With efficacy of property rights, function can be more important than form

Issues of land rights, particularly in agrarian societies, are a growing point of focus for those concerned with the efficient use of and equitable access to natural resources. The dialogue concerning land ownership is typically structured as a binary debate about the relative merits of private, secure tenure systems versus communal or customary arrangements. The former is largely celebrated for its security, while the latter is typically distinguished as a structure of tradition, but one that comes with certain drawbacks and characteristically deemed insecure. However, evaluations based on those attributes typically associated with one or the other form distract from a more meaningful appraisal of how various systems function in practice.

In a recent study published in Land Use Policy, Peter Ho, professor at the Delft University of Technology and principal investigator of the RECOLAND project funded by the European Research Council, presents his "Credibility Thesis" as an alternative framework for evaluating land ownership structures. The thesis is built upon an empirical case study of China's rural land-lease system, referred to as the "Household Contract Responsibility System." Ho and his research team conducted surveys of 1,100 farm households asking proxy questions aimed at addressing two key issues: First, whether insecure tenure exists alongside low credibility in the tenure institutions; and second, whether a credible tenure system exhibits a low level of perceived conflict. The findings of the survey asserted that despite the insecurity of China's rural land-lease system, there exists a high level of perceived support for the structure. Moreover, despite growing insecurity from new political and demographic circumstances, land conflict is markedly low in China's agrarian provinces. Finally, the primary cause of conflict revolved around factors atypical for agrarian society, particularly from increasing urban sprawl and the evictions this sprawl produces.

Drawing from this research, Ho's thesis begins from the premise that function matters far more than form. More specifically, Ho argues for the importance of understanding the credibility of a tenure institution in order to evaluate how and why it functions in a particular context. The thesis suggests the significance of institutional persistence, noting that the staying-power of a tenure arrangement exists in direct relation to that arrangement's perceived social support or credibility. Moreover, Ho argues that dismissing existing and temporally stable tenure systems because of theoretical assumptions about their function – i.e. that informal arrangements are inefficient or insecure – prevents a more meaningful understanding of the system's importance in context.

In developing his thesis, Ho relays the defining characteristics of credibility. He highlights that credibility is vested in a social or aggregate belief in the validity of an institution as opposed to individual trust. Additionally, credibility is directly related to whether or not the institution is an endogenous creation. Those institutions imposed from without engender less credibility than those developed at the local or grassroots level, in other words from the bottom up.

These findings indicate that there is not a direct relationship between informal tenure systems and social instability or a lack of credibility. To the contrary, in the specific context of rural, agrarian China the particular communal tenure arrangement, although partially insecure, performs an essential function of securing land access for land-dependent farmers. Thus, in its insecurity it produces security. Moreover, the credibility the land-lease system engenders produces a low level of conflict, although conflict was still present. Ultimately, the study makes clear that credibility is a powerful metric by which to understand and evaluate tenure systems. Importantly, understanding the credibility of a given institution requires analysis outside of theory and politics, analysis that is locally and temporally specific and multilayered.

Given that stability of land access is frequently linked to resource use and the resilience of agrarian societies, the Credibility Thesis has much to offer both the academic and practitioner perspective on land tenure analysis and policy. In sum, context matters more than theory, and similarly, function matters more than form. Thus, in thinking about issues of land ownership and access it is important to understand the function of a particular institution in context before proposing or undertaking any intervention.