=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2797/paper23
|storemode=property
|title=The e-Governance of Land Record and Social Dispute Resolution: An Impact Evaluation of the
Punjab Land Record Management Information System (PLRMIS) in the Punjab Province
Pakistan
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2797/paper23.pdf
|volume=Vol-2797
|authors=Inayat Ullah,Wafa Akhoubzi
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/egov/UllahA20
}}
==The e-Governance of Land Record and Social Dispute Resolution: An Impact Evaluation of the
Punjab Land Record Management Information System (PLRMIS) in the Punjab Province
Pakistan==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2797/paper23.pdf
The e-Governance of Land Record and Social
Dispute Resolution: An Impact Evaluation of the
Punjab Land Record Management Information
System (PLRMIS) in the Punjab Province Pakistan
Inayat Ullah*, Wafa Akhoubzi**
*COMSATS University Islamabad, Attock Campus, Pakistan Address, inayat@kdis.ac.kr
**KDI School of Public Policy and Management, w.akhoubzi@gmail.com
Abstract: Complexity in administration and limited accessibility of land records have been a long-
standing issue in developing countries. In Pakistan, except for the province of Punjab (the
treatment province) where land-record has been computerized in 2017, the land record is
administered through traditional land registers and cadastral maps in paper formats requiring a
-root level. As an important
step towards e-governance, the Punjab provincial government in 2017 established a Land Record
Management Information System (PLRMIS) that simplified the procedure of land registration and
transfer through digitization of the land-records. This research attempts to adopt a quasi-
experimental approach to link the introduction of PLRMIS with land-related dispute resolution in
Punjab and to scientifically evaluate the social impacts of this project. This paper outlines the
importance of the area, research design and proposed Difference-in-Difference method of the
School of Public Policy, South Korea in collaboration with the Department of Management
Sciences, COMSATS University Islamabad, Attock Campus, Pakistan. The purpose of this paper is
to share the proposed research design with conference participants and elicit important
comments on the validity of the approach being adopted.
Keywords: Land Record Digitization, Quasi-Experimental Design, Dispute Resolution, Impact
Evaluation
Acknowledgement: This research is being conducted under the joint research project titled
the KDI School of Public Policy, South Korea and to be completed in collaboration with COMSATS
University Islamabad, Attock Campus, Pakistan.
Copyright ©2020 for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
236 Ongoing Research
1. Introduction
Land in the Punjab province of Pakistan is known for its fertility, agricultural diversity and its
contribution to the rural economy of the country. However, ownership and administration issues
associated with land have been causing significant constraints for both government and the general
public in realizing its real value. These issues include inequalities in land distribution, tenure
insecurity and difficulties associated with registration and transfer system of land (Ali, 2013; Thakur
et al., 2005; Marshall, 1975) d manual land record system has
increased the land transaction cost (both formal and informal) and land-related disputes in rural and
urban areas (Cheema, 2006). As a result, the land market has become contracted while land prices
are often unpredictable and in excess of the discounted value of the potential agricultural earnings
from it. The low mobility of land contributes to perpetuating the highly unequal distribution of land
and related livelihood opportunities across the province.
In the past, land reforms were largely carried out for the purpose of securing property rights
(Conning & Deb, 2007). These reforms include land entitling (Zhang et al., 2020), land administration
(Conning & Deb, 2007; Enemark, 2009; Gignoux & Wren-lewis, 2013), imposed redistributive
reforms (Adams & Howell, 2001; Conning & Deb, 2007), negotiated or market-led reforms (Gauster
& Isakson, 2007) and reforms through restitution (Conning & Deb, 2007; Gignoux & Wren-lewis,
2013). Some of them were successful and others resulted in unintended outcomes (Besley, 1995;
Deininger, 2003; Feder & Nishio, 1999). Many of the national and international organizations and
governments have played a crucial role in such reforms. For instance, the world bank solely
committed billions of dollars in different parts of the development world (World Bank 2005; Holstein
1996; USAID 2005). The core components of these reforms include economic, political, credit supply,
environment, sustainable development (Hernando de Soto 2000; Douglass North 1990; Conning &
Deb, 2007). Failure in land reforms often happens when there are unknown community
arrangements, poor implementation, and lack of accountability (Scott 1999; Lauria-Santiago 1999;
Swinnen 2000; Conning & Deb, 2007). But the risk can be minimized by efficient monitoring,
accountability, participation, and feedback along with pilot studies before scaling up to costly
program intervention (World Bank 2005, Conning & Deb, 2007). A strong feedback mechanism is
key to the effective monitoring, evaluation and accountability in reforms packages ensuring
intended outcomes. For this purpose, different types of impact evaluation studies are carried by
qualified researchers to identify the various reasons and to recognize the outcomes associated with
the reforms package that contribute in evidence-based policy making.
