Next Article in Journal
Analysis of the Evolution of Non-Agriculturization Arable Land Use Pattern and Its Driving Mechanisms
Previous Article in Journal
Spatio-Temporal Evolution Characteristics of Tourism Ecological Resilience in China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Land
Volume 14
Issue 5
10.3390/land14050967
land-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Rural Land Rights, Markets, and Structural Transformation: A Review of a Ugandan Case

by
Noel Kishaija
1,2,3,* and
Bálint Heil
1,2
1
Roth Gyula Doctoral School of Forestry and Wildlife Management Sciences, University of Sopron, H-9400 Sopron, Hungary
2
Institute of Environmental Protection and Nature Conservation, Faculty of Forestry, University of Sopron, H-9400 Sopron, Hungary
3
Production and Marketing Department, Sheema Municipal Council, Kabwohe P.O. Box 160, Uganda
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2025, 14(5), 967; https://doi.org/10.3390/land14050967
Submission received: 11 March 2025 / Revised: 21 April 2025 / Accepted: 24 April 2025 / Published: 30 April 2025
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Uganda is gradually transitioning from communal to private land tenure systems. However, establishing privatized land rights has faced ongoing criticism, particularly concerning their impact on vulnerable groups. Despite the enactment of a national land policy, its benefits have not fully reached rural populations. Issues of land tenure insecurity and unclear ownership continue to generate confusion and have reportedly weakened traditional communal land systems, undermining sustainable agricultural production and long-term investment. This paper examines rural land rights, land markets, and the broader structural transformation of Uganda’s land sector, drawing on the existing literature and published reports. This review reveals that land tenure and administrative challenges persist, largely due to the dominance of customary tenure systems. Although land markets are active, they remain imperfect due to tenure insecurity and legal ambiguities. The findings highlight the need for increased public sensitization regarding land policy, gender-sensitive policies that promote joint ownership, continuous incentives for formalization, the acquisition of land documents, and the harmonization and strengthening of relevant land governance institutions.

1. Introduction

Following years of political instability from Uganda’s independence in the years 1962 to 1986, the promulgation of the 1995 Constitution marked a significant milestone in the country’s governance framework. The 1995 Constitution led to policy reforms, including the enactment of the National Land Policy in 1998 [1]. The spirit behind this policy was to guarantee effective, just, and optimal use and management of Uganda’s land resources for poverty reduction, wealth creation, and, ultimately, socio-economic development. The policy, in its spirit, aimed at ensuring that natural resources are optimally used and sustainably managed [2,3]. This is mainly through restoration, maintenance, and enhancement of the integrity of natural resources. Additionally, all of these practices follow recommended plans and principles of sound environmental management, including biodiversity preservation, soil and water protection, conservation, and sustainable land management [4,5]. Consequently, for equitable access to land, security of tenure, and elimination of historical injustices, among others, the land policy was justified [6,7,8]. In the area of climate change, the policy intends to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change. From the routine monitoring, evaluation, and review framework for the implementation of the policy, the government developed a monitoring and evaluation system. Periodic reviews of land sector performance and the policy are important in identifying persistent and/or new issues requiring further policy interventions at least every five years, which culminated in the 2013 Uganda Land Policy amendments [9,10].
The highest population explosion will happen in Africa by the year 2050, and, in the same breath, Africa houses the largest number of economies dependent on agriculture for subsistence and the primary source of livelihood [11]. With the Ugandan population projected to exceed 80 million by 2050, demand for sustainable sources of livelihood amidst the threat of climate change will increasingly exert pressure on land, an inelastic production resource [12,13,14]. This population growth trend is common across Africa (except for a few countries at war). Land is a critical resource for any country, and in an agriculturally dependent nation like Uganda, it is of particular importance [12,15,16]. Consequently, in Uganda, farming largely occurs on small family farms that depend on tilling land that is rain-fed as a main source of livelihood [17]. Additionally, some of these farms are co-owned by both women and men, where men are usually the household heads with over-arching decision making powers [18,19]. These factors support the need to continue making necessary structural reforms and transformations to ensure sustainable land rights with efficient markets.
Several land tenure systems exist in Uganda, and these have links to the historical times, culture, tradition, beliefs, and colonial administration in the years before its independence [20]. Although transformation has occurred in the land sector, a significant number of rural land rights are still ambiguous and do not offer the security of tenure and thus are not easily enforceable under the current law [6,21,22]. Uganda’s land tenure systems differ greatly from one region to another; in some areas, ownership and administration are communal under the stewardship of the clan heads [23]. For a long time, this has hampered development, and thus, prospective investors have been unable to fully acquire rights in some regions for commercial agricultural production due to a lack of individual security of tenure that characterizes this form of land tenure and therefore limits its efficient transfer and use [24].
On a broad scale, land markets in Uganda have not been structurally transformed, as most settlements and rights are not formalized, with rampant reported land evictions occurring in this decade [7,23,25,26]. This has emanated from the insecure land rights that create an enabling environment for encroachment on both public and private lands [10,27,28]. These challenges are exacerbated by climate change and its impacts; for example, in the eastern part of Uganda, due to recurrent flooding, mud, and landslides, several households have been rendered homeless and landless [29]. The current slow structural transformation of landownership and tenure systems continues to render rural communities less resilient to the impacts of climate change [10]. For several decades, there has been substantial investment in public infrastructure in Uganda [30]. However, such investment has become more expensive and, most of the time, impaired due to the “liberal” land rights. This has resulted in cases where people with the titled land demand unreasonable compensation in case the government intends to use their land for public infrastructure development [31]. This creates market failure and raises the cost of public expenditure on infrastructure, and, worse still, the funds usually used for such projects are borrowed from developmental partners like the World Bank, China, and the European Union, payable at an interest [32].
Transforming thirty-nine percent of the subsistence farmers to commercial market-oriented households is the core mandate of the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF), and the theme of Uganda’s Budget for the year (2023–2024) requires that land should not be fragmented [33], thus encouraging the use of machinery and other modern technologies, like irrigation [34]. Additionally, the current budget (2024–2025) echoes the commercialization of the economy through agriculture [35]. However, there are high levels of land fragmentation in the majority of the regions in Uganda [36]. This presents mixed effects on the performance of land rights and markets. For those that are less formally structured, it may hinder the adjustment of the forces of demand and supply from freely operating to facilitate the efficient transfer of land (through consolidation) for large-scale production purposes [6,7]. However, some scholars state that small fragments may aid farmers in guarding against the risks associated with variations in weather patterns [36].
With the constantly changing climate, the Ugandan agricultural-based economy is less resilient [37]. The existing system of transfer of land rights and ownership among individuals is, to a great extent, not computerized, and the government cannot trace and follow these transfers. Additionally, the Ugandan land policy requires that land transfer transactions be reported to the local authorities at the sub-county or division levels for formalization purposes [38]. However, most rural land transactions bypass these legal provisions, resulting in perpetual insecurity of tenure for the buyers of these lands, as the documents involved are not certified by the relevant authorities.
Consequently, according to the local income tax, these land transfers should be subject to a tax that forms revenue for the nation [38]. This is also some form of land market failure, as these can be taken to be “black land markets”. Government and “mailo” landowners are sometimes unable to collect taxes and rent from the occupants of the lands under these tenure systems [30,39]. “Mailo” tenure is a system of owning land in which there is an owner of the land, called a landlord, and there are recognized occupants on the land, called tenants. It is common in Uganda’s central region and the Buganda Kingdom [40,41]. On the micro level, land may mean soil, and, therefore, for sustainable production amidst climate change, arable land should be protected and used sustainably for the current and future generations [42]. With improvement in the security of land rights, there will be stability in investments in sustainable land management practices [30].
While existing research has contributed significantly to our understanding of land tenure systems and policy frameworks in Uganda, few studies have holistically examined how land rights, land markets, and structural transformation intersect, especially under the pressures of climate change and population growth. This review study addresses this gap by presenting a detailed review of the existing literature under the theme “Rural land rights, markets, and structural transformation for poverty reduction”. By exploring the interlinkages between the legal framework and institutional and socio-economic factors, this review analyzed rural land tenure systems, the land market structure, and performance, with an emphasis on the main challenges related to the security of land tenure, and it provides appropriate recommendations.

