2014年-世界发展银行全球_Issues_and_Options_for_Improved_Land_Sector_Governance_in_Ukraine_31页_905kb

Summary of Issues and Options for Improved Land Sector Governance in Ukraine

Core Content

This report evaluates land governance in Ukraine using the Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF), developed by the World Bank and its partners. It outlines the current legal and institutional landscape, identifies key challenges in land administration, and proposes policy priorities to enhance land governance.

Main Points

1. Land Governance Importance in Ukraine

• Ukraine is the largest country in Europe, with vast fertile land and a significant agricultural sector.
• The government has privatized urban housing and 75% of agricultural land.
• Land policy formulation and implementation require greater public participation.
• Land dealings require more transparency and accountability mechanisms.

2. LGAF Methodology

• The LGAF is a diagnostic tool used to assess and prioritize land governance reforms.
• It includes 21 Land Governance Indicators (LGIs) covering 80 dimensions of land governance, grouped into five thematic areas:
  • Legal and institutional framework
  • Land use planning, management, and taxation
  • Management of public land
  • Public provision of land information
  • Dispute resolution and conflict management
• Optional modules were also included, such as those on large-scale land acquisitions (LSLA) and forestry.

3. Land Policy Issues in Ukraine

3.1 Background Information

• Ukraine is located in Central and Eastern Europe, with a population of around 46 million.
• The economy transitioned from a Soviet model to a market economy, with significant challenges in restructuring.
• The country has a dualistic farm structure: 60% of agricultural land is under corporate farms, while 40% is managed by small and medium farmers.

3.2 Tenure Typology

• State and communal ownership: 29.4 million hectares (49% of total land), mostly used for agriculture and non-agricultural purposes.
• Private ownership: 30.9 million hectares (51% of total land), primarily in urban areas.
• Non-local use: 101,500 hectares (<1%), mostly for agricultural leases.

3.3 Land Policies and Legal Framework

• Land privatization began in 1992, with the majority of agricultural land being divided among former workers.
• A moratorium on agricultural land sales was introduced in 2002 and extended to 2016.
• The moratorium restricts the sale, purchase, and transfer of agricultural land, except for inheritance and public need.
• The State Land Bank was established in 2012 but lacks a clear operational mandate.

3.4 Land Management Institutions

• Land management involves both central and local government bodies.
• Key institutions include:
  • State Agency on Land Resources
  • State Agriculture Inspection
  • State Agency on Forest Resources
  • Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food
  • Ministry of Justice
• These institutions have overlapping functions and unclear mandates, leading to inefficiencies and lack of coordination.

Key Findings from LGAF Assessment

4.1 Legal and Institutional Framework

• Land rights include ownership, permanent use, and lease.
• Ownership of agricultural land is restricted for foreign citizens and entities.
• The process for acquiring land rights through acquisitive prescription is ambiguous and inefficient.
• Courts often do not give sufficient weight to non-documentary forms of evidence.

4.2 Land Use Planning, Taxation, and Management

• Restrictions on land use are often not transparent or well-defined.
• The planning process is not efficient, with delays and lack of predictability.
• Land valuations lack transparency, and tax collection efficiency is low.

4.3 Management of Public Land

• Public land is managed by local authorities, who can lease or transfer it.
• Expropriation procedures are not fully transparent, and allocation of public land is unclear.
• There is a need for better mechanisms to manage and allocate public land.

4.4 Public Provision of Land Information

• Land information completeness and reliability are insufficient.
• Registration and valuation processes are not cost-effective or accessible.
• There is a lack of transparency in service costs, which hinders access to land information.

4.5 Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management

• Responsibility for dispute resolution is unclear.
• A significant number of land disputes remain unresolved.
• The need for clear procedures and increased public participation in conflict resolution is emphasized.

4.6 Large-Scale Land Acquisitions

• The LSLA module highlights the need for transparency and accountability in large land deals.
• There are concerns about the concentration of land in the hands of elites, with only 18% of Ukrainians believing small and medium farmers would benefit from a free land market.

4.7 Forestry

• Forestry is managed by the State Agency on Forest Resources.
• There is a need for improved policies on land use changes and forest management.

Policy Priorities

• Legal and institutional framework: Clarify institutional mandates and reduce overlaps.
• Land use planning, management, and taxation: Improve transparency and efficiency in land use planning and tax collection.
• Management of public land: Enhance transparency and fairness in expropriation and land allocation.
• Public provision of land information: Ensure completeness, reliability, and accessibility of land data.
• Dispute resolution and conflict management: Establish clear procedures and increase public involvement.
• Large-scale land acquisitions: Strengthen transparency and accountability in land deals.
• Forestry: Improve policies on land use changes and forest management.

Conclusion

The LGAF assessment highlights significant challenges in Ukraine's land governance, particularly in the legal and institutional framework, land management, and public land provision. The report emphasizes the need for reforms to enhance transparency, equity, and efficiency in land administration. Continued policy analysis and stakeholder engagement are crucial to achieving these goals.