Digitization of records is an important catalyst to the land reforms. Recently, there have been
successful attempts to transform the governance mechanism through e-governance where
information technology is used to enhance access to, and delivery of, government services to benefit
citizens, businesses and government from local level to national and international levels (Arfeen &
Khan, 2012). The introduction of PLRMIS in the Punjab province of Pakistan is one such example of
transforming governance mechanisms that is intended to enhance productivity and reduce conflicts
arising from conventional record administration. Initially the program was implemented in
Ongoing Research 237
eighteen1 districts of the province (henceforth collectively called Treatment Group 1), while in the
2nd phase expanded to the entire province2 (henceforth called Treatment Group 2). Following are the
key evaluation questions related to the impact of PLRMIS program:
i) To what extent the introduction of PLRMIS has affected land-related disputes in the
Punjab Province?
ii) Are there differences in changes overtime in the land-related key variables observed
between Treatment Group 1 and Treatment Group 2 in the Province?
iii) What challenges are still remaining in the governance, functioning and public
participation and how stakeholders view these challenges?
In this paper, the researchers adopt a quasi-experimental approach to finding the true impact of
the digitization of the land record in the Punjab Province, Pakistan. The following section describes
a brief history of the land administration in Punjab, context, and objectives of the program while
section 3 discusses methods, experimental design, data and empirical specification of the study.
Section 4 briefly discuss the preliminary results of the PLRMIS data while the last section outlines
the future plan.
2. Context and Program Description
The history of land administration and revenue generation in the Indian Sub-continent can be traced
back in the 13th and 14th centuries when the first Indian Sultan, Ala Uddin Khilji started the
registration and administering the land record (Ali, 2013). Successive rulers initiated and maintained
the land record tradition throughout their reigns and extracted land revenue such as Sher Shah Suri
of 16th century who introduced fixed crops rates (Thakur et al., 2005) that significantly improved
the measurement of land records. Akbar, the most powerful emperor of Mughal Empire in the 17th
century, brought substantial reforms in the land administration such as determining different classes
of lands and revenue estates (Ali, 2013). The Mughal Empire was followed by the British rule during
which the land administration system was enhanced to raise more land revenues (Marshall, 1975).
In view of the complication in uniform implementation of laws across sub-continent, the British
government introduced and modified state-specific regulations over the course of nearly 90 years
from agriculture to non-agriculture class was an important intervention by the British rule in India
(Cheema, 2006). Although minor amendments took place over the years, the major land related laws
y Act of
land administration system in Pakistan is carried out withi
1 Districts in the Treatment Group 1 include, Jhlem, Chakwal, Khushab, Sargodha, Jhang Toba Tek Singh, Khanewal
Multan, Lodhran, Vehari, Pakpattan, Sahiwal, Faisalabad, Kasur, Hafizabad, Gujranwala, Sialkot and Narowal.
2 The remaining eighteen districts that exposed to the 2 nd phase of the program include Rawalpindi, Attock, Mianwali,
Bhakkar, Layyah, Deraa Ghazi Khan, Muzaffargarh, Rajanpur, Rahim Yar Khan, Bahawalpur, Bahawalnagar, Okara,
Nankana Sahib, Lahore, Sheikhupura, Chiniot, Mandi Baha Uddin and Gujrat
238 Ongoing Research
and regulations (UN-HABITAT, 2012). Appendix I shows a detail timeline and land related
legislations in Pakistan over the course of 140 years.
