Land Governance in French-Speaking Africa: Comparative Analysis of Legal and Institutional Reforms for Sustainable Management of Community Lands

Abstract

In July 2009, African leaders adopted the Declaration on Land Issues in Africa, reaffirming the commitment of African Union member states to effective land management. The declaration emphasizes the protection of land rights for all, with particular attention to women and marginalized groups. Land governance in Africa, which spans various aspects of society, remains a critical issue and is often a source of conflict and instability across the continent. This study examines the legal and institutional reforms of land governance in Francophone Africa (Benin, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Mali, and Senegal), analyzing their objectives, outcomes, and the challenges associated with their implementation. In addition, this study highlights examples of both effective and ineffective reform implementations based on case studies from countries with notable successes (Ethiopia, Rwanda, Mauritius, Ghana, and Madagascar) and failures (South Africa and Zimbabwe). Finally, this study offers recommendations for improving sustainable land management while considering social, economic, political, and environmental dimensions. The methodology employed is based exclusively on a systematic review guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) approach, applied to the ROSES (Reporting Standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses) protocol. This approach facilitated the selection of 57 relevant documents retrieved from databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Land governance in Francophone Africa varies significantly from country to country and cannot be comprehensively addressed in a study of this scope. Nevertheless, this research study identifies common challenges, opportunities, and measures that could inspire reflection in other countries. In several cases, administrative and customary authorities play central roles in land management. However, their overlapping responsibilities, often marked by corruption, extend procedures and exacerbate local conflicts.

1. Introduction

In French-speaking Africa, land governance is a fundamental pillar of the region’s economic and social development [1]. It encompasses all the processes, institutions, and policies that govern the access, use, management, and redistribution of land [2]. In this region, as in most countries worldwide, land is a primary resource and often lies at the heart of power dynamics and socio-economic issues, as it represents the main source of subsistence for a significant portion of the population [3].

Historically, although land management is a global issue, in French-speaking Africa, it is characterized by specific dynamics influenced by the region’s unique geographical, political, economic, and social contexts. Geographically, this management is exacerbated by a low proportion of arable land, an unequal distribution of land, and extreme climatic conditions that increase pressure on natural resources [4]. It is also politically encumbered by its colonial legacy, through which the appropriation of land by any European settlers generated opposition between traditional land rights and imported legal frameworks. The land question has been socialized here in such a way that it comes closer to the spirituality and identity of societies, where land is seen as the core of social organization and religious beliefs [2,4]. Hence, this factor always marks the issue of land management in Africa with these factors: it lies between customary systems rooted deeply in local traditions and the formal legal framework established during the colonial period [2]. This duality often generates conflicts, legal ambiguities, and land insecurity, particularly in rural areas dominated by the community lands [5].

Land governance is at a crossroads in French-speaking Africa due to the necessity of modern reforms undertaken to face today’s challenges [3]. The reforms are meant to strengthen land security and promote sustainable development and equitable access to land, with regard to the local communities’ rights, while securing the ecosystems as well [6].

Community lands, highly valuable in terms of economic and social development, are the part of French-speaking Africa [7]. Local communities necessarily manage it through their respective customary systems inherited from ancestors [8]. These lands are critical resources to varied continuity within much of the population, mainly in rural settings, as they have much to do with agricultural practice, livestock breeding [9], and resources of nature such as water and wood access [10].

Community lands hold importance beyond their financial value. They are essential to social cohesion and the ethnic composition of communities [8]. Community-owned lands enable resilience in the face of monetary, ecological, and climate crises by helping residents meet their food needs, earn a living, and maintain their traditional way of life [11]. Additionally, collaborative land management supports ecological practices that protect nature and wildlife, helping to combat land degradation, soil deterioration, and deforestation [7]. As such, communal lands are not only a resource for regional economic growth but also a crucial tool for environmental preservation and promoting equitable growth in Francophone Africa [2].

However, land governance in Francophone Africa faces many challenges rooted in its history of land management [11]. Institutional incapacity, characterized by deep ideological divergences among the actors involved, exacerbates disparities in access to land and hinders the efficient and equitable regulation of land [10]. Moreover, the coexistence and frequent conflicts between traditional land tenure systems (deeply rooted in local practices) and those based on Western norms and legislation lead to land insecurity, which has become a serious problem [3]. Adequate protection by constitution is similarly affecting many communities due to this dualism, since it complicates the process of the official recognition of ancestral land ownership and causes legal disputes [12]. Bureaucracy and corruption within land administration worsen the situation, putting officials and politicians and private actors in collusion to facilitate land grabbing by foreign investors or regional elites at the expense of local residents [2]. Land reforms are also sought for these needs; however, they are also poorly designed or poorly fit local conditions, meaning they are thus scaled down in effectiveness [13].

Land conflict occurs frequently between either local residents and the state or communities, very frequently followed by violence, which keeps vulnerable populations at increased risk while stifling economic growth within the region [13]. In addition, land governance in West Africa, especially in places where French is the spoken language, is institutionally fragmented [14]. Therefore, land control becomes a shared responsibility across multiple ministries including, but not limited to, decentralization, real estate, urban development, and agriculture [14]. This situation not only creates jurisdictional conflicts among agencies but also makes it a huge task to implement coherent land reforms, especially in postcard regions of French-speaking Africa where conflict issues are most eminent [10,14]. These challenges highlight the urgent need for reform and reorganization that will produce proper land governance and equity for sustainable land management within the Francophone African region.

Thus, this study also aims at analyzing, through the lens of such facts, various parameters in the dimension of community land, making it stand out from other land types, while analyzing how current institutional and legal changes affect the governance of such resources in French-speaking Africa. Furthermore, this study seeks to identify shortcomings and assess the effectiveness of these reforms to propose governance strategies best suited to local conditions. At a time when land is under increasing pressure due to factors such as population growth, rapid urbanization, inadequate food supply, and global warming, this study is highly relevant.

This study focuses on three main angles: first, a review of the legal and institutional aspects of land governance reforms in French-speaking Africa (Benin, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Mali, and Senegal), analyzing their objectives, results, and the challenges associated with their implementation; second, examples of effective and ineffective reform implementations based on case studies from countries with notable successes (Ethiopia, Rwanda, Mauritius, Ghana, and Madagascar) and failures (South Africa and Zimbabwe); and third, specific recommendations for improving sustainable land management while considering social, economic, political, and environmental dimensions.

2. Conceptual and Theoretical Framework

2.1. Conceptual Framework

2.1.1. Concept of Land Governance

Land governance encompasses the processes, laws, institutions, and practices that regulate land management [2]. It defines who can use land, how these rights are protected, and how benefits are distributed [7]. Its key elements include a clear legal and regulatory framework, effective administrative institutions, transparency and stakeholder participation, the security of land rights, sustainable land management, and conflict resolution mechanisms [3]. In this context, Kassis [15] emphasizes that land governance is considered the establishment of coordination mechanisms among the various actors involved in land management. It is based on a set of clearly defined rules and rights, promoting the joint mobilization of resources, skills, and initiatives to ensure the valorization of land within a common objective [16,17]. In the agricultural sector, this governance is centered on the goal of preserving agricultural land [18,19]. McGinnis [20] adds that it is also a dynamic process through which the rules and strategies governing the decisions of land sector actors are developed, applied, interpreted, and adapted.