1.1. Definition of Main Terms and Geographical Scope of the Study

Rural land rights are legally established rights that individuals, groups, families, or communities have over land use in each area at a given time [8], and, in this case, mainly the rural communities. These rights are essential in many aspects, including reducing poverty when used as a livelihood source. They help the owners use, transfer, exchange, distribute, and manage land resources for all acceptable uses while protecting the environment and social justice [38].
Land markets, in this case, mean the systems, mechanisms, and processes through which land resources are bought, sold, leased, rented, or otherwise relocated between individuals, partners, groups, communities, entities, and governments under some form of agreement [43,44]. Land markets form an essential element of real estate development, industrial development, and agricultural production, among others, and this transfer may have significant economic, social, and environmental impacts, especially in ensuring equity in resource allocation [43]. Usually, in these markets, the major aspect/outcome is the transfer of rights [44].
Land structural transformation refers to the fundamental changes and shifts that occur in the structure of land use, land ownership, and land-related activities within a region or country [45]. This transformation is often associated with economic development, mining, agricultural land use changes, real estate development, infrastructure development, urbanization, and changes in land and resource management practices. Some key aspects of structural land transformation may occur due to natural or human-made factors, like climate change, population increases, improvements in standards of living, discoveries, and exploration, among others [46]. This process is usually facilitated by functional land markets with associated enablers from either formal or non-formal institutions [38].

1.2. Study Area

Uganda is a landlocked country situated in the East African region, straddling the equator between 4° N and 1° S latitude and extending from 29.5° E to 35° E longitude, sharing its border with Rwanda (southwest), the Democratic Republic of Congo (west), South Sudan (north), Kenya (east), and Tanzania (south). Its total land, including water bodies, covers an area of approximately 241,038 km2 [47]. The country is enriched with natural resources and fertile land, which makes agriculture a mainstay for its economy and the livelihood of more than 60 percent of the population. According to [48] statistics, Uganda’s population is estimated at 45.9 million people as of the year 2024, and it is among the fastest-growing populations, with an annual growth rate of approximately three percent. The majority of this population resides in rural areas, where their main occupation is primarily agriculture and its value chain. However, the rate of urbanization in Uganda is accelerating, with 15 to 25 percent of the population presently residing in cities and peri-urban centers, as affirmed by the creation of eight cities in the last five years [49].
Agriculture is the backbone of Uganda’s economy, accounting for 70 percent of the active labor force. The main food crops produced include maize, banana, beans, ground nuts, cassava, millet, rice, sorghum, potatoes, and beans. Cash crops also form a critical part of the agricultural products, including coffee (the country’s leading export by earnings), tea, cocoa, vanilla, and sugarcane, among others [17]. Furthermore, livestock farming and fishing, especially around the major water and human-made ponds, contribute to food production and income for many households. All of these are practiced in nearly all regions and agroecological zones of Uganda [50]. Food production is dominated by smallholder farmers who cultivate less than two hectares of land, often using low inputs and relying on family labor for most of the agricultural activities. Over 90 percent of the farms are rain-fed. Farming systems are typically mixed, integrating crops and livestock, and, in some areas, agroforestry. Mechanization is still limited, and irrigation is not widespread (although it has recently been promoted through government projects and subsidies). This implies that agricultural productivity is highly dependent on seasonal and erratic rainfall.
Uganda’s climate is tropical, moderated by its physical features, with two main rainy seasons, that is, March to May and September to November, for a greater part of the country. The annual rainfall averages between 1000 and 1500 mm; however, regions like Karamoja in the northeast usually receive less rainfall and are prone to recurrent droughts [51]. There is large variation in the soil types across Uganda, with moderately fertile volcanic soils in the eastern and southwestern highlands, moderately fertile lateritic soils in the central region, and sandy or loamy soils in the north [52]. However, there is a notable soil degradation due to over-cultivation, erosion, and poor land management as numerous households search for alternative livelihood sources. Land use in Uganda is dominated by agriculture, accounting for over 70 percent of land cover [53]. Despite this, a substantial portion of the land in rural areas is held under informal or customary tenure arrangements. Regional differences in land tenure systems, such as mailo in central Uganda and customary tenure in the north and east, affect access to land, the security of tenure, and willingness to invest in land improvement. Land tenure security is a key factor influencing agricultural investment and productivity.

2. Methodology of the Study

2.1. Search Strategy

This review adopted a systematic approach to collect relevant data and information on rural land rights, land markets, and structural adjustments in Uganda over the past 30 years, coinciding with the operationalization of the Ugandan Land Policy [54]. The search was conducted using online databases, specifically Google Scholar and Web of Science, to identify accessible published articles, papers, book chapters, and documents, as these are dominant sources of published information [55]. A combination of keywords and Boolean operators was employed, including ((Rural OR Land) AND (Rights OR Market OR “Structural Transformation”) AND (Uganda OR Ugandan)), with filters set to All Fields, English (Languages), and Document Types Article, Proceeding Paper, Book Chapter, Early Access, or Data Paper. The search focused on the literature published between 1995 and 2024, a period marked by significant land policy reforms and the availability of a substantial body of research relevant to the topic.

2.2. Eligibility Criteria

Documents were considered eligible for inclusion if they addressed themes related to rural land rights, land markets, or structural transformation in the Ugandan context. Due to the limited availability of recent publications on certain aspects of this topic, some documents older than ten years were included when they were found to be particularly relevant to the research objectives. Both peer-reviewed and gray literature were eligible, provided they met the thematic and geographic focus of the study.

2.3. Document Screening

An initial pool of 265 documents was retrieved based on the specified keywords and search parameters. The titles and abstracts of these documents were first screened for relevance, followed by a full-text review of selected papers. After applying the inclusion criteria and assessing thematic relevance, 45 documents were retained for detailed analysis. The process of document identification, screening, and selection is summarized in Table 1.