Considering the importance of improving land administration, the functioning of land market,
and linking it to the broader areas of governance and administration, the Punjab provincial
government in collaboration with the World Bank (WB), introduced the Land Record Management
Information System (PLRMIS) through establishing the Punjab Land Record Authority in 2017. The
aim of this system was to facilitate public-access to land and bring transparency into the land
records. Initially the program was implemented in eighteen districts in Punjab in late 2013 and later
expanded the program to the entire province in late 2016. Figure 1 shows the distribution of districts
that exposed to treatment in two phases.
Figure 1: Distribution of Early Treatment and Control Districts in Punjab
2.1. Theory of Change
The PLRMIS is expected to influence the stakeholders through institutional, social and behavioral
mechanisms. Intuitional mechanism involves the transformation of methods that are followed and
written in the standard operating procedures for a task. In the context of PLRMIS, various intuitional
changes have occurred during and after the implementation of PLRMIS. These include, the web-
based software development-a crucial output of the project-, establishment of the Arazi Record
Centers (ARCs) and the business processing and re-engineering of the land record management
system. Information technology development such as software development enhances the
institutional performance of an individual as well as organization (Horton, D., & Mackay, R., 2003).
Under the PLRMIS, a well-standardized monitoring dashboard that enables top-level management
to track each activity at all levels. Additionally, the dashboard works a guide for staff following
standard operating procedures of all four levels of management record system. The establishment
-a basic land record document- that expedite the process of
land related transactions. ARCs further achieve four objectives including client satisfaction, saving
Ongoing Research 239
of time, reducing cost of a transaction and improvement in land tenure security. Finally, the legal
and policy framework of PLRMIS enhances the institutional capability to work smoothly according
to the defined outputs of the project. One of the key objectives of the program is to enhance public
services delivery. Unlike the conventional system, under the PLRMIS, women have access to land
records easily and can perform land transactions with convenience.
were taken to create a positive attitude among the key stakeholders-employees of the land
department-. These measures gained support for the project by decreasing the fears about job
security and explaining to the participants about new roles under the new system. Initially, Land
refusing to work. After extensive negotiations, the program included incentives for employees and
capacity building such as construction of new field offices furnished with IT facilities, transportation
allowance and allocation of 2% of land revenues to Revenue Officers.
Social awareness is an essential part for any project because the general public responds lately
especially people who live in rural areas. Under the new program, a number of public awareness
campaigns were launched that encouraged the general public to actively benefit from the digitized
record management systems. Major awareness measures included conducting of 36 workshops with
5,663 internal key stakeholders namely Officers of the District Administration (District Collectors,
Additional District Collectors, Assistant Commissioners) and Revenue functionaries (Tehsildars,
Girdawars/Kanungos, Patwaris) between December 2011 and February 2014. Moreover, 250
representatives of the Punjab Bar Association and Field Revenue Staff were consulted about effective
implementation of the program.
The main objectives of PLRMIS are given below:
To reduce number of procedure (steps) to complete a property registration (Efficient Land
Registration).
To reduce the total (transaction) cost incurred on property registration (Cost Reduction).
To increase the level of tenure security of land-right holders.
2.2. Key Features of the Program
ut of the total 25, 709
revenue states (Rural and Semi-Urban) covering 90% of the land in Punjab. The system has
Minutes.
Establishment of the 151 state-of-the-art Land Record Centers integrated with 45 Sub-registrar
offices across Punjab. This has increased collateral value of land due to improved
authentication.
Online availability of land record 24/7 at the website and efficient procedure of land
registration.
Creation of 4000 direct and 10,000 indirect jobs in the province.
240 Ongoing Research
2.3. How does the PLRMIS Work?
The PLRMIS Project was designed by the Project Management Unit using the experiences of the pilot
projects in districts of Kasur, Lahore, Rahim-Yar Khan and Gujrat and also utilizing the experience
from other countries. Currently, the PLRMIS system is fully operational in all districts of Punjab
since 2017. It allows the right holder to search, obtain and register the land he owns using simple
procedure e.g the right holder has to go to the service center. The staff will search their record by his
name, father/husband name, or khewat number using his/her computerized national identity card.
The service center staff then asks for the thumb impression through a bio-metric device and a photo.
The right holder then gets copy of their record within 10-15 minutes after paying the specified fee.
