therefore, particular weight must be given to the starting points and the instruments of development cooperation for resource tenure

• through which the transformation process can be secured long-term and can be made irreversible, and
• which can react to the future challenges which are already recognizable.

After the initial euphoria, the sobriety regarding social consequences, and marginalisation or international dependency has set restorative process in action with which - above all in Africa - the "hands of time" are supposed to be turned back, and reforms of property rights are to be withdrawn or no longer pursued (cf. Benin, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Niger). Other countries, such as Cambodia, are in danger of being controlled by new Mafia structures in view of the immense problems for enforcing human rights, the rule of law and the participation of people in the process of development.

Land tenure arrangements belong to a society's most intimate institutions. They are the result of historical, social, economic and political development of a country or a society. Influences from outside can be dangerous (Kuhnen 1996:59). With that, development co-operation in the field of land/resource tenure development also always gives external support to changes of internal political, legal and administrative framework conditions in partner countries. [FN 110] It directly influences five criteria which the German Ministry for Development Cooperation has identified as the most important internal framework conditions which are to be specifically supported:

• respect of human rights, by paying regard in this case to customary rights, gender issues, property rights of ethnic minorities, etc.,
• legal security, for instance through the improvement of tenure security, and the strengthening of incentives for long-term investment;
• participation of the population in the political process through the empowerment of local users, participatory land management, etc.;
• market-oriented institutional environment through the setting up of a resource-related legal framework and new contractual arrangements and
• development-oriented state action through the implementation of the reformed resource tenure legal framework or the divestiture of state property.

German development cooperation distinguishes between countries in which a) the government suppresses or hinders the will of the people through arbitrary measures (violations of human rights, the suppression of the freedom of opinion, etc.), and b) those in which the sociopolitical reform process is underway or is introduced by the government (from top down) as in most countries in the process of transformation. Lao PDR does not fit into either of these categories since the economic reform process is indeed scarcely irreversible, the sociopolitical reform process is being rather timidly introduced from top down, but freedom of opinion remains limited and there are individual cases of human rights violations.

The possible fields of action for development co-operation are accordingly very complex:

• The political dialogue must be centered around extending the space for a socio-political reform discussion concerning resource tenure-related problems and to sustain the discussion in the future; this has to be done by sharing the workload with NGO's or political foundations;
• a check must be made as to whether or not official policy advice should be striven for in a further step which would further support the reforms of the institutional environment.
• involve actors at all levels with training programmes and the dissemination of information so as to build up a long-term investment - to familiarize the actors with concepts such as self-administration, subsidiarity, market solutions, etc.
• to strengthen the position of groups so far disadvantaged with regard to the access and use of resources through programmes of financial and technical co-operation;
• at the same time, to strengthen specifically the dialogue between theses groups (rural population, shifting cultivators, women, etc.), their official representatives (in self-help groups, associations) and state officials;
• to build up the efficiency of the State administration with regard to land questions, and
• also to establish legal security and the rule of law at long-term in the case of conflicts.

With that, all regional levels will come into contact with: the national level in the policy dialogue and in the case of further development of the legal framework, the regional level, in case of further development of land titling or co-ordination of land use planning, the local level in the strengthening of the self-organisations of stakeholders, the promotion of participation in land management and conflict resolution. In addition, sector-specific (irrigated agriculture, shifting cultivation) and sector-encompassing approaches (land markets) are required.