However, the effectiveness of these governance systems also depends on the interaction between public and private actors, including local authorities, spatial planning actors, semi-public entities—such as the chamber of agriculture as an associated public body responsible for studying planning documents—and the inhabitants of a territory through public surveys [15]. These actors, with diverse and sometimes opposing interests and powers, collaborate and interact to establish the methods for applying this governance and select the appropriate instruments for its implementation [15].

Nonetheless, land governance should not be limited to mechanisms defined solely by legal, political, and administrative frameworks [3]. According to the FAO [21], land governance serves as a means of accessing natural resources while enabling societies to control their management. It also seeks to reconcile the priorities and interests of different groups competing for the exploitation of these resources [21]. It allows the monitoring of how individuals and groups are involved in decision making, how governments are accountable to stakeholders, and the measures societies take to enforce rights, freedoms, rules, and laws [21]. Effectiveness in addressing land issues is closely linked to the quality of governance. Moreover, community cohesion, ecological sustainability, food security, and economic growth depend on effective land governance [3].

This premise is particularly relevant to the objective of this study, which is to assess the effectiveness of organizational and legislative reforms in managing communal lands in Francophone Africa. By identifying the essential elements of land governance on which this study focuses, this foundational clarification enables an evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of current structures and the formulation of appropriate remedies.

2.1.2. Legal and Institutional Reforms

Legal and institutional reforms are structural or legislative changes carried out by relevant government agencies to improve efficiency, transparency, and fairness in the management of public affairs [10]. These invaluable changes may also involve the modification of laws and public policies to enable the recognition of various institutions, decentralization of powers, or the effective implementation of new public policies [1].

Since the late 1980s, African states, encouraged by donors, have initiated a wide range of reforms affecting public policies, administrative decentralization, and the restructuring of administrations, thereby plunging bureaucracies and public services into a state of continuous reorganization [22]. Under the guise of “fighting poverty” [23] and promoting “good governance” [24], these reforms aim to institutionally embed a reduction in state intervention [10]. They are expected to be developed by the states with a focus on policy ownership [25].

It is important to note that the objectives of these reforms often include strengthening governance, increasing citizen participation, ensuring social justice, and promoting sustainable and inclusive development [26]. By analyzing and examining the potential impact of these reforms on land utility and community land management in Francophone Africa, this research study seeks to identify both the factors contributing to success and the various obstacles hindering sustainable and equitable land use.

2.1.3. Specificities of Community Lands in Africa

In Africa, all communal properties, including land, are characterized by their collective use and their cultural, social, and fiscal value [8]. Communal lands are not personal properties; rather, they are usually owned by ethnic groups, clans, or villages and are governed by customary systems based on consensual mechanisms that guarantee equitable access for group members [27]. These customary rights are transmitted ancestrally and often reflect a deep integration of traditional practices rather than formally titled rights to use the land [27], an approach that remains weakly protected within modern legal frameworks.

Indeed, laws that granted traditional authorities the power to manage land issues and related institutions, as well as claims to land rights based on customary instruments, have largely been annulled in some African countries [28,29]. Following the periods of independence, most Francophone West African countries annulled the recognition of customary land rights (established in 1955) and transferred their management to the state by creating a national land domain under exclusive state control [30]. This is the case in Senegal and many other countries, which reversed late colonial reforms that recognized customary property and instead opted for the generalization of state land ownership [30]. However, a minority of these countries, such as Togo, still maintain the earlier approach by implementing reforms aimed at giving greater legitimacy to customary land rights [30].

The lack of formal and legal recognition of customary rights in most French-speaking African countries, combined with the sharp increase in pressures on natural resources due to population growth, has made land highly vulnerable and a frequent source of conflict [12]. These pressures are further exacerbated by another significant threat: the alienation of land, or “land grabbing”, of foreign origin, which is often facilitated by national governments [31].

It should be noted that this study does not aim to fully explain the essence of communal land rights in Africa but rather seeks to analyze the reforms implemented for land management in light of the limiting factors identified in the current specificities of community lands. This analysis is intended to serve as a starting point for reflections aimed at better orienting future reforms, considering local realities and colonial legacies.

2.1.4. Land Tenure Insecurity

The concept of tenure insecurity is mainly divided into two approaches: the insurance school and the substance of rights school [32]. The insurance school emphasizes the risks of the loss of rights, unpredictable policy changes, and their impacts on land attributes [33,34,35,36]. This view is supported by other authors such as Simbizi et al. [37], who specify that tenure insecurity is defined as the perceived probability of losing ownership of part or all of one’s land without consent. However, the definition proposed by this school does not stop at the loss of property rights; it also emphasizes the uncertainty of rights, unpredictable policy changes, and their impacts on land attributes [32,33].

In contrast, the substance of rights school focuses on the duration of rights, the possibilities of renewal, and the right to transfer or sell land [33,38]. This partially aligns with the perception of Ege [39], who clearly points out that this concept does not only imply the loss of property but also includes events such as the administrative redistribution of land and latent rights. An example is when young people engage in the exploitation of family land under a formal title held by their parents. These findings demonstrate that land insecurity is a multidimensional concept that includes many forms of risk associated with land rights holders.

The work of Arnot et al. [40] also highlights the divergences that occur in the conceptualization and measurement of land insecurity, which can lead to differences in the analysis and interpretation of land dynamics. This observation reinforces the opposition between the two schools previously mentioned. Thus, Arnot et al. [40] explain that these theoretical and conceptual divergences around land insecurity can generate risky strategies on the ground, such as inappropriate tree planting on plots—a technique often used to establish property claims and which becomes a frequent source of serious conflicts between users. Arnot et al. [40] therefore insist on the urgency of rigorously conceptualizing land security and adopting relevant indicators capable of reflecting local realities and effectively measuring the levels of protection of land rights. This clarification of the concept of land insecurity within the framework of this study allows for a better understanding of its dimensions, enabling a more precise evaluation of the impact of reforms on land governance issues.

2.2. Theoretical Framework

2.2.1. Resource Theory

Resource-based theory, as proposed by Barney [41], posits that the scarcity and ownership of resources are central factors in firm performance [42]. This approach suggests that differences in performance between firms (or production units) are not explained by the positioning and characteristics of the sector but by the heterogeneity of resources [42]. At the core of this theory is the assumption that strategic resources—those that are rare, valuable, inimitable, and non-substitutable—enable an organization or entity to maintain a competitive advantage [43]. According to Kim and Mahoney [44], this theory implicitly assumes that property rights over these strategic resources must be guaranteed for them to play their role in creating value and sustaining advantages.

In the context of this study, resource theory is particularly relevant as it helps to understand the strategic importance of land management as a key resource for rural communities in Africa. Land is not only a material basis for agricultural and economic activities but also a scarce and strategic resource whose property rights directly influence the ability of rural communities to derive sustainable benefits. Based on the assumptions described above, the lack of adequate guarantees for property rights can be seen as a source of uncertainty, exposing land to risks of confiscation, conflict, or inefficient use.

By applying this theory, this study highlights how heterogeneity in land access and management is influenced by the sustainability and effectiveness of legal and institutional reforms in Francophone Africa. To address this issue, it is essential to clearly define the theoretical models surrounding land resource management.