3. Methods
3.1. Experimental Design
The Punjab province occupies a total area of 205,345 km2, and is the most populated province of
economy.
In view of the implementation of the PLRMIS across all districts of the Punjab province and
adopt a quasi-experimental approach that involves Difference-in-Difference (DiD) design coupled
with qualitative interviews from the field to evaluate the effect of the land record digitization on the
land related disputes. For the quantitative analysis, the researcher finds comparable control groups
(regions) that have not been affected by the program precisely due to the administrative division of
the districts and provinces in Pakistan yet have similar socio-economic characteristics across the
border with the treatment province (see figure-2). Given the phase-in implementation of the PLRMIS
program in Punjab, we find two types of treatment groups. Firstly, the districts within Punjab
Province, that were initially exposed to the program are the treatment group 1 while the remaining
districts are considered as control group for the first phase of the program. The second phase of the
program expands to the entire province that include all 36 districts of Punjab, called the treatment
group 2. For this later treatment group 2, the control regions belong to the districts of the provinces
that border alongside the Punjab province. More specifically, there are three provinces that share
border with the treatment (Punjab) province. These are the Province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,
Balochistan and the Sindh province. The bordering districts of these provinces have same
geographic, natural, and social characteristics as districts in the bordering region in the Punjab
province. We attempt to select districts and associated revenue estates within all districts identified
through red line in figure-2, and to differentiate the treatment and control regions in terms of the
outcome variables.
Ongoing Research 241
Figure 2: Difference-in-Difference Setting of the Program Area and Adjacent Control Regions
3.2. Data
Our data comes from two main sources; primary source that involves collection of data through field
survey and secondary sources that include records from government offices including published
record of courts proceedings. Data on the outcome variable (e.g. number of land-related disputes) is
being collected from the police stations records located within the jurisdiction of each revenue estate.
In Pakistan, the distribution of police stations follows similar pattern of division of revenue estates,
however the number of police stations depends on the crime rate and population within each sub-
unit of a district (See table 1). This research utilizes data on the number of police stations collected
through systematic surveys from each police station as an outcome variable. Parallelly, the
researchers have obtained data on the number of disputes and related information from the courts
official records that allow for preliminary tests on the validity of our research design.
Data on the land record computerization is obtained from the PLRA website as well as designated
centres (ARCs) in the province of Punjab. The researchers are working on carefully designing a
systematic survey to obtain information about estate-specific incidence of conflicts and their
historical records from government records (through police stations) and from concerned parties in
the conflict. This survey will enable the researcher to clearly identify the origin of a conflict and if
the availability of digital information on the land related record helped them (concerned party)
resolve the issue without going through prolonged court cases.
Table 1: Distribution of Police Stations in Pakistan
No. of No. of Police
Province Divisions Districts Stations
Punjab [Treatment] 8 35 705
Sindh [Control] 5 22 566
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa [ Control] 7 34 198
242 Ongoing Research
Balochistan [Control] 6 34 117
Source: Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS), 2018
3.3. Empirical Strategy
The pre-program land legislations that came from the Land Revenue Act (1967) and the Registration
Act (1908), did not sufficiently entitle the landowners with the ownership right certified by State.
The ownership rights and other related documents associated with land records were merely
status of rights had led to many disputes among landowners and concerned parties and the
government due to the contestable nature of the land record and insufficient documentation. A
number of studies have pointed to the dispersed and duplicative nature of land record in Pakistan
causing uncertainties in the land administration and impeding economic development besides
threatenin
reasons of increasing disputes in rural areas is the ambiguity in land records that is often exploited
by the relatively upper class of the society rendering the poor land owners deprived of their
loopholes in the land records are resolved, then, it will reduce the probability of conflict that
originates primarily from such an ambiguity. Figure 2 shows the results chain of the program that
identifies the functional relationship of the program components with the dispute resolutions in the
treatment province.
3.3.1. The Model
Individual-level panel data is a powerful tool for estimating policy effects. Initially, in the simplest
case we expect to collect data on two time periods and a binary Treatment indicator, Treatment1it,
which is unity if unit i is exposed to PLRMIS program at time t. The following is the main
specification for estimating all our outcome variables.
