Governance of Indigenous Communal Land Rights in Namibia: A Political–Institutional Analysis of the Communal Land Reform Act (2002)
(2026) SIMZ31 20261Master of Science in Development Studies
- Abstract
- This study examines how the institutional and governance arrangements established
under Namibia's Communal Land Reform Act (CLRA) of 2002 shape the equitable
administration of indigenous communal land rights, with particular focus on the San
community. Drawing on institutional theory and property rights theory as
complementary analytical frameworks, and employing qualitative document analysis
of primary legislation, national policy, and civil society and academic sources, the
study investigates three interconnected questions: how the CLRA distributes decision
making authority among the state, Communal Land Boards, and Traditional
Authorities; why existing arrangements fail to secure indigenous land rights; and which
... (More) - This study examines how the institutional and governance arrangements established
under Namibia's Communal Land Reform Act (CLRA) of 2002 shape the equitable
administration of indigenous communal land rights, with particular focus on the San
community. Drawing on institutional theory and property rights theory as
complementary analytical frameworks, and employing qualitative document analysis
of primary legislation, national policy, and civil society and academic sources, the
study investigates three interconnected questions: how the CLRA distributes decision
making authority among the state, Communal Land Boards, and Traditional
Authorities; why existing arrangements fail to secure indigenous land rights; and which
governance reforms are most likely to produce durable improvements in tenure
security. The findings reveal that San land insecurity is not a product of policy absence
but of structural institutional dysfunction embedded within the governance framework
itself. Three reinforcing mechanisms produce this outcome: the selective recognition
of only five of thirteen San sub-tribal Traditional Authorities, which excludes the
majority from primary land allocation processes; the CLRA's failure to recognise group
tenure under customary law, rendering collective San land-use systems legally
illegible; and persistent enforcement gaps that leave formally recognised rights
unprotected against encroachment by more powerful actors. The study concludes that
durable reform requires simultaneous action across three domains: ratification of ILO
Convention No. 169 to establish binding state accountability; targeted amendment of
the CLRA to recognise group tenure and San-specific beneficiary status; and the
mandatory embedding of San representation within Communal Land Boards. These
findings contribute to scholarship on post-colonial land governance by demonstrating
that institutional architecture, rather than legal absence, is the primary determinant of
indigenous tenure outcomes in sub-Saharan Africa. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9234307
- author
- Hausiku, Regina Nangura LU
- supervisor
-
- Martin Hall LU
- organization
- course
- SIMZ31 20261
- year
- 2026
- type
- H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
- subject
- keywords
- Keywords: Communal Land Reform Act, San community, tenure security, communal land governance, indigenous land rights, institutional theory, customary tenure.
- language
- English
- id
- 9234307
- date added to LUP
- 2026-06-25 10:13:17
- date last changed
- 2026-06-25 10:13:17
@misc{9234307,
abstract = {{This study examines how the institutional and governance arrangements established
under Namibia's Communal Land Reform Act (CLRA) of 2002 shape the equitable
administration of indigenous communal land rights, with particular focus on the San
community. Drawing on institutional theory and property rights theory as
complementary analytical frameworks, and employing qualitative document analysis
of primary legislation, national policy, and civil society and academic sources, the
study investigates three interconnected questions: how the CLRA distributes decision
making authority among the state, Communal Land Boards, and Traditional
Authorities; why existing arrangements fail to secure indigenous land rights; and which
governance reforms are most likely to produce durable improvements in tenure
security. The findings reveal that San land insecurity is not a product of policy absence
but of structural institutional dysfunction embedded within the governance framework
itself. Three reinforcing mechanisms produce this outcome: the selective recognition
of only five of thirteen San sub-tribal Traditional Authorities, which excludes the
majority from primary land allocation processes; the CLRA's failure to recognise group
tenure under customary law, rendering collective San land-use systems legally
illegible; and persistent enforcement gaps that leave formally recognised rights
unprotected against encroachment by more powerful actors. The study concludes that
durable reform requires simultaneous action across three domains: ratification of ILO
Convention No. 169 to establish binding state accountability; targeted amendment of
the CLRA to recognise group tenure and San-specific beneficiary status; and the
mandatory embedding of San representation within Communal Land Boards. These
findings contribute to scholarship on post-colonial land governance by demonstrating
that institutional architecture, rather than legal absence, is the primary determinant of
indigenous tenure outcomes in sub-Saharan Africa.}},
author = {{Hausiku, Regina Nangura}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Governance of Indigenous Communal Land Rights in Namibia: A Political–Institutional Analysis of the Communal Land Reform Act (2002)}},
year = {{2026}},
}