2.4. Data Analysis Methods

The final set of 45 documents was systematically analyzed to extract key themes and patterns concerning rural land rights, market dynamics, structural adjustments, and challenges associated with land tenure in Uganda. A thematic content analysis approach was used, supported by manual coding of recurring concepts and findings across the literature. The data extraction and synthesis process is also detailed in Table 1, highlighting how the findings were organized and interpreted for this review.

3. Results

This section presents the key findings from a synthesis of the existing literature on Uganda’s rural land rights, structural shifts in land markets, and the associated challenges. The analysis highlights the persistent ambiguities and tensions within the land tenure system, particularly under customary ownership. While the Land Act of 1998 and its amendments aimed to formalize and secure land tenure for all, including vulnerable groups, evidence suggests that significant gaps remain. The following subsections unpack these complexities, starting with the current status of rural land rights in Uganda.
Empirical evidence further suggests that land markets do function, though imperfectly. In some areas, land rental markets perform an important function in the process of structural transformation by offering opportunities to those with better non-farm opportunities to move out of the villages, thus allowing land-poor but labor-rich productive households to increase the amount of land they cultivate [56]. Unfortunately, on rented land, households do not usually make substantial agricultural investments, like planting perennial cash crops, as there is no guarantee of security of tenure; thus, it may not quickly solve the rural poverty that is common in the rural land tenure systems [57]. Furthermore, individuals do not simply farm because they have land titles; they must be able to make a profit. This implies that formalization of the land tenure system through titling is not an end, although it may imply opening the land to opportunities for market transfer and security of ownership [33].

3.1. Status of the Rural Land Rights

Numerous studies by [23,58,59,60,61,62,63] indicate that the existing land rights did not necessarily translate into an increase in the security of tenure, especially for women. Ambiguity in the land tenure systems still obscures efficient investment in land in certain regions of Uganda. They continue to indicate that, in both 1998 and through several amendments, formalization to facilitate investment still has some gray areas, even in the case of titled land. Empirical findings indicate that most women still lack critical information about land laws and tenure security outlined in the 1998 Land Act. Equally, refs. [58,59,64] report that the land policy has inadequacies in addressing the tenure security of vulnerable groups, especially women and children, even when registration is formalized. Additionally, the rights of vulnerable people are not well-catered to, including, for example, the rights of rural unmarried women who have children [65]. However, there is recognition that the Land Act has made significant strides in addressing some of the land-related rights.
Also, studies by [66,67,68] reveal that women’s inequality over the means of land tenure because of gender-conservative norms is still an overarching issue that impacts many different aspects of life, including but not limited to land tenure. Because in many Ugandan rural communities, the norms of gender equality are not fully accepted, men’s dominance is still visible in terms of more access compared to women [68]. With increased pressure on land due to population pressure, women’s inability to protect their land diminishes quite often within these dispute situations. Most women are skeptical about the law’s ability to protect them, and they end up running to the elders, although, in many cases, the elders are still unable to protect their land [65,69]. Furthermore, the study by [61] asserts that the customary institutional framework for land administration and justice has been severely weakened, especially in the Teso sub-region, thus making vulnerable groups, such as women and children, more marginalized. There is a wide gender gap between men and women, and this is even more prevalent in the case of titled land; for married people, women’s ownership rights are lost as soon as the marriage is dissolved or when they lose their spouses [70]. Also, some scholars point out skepticism regarding the sustainability of the current land rights, implying that something could come up and overturn the status quo [23].
Furthermore, several studies indicate that there exist intermediate documents that provide some form of security of tenure to people, especially in rural areas [63]. They are recognized as legitimate property of ownership and provide some form of security to the occupants. However, they do not carry the same bundle of rights as the land tenure systems, for example, when seeking credit and when seeking compensation. Studies by [23] show that gendered joint land ownership is common in rural areas, but it is complex, as such formal land ownership does not imply having full rights, and, in some cases, women’s names are usually not reflected in the titles. Also, the study by [23] indicates that with increased levels of urbanization in rural areas, land markets have also been transformed. However, in the case of areas with poor relations, mailo land tenure systems have been associated with the increase of tenants losing the right of access to the land, and it has also exacerbated the levels of land grabbing.
Nonetheless, available information from [7,8,39] reveals differing opinions, as the studies indicate that available legal provisions do strengthen the rights of existing occupants and land users. Although the appropriate dissemination of existing land policy provisions to rural landowners can have significant benefits, there is substantial reported demand for land certificates that are backed up by a realistic willingness to pay. Establishing cost-effective land registration and administration of legal provisions is paramount. The Ugandan 1998 Land Policy lays a firm foundation for full protection of private land rights, even to vulnerable groups like women and children.
The available literature indicates a continued deficiency of proper definitions and implementation of rural land rights, more especially in the management, distribution, and administration of land rights in the patriarchal societies of Uganda [71]. The majority of the researchers allude to the fact that under the current law and the amendments that have been passed, there is a good spirit of providing ground for the protection of the land rights of the minority and vulnerable groups. For example, in the new amendment, there is a provision for “bona fide occupants”. This, in part, gives the squatters who have stayed on the land for about 12 years, before the coming into force of the 1995 Land Act, some ownership rights. For example, this includes the right to negotiate with the landlord to obtain a share of the land where they have been settling for a period prescribed under the Uganda Land Act, as amended [63].