2.2.2. Theoretical Model Around Common Goods: Case of Land Resources

Commons refer to resources shared within a community of users [45], belonging to the community as a whole within a sovereign framework rather than to individuals [46]. Based on this definition, land resources can be classified as commons. Given that the management of land issues in Francophone Africa involves the participation of multiple institutions [2], analyzing land resource management must consider the concept of polycentric governance—a complex model characterized by multiple semi-autonomous decision-making centers operating in an interconnected manner [47,48]. In other words, polycentric governance refers to a system in which multiple stakeholders, such as national institutions, local authorities, community organizations, and sometimes private actors, participate in decision making [47,48]. It is an approach characterized by interaction and coordination at different levels. In line with the clarification provided by Kassis [15], who emphasizes that land governance involves establishing coordination mechanisms among various actors involved in land management, we can associate this governance model with a polycentric system.

By examining the polycentric nature of land governance, this study seeks to provide a deeper understanding of the legal and institutional reforms developed, implemented, and regulated at different levels, from national institutions to local organizations. This examination helps highlight the interactions between these levels of governance, as well as the challenges and opportunities associated with coordinating efforts and decision making in such a complex context.

Building on the concepts and theories presented, a relevant research question emerges: to what extent do legal and institutional reforms in land governance, including polycentric governance arrangements, influence sustainable community land management in Francophone Africa? Additionally, what are the key factors for the success or failure of these reforms? This question explores the interactions between levels of governance, institutional reforms, and local mechanisms, assessing their contributions to sustainable land resource management. The main hypothesis is that the effectiveness of legal and institutional reforms in land governance, when integrated into a polycentric governance model, significantly contributes to sustainable community land management in Francophone Africa. However, the success or failure of these reforms depends on effective coordination across levels of governance and the capacity of local mechanisms to ensure the legal and formal recognition of land rights. To address this central question and test the hypothesis, this study employs a rigorous methodological approach.

Figure 1 provides an analytical synthesis of the concepts and theories used in this study. Community properties are considered here as resources or common goods belonging to ethnic groups, clans, or villages and are governed by customary systems based on consensual mechanisms that guarantee equitable access for group members. This community behavior is perceived as a source of divergence within different societies, often leading to land tenure insecurity. On the one hand, this study analyzes the laws and rules (land governance) surrounding the management of these land resources. Given that land issues involve the participation of multiple actors (national institutions, local authorities, community organizations, and private actors), this analysis places particular emphasis on the polycentric nature of land governance. On the other hand, legal and institutional reforms in land governance have been subjected to an in-depth comparative analysis between countries. This level of analysis highlights the structural and legislative changes surrounding land governance in Francophone Africa and examines the potential effects of these reforms on community land management. This synthesis summarizes the links between the conceptual and theoretical frameworks used in the analysis of documentary sources for this study.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Data Collection Materials and Methods

This study was conducted using a systematic review following the method proposed by Higgins et al. [49], which provides a robust methodology for research synthesis and monitoring. The Systematic Evidence Synthesis (ROSES) framework for systematic literature reviews (SLRs) was applied to ensure that the research can be replicated [50]. This framework includes the following: (a) describing literature sources relevant to land governance issues; (b) formulating search terms and explaining in detail the process used to identify the relevant literature; (c) defining criteria for the inclusion and exclusion of the literature in the review; and (d) documenting the literature included in the review based on the defined criteria.

3.2. Eligibility Criteria for Documents or References Used

To address this question, inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined to select appropriate studies, as recommended by Brignardello-Petersen et al. [51]. This research study initially focused on studies addressing legal and institutional reforms in the context of land resource governance. Geographical relevance was considered a secondary criterion, favoring studies conducted in French-speaking African countries. The focus on these countries is justified by several factors. First, they share homogeneity in land history due to the colonial influence of France, which shaped land ownership and management structures. In these regions, land was often nationalized, leading to the formal abolition of customary systems [52]. This homogeneity is also reflected in the dichotomy between modern land law and local land practices [52]. This legal pluralism, where incompatible rules coexist, necessitates an in-depth analysis of legal and institutional reforms for sustainable community land management.

Subsequently, this study was extended to English-speaking countries where institutional reforms have achieved notable successes in land resource governance. This dual approach enabled a comparative analysis to identify factors contributing to successes and failures in the two geographical areas.

The final eligibility criterion was the “year of publication.” Only studies conducted between 1971 and 2024 were considered for this review. This period was selected to include both the advent of democracy and multiparty politics as well as earlier land reforms that laid the foundations for current policies. This broader historical perspective is essential for understanding continuities and ruptures in land governance and their impacts on community land management.

Regarding the choice of countries included in this study, the selection was based on the criterion of presenting significant and exemplary results in terms of land governance. Emphasis was placed on countries where reforms have demonstrated notable successes or failures, offering valuable lessons for understanding the dynamics of community land management (Figure 2). Success is defined as reforms that achieve the objectives set. It is important to emphasize that this section does not aim to clarify concepts but rather to describe the strategies or reasons that served as methodological guidelines in selecting the countries included in the study. For example, reforms related to decentralizing land administration systems are considered successful when the literature indicates that land administration responsibilities have been effectively devolved to local authorities. Conversely, reforms are classified as failures when the intended objectives are not achieved. For instance, rural land reforms aimed at registering land titles are considered failures if the literature indicates that a high proportion of land remains unregistered in a given country.

3.3. Search Strategy

The search strategy relied on several computerized databases, including Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar, which are among the most widely used databases in scientific research [53]. A total of 320 publications were initially identified. This compilation of documents from various sources proved essential to the research, providing a solid foundation for the analysis and evaluation of existing knowledge in the field. During the selection and refinement stages, 263 publications (including unrelated studies and duplicates) were excluded. Consequently, 57 publications were ultimately included in the review, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) methodology [54], applied within the ROSES strategy (Figure 3). Furthermore, the thematic search strategy was conducted using keywords combined with Boolean operators to capture all relevant studies. The search string adopted in this study was defined as follows: (“Land reforms” OR “land management” OR “Legal reforms” OR “Institutional reforms”) AND (“Francophone Africa” OR “West Africa”) AND (“Customary rights” OR “Community lands”) AND (“Land governance” OR “Land security”).

3.4. Analysis Method

This study adopted a spatial and comparative analysis approach to examine the information collected. As the first step, a geographical map illustrating the different French-speaking African countries where land reforms have been implemented was produced. This visual representation contextualizes the reforms within their geographical environments and identifies the most impacted regions. Additionally, a comparative analysis between countries was conducted to examine the reforms based on their objectives, outcomes, and implementation strategies. The various approaches adopted by each country were assessed, highlighting successes and failures to draw relevant lessons for sustainable community land management. This dual approach provides a better understanding of the dynamics underlying land reforms in these countries and identifies potential avenues for improvement in future policies. By following these methodological approaches, valuable results were obtained and discussed.