Where
represents the outcome variable in unit i in district j of Punjab at year t
=1 if the surveyed responding unit i belongs to district j of Punjab province
(treatment group 1) & t PLRMIS 1st Phase)
0 Otherwise
= Vector of characteristics at the responding unit level (refer to the variable list section
2.2.1 above)
The unknown intercept for each responding unit (n entity-specific fixed
effects).
Ongoing Research 243
The unknown intercept for each district in the Punjab province (n district-
specific fixed effects).
Time trend. t is time as binary variable (dummy), so we have t-1 time
periods.
Uijt = Error term to be clustered at individual responding unit level.
Phase 2:
Where
represents the outcome variable in unit i in district j (observed in Punjab, KP, Sindh,
Balochistan provinces) at year t
=1 if the surveyed responding unit i belongs to district j of Punjab province
(treatment group 2) & t PLRMIS 2nd Phase)
0 Otherwise
Our empirical strategy rests on the following key assumptions.
a) Strict Exogeneity: Our fixed effect DID design aims to difference out unmeasured
confounders using techniques that eliminate biases from group- or time-invariant factors. For
this, we assume that the timing of treatment exposures in the DID design is statistically
independent of the potential outcome distributions, conditional on the group- and time-fixed
effects. There is no such intervention as PLRMIS or any other system in the control districts.
Although, recently, governments of these provinces are trying to introduce such a system, the
existing land related record is still operated manually
b) The Common Trend: The outcome variables in the treatment region (treatment group 1 and
treatment group 2) follows a similar nature and mechanism as in the control districts in
Punjab2, Sindh, Balochistan and KP. Before the introduction of the PLRMIS system, the
difference in terms of land-related disputes after controlling for province and district fixed
effects is expected to be insignificant. Existing research also points to the commonality on key
aspects in our design. Despite variation between urban and rural areas, land disputes,
registration of land, transaction cost, land use & development, land tenure and land market
values follow a similar pattern Punjab, Sindh, KPK and Balochistan. A number of studies such
as CPIN (2020), Khalid and Begum (2013), Gazdar (2009), USAID (2010), Niazi (2003), MOCC
(2020), NDMA (2020), and LandLinks (2020) have pointed to this commonality.
c) Pakistan has a parallel court structure in all provinces, and the formal court system has
powers to hear and resolve the land-related dispute cases. Land related disputes are the most
common cases in the courts of Pakistan. According to one estimate, over a million land related
cases are pending countrywide covering all four provinces, i.e. Punjab, Sindh, KPK and
Balochistan. Significant causes of land disputes are inaccurate or fraudulent land records,
244 Ongoing Research
erroneous boundary descriptions that create overlapping claims, and multiple registrations
to the same land by different parties (USAID 2008; Dowall and Ellis 2007; Ali and Nasir 2010).
4.
dispute references received, references mediated successfully, references for which mediations
failed, criminal cases, civil cases and rent related cases across all districts from the Punjab Province
for the period 2017-2019. One limitation with this data is that it does not allow us to obtain evidence
on the pre-program difference of the treatment and control groups. We conduct an ex-post analysis
of the mean difference of the early treated districts in Punjab and the early control districts to see the
difference in performance of the court cases. Figure 3 shows the mean differences between the
treatment group 1 and treatment group 2 shown in figure 3. Significant difference in terms of court
related response growth can be observed from the data that signifies better performance of districts
that were early treated compared to later treated districts. This analysis however is preliminary, and
been halted due to COVID-19 pandemic. We expect to come up with our primary data and
subsequently test on the specification as soon as the pandemic is over.
Figure 3: Mean Difference Between the Early Treated Districts of Punjab and Early Control Districts.
Ongoing Research 245
Preliminary data by the PLRA (Figure-4) also shows a sizable drop in the land related disputes
however, these aggregate data of Punjab and district Lahore do not provide causal evidence of the
program impact. Analysis of data on the individual police stations and associated revenue estates
in treatment and control districts can only provide a basis for causal inference with regard to the
program impact.