3.2. Structural Changes in the Land Markets and Rights

Under this theme, an analysis is conducted to understand what has been happening in the land markets and especially how rights of access, use, and distribution have been performing with the existence of the Land Policy of 1998 and associated amendments. It is emphasized that the reforms to the Ugandan 1998 Land Policy were intended to make land a commodity easily traded in the market [62]. This included a definition of the roles of each of the stakeholders and institutions involved and ways of resolving conflicts related to land, especially in the migrant communities. This is crucial for ensuring increased agricultural productivity to cater for increased pressures resulting from the population explosion [20,72]. Consequently, one of the objectives of the land policy is to enhance agricultural investment and productivity improvement. However, this could not be fully realized, partly due to the existing and historical linkage of the rural tenure systems and their patriarchal nature, which tends to limit the rights of vulnerable groups. This could be the reason why, in some regions, massive investment in agriculture has not been attained, even after over 25 years of land policy legislation.
A study by [73] reports the urgency of transforming land titles into digital formats while maintaining the evidence and integrity of the body in charge of land registration and administration. This is premised on supporting critical land use aspects of rights to access, use, distribution, and transfer of ownership more efficiently and effectively. Studies by [74,75] assert that the level of participation in the land markets has increased as the wealth constraint diminishes; this is seen as a positive impact on land policy, as it even allows women to gain access to land and associated rights through the markets. Some studies assert that land markets in the central region have facilitated the reallocation of land from the minority (haves) and the majority (have-nots). It is pointed out that rural land markets are dismally small and associated with imperfections that would not easily allow for mortgages for agricultural production [58]. Markets in the inheritance systems have tended to sub-divide land in certain places, yet the adoption of productivity-enhancing technologies requires structural reorganization of the land use systems to allow for systematic expansion of rural farming lands to exploit the advantages of economies of scale.
Furthermore, some scholars indicate the relevance of migration in causing market restructuring, in that it transfers ownership from communal to individual/private owners [76]. This provides evidence that communities with high rural–rural migration have a greater tendency to experience this shift in the land tenure system compared to “closed” communities with less migration [76]. This implies that migration results in increased agricultural productivity and efficiency in the long run. The study by [60] presents the ambiguity between the land reforms and the communal land tenure systems and the relevant district, the Local Council (III), and (I) authorities that are supposed to administer the land policy. There is a perceived conflict between the state and non-state organs involved in the implementation of the land policy. The policy delegitimizes the role of family elders in customary land tenure issues; however, when there is a conflict, they are consulted, as they are said to know relevant, important history about the land. Scholars recommend gaining a clear understanding of how the stakeholders and institutions are supposed to collaborate to ensure the security and transfer of tenure, as “there is no single best practice in this”. Addressing this conflict will facilitate land market performance in rural areas. Physical planning committees, land boards at the sub-county and district levels, and other informal institutions are crucial in land administration [77]. They need to be sensitized and well-equipped with the necessary resources, and they should work at a high level of integrity in establishing the appropriate lands to be titled, addressing land and related conflicts amicably and justly.
Tenant farmers in central Uganda (near the capital city of Kampala) have been crowded out of the land markets in the last two decades. This is because of increased land market prices [33], state interventions in the central region, and social dynamics. Additionally, the common observation is that titled land guarantees more security; tenant farmers in peri-urban areas are slowly being replaced by middle-income people interested in farming land close to the city [33]. This is one of the structural transformations of land use systems in peri-urban areas. As a result of state and market shifts, by easing the process of titling and issuing land certificates, the value of titled land is automatically appreciated. Tenants with titled land can quickly and easily transfer ownership to middle-income farmers. The adoption of fit-for-purpose technologies is said to facilitate the security of tenancy rights [40]. However, this does not entirely benefit the rural farmers, but it eases the transfer of ownership as the buyer does not labor much in carrying out due diligence.
Some scholars [78] suggest that children inheriting large landholdings are more likely to bequeath part of the land through land sales, contrary to those with little or no inheritance, who usually have an incentive to accumulate land through land purchases in the market. This helps, in the long run, to restore the balance in land rights by facilitating land market performance. It is noted that land markets do not function perfectly in all of the regions of Uganda; land rental markets perform an important function in the process of structural transformation [56]. This occurs by offering opportunities to those with better non-farm opportunities to move out of the villages, thus allowing land-poor but labor-rich productive households to increase the land they cultivate. In some studies, it is proposed that structural market reforms that are not cognizant of the unique political, social, and economic structural setup of Ugandan rural communities should not be enacted as nationwide reforms [58]. For example, under such conditions, a feasible land market does not compel the movement of land from inefficient to more efficient farmers that can till it.
Findings by [36,79] indicate that renting land enhances household welfare, although there is lower productivity on rented-in parcels (not feasible in Uganda with imperfect markets) and fragmented land holdings [33,36]. They also state that less than 10 percent of households have land certificates. One study concludes that land market participation cannot be fully harnessed by only strengthening and clarifying land rights, but rather through the adoption of modern agricultural inputs, such as chemical fertilizers. Additionally, refs. [20,23] conclude that more than 80 percent of the rural land in Uganda is owned under customary tenure and unregistered. There is a need to realign the national land policy to be supported by the local communities to be rendered legitimate. It is recognized that even in land policy, the communal land tenure system is also considered a legal ownership status. Additionally, other findings also propose recognition of the customary land tenure system in the Land Act to curb the issues of premature evictions, feasible transfers, and long-term investments [58]. For the Mailo land, it is noted that the Land Act set uneconomically very low rental fees in addition to fostering communication and negotiation and formalizing squatter–landlord relationships [40]. However, under such arrangements, agricultural productivity is impaired, as the tenant with little land and low security cannot expand [36].
Studies by [20,80] show that there is a high level of distrust by the locals in the Teso sub-region towards the Central Government’s intentions towards the land; customary tenure is still seen as a legitimate form of tenure, although the statutory and customary institutional framework for land administration and justice has been severely weakened [38]. There exists a series of assertions that customary tenure systems, as opposed to individual ownership, have impeded land markets and economic development, and this is rooted way back in historical times. However, some scholars still believe that this system should not be replaced. The establishment of a robust land administration system right from the village, where most farmers are under a communal land tenure system, will serve to create sustainable markets. The involvement of all of the stakeholders in the land industry at small, medium, and large scales needs to appreciate the strategy of streamlining land user rights and formalizing ownership to create a market environment that works for all.
On the other hand, land in Uganda is the most reliable collateral/security that can be presented to the financial institutions that offer credit for loan requests [81]. Even under the current ambiguity in the security of rural landownership and rights, credit-offering institutions still require that most of the individual loan applicants provide some basic authentic documents about their land for them to successfully obtain loan advances [62] Sometimes, such documents can easily be forged or duplicated, and, therefore, financial institutions may find it difficult to prove that the holders of these documents are true owners of the land offered as collateral. This has a significant effect on the borrower and the lending institution, as this raises the cost of transactions and the risk of proof of ownership rights due to higher information asymmetry.
Uganda’s current stand on Foreign Direct Investment, as stated in the National Development Plan IV (NDPIV), is to attract foreign investors to finance progressive projects, especially in agriculture, infrastructure development, mining, and extraction for job creation through the industrialization of the economy [82]. It is still highlighted that acquiring land is a major primary factor in undertaking such investment portfolios, and yet the land market is not perfectly competitive due to its imperfect nature, caused by issues related to security of tenure and information asymmetry [82]. This will hinder the creation of viable public industrial parks and estate farming, as the government must sometimes purchase expensive land for prospective investors or ends up allocating marginal areas like wetlands, forests, and others, which will, in the long run, exacerbate climate change and its impacts [25].

3.3. Challenges Associated with Current Land Rights

Several impediments to existing land use, access, ownership, distribution, and transfers, including general perpetuity of tenure rights, are highlighted in the literature synthesis. Findings by [20,78] indicate that challenges have been raised, including conflicts (between landlords and tenants, resisting compulsory land acquisition by investors, inter-border conflicts, especially among refugees, and inter-district conflicts) [38,83]. These are to be heightened as the Ugandan population increases at a rate of three percent per annum or higher. This is generally associated with encroachment, increased land scarcity, and evictions [46]. The study by [6] establishes that most women do not trust the law to protect them but prefer to utilize their elders, even though, in many cases, the elderly are unable to protect themselves and their land. The study recommends a system that is more gender inclusive, as women are the ones who are looking for productive opportunities, and they are most affected by tenure insecurity [22]. Furthermore, tenure insecurity is also greatly affected by increased pressure on land because of population increases and family disputes, both of which seem to be deeply affected by gender norms.
In the report by [8], it is indicated that colonial and historical policies are partly responsible for current land insecurity in Uganda, as some of the tenure systems outlined in the current policy are rooted in the colonial administration [84]. These were meant to serve the interests of the then-governments and the monarchies and chiefdoms that assisted the colonialists in accessing resources [84]. Scholars assert that land rights can be broken down into several specific rights, including access, withdrawal, management, exclusion, and alienation. Most of the land in rural areas is communally owned and implies different rights that a group of people may have over the land [85]. For example, women and children may not have exclusion and alienation rights in the same household [65]. This increases the complexity of land rights in the rural setting in Uganda. With increased interest from powerful investors and government agents to acquire land, especially under the widespread communal land tenure system, there is an increased risk of insecurity among the marginalized groups, such as women losing their land [65,68]. Studies about customary land ownership and underdevelopment in northern Uganda [38] assert that there is a strong relationship between the customary land tenure system and underdevelopment, low agricultural productivity, and conflicts, among others [72].