4. Results

4.1. Spatial Analysis of Countries That Have Undergone Legal and Institutional Reforms in Africa

Before narrowing the focus to a smaller group of countries, a continent-wide exploratory study was necessary to gain an overview of the state of land reforms in Africa. This preliminary examination of the various countries that have undertaken legal and institutional reforms provided a better understanding of the overall dynamics and regional variations, serving as a frame of reference. This initial exploration also facilitated the selection of countries that have achieved particularly significant results, forming the basis for analyzing the successes, challenges, and lessons learned in this study.

The spatial analysis (Figure 4) reveals that legal and institutional reforms affecting land governance have been implemented in various regions of Africa. In West Africa, countries such as Mauritania, Mali, Burkina Faso, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Ghana, Benin, Ivory Coast, and Niger have undertaken reforms aimed at improving the management of community lands. These efforts often seek to reconcile modern land law with customary practices in the context of legal pluralism. In Central Africa, Cameroon stands out for its initiatives to strengthen land governance, while in Southern Africa, Angola, Namibia, Botswana, South Africa, and Zimbabwe have introduced reforms to better manage land in response to increasing pressures on natural resources. Similarly, Ethiopia and Madagascar have adopted comparable approaches in East Africa. The remainder of this study analyzes these reforms in detail, focusing on the successes and failures recorded during their implementation.

4.2. State of Play of Land Governance in French-Speaking Africa

Traditional land tenure systems in the pre-colonial period in Francophone Africa were based on collective and customary land management, emphasizing resource preservation and social cohesion [55]. These systems, although diverse, shared a common vision of land as a community patrimony [56]. The arrival of colonial powers profoundly disrupted these regimes, shifting from a community-oriented system to one emphasizing individual ownership and private property [56]. This transition encouraged the commodification of land, altering traditional practices and creating tensions between customary and modern systems [10]. While this situation is common across Francophone African countries, the state of legal and institutional reforms for sustainable community land management reveals a complex and varied landscape, despite some common challenges [57].

Current land legislation remains deeply influenced by the colonial legacy, where land registration and formal land titles are the only legal forms of ownership recognized by the state [52]. This legal framework, inherited from colonial administrations, institutionalized the distinction between registered land, which enjoys formal legal protection, and unregistered land, often governed by customary regimes [10]. Most rural land in real life is incorporated into the private domain of the state as unregistered, allowing the latter to dispose it as it wishes, hardly to the betterment of local communities exercising traditional rights [10]. This duality persists in the clash of customary practices with modern legislation, which leads to frequent conflicts over the rights and management of such lands.

In response, many states have undertaken reforms in the past few decades to modernize land management and adjust legislation to current socio-economic realities [52]. Yet, such reforms face significant, complex challenges in implementing them, with societies resisting involvements and an inconsistency between modern and customary systems [58]. Some countries have initiated reforms geared towards clarifying land rights, strategies for conflict reduction, and sustainable community land management [57]. These have included an amendment of land codes and regulatory measures for protection from private or foreign interests [59]. For example, Benin, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Mali, and Senegal undertook legislative revisions aimed at customizing customary laws into national legal frameworks [13].

In vain again, prior to enabling the objectives for which these reforms were set, myriad challenges beset them. Countries with long-existing land systems—mostly in Africa—have laws that overlap with more than one law, which makes matters more insecure and conflict-ridden [3].

Land governance issues in Francophone Africa are complex and interrelated [3]. Land insecurity sharply increases through urbanization, which places much legal uncertainty on women and youth who are typically restricting in terms of access to land [60]. Vulnerable pastoralists and indigenous peoples face heightened pressures due to land conflicts and the lack of recognition of their customary rights [57]. Furthermore, institutional inefficiencies in land administration and service delivery compound these challenges, while unsustainable agricultural practices and climate change further degrade natural resources [61]. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated land management challenges, widening inequalities and intensifying land use conflicts [2].

Large-scale land investments, often at the expense of local communities, underscore the urgent need for a more inclusive and sustainable land governance framework [57]. Recurring problems such as administrative delays, corruption, insufficient technical capacity, and the lack of community participation are widely documented [7].

Integrating customary systems into modern legal frameworks remains a major challenge, requiring the reconciliation of often divergent views on land ownership and use [11]. Additionally, some reforms have been constructively criticized for their top-down approach, which fails to adequately address local events and the needs of affected populations. However, many innovations have not achieved the expected results [2].

Figure 5 summarizes these challenges in land governance in French-speaking Africa. To ensure that these reforms are truly effective, it is essential to strengthen the participation of local communities, improve transparency and governance, and adapt reforms to local contexts while respecting the rights of the populations concerned.

4.3. Analysis of Legal and Institutional Reforms

4.3.1. Major Agrarian Reforms Undertaken in Various French-Speaking African Countries

Administrative and policy reforms for community land management in French-speaking Africa vary from country to country but share common objectives: securing land rights, promoting the decentralization of land management, and integrating customary land management systems into national legal frameworks [22]. Legal and institutional reforms have the potential to significantly improve community land management in Francophone Africa by addressing several key aspects [10].

First, they can clarify land rights by harmonizing customary and modern systems, thereby reducing conflicts over overlapping land claims [12]. By formally recognizing customary land rights, such reforms would strengthen the tenure security of local communities, enabling them to better protect and manage their land [11]. Additionally, reforms aimed at improving transparency and reducing corruption in land administration are crucial [12]. Measures such as digitizing land records, simplifying land titling procedures, and establishing stricter control mechanisms [62] would help curb land-grabbing practices and promote a more equitable management of land resources.

Table A1. Agrarian reforms in some major French-speaking African countries.

Country	Agrarian Reforms	Goals	Actors Involved in the Implementation Process	Results	References
Benin	Law No. 2013-01 of 14 August 2013 relating to the land and property code in the Republic of Benin	This law reduces land insecurity, improves access to land for local populations and modernizes land management to combat the fragmentation of plots.	The Ministry of Finance through the National Agency for Estates and Heritage, local authorities, civil society organizations, technical and financial partners.	In an approach focused on rural areas and decentralization, the 2013 legal reform only reinforced the land registration procedure inherited from the colonial era. This led to a break with the recognition of customary land rights by favoring formal land registration mechanisms to the detriment of traditional practices.	[10,52,62,63,64]
Senegal	Law on the national domain adopted on 17 June 1964 (law 64–46)	The main objective of this law is to provide Senegal with a unified legal framework for land management.	The Ministry of Rural Development (state) and rural communities created by decree under the authority of the State. Procedure: All lands not classified in the public domain, not registered and whose ownership has not been transcribed to the mortgage registry constitute by right the national domain.	This law allowed for the nationalization of unregistered land, giving the state centralized control over a large part of the national territory. However, it also gave rise to tensions, particularly in areas where customary rights were predominant.	[6,64,65,66]
	Law 2004-16 known as the Agro-Sylvo-Pastoral Orientation Law (LOASP)	It unambiguously aims to introduce new land governance assisted by the market.	Consultation of the state (under the authority of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock) with professional agricultural organizations, non-governmental organizations, local elected officials, public and parapublic establishments, company civil society and partners in agro-sylvo-pastoral development.	This led to the modernization and diversification of agriculture.	[6,66,67]

and

Table A2. Agrarian reforms in some major French-speaking African countries.