Figure 4: Land Disputes in Punjab and District Lahore (Source: Researcher own work PLRA data)
Number of Land Disputes in Punjab Province and
100000
90000
80000
70000
60000 District
50000 Lahore
Punjab
40000
Province
30000
20000
10000
0
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
5. Discussion and Future Plan
The challenge for valid impact evaluation studies in land related reforms is to find the counterfactual
of the treated group. The best idealized method is to assign randomized treatment to households
but in most cases, it is costly and hard to implement a program through randomized control trails
(RCTs) (Conning and Deb, 2007). The next best alternate to RCTs is the quasi-experimental approach
that utilize the program introduction in an area as a treatment region while finding a close
counterfactual region that carries similar characteristics except the program introduction
The PLRMIS system is likely to be expanded across Pakistan. Although, the PLRMIS success on
key outcome such as reducing procedural time and cost etc is known, however, it is not known as
to whether the program has contributed into lessening the land-related conflicts. In this proposed
project, considering the PLRMIS as a quasi-natural experiment, the researcher plans to carry out a
rigorous impact evaluation of the program to come-up with evidence-based policy recommendation
for the government to bring governance reforms.
The proposed quasi-experimental approach to this one-year research project is expected to be
completed in several stages. In the first stage of the project we have reviewed existing literature on
land related policy interventions and impact evaluation methodologies with a special reference to
social dispute resolution. Our research team is currently engaged in extensively reviewing the
literature and preparing for the development of a strong research design in the following months.
We plan to develop an effective survey design before going to field for actual data collection. The
data collection process may take up to four months that will be followed by the data cleaning and
246 Ongoing Research
processing. Data analysis, testing and examining the results are to be done in the middle of the year
2020.
References
Adams, M., & Howell, J. (2001). Redistributive Land Refroms in Southern Africa. Natural Resource Perspective,
64(January).
Ahmad, M. (1959). Land Reforms in Pakistan. Pakistan Horizon, 12(1), 30-36.
Akhtar, A. S. (2006). The state as landlord in Pakistani Punjab: peasant struggles on the Okara military
farms. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 33(3), 479-501.
Ali, Z. (2013). Developing a framework to apply Total Quality Management concepts to land administration:
the case of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Ali, Zahir and Abdul Nasir. 2010. Land Administration System in Pakistan Current Situation and
Building
the Capacity. Sydney, Australia, 11 16 April 2010.
Bhutto, A. W., & Bazmi, A. A. (2007, November). Sustainable agriculture and eradication of rural poverty in
Pakistan. In Natural Resources Forum (Vol. 31, No. 4, pp. 253-262). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Conning, J., & Deb, P. (2007). Impact evaluation for land property rights reforms.
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2007/11/8990570/impact-evaluation-land-property-rights-
reforms%5Cnhttp://www-
wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2008/02/05/000333037_200802
05233115/Rendered/PDF/423820NWP0Doin10Box321452B0
CPIN Pakistan Land Disputes, Ver 2, Year 2017. Retrieved 30 May 2020, from
https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/588a0a134.pdf
Deininger, K., & Feder, G. (2009). Land registration, governance, and development: Evidence and
implications for policy. The World Bank Research Observer, 24(2), 233-266.
Dowall, David and Peter Ellis. 2007. Urban land and housing markets in the Punjab, Pakistan. Working
Paper, University of California Berkeley Institute of Urban and Regional Development (IURD)Working
Paper 2007/4. Berkeley: IURD.
Ehwi, R. J., & Asante, L. A. (2016). Ex-post analysis of land title registration in Ghana since 2008 merger:
Accra lands commission in perspective. Sage Open, 6(2), 2158244016643351.
Enemark, S. (2009). Land Administration Systems-managing rights, restrictions and responsibilities in land.
Faruqee, R., & Carey, K. (1997). Land markets in South Asia: What have we learned?. World Bank.
Gauster, S., & Isakson, S. R. (2007). Eliminating market distortions, perpetuating rural Inequality: An
evaluation of Market-assisted land reform in Guatemala. Third World Quarterly, 28(8), 1519 1536.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01436590701637375
Ongoing Research 247
Gazdar, H. (2009). The fourth round, and why they fight on: An essay on the history of land and reform in
Pakistan. PANOS South Asia, Collective for Social Science Research, Karachi.
Gignoux, J., & Wren-lewis, L. (2013). Evaluating the impact of Land Administration Programs on
agricultural Productivity and Rural Development (Issue January 2013).