4. Discussion

Most of the reviewed papers allude to the fact that land markets do function, although imperfectly. In some areas, land rental markets play an important role in structural transformation by enabling individuals with better non-farm opportunities to move out of the villages. This shift allows land-poor but labor-rich households to access more land for cultivation. However, efforts at formalization, such as land titling, have not always yielded the desired outcomes in terms of land tenure security. Consequently, there has been little or no substantial investment in large-scale commercial agriculture. This is largely attributed to ambiguous legal frameworks and deeply entrenched patriarchal norms that persist in many rural and peri-urban communities.
On rented land, households are generally reluctant to make long-term agricultural investments, such as planting perennial cash crops, due to the absence of secure tenure. As a result, land rental markets may not offer a quick solution to rural poverty under current tenure systems. Furthermore, possessing a land title does not automatically lead to productive land use; landowners must also be able to generate a profit. This suggests that formalization through titling is not an end in itself. While it may facilitate land market transactions and provide a degree of ownership security, it does not inherently stimulate agricultural development or sustainable land use.
Land conflict resolution and the administration of justice in land matters have also faced serious challenges. In some cases, individuals bypass local land governance structures and proceed to process ownership documents, such as land titles, without community involvement. These findings are consistent with those by [86,87,88] on how land rights and related conflicts can be secured and what ought to be done at all levels and by different institutions. When these land titles are later contested, claimants often struggle to secure witness support or evidence from traditional leaders, clan heads, or elderly community members who possess critical historical knowledge of land ownership. This exclusion undermines legitimacy and fuels disputes. Moreover, court rulings and arbitration in such contexts have frequently failed to deliver timely and effective resolutions.
Gender disparities in land rights remain a major concern, as ascertained by other scholars from Ethiopia, Uganda, and Asia [89,90,91]. Despite increasing land registration and titling in some areas, women’s names are frequently omitted from land titles, even on co-owned land. In patriarchal societies, this omission has severe implications, particularly in cases of divorce, where women may be unable to claim ownership or exercise control over land they once shared. While Uganda’s Vision 2040 and the Sustainable Development Goals emphasize sustainable land use management, persistent gender inequities hinder progress. Although the 1998 Land Act and its amendments aimed to improve access and tenure security, they lack clear provisions for dual land ownership between spouses. Many tenure systems continue to require male dominance for recognition and enforcement, often resulting in violence and dispossession. In some communities, even when women possess formal land documentation, they are still unable to utilize or protect their land rights fully.
Uganda has made efforts to promote land use and attract Foreign Direct Investment through frameworks like the National Development Plan III (NDPIII), which focuses on industrialization. However, the plan’s implementation has been undermined by weak tenure security and information asymmetries, leading to inflated transaction costs [82]. These challenges make Uganda’s land markets less competitive compared to neighboring countries. Establishing an accurate, computerized land data management system at all administrative levels could significantly improve transparency, reduce disputes, and support investment in long-term, climate-smart agricultural technologies. This would contribute to sustainable and competitive land markets that benefit all tenure systems across Uganda.
Although land reforms have attempted to offer protections, particularly for bona fide occupants and marginalized groups, enforcement and public awareness remain limited. The customary tenure system, though recognized in Ugandan law, still lacks the legal strength necessary to guarantee land rights, especially in rapidly urbanizing areas prone to disputes. Weak coordination among formal and informal land governance institutions continues to hamper effective policy implementation and justice delivery. As a result, rural communities rooted in communal tenure systems, especially those with strong ties to clanship, remain vulnerable to land-related conflicts. A range of scholars [92,93,94] have alluded to these findings in countries like Kenya, Indonesia, and the South Pacific, revealing the substantial impacts of such tenure systems on ownership, especially among marginalized groups.
Meanwhile, the increasing activity in land markets and rapid urbanization reflect shifting land use patterns. However, these changes often come at the expense of smallholder farmers, squatters, and tenants, who lack the protection and resources needed to navigate complex land transitions. These findings agree with those from scholars [95,96,97] on the changes and transitions in the market structures and their associated policy dynamics. Without inclusive reforms and robust implementation mechanisms, land governance will continue to face contestation, exacerbating inequality and undermining sustainable development efforts.

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

Lastly, from this review, the findings reveal several issues from which recommendations have been drawn to ensure the security of land tenure, market performance, and the sustainability of livelihoods. Firstly, public awareness and the dissemination of land policies and laws are critical, especially among the rural communities and their leaders, who may be disenfranchised. This is notable among rural communities, institutions (formal and informal), and vulnerable groups to strengthen their understanding of land rights, roles, duties, and collaborations necessary in land management and administration.
Consequently, it is paramount to strengthen the institutional frameworks that are charged with the responsibility of land registration, titling, and dispute resolution. This can be enhanced through the mass adoption of digital technologies in all of the land registration and survey processes and capacity building of Area Land Committees, District Land Boards, and Physical Planning Committees, among other stakeholders involved. This will guarantee fairness, transparency, and efficiency in land ownership, distribution, and management, which are important pillars of land markets and tenure security. In the long run, this is critical in mitigating land conflicts and rampant land evictions.
Also, land policies essentially need to be more gender sensitive, ensuring that joint land ownership is legally recognized and enforced and that women’s rights are explicitly protected in both statutory and customary contexts. All in all, continuous integration of sustainable land use and climate-smart investments can be achieved by prioritizing and aligning land tenure reforms with National Development Plans, such as Uganda’s Vision 2040 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This is critical in enhancing sustained productivity, securing the livelihoods of communities, and mitigating environmental degradation.

6. Limitations of This Study

This study only utilized papers that are published in the English language and accessible online from two main databases, and it thus could have missed out on some relevant information outside of this search coverage.

Author Contributions

The first author (corresponding), N.K., conceptualized, reviewed, analyzed, summarized, and drafted this paper. The second author, B.H., reviewed, realigned, and corrected errors and typos, guided the interpretation and coherence of the ideas, and corrected mistakes that were made in preparing the article. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This article was supported by the RRF-2.1.2-21-2022-00011 project, financed by the Government of Hungary within the framework of the Recovery and Resilience Facility.