Country	Agrarian Reforms	Goals	Actors Involved in the Implementation Process	Results	References
Mali	Law No. 63-7/AN-RM of 11 January 1963, establishing the fundamental law on land and real estate matters	Provide a legal framework for the management of public and private lands and domains of the State, by regulating the ownership, occupation and use of land.	This involved the Ministry of State Property and Land Affairs. Principle: the absolute withdrawal of land and natural resource management powers from traditional authorities (such as village or community chiefs) and the centralization of their management under the authority of the state.	Land regulation and titling have been implemented unevenly, with disparities between urban and rural areas.	[57,68]
	Law No. 06-45 on agricultural orientation of 5 September 2006	Ensure that farmers, especially smallholders, have secure access to land to promote agricultural production.	Actors in the agricultural sector: professional agricultural organizations, the Chambers of Agriculture (the Ministry of Agriculture), and state and local authorities. This applies to two types of agricultural holdings: family farms and agricultural businesses (recognized and secure).	Attempts at land reform have since sought to resolve the tensions created by this law, notably by recognizing customary rights and decentralizing land management.	[68,85]
	Land and property management reform launched in Mali in 2014	Improving land and land resource management in the country	Three ministries were involved: the Ministry of State Lands and Land Affairs, the Ministry of Agriculture, and the Ministry of the Environment. Other stakeholders: local authorities and local communities, farmers’ organizations, international donors and technical partners. This was a participatory and multi-stakeholder process aimed at modernizing land management, strengthening legal certainty and promoting inclusive and sustainable land governance.	This improves land security, modernizing legal and institutional frameworks	[86]
	Law No. 2017-001 of 11 April 2017 relating to agricultural land	Secure land rights for smallholder farmers, particularly in rural areas, and encourage sustainable agricultural investments.	The implementation mechanism is essentially based on the institutional and territorial framework of rural municipalities, in other words, on the synergy between policies, the land security actions of local actors and the development of complementarity between rural municipalities and local land management institutions. These are mainly village land commissions (customary chiefs) and the National Observatory of Agricultural Land (the Ministry of Rural Development).	The implementation of rural land registration has progressed, but it is hampered by local interest conflicts and traditional practices.	[68,87]
Ivory Coast	Rural Land Law of 23 December 1998, revised in 2013, aimed at formalizing customary land rights and encouraging rural investment	Reserves rural land ownership for Ivorians.	This involved the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development and village communities. Principles: the issuance of land certificates, but it lack of knowledge of the registration and formalization of relations between holders of customary rights and non-owner operators.	It plays a key role in rural land management, but its implementation remains complex due to challenges such as land conflicts and slow procedures.	[69,70]
	Law No. 2015-537 of 20 July 2015 on agricultural orientation of Ivory Coast	Provides for the implementation of a policy that aims to secure the rights of customary owners and occupants to keep young people and women in the territory on an identified land heritage and to enhance the value of land resources.	This involved the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (state), national institutions responsible for social cohesion, agricultural organizations and civil society organizations. Consultation for the implementation of this policy aimed at strengthening social cohesion between rural stakeholders.	This results in securing the rights of customary holders, enhancing the value of land resources, equitable access for men and women to said resource and its sustainable management.	[71]
Burkina Faso	Law 034-2012/AN on agrarian and land reorganization (RAF) in Burkina Faso was adopted on 2 July 1984	Marginalizes customary powers and promote “rational” land management based on the nationalization of land and the prohibition of the land market.	This involved several ministries (the Minister of Regional Planning and Decentralization, Minister of Economy and Finance, Minister of Housing and Urban Planning, Minister of Agriculture and Food Security, Minister of Animal and Fisheries Resources, Minister of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Minister of Equipment and Opening Up, Minister of Territorial Administration and Security, and Minister of Justice) in collaboration with local authorities and competent technical services. Implementation: The Raf had focused on urban land but had not proposed anything on rural land. There was no land management structure. There was no land registry. We relied on oral testimonies to attest to the ownership of one and the other.	The law has never been applied because Burkina Faso has never had the means to match its ambitions in terms of regional planning.	[10,72,73]
	In June 2009, Law No. 0342009/AN of 16 June 2009, relating to rural land tenure	This law defines the land and property regime applicable to rural land and establishes the principles of land security for all rural land stakeholders, with an emphasis on the issuance of rights.	The ministries concerned were Finance, Territorial Administration and Decentralization, and Agriculture. At the population level, the implementation of this law is based on the establishment, at the municipal level, of a rural land service (SFR) and, at the village level, of a Village Land Commission (CFV) attached to the Village Development Committee (CVD).	This results in the distribution of national lands between domains (of the state, local authorities and individuals), land charters, the creation of structures at the communal and village levels, consultation bodies at the communal level, the creation of a village body responsible for resolving conflicts, and the recognition of the legitimate rights of populations, which gives the right to a certificate of land possession.	[72]

(Appendix A) provide an overview of the various legal and institutional land reforms in French-speaking Africa.

4.3.2. Comparative Analysis of Different Reforms on Land Governance in French-Speaking Africa

A comparative analysis of land reforms in various French-speaking African countries, as presented in

Table 1. Comparative analysis of reforms adopted by French-speaking African countries.

Country	Goals	Similarities and Differences	Actors Involved	Results Obtained
Benin	Reduction in land tenure insecurity and modernization of land management	Similarity with the case of Senegal Centralized approach and marginalization of customary rights	Ministry of Finance, National Land Agency, local authorities, technical partners	Reducing land fragmentation, debates on the marginalization of customary rights, resistance of rural communities
Senegal	Nationalization of unregistered land, market-oriented agricultural modernization (LOASP, 2004)	Similarity with Benin and Mali Centralized approach and agricultural orientations	State (Ministry of Rural Development), professional agricultural organizations, NGOs, local officials and international partners.	Creation of tensions related to customary rights, reduction in conflicts thanks to inclusive approaches with the LOASP 2004
Mali	Securing smallholder land rights, institutional modernization	Mixed approach allowing partial recognition of customary rights, distinct from the case of Senegal and Benin Decentralization similar to the case of Burkina Faso	State through several ministries, rural communities (village land commissions)	Some progress slowed by local practices and institutional tensions
Ivory Coast	Formalization of customary rights, social inclusion and land tenure security for sustainable agricultural land management	In terms of similarity, this country adopts approach close to that of Mali (securing land rights) and Senegal (agricultural orientation) In terms of difference, reforms here prioritize inclusive approach (social cohesion)	State (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development), village communities and agricultural organizations.	Valorization of land resources, social cohesion, delays in the implementation of reforms and persistence of land conflicts
Burkina Faso	Securing land rights, promoting rural investment	Objective of securing land rights similar to that of Mali and Ivory Coast, but stands out through an approach focused on strong decentralization with establishment of village commissions for land management	The ministries concerned (Finance, Territorial Administration and Decentralization, Agriculture); Population (Rural Land Service SFR), rural communities (Village Land Commission)	Practical challenges in managing land conflicts, decentralization hampered by resource constraints

, highlights both similarities and differences in objectives, the actors involved, and outcomes. In Benin, the 2013 land reform primarily aimed to reduce land insecurity and modernize land management to improve access for local populations [62]. Supervised by the Ministry of Finance and the National Agency for Land and Property, with support from local authorities and technical partners [63], the reform adopted a centralized approach to land registration. While it helped reduce land fragmentation, it sparked debates about the marginalization of customary rights [10,62,64].

In Senegal, the 1964 National Domain Law sought to nationalize unregistered land and establish a unified legal framework [65,66]. Driven by the Ministry of Rural Development and rural communities under state authority [6], this reform created tensions in areas where customary rights were widely practiced. The 2004 Agro-Sylvo-Pastoral Orientation Law (LOASP) complemented this approach by introducing market-based land governance aimed at modernizing agriculture [67]. Its implementation required consultations between the state, professional agricultural organizations, NGOs, local officials, and international partners to strengthen sustainable land management [67].

In terms of outcomes, Benin’s reforms modernized land management but failed to adequately address customary rights, leading to resistance from rural communities [10,62,64]. Similarly, Senegal’s 1964 centralized law generated conflicts over customary rights, particularly in rural areas, but the 2004 LOASP eased tensions by promoting inclusive approaches while modernizing agriculture [9,65,66]. While Benin focused on securing land for local populations, Senegal initially pursued centralized management before transitioning to market-oriented governance.

In Mali, complementary approaches to land tenure security and institutional modernization were implemented through the 2017 Agricultural Land Law and the 2006 Agricultural Orientation Law. The latter aimed to secure land rights for smallholder farmers and encourage sustainable agricultural investments [68]. Despite efforts by rural communes and village land commissions, traditional practices and conflicts of interest have slowed progress [68]. Compared to Benin’s centralized reforms and Senegal’s nationalization-oriented laws, Mali adopted a mixed approach that combined land tenure security with the recognition of customary rights but continued to face challenges related to local practices and institutional tensions.

In Ivory Coast, the 1998 Rural Land Law, revised in 2013, aimed to formalize customary rights while reserving rural land ownership for Ivorians [69,70]. However, its implementation was hindered by land conflicts and procedural delays. Unlike Mali, where institutional synergy between communes and local actors facilitated progress, Ivory Coast faced similar challenges in formalization and registration. The 2015 Agricultural Orientation Law emphasized social inclusion, particularly for youth and women, while promoting sustainable land management [71]. Ivory Coast’s reforms are distinguished by their focus on social cohesion and the valorization of land resources.

In Burkina Faso, the 2009 Rural Land Act focused on securing land rights through strong decentralization, establishing village land management commissions [72]. Despite these efforts, practical challenges similar to those in Senegal, such as managing land conflicts, persisted. The 1984 RAF centralized land control under the state but faced implementation difficulties, particularly in rural areas, due to resource constraints [10,72,73]. Compared to Ivory Coast’s promotion of rural investment through land certificates, Burkina Faso has struggled to effectively implement its land reforms.

A comparative analysis between countries like Mali and Burkina Faso, which emphasized decentralization in land reforms, and countries like Senegal, which adopted centralized approaches, reveals divergent strategies. Decentralization can align land management with local realities but faces significant implementation challenges, as seen in Burkina Faso. Conversely, centralized reforms in Benin and Senegal, while effective on paper, have also led to tensions with customary rights.

In summary, the successes and failures of these reforms depend largely on the political context, institutional capacities, and the participation of local communities. Across various French-speaking African countries, land reforms represent a concerted effort to modernize land management, secure land rights, and improve access for local populations. However, despite ambitious goals, these reforms face significant obstacles, including conflicts of interest, the limited recognition of customary rights, and disparities in implementation between rural and urban areas. The continued adherence to traditions, combined with the constraints imposed by contemporary legal frameworks, undermines the effectiveness of reforms. This highlights the gap between the intentions of legislators and actual conditions. Without fully integrating local customs and ensuring equitable implementation, reforms risk exacerbating existing inequalities rather than reducing them.

4.4. Impact of Reforms on Community Land Management

Land reforms in Francophone Africa have had a significant impact on community land management, although the results have been mixed [66]. These reforms have improved the legal recognition of customary land rights and facilitated the formalization of property titles, thereby strengthening land tenure security for some communities. They have also facilitated access to credit and agricultural investments, contributing to local economic development [3]. However, these reforms have often been insufficiently adapted to local contexts, leading to the over-centralization of land authority and a disconnection of decision making from the communities concerned [72]. The introduction of new regulations without sufficient consultation has, in some cases, resulted in land conflicts and the marginalization of vulnerable groups, including women, youth, and indigenous peoples [7]. In other instances, the reforms have facilitated the acquisition of land by private or foreign entities, undermining traditional sustainable land management practices [60]. These dynamics highlight the urgent need to formulate inclusive and participatory reforms that improve community land management while recognizing and respecting the rights and needs of local populations.

4.5. Case Studies of Successful Reforms and Failed Selected Based on the Relevance of the Objectives Pursued and the Results Obtained

4.5.1. Spatial Analysis of Successful and Failed Reform Cases in Africa

Figure 6 presents clear examples of successful and failed land reforms in various countries. In some Southern African countries, such as Zimbabwe and South Africa, recent land redistribution reforms have primarily benefited elites, leaving historical inequalities largely unchanged [5]. These cases highlight the complexity and failures of land reforms on the continent and emphasize the need for more inclusive strategies tailored to local realities. Conversely, there are notable examples of successful reforms [3]. Several countries, including Angola, Botswana, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, and Mauritius, have partially and effectively implemented decentralized land administration systems [2]. These initiatives demonstrate how localized land management can better address the specific needs of communities while strengthening governance and transparency at the local level [7]. The map below illustrates countries where land reforms have been successful and those where they have encountered difficulties.

4.5.2. Some Examples of Successful and Unsuccessful Reforms

Although this study focuses primarily on French-speaking countries, the scope of analysis has been broadened to include English-speaking areas to extract maximum information and identify best practices. The successes and failures observed in some African countries provide valuable insights into the dynamics and challenges common across the continent, which can serve as inspiration for reforms in French-speaking countries.

Table 2. Concrete cases of successful and failed reforms.

Country	Reforms	Case or Objective (Success or Failure)
Concrete cases of successful reforms
Ethiopia and Madagascar	Decentralization of land administration systems	In some areas, land administration responsibilities are delegated to local governments, facilitating the registration and certification of household land holdings [2].
Ghana	Considering customary land tenure systems	The legalization of the customary land tenure system, which governs more than 80% of rural land, has led to the establishment of Customary Land Secretariats (CLSs), strengthening land administration capacities and ensuring the transparent delivery of land services based on customary and statutory land rights [2].
Rwanda	Digitization of the land administration system	Rwanda has modernized its land administration system by adopting geographic information systems (GISs), reducing land transfer time to 7 days compared to an average of over 40 days in many other African countries [2].
Mauritius	Digitization of the land administration system	Like Rwanda, Mauritius has digitalized its land system, improving the efficiency of land transactions [2].
Concrete cases of failed reforms
South Africa and Zimbabwe	Land redistribution reforms	Indigenous land rights reforms have also been experimented with in these African countries through various measures such as the issuance of individual and collective land titles or the appropriation of land to produce cash crops; they have, however, had limited success due to the persistence of social and cultural attachment to the land and, in some cases, due to contestations and conflicts [2].

summarizes some examples of reform successes and failures in Africa.

The lack of reliable land records poses significant challenges to land administration, particularly in politically unstable regions such as the Sahel [57]. In these regions, customary land tenure systems, where land is typically managed by traditional leaders, are widespread. However, this form of management can lead to abuses of power in land distribution. Moreover, Islamic laws, often intertwined with customary structures, struggle to meet modern demands for effective land administration, exacerbating land conflicts in regions such as West Africa and Chad [2]. These laws typically allocate access to land based on the social status of individuals, particularly women, and household dynamics [2]. This approach hinders the development of effective land administration systems, limiting the allocation and optimal use of land.

In West and Central Africa, these challenges are further complicated by conflicting Christian and Islamic influences, which intensify land conflicts [2].

An analysis of community land management policy reforms shows that their success depends largely on the inclusion of local communities, the clarity of land rights, institutional and technical support, and gradual, flexible implementation [2]. Reforms that incorporate these elements promote ownership and effectiveness while minimizing conflicts. In contrast, failures are often linked to stakeholder exclusion, legal uncertainty, a lack of resources, inflexible implementation, and weak governance [7]. A participatory approach, supported by adequate resources, is therefore essential to ensure the success of these reforms [9].

4.6. Challenges for Sustainable Community Land Management

The sustainable management of community lands in French-speaking Africa faces several challenges, which can be summarized as follows.

4.6.1. Land Conflicts

Land conflicts are perennial issues in Francophone Africa, especially regarding communal lands [3]. Conflicts mostly arise owing to land scarcity, overlaps between customary land rights and contemporary legislation, and legal ambiguities [62]. These conflicts become aggravated when the parcel of land under contention falls among different stakeholders like local communities, government entities, private investors, and others [74]. Socio-economic impacts will be massive in the form of food insecurity, population displacement, and the destruction of social cohesion [9]. Typical examples of failed reforms in Zimbabwe and South Africa bring to light the issues of land conflicts, specifically those that arise from ill-fitted policies to local contexts. Previous research has indicated that previous reforms have failed to address one fundamental issue concerning South African society: the unequal redistribution of land. This failure has created public discontent. The persistence and worsening of violence in these regions are indicative of the fact that previous administrations have been unable to effect successful land redistribution. Legal frameworks should be improved, the definition of land rights clarified, and conflict resolution processes blended to suit a given local context [75].

4.6.2. Access to Land and Securing Land Rights

Two major points of interest are access to land and the establishment of land rights regarding local communities in Francophone Africa [75]. Access to land tends to be obstructed by discriminatory practices, social inequalities, and more so by a lack of the adequate management of land resources [69]. Although recognized and acknowledged as customary rights by communities, the absence of their formalization leads to land insecurity not only among local populations [56]. To secure land rights means attaining the legal recognition and protection of individual and community rights over their land [75]. This security is important for investment, livelihood protection, and the prevention of land conflicts [1].

Reforms in the law and institutions would be effective in addressing the legal framework improvement concerning land registration and indeed subjections of such rights under consideration. The success highlighted in decentrally governed countries such as Ghana proves the need to secure land rights within a governance structure improved and made more transparent. At the same time, many failed reforms have revealed some countries that have not formalized customary land rights and have insufficient land tenure security. Communities stand at risk without the formal identification of communal rights [2].

The indication of these results is that legal certainty is a necessary precondition for equitable access to land and, consequently, sustainable investments.

4.6.3. Impact of Climate Change and Demographic Pressures

As a result, climate change and demographic changes are having increasingly significant effects on land management in Francophone Africa. It is these changes in climatic conditions that result in phenomena such as desertification, sea level rise, and shifts in the growing season, which can both increase land availability and compromise quality. When such changes occur, competition over resource access increases conflicts. Scarcity raises the value of land and makes it even more vulnerable to these changes, necessitating the development of resilient and adaptive management strategies.

Land management in Francophone Africa has become inextricably linked with multifaceted challenges that create an environment of deprivation and threat to the land tenure security of local communities, resulting in unsustainable development. Legally insecure situations resulting from a lack of formal property titles and from complexities characteristic of the interaction between customary systems and modern land tenure systems unleash a series of conflicts among communities, individuals, and the state, leading to damage in social stability and economic development. Demographic pressure and rapid urbanization compound these problems, increasing land competition and fragmentation, decreasing the amount of land available for agriculture, and degrading the environment through soil erosion and the loss of biodiversity.

Disarticulated or poorly implemented land reforms, a lack of congruence with local realities, and corruption and a lack of transparency in land administration disfavor equitable access to land. Furthermore, the increasing influx of foreign investors into the regions in which they buy out large parcels of land for agribusiness or mining activities further poses a serious threat to the rights of local communities, as this most often results in forceful evictions and human rights abuse. Indeed, these motives provide a basis for the urgency being given to land governance reforms that protect the rights of local populations, promote sustainable land management, and reduce conflicts. Sustainable community land management in Francophone Africa requires robust policies and administrative reforms that address the combined impacts of climate change and demographic pressures on land. Reforms in Ethiopia and Senegal demonstrate that effective local land management can better adapt to community needs, reducing the impacts of climate change and demographic pressures through well-designed strategies.

In Senegal, the government’s inclusive approach to implementing the LOASP, which involved multiple stakeholders, including NGOs, has improved sustainable land management in the context of climate change [67]. This aligns with the findings of [76,77], which highlight that while government organizations or NGOs have limited authority over individual landowners, they can enhance the adoption and perception of biodiversity conservation initiatives in land management through improved social communication.

4.7. Strategies for More Effective Land Governance

To improve land governance and ensure sustainable and equitable land management, several strategies can be implemented (

Table 3. Suggestions for effective governance.

Strategies	How to Get There	References
Capacity building	Training and skills development, infrastructure improvement (road infrastructure, administrative infrastructure such as land management offices, land documentation centers, digital tools for land registration), strengthening interinstitutional coordination	[1,3,7,16,56,57,60,75,78]
Integration of land and customary rights	Legal recognition of customary rights, participation of local communities
Transparency and the fight against corruption	Transparency in land management processes, strengthening of control and sanction mechanisms
Improved conflict resolution	Creation of local conflict resolution mechanisms, strengthening the role of justice
Participatory and inclusive approach	Stakeholder engagement, awareness and education
Adoption of flexible and adaptive policies	Flexibility in the application of laws
Sustainable development and environmental protection	Promotion of sustainable agricultural practices, protection of community lands against excessive exploitation

). Strengthening institutional capacities through training and the modernization of infrastructure—such as access routes to facilitate plot demarcation and reach concerned areas, land management offices, land documentation centers, and digital tools for land registration—is essential [74]. Integrating customary land rights into the national legal framework is also crucial. Transparency and anti-corruption efforts must be prioritized and supported by effective monitoring and sanction mechanisms [3]. Additionally, improving conflict resolution through appropriate local structures and an accessible justice system is vital [5].

A participatory approach that includes all stakeholders, combined with flexible policies and sustainable agricultural practices, will better address local challenges and promote sustainable land management [1]. By adopting these strategies, governments can establish a more effective land governance framework that meets the needs of communities while ensuring sustainable resource management.

Community-based land management greatly benefits from the engagement of local communities, as it provides specific knowledge, fosters the acceptance of reforms, and improves sustainability. Effective practices include involving communities in all phases of land management, ensuring the clarity of rights, providing adequate training, and establishing strong conflict resolution mechanisms.

While challenges to land governance reforms persist in Francophone Africa, there are significant opportunities to improve land governance. Global and regional initiatives, including the ALPC/Network of Excellence on Land Governance in Africa (NELGA) and the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (VG), offer platforms for collaboration and financial support [2]. Furthermore, land plays a central role in Africa’s sustainable development strategies. Science, technology, and innovation, alongside digital transformation, are recognized as essential mechanisms for modernizing land administration [2]. The use of digital technologies can enhance the transparency and efficiency of land administration. Moreover, Africa’s demographic structure, characterized by a predominance of youth, presents significant development potential [2]. Involving younger generations in training and integration programs related to land management can foster innovation and promote sustainable governance in the long term.

5. Discussion

Land governance in Francophone Africa reflects a complex evolution of land tenure systems, influenced by a lasting colonial legacy and modernization efforts. Many states have launched ambitious land reforms; however, these efforts face considerable challenges related to implementation and social resistance [79]. The interaction between modern and customary land tenure systems frequently leads to legal insecurity, a situation exacerbated by rapid urbanization that disproportionately affects women and youth [60,80]. Attempts to clarify land rights, including the revision of land codes and the establishment of mechanisms to deter land grabbing, have proven insufficient to address current tensions [57,58]. Establishing conflict resolution strategies and a more inclusive land governance framework, in addition to implementing more effective restoration practices, is essential to mitigate conflicts and improve social relations [81,82,83].

Structural problems, including corruption, institutional inefficiency, and insufficient technical capacity, further compound the challenges of land management in Francophone Africa [7,84]. Unsustainable agricultural practices and climate change are exacerbating the degradation of natural resources, complicating the situation [61]. Criticism of the top-down approach of some reforms highlights the need to adapt initiatives to local realities and community needs, as reforms intended to be beneficial often fail to produce measurable results in practice [2]. Integrating the perspectives of local communities into the reform process is essential to achieve sustainable land governance that respects the rights of the populations concerned.

A comparative analysis of land reforms in French-speaking Africa reveals a complex interplay between modernization dynamics, the establishment of land rights, and deep-rooted local realities. In Benin and Senegal, land management remains largely centralized, meaning decisions concerning land are primarily made by state authorities, often to the detriment of local practices and rules [62]. This approach frequently leads to the marginalization of traditional customary rights, causing tensions and conflicts between rural communities and central administrative structures [62].

Mali has adopted a mixed approach that recognizes customary rights while securing land; however, conflicts of interest and traditional practices persist, hampering effective implementation [68]. In Ivory Coast and Burkina Faso, initiatives to formalize land rights face challenges due to slow procedures and difficulties in managing conflicts, which undermine the effectiveness of these reforms [70,72]. The effectiveness of these reforms depends on adopting inclusive approaches that integrate local dynamics and strengthen institutional capacities to create participatory land governance adapted to the needs of the populations [10].

In terms of impact, land reforms in Francophone Africa have transformed community land management by providing some communities with an increased legal recognition of their land rights and facilitating access to financial resources [66,72]. However, excessive centralization and inadequate consultation have also generated tensions, leading to land conflicts and the marginalization of vulnerable groups [7]. While these reforms have the potential to support local economic development, they need to be revised to integrate participatory approaches that protect traditional practices and safeguard the rights of local populations against the threat of land grabbing [60].

Case studies of land reforms reveal mixed results. For example, initiatives in Zimbabwe and South Africa have failed to address historical inequalities, instead benefiting elites [5]. Conversely, successful decentralization efforts in countries such as Angola and Ghana demonstrate the effectiveness of locally tailored approaches to improving land management and strengthening governance [3]. These findings highlight the need for inclusive strategies that respond to community needs to ensure equitable access to land resources [7].

The literature review emphasizes that improving land governance in Francophone Africa depends on strategies that integrate institutional modernization, the inclusion of customary rights, and community participation [1,74]. Transparent practices, anti-corruption measures, and the adoption of digital technologies are essential to improving the efficiency and accessibility of land administration [2]. Engaging younger generations and leveraging regional initiatives such as the ALPC offer significant opportunities for sustainable and resilient governance, promoting sustainability and social justice in land management.

The cases of Rwanda, Ethiopia, and Madagascar provide notable models for countries such as Benin, Burkina Faso, and Ivory Coast. In Ethiopia, the decentralization of land management processes and the implementation of digital technologies have strengthened land tenure security. The digital cadaster has enabled the rapid registration of land rights, reducing land conflicts and improving agricultural planning [2]. In Madagascar, a participatory reform involving local communities in mapping and allocating land rights has effectively secured customary rights and promoted agricultural investments [2]. These approaches illustrate how inclusive and technologically advanced land governance can reform land tenure systems while preserving traditional rights.

For Francophone African countries such as Benin, Burkina Faso, and Ivory Coast, integrating lessons from Rwanda, Ethiopia, and Madagascar could lead to the digitization of national land systems and improved community participation in decision-making processes. The establishment of a participatory cadaster could reduce land insecurity and improve administrative efficiency. In Mali, the Ghanaian approach—which integrates customary land systems into established institutional frameworks—can serve as a model to mitigate conflicts of interest in land management. In Ghana, traditional leaders play an integral role in land management within local frameworks, such as the CLS, which facilitates community participation in land decision-making processes [2]. Mali could strengthen the local commissions created under the 2017 Agricultural Land Act by implementing a stronger legal framework and formalizing the collaboration between customary leaders and public administrations.

The institutional recognition of customary actors, combined with effective state oversight, would facilitate the better alignment of interests, reduce jurisdictional conflicts, and promote inclusive land management that meets the needs of rural populations while respecting the principles of institutional modernization.

6. Conclusions

Land governance in Francophone Africa varies considerably from country to country and cannot be comprehensively addressed in a brief study. Nevertheless, common challenges and solutions have been identified that can offer valuable insights in many contexts. Many countries face issues such as unclear roles, the abuse of power, inadequate law enforcement, and corruption. A review of legislative and institutional changes highlights ongoing efforts to improve land management in Francophone Africa. These reforms aim to establish land rights, enhance access to land, and encourage sustainable land management—key elements for social and economic development. Land governance is closely linked to sustainable development and social balance. The complexity and challenges of land governance in Francophone Africa reveal both disparities between nations and common issues, including corruption, the abuse of power, and conflicts of authority between customary and administrative entities. The involvement of multiple entities in land management often results in corruption and conflict. Examples from Cameroon, Madagascar, and Chad demonstrate that cooperation between customary and administrative authorities can help mitigate land conflicts; however, law enforcement continues to face challenges due to corruption and poor coordination. Governments and local actors must recognize the importance of equitable land management to prevent conflicts, reduce disparities, and foster collective prosperity. Achieving this requires coordinated efforts and the continuous reassessment of land policies.

It is essential to examine in more detail certain aspects of land governance in various Francophone African countries that are not addressed in this article. The implementation of harmonized land governance frameworks at the subregional or continental level could foster collaboration among nations and improve regional stability. Furthermore, additional empirical data are needed to enhance existing analyses and formulate solutions tailored to local contexts.