Haq, R. (2007). Land inequality by mode of irrigation in Pakistan, 1990-2000. The Pakistan Development
Review, 1011-1022.
Heltberg, R. (1998). Rural market imperfections and the farm size productivity relationship: Evidence from
Pakistan. World Development, 26(10), 1807-1826.
Housing, page 2), http://hrcp-
web.org/hrcpweb/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Housing.pdf
http://www.fig.net/pub/fig2010/papers/fs03f%5Cfs03f_ali_nasir_3901.pdf
Jacoby, H. G., & Mansuri, G. (2008). Land tenancy and non-contractible investment in rural Pakistan. The
Review of Economic Studies, 75(3), 763-788.
Khalid, I., & Begum, I. (2013). Hydro Politics in Pakistan: Perceptions and Misperceptions. South Asian
Studies (1026-678X), 28(1).
LandLinks. (2020). Retrieved 30 May 2020, from https://www.land-links.org/country-
profile/pakistan/#1528992503488-6b2250be-7112
Mahmood, K., & Cheema, M. A. (2004). Empirical analysis of juvenile crime in punjab, Pakistan. Pakistan
Journal of Life and Social Sciences, 24, 10-9.
Marshall, P. J. (1975). British Expansion in India in the Eighteenth Century: A Historical Revision. History,
60(198), 28-43.
McDermott, M. I. K. E., Selebalo, C., & Boydell, S. (2015). Towards the Valuation of Unregistered Land.
MOCC (2020). Retrieved 30 May 2020, from
http://www.mocc.gov.pk/moclc/userfiles1/file/MOC/Publications%20on%20Env%20and%20CC/M
iscellaneous/land%20use%20and%20care.pdf
NDMA (2020). Retrieved 30 May 2020, from
http://www.ndma.gov.pk/Publications/A%20Guide%20on%20Land%20and%20Property%20Rights%
20in%20Pakistan%202012.pdf
Niazi, T. (2003). Land tenure, land use, and land degradation: A case for sustainable development in
Pakistan. The Journal of Environment & Development, 12(3), 275-294.
Punjab Land Record Authority. (2019). No Title. https://www.punjab-zameen.gov.pk/Laws
AndRules/LawsandRules
Qazi, Usman Muhammad (2006). Computerization of Land Records in Pakistan: A comparative Analysis of
two Projects from a Human Security Perspective. LEAD International, Islamabad, Pakistan.
248 Ongoing Research
Qureshi, M. G., Qureshi, S. K., & Salam, A. (2004). Impact of Changing Profile of Rural Land Market in
Pakistan on Resource Allocation and Equity [with Comments]. The Pakistan Development Review, 43(4),
471-492.
Raulet, H. M., & Uppal, J. S. (1970). The social dynamics of economic development in rural Punjab. Asian
Survey, 10(4), 336-347.
Recovery, F. (2012). A guide on land and property rights in pakistan 2012.
Thakur, V., Dutta, D., Khadanga, G., & Venkatesh, D. (2005). Social Impact of Computerisation of Land
Records. Adopting e-governance. New Delhi, India: Computer Society of India Publications.
UN-HABITAT. (2012). A guide on land and property rights in Pakistan 2012.
https://www.land-
links.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/09/USAID_Land_Tenure_Pakistan_Profile_0.pdf
(Bizclir). Washington DC: USAID
Zhang, L., Cheng, W., Cheng, E., & Wu, B. (2020). Does land titling improve credit access? Quasi-
experimental evidence from rural China. Applied Economics, 52(2), 227 241.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1644446
About the Authors
Inayat Ullah
Inayat Ullah has done his PhD in Public Policy from KDI School of Public Policy, South Korea. He currently
works as a faculty member and Principal Investigator at COMSATS University Islamabad, Attock Campus
Pakistan where he is leading a Joint Research Project of the KDI School of Public Policy and COMSATS
University Islamabad, Attock Campus.
Wafa Akhoubzi
Wafa Akhoubzi is a Master in Public Policy from KDI School of Public Policy, South Korea. She currently works
as Marketing & Product Manager at the SWARMERS (Blue TIT, Amazon Sellers), in the Kingdom of Morocco.