Data Availability Statement

Non-numerical secondary published information was utilized in the preparation of this paper, and it is from the work cited herein and referenced below.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests, personal associations, or affiliations that could have affected the work conveyed in this paper. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Uganda. The Land Act, 1998 (Cap. 227). Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Developmen. 1998. Available online: https://mlhud.go.ug/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Land-Act-Chapter_227.pdf (accessed on 20 April 2025).
  2. Kassim, W. Land Conservation in the Albertine Graben Region of Uganda: A Critical Analysis of the Legal Regimes. In Legal Instruments for Sustainable Soil Management in Africa; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Byakagaba, P.; Egeru, A.; Barasa, B.; Briske, D.D. Uganda’s rangeland policy: Intentions, consequences and opportunities. Pastoralism 2018, 8, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Fleming, B. Environmental Land Use Planning and Management. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2005, 24, 452–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Dumanski, J. Criteria and indicators for land quality and sustainable land management. ITC J. 1997, 3, 216–222. [Google Scholar]
  6. McDonald, E. Women and Tenure Transition: An Examination of Land Access and Gendered Land Rights in Kanungu District, Uganda. McNair Sch. Online J. 2011, 5, 145–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Tatwangire, A.; Holden, S.T. Land Tenure Reforms, Land Market Participation and the Farm Size—Productivity Relationship in Uganda. In Land Tenure Reform in Asia and Africa; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development. The Uganda National Land Policy 2013; Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development: Kampala, Uganda, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  9. Kasirye, I. Socio-Economic Land Data and Land Improvement Strategy for Uganda (Policy Brief No. ISELDA010). African Economic Research Consortium. 2021. Available online: https://publication.aercafricalibrary.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/cca75c3d-224e-4781-b176-87e69cef30d7/content (accessed on 21 April 2025).
  10. Mabikke, S.B. Historical Continuum of Land Rights in Uganda. J. Land Rural. Stud. 2016, 4, 153–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hall, C.; Dawson, T.P.; Macdiarmid, J.I.; Matthews, R.B.; Smith, P. The impact of population growth and climate change on food security in Africa: Looking ahead to 2050. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 2017, 15, 124–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Pender, J.; Jagger, P.; Nkonya, E.; Sserunkuuma, D. Development Pathways and Land Management in Uganda: Causes and Implications; EPTD Workshop Summary Paper No. 12; International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI): Washington, DC, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  13. Osiru, D.S.O. Climate Smart Agriculture—A Comprehensive Scoping and Assessment Study with Particular Reference to Uganda. Bish. Stuart Univ. J. Dev. Educ. Technol. 2023, 1, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Place, F.; Otsuka, K. Population pressure, land tenure, and tree resource management in Uganda. Land Econ 2000, 76, 233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Nkonya, E.; Pender, J.; Kaizzi, K.C.; Kato, E.; Mugarura, S.; Ssali, H.; Muwonge, J. Linkages Between Land Management, Land Degradation, and Poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Case of Uganda; Research Report No. 159; International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI): Washington, DC, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Nkonya, E.; Mirzabaev, A.; Von Braun, J. Economics of land degradation and improvement: An introduction and overview. In Economics of Land Degradation and Improvement—A Global Assessment for Sustainable Development; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Bamwesigye, D.; Doli, A.; Adamu, K.J.; Mansaray, S.K. A review of the political economy of agriculture in Uganda: Women, property rights, and other challenges. In Universal Journal of Agricultural Research; Horizon Research Publishing: San Jose, CA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hillesland, M.; Slavchevska, V.; Henderson, H.; Okello, P.; Oumo, F.N. Beyond the sex of the holder: Understanding agricultural production decisions within household farms in Uganda. AgriGender J. Gend. Agric. Food Secur. AgriGender 2020, 5, 14–27. [Google Scholar]
  19. Ahimbisibwe, V.; Auch, E.; Groeneveld, J.; Tumwebaze, S.B.; Berger, U. Drivers of household decision-making on land-use transformation: An example of woodlot establishment in Masindi District, Uganda. Forests 2019, 10, 619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Margaret, A.R. Escalating Land Conflicts in Uganda: A Review of Evidence from Recent Studies and Surveys; Associates for Development: Kampala, Uganda, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  21. Nkuba, M.R.; Chanda, R.; Mmopelwa, G.; Adedoyin, A.; Mangheni, M.N.; Lesolle, D.; Kato, E. Barriers to Climate Change Adaptation Among Pastoralists: Rwenzori Region, Western Uganda. In African Handbook of Climate Change Adaptation; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kabahinda, J. On-the-ground perspectives of women’s land rights in Uganda. Dev. Pract. 2018, 28, 813–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Doss, C.; Meinzen-Dick, R.; Bomuhangi, A. Who Owns the Land? Perspectives from Rural Ugandans and Implications for Large-Scale Land Acquisitions. Fem. Econ. 2014, 20, 76–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Mercedes, M.S. Governance of Large-Scale Land Acquisitions in Uganda: The role of the Uganda Investment Authority. 2012. Available online: https://land.igad.int/index.php/documents-1/countries/uganda/investment-7/1295-governance-of-large-scale-land-acquisitions-in-uganda-the-role-of-the-uganda-investment-authority/file (accessed on 21 April 2025).
  25. Médard, C.; Golaz, V. Creating dependency: Land and gift-giving practices in Uganda. J. East. Afr. Stud. 2013, 7, 549–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Meinert, L.; Kjær, A.M. “Land belongs to the people of Uganda”: Politicians’ use of land issues in the 2016 election campaigns. J. East. Afr. Stud. 2016, 10, 769–788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Wabineno-Oryema, L.M. The Role of the Social Tenure Domain Model in Strengthening Land Tenure Security in Informal Settlements of Uganda. In Responsible and Smart Land Management Interventions; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Coldham, S. Land reform and customary rights: The case of Uganda. J. Afr. Law 2000, 44, 65–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bagonza, R.A. Gender and Vulnerability to Disasters and Disaster/Climate Risk Management in Uganda: A Participatory Characterisation; Office of the Prime Minister (OPM): Kampala, Uganda, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  30. Deininger, K.; Ali, D.A. Do overlapping land rights reduce agricultural investment? evidence from Uganda. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2008, 90, 869–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Nabawanda, V. Legal issues, challenges and prospects associated with land acquisition for socio-economic development In Uganda. KAS Afr. Law. Study Libr.—Libr. Afr. D’etudes Jurid. 2024, 11, 409–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ogwang, T.; Vanclay, F. Resource-financed infrastructure: Thoughts on four Chinese-financed projects in Uganda. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chalin, V.; Golaz, V.; Médard, C. Land titling in Uganda crowds out local farmers. J. East. Afr. Stud. 2015, 9, 559–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. MFPED. The Budget Speech, Financial Year 2023/2024. 2023. Available online: https://budget.finance.go.ug/sites/default/files/National%20Budget%20docs/NATIONAL%20BUDGET%20SPEECH%20FOR%20FY%202023-24.pdf (accessed on 4 April 2025).
  35. Kasaija, M. The Budget Speech for the Financial Year 2024/25: Full Monetisation of Uganda’s Economy Through Commercial Agriculture, Industrialisation, Expanding and Broadening Services, Digital TRANSFORMATION and Market Access; Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development: Kampala, Uganda, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  36. Veljanoska, S. Can Land Fragmentation Reduce the Exposure of Rural Households to Weather Variability? Ecol. Econ. 2018, 154, 42–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Bank, W. Ugandan Government Steps Up Efforts to Mitigate and Adapt to Climate Change. 2019. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2019/05/31/ugandan-government-steps-up-efforts-to-mitigate-and-adapt-to-climate-change (accessed on 5 April 2025).
  38. Margaret, A.R. Land tenure as a cause of tensions and driver of conflict among mining communities in Karamoja, Uganda: Is secure property rights a solution? Land Use Policy 2020, 94, 104495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Deininger, K.; Ali, D.A.; Yamano, T. Legal Knowledge and Economic Development: The Case of Land Rights in Uganda. Land. Econ. 2008, 84, 593–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Musinguzi, M.; Huber, T.; Kirumira, D.; Drate, P. Assessment of the land inventory approach for securing tenure of lawful and bona fide occupants on private Mailo land in Uganda. Land Use Policy 2021, 110, 104562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bird, J.; Venables, A. The Efficiency of Land-Use in a Developing City: Traditional vs. Modern Tenure Systems in Kampala, Uganda; CEPR Discussion Paper No. 13563; Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR): London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  42. Xia, L.; Dai, Y.; Zhang, J. Progress in the Study of the Drivers of the Transformation of Arable Land Use. Front. Sci. Eng. 2023, 3, 11–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Wineman, A.; Liverpool-Tasie, L.S. Land markets and the distribution of land in northwestern Tanzania. Land. Use Policy 2017, 69, 550–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Wallace, J.; Williamson, I. Building land markets. Land. Use Policy 2006, 23, 123–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Jin, S.; Deininger, K. Land rental markets in the process of rural structural transformation: Productivity and equity impacts from China. J. Comp. Econ. 2009, 37, 629–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Bamwesigye, D.; Chipfakacha, R.; Yeboah, E. Forest and Land Rights at a Time of Deforestation and Climate Change: Land and Resource Use Crisis in Uganda. Land 2022, 11, 2092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Masum, A. UGANDA: A Country Profile. J. Int. Stud. 2020, 8, 149–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. (UBoS) Uganda Bureau of Statistics. National-Population-and-Housing-Census-2024-Preliminary-Report; (UBoS) Uganda Bureau of Statistics: Kampala, Uganda, 2024; pp. 1–53. Available online: https://www.ubos.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/National-Population-and-Housing-Census-2024-Preliminary-Report.pdf (accessed on 7 April 2025).
  49. Pozhidaev, D. Urbanization and the Quality of Growth in Uganda: The Challenge of Structural Transformation and Sustainable and Inclusive Development. In Reflections on African Cities in Transition; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Galema, S.; Male, D.; Mbabazi, M.; Mutambuka, M.; Muzira, R.; Nambooze, J.; Ruma, D.H.; Byakika, S.; Ingram, J.; Dengerink, J. An Overview of the Ugandan Food System: Outcomes, Drivers & Activities; Foresight4Food: Oxford, UK, 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ngoma, H.; Wen, W.; Ojara, M.; Ayugi, B. Assessing current and future spatiotemporal precipitation variability and trends over Uganda, East Africa, based on CHIRPS and regional climate model datasets. Meteorol. Atmos. Phys. 2021, 133, 823–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Minai, J.O.; Okach, J. Assessing the Spatial Variability of Soils in Uganda. Master’s Thesis, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA, 2015. Available online: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/open_access_theses/581/ (accessed on 13 December 2024).
  53. Karamage, F.; Zhang, C.; Liu, T.; Maganda, A.; Isabwe, A. Soil erosion risk assessment in Uganda. Forests 2017, 8, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Obaikol, E. Draft Final Report of Implementation of the Land Governance Assessment Framework in Uganda; World Bank Group: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  55. Martín-Martín, A.; Orduna-Malea, E.; Thelwall, M.; López-Cózar, E.D. Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. J. Informetr. 2018, 12, 1160–1177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Deininger, K.; Xia, F.; Savastano, S. Smallholders’ Land Ownership and Access in Sub-Saharan Africa: A New Landscape? Food Policy 2015, 67, 78–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Mwesigye, F.; Barungi, M. Land Tenure Insecurity, Fragmentation and Crop Choice: Evidence from Uganda; African Economic Research Consortium (AERC): Nairobi, Kenya, 2021; Available online: https://publication.aercafricalibrary.org/bitstream/handle/123456789/1964/Research%20Paper%20419.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed on 29 February 2024).
  58. Bazaara, N. Politics, Legal Land Reform and Resource Rights in Uganda, Kampala-Uganda. In Proceedings of the Conference ‘Africa in the New Millennium’, Nile International Conference Centre, Kampala, Uganda, 9–12 December 2002. [Google Scholar]
  59. Rugadya, M.A.; Obaikol, E.; Kamusiime, H. Gender and Land Reform Gender and the Land Reform Process in Uganda Assessing Gains and Losses for Women in Uganda; Associates for Development: Kampala, Uganda, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  60. Van Leeuwen, M. Renegotiating customary tenure reform—Land governance reform and tenure security in Uganda. Land Use Policy 2014, 39, 292–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Rugadya, M.A.; Nsamba-Gayiiya, E.; Kamusiime, H. Northern Uganda Land Study Analysis of Post-Conflict Land Policy and Land Administration: A Survey of IDP Return and Resettlement Issues and Lesson: Acholi and Lango Regions; World Bank: Kampala, Uganda, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  62. Pedersen, R.H.; Spichiger, R.; Alobo, S.; Kidoido, M.; Bashaasha, B.; Munk Ravnborg, H. Land Tenure and Economic Activities in Uganda: A Literature Review; Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS): Copenhagen, Denmark, 2012; Available online: www.diis.dk (accessed on 23 January 2025).
  63. Gondo, T.; Kyomuhendo, V. Between reality and rhetoric in land conflicts. An anecdotal anatomy of the lawful, bonafide occupants and customary tenants in Kyenjonjo district, Uganda. Land Tenure J. 2011, 1, 27–50. [Google Scholar]
  64. Sebina-Zziwa, A.; Kibombo, R. Licensing of artisanal mining on private land in Uganda: Social and economic implications for female spouses and women entrepreneurs. Can. J. Afr. Stud. 2020, 54, 101–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Anying, I.W.; Gausset, Q. Gender and forum shopping in land conflict resolution in Northern Uganda. J. Leg. Plur. Unoff. Law. 2017, 49, 353–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Gärber, B. Womens Land Rights and Tenure Security in Uganda: Experiences from Mbale, Apac and Ntungamo. Stichproben. Wien. Z. Für Krit. Afr. Dien 2013, 24, 1–32. [Google Scholar]
  67. Doss, C.; Truong, M.; Namaalwa, J. Women, Marriage and Asset Inheritance in Uganda. Dev. Policy Rev. 2012, 30, 597–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Atwagala, D.S. ‘Visitors have become owners’: Internationalization of land and its implication for rural women. J. Contemp. Afr. Stud. 2021, 39, 88–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Whyte, S.R.; Acio, E. Generations and Access to Land in Postconflict Northern Uganda: Youth Have No Voice in Land Matters. Afr. Stud. Rev. 2017, 60, 17–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Obika, J.A. The ‘Intimate Governance’ of Land in Northern Uganda. Nord. J. Afr. Stud. 2022, 31, 136–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Naybor, D. Land as fictitious commodity: The continuing evolution of women’s land rights in Uganda. Gend. Place. Cult. 2015, 22, 884–900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Mwesigye, F.; Matsumoto, T. The Effect of Population Pressure and Internal Migration on Land Conflicts: Implications for Agricultural Productivity in Uganda. World Dev 2016, 79, 25–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Luyombya, D.; Obbo, D.F. The state of digitisation of the land registry operations in Uganda. J. S. Afr. Soc. Arch. 2013, 46, 25. [Google Scholar]
  74. Baland, J.-M.; Gaspart, F.; Place, F.; Platteau, J.-P. The Distributive Impact of Land Markets in Central Uganda; FUNDP: Namur, Belgium, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  75. Deininger, K.; Mpuga, P. Land markets in Uganda: Incidence, impact and evolution over time. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference of Agricultural Economists: Reshaping Agriculture’s Contribution to Society, Durban, South Africa, 16–22 August 2003; International Association of Agricultural Economists: Durban, South Africa, 2003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Mwesigye, F.; Matsumoto, T.; Otsuka, K. Population pressure, rural-to-rural migration and evolution of land tenure institutions: The case of Uganda. Land Use Policy 2017, 65, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Musinguzi, M.; Enemark, S.; Mwesigye, S.P. Fit for purpose land administration: Country implementation strategy for addressing uganda’s land tenure security problems. Land 2021, 10, 629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Ainembabazi, J.H.; Angelsen, A. Land Inheritance and Market Transactions in Uganda. Land Econ. 2016, 92, 28–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Kijima, Y.; Tabetando, R. Efficiency and equity of rural land markets and the impact on income: Evidence in Kenya and Uganda from 2003 to 2015. Land Use Policy 2020, 91, 104416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Mugambwa, J. A Comparative Analysis of Land Tenure Law Reform in Uganda and Papua New Guinea. J. South Pac. Law 2007, 11, 39–55. [Google Scholar]
  81. African Development Bank Group. On the Path to Middle-Income Status and Structural Transformation: Challenges and Opportunities Country Diagnostic Note. August. 2021. Available online: https://www.afdb.org/sites/default/files/documents/projects-and-operations/uganda_cdn_2021_09_16.pdf (accessed on 21 April 2025).
  82. National Planning Authority (NPA). Fourth National Development Plan (NDPIV), 2025/26-2029/30. Kampala-Uganda, December. 2024. Available online: https://parliamentwatch.ug/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/PDF-FINAL-NDPIV-for-Parliament-Approval-13122024-1.pdf (accessed on 8 April 2025).
  83. Khasalamwa-Mwandha, S. Local integration as durable solution? Negotiating socioeconomic spaces between refugees and host communities in rural Northern Uganda. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Alava, H.; Shroff, C. Unravelling Church Land: Transformations in the Relations between Church, State and Community in Uganda. Dev. Change 2019, 50, 1288–1309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Bomuhangi, A.; Doss, C.; Meinzen-Dick, R. Who Owns the Land? Perspectives from Rural Ugandans and Implications for Land Acquisitions; IFPRI: Washington, DC, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  86. Quan, J.F.; Monteiro, J.; Mole, P. The experience of Mozambique’s community land initiative (iTC) in securing land rights and improving community land use: Practice, policy and governance implications. In Proceedings of the Annual World Bank Conference on Land and Poverty, Washington, DC, USA, 8–11 April 2013. [Google Scholar]
  87. Moreda, T. Beyond land rights registration: Understanding the mundane elements of land conflict in Ethiopia. J. Peasant. Studies 2023, 50, 1791–1819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. John, P.; Kabote, S.J. Land Governance and Conflict Management in Tanzania: Institutional Capacity and Policy-Legal Framework Challenges. Am. J. Rural. Dev. 2017, 5, 46–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Lavers, T. Land Registration and Gender Equality in Ethiopia: How State–Society Relations Influence the Enforcement of Institutional Change. J. Agrar. Change 2017, 17, 188–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Cherchi, L.; Goldstein, M.; Habyarimana, J.; Montalvao, J.; O’Sullivan, M.; Udry, C.; Gruver, A. Empowering Women Through Equal Land Rights: Experimental Evidence from Rural Uganda; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Kieran, C.; Sproule, K.; Doss, C.; Quisumbing, A.; Kim, S.M. Examining gender inequalities in land rights indicators in Asia. Agric. Econ. 2015, 46, 119–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Kristiansen, S.; Sulistiawati, L. Traditions, Land Rights, and Local Welfare Creation: Studies from Eastern Indonesia. Bull. Indones. Econ. Stud. 2016, 52, 209–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Greiner, C. Pastoralism and Land-Tenure Change in Kenya: The Failure of Customary Institutions. Dev. Change 2017, 48, 78–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. McEvoy, D.; Mitchell, D.; Trundle, A. Land tenure and urban climate resilience in the South Pacific. Clim. Dev. 2020, 12, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Gyapong, A.Y. Commodification of family lands and the changing dynamics of access in Ghana. Third World Q. 2021, 42, 1233–1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Rudel, T.K.; Hernandez, M. Land Tenure Transitions in the Global South: Trends, Drivers, and Policy Implications. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2017, 42, 489–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Gyau, A.; Faith, A.N.; Fondjem-Tita, D.; Ajaga, N.; Catacutan, D. Small-holder farmers’ access and rights to land: The case of Njombé in the littoral region of Cameroon. Afr. Focus 2017, 27, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Criteria for inclusion and exclusion.
Table 1. Criteria for inclusion and exclusion.
Criteria for Inclusion or ExclusionNumber of Articles Included = 45The Number of Articles Dropped = 220Justification of the Criteria Used
Year of publicationPublished between 1995 and 2024Published before 1995This database would give a good historical perspective of land rights, markets, and challenges after the promulgation of the current constitution of Uganda
Language of publicationOnly those published in EnglishNot published in EnglishMost of the impactful research in this area is published in the English language
Publication themeLand rights, land markets, and structural land transformationKeywords in the title or abstract are missing at least one of these: land rights, land markets, structural land transformation, and challengesTo be able to cover the content scope for this review
Availability of the article onlineAvailableNot availableFor easy and quick reference for other interested readers
Study locationUgandaOutside of UgandaTo maintain the geographical scope of interest
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kishaija, N.; Heil, B. Rural Land Rights, Markets, and Structural Transformation: A Review of a Ugandan Case. Land 2025, 14, 967. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14050967

AMA Style

Kishaija N, Heil B. Rural Land Rights, Markets, and Structural Transformation: A Review of a Ugandan Case. Land. 2025; 14(5):967. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14050967

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kishaija, Noel, and Bálint Heil. 2025. "Rural Land Rights, Markets, and Structural Transformation: A Review of a Ugandan Case" Land 14, no. 5: 967. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14050967

APA Style

Kishaija, N., & Heil, B. (2025). Rural Land Rights, Markets, and Structural Transformation: A Review of a Ugandan Case. Land, 14(5), 967. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14050967

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop