Universo, población, muestra

Several land management reforms were put in place between independence (1957) and 19683 to regulate the land tenure system. These reforms were intended to bring about a shift in land administration from the customary system to a government controlled and subsequently, a monetised system (Kasanga and Kotey, 2001). The reforms were also intended to bring about equity and equal rights to land for all. However, as Obeng-Odoom (2014) states, the idea of the “untouchable chief” and his land was not completely eroded after independence. Nkru- mah’s government disempowered the chiefs but retained the ideology of collective ownership

2 _{The Administration Ordinance (CAP III), 1902; The Land and Native Rights Ordinance No. 1, of 1927,}

the Land and Native Rights Ordinance, 21 November 1931(Cap 147), 195 and the mineral Ordinance 1936(Cap 155) revised in 1951.

3 _{The state land Act, 1962 (Act 125); the Administration Lands Act of 1962 (Act 123). The state property}

and contracts Act 1960(CA6) transferred all land vested in the Governor General to the President. The state was empowered to acquire land compulsorily in the country. All Northern land was vested in the President. In the South, the Ashanti and Akim Abuakwa stool lands were vested in the President when it was discovered they used stool money to support the rival political party (Ashanti stool Act 1958 and the Akim Abuakwa stool Revenue Act N0 _{78 of 1958). By extension the vesting of power was later}

extended to the rest of the country by the Stool Lands (validation of legislation) Act N0 _{30 of 1959 and}

Stool Lands Act 1960 (Act 27).The Concession Act, 1962 vested all timber trees in the government on trust for the stool even though it was later repealed.

of land which, giving the importance of chiefs to the collective, leaves their authority over lands undiminished (Amanor, 2005). Thus, although Nkrumah (1973: 35) was of the view that “the chieftaincy, in common with other human institutions, cannot remain static, but that it must in large measure adapt itself to the changing requirement of the changing time”, only the chiefs` allodial rights to lands were shifted to his government (Obeng-Odoom, 2014).

Early research in the 60’s and 70’s portrayed colonial governments as external actors governing and exploiting African societies according to the political and economic interests of their home governments (Berry, 1992). But authors including Bates (1983) and Jessop (1977) have argued that it was not only colonial governments who benefited from the African states. They explained that governments are made up of complex institutions with different individuals or group of individuals with different interests. Thus, a political institution can be viewed as a forum through which people channel their preferences for a social outcome. Even though the government manages the national economy, it can only retain power through satisfying the interests of other key sectors within the domestic political economy. For example, in the case of Ghana, land administration policies enacted by the state can only work efficiently if the interests of chiefs and other senior administrators are satisfied. The idea of disaggregating the state, conceptually speaking, has been borrowed by many students of political economy and social history in explaining how culture shapes social and economic processes. Paaga (2013) states that land as a resource arouses territorial instincts from different individuals and groups, with different agendas or interests which could sometimes lead to disputes.

After Nkrumah was overthrown in 1966, the land tenure system in Ghana underwent several reforms with the most recent one made by the 1992 constitution (Kasanga, 2002). Currently, there are 86 legal land instruments4 _{in Ghana. These legal instruments operate} alongside customary laws, thereby making the administration of land in Ghana more complex (Ministry of Land and Forestry, 2003a). For example, Article 271(1) of the 1992 constitution states that “all stool land is vested in the appropriate stool or skin on behalf of and in trust for the subjects of the stool or skin in accordance with the customary law and usage.” This implies that the traditional authorities take all management decisions and exercise powers that deal with the rights to own, sell, receive payment, manage, and decide on allocation terms and price for a plot. The above article overlaps with Article 267 (2) and (6) that sets up the Office

4 _{Local Government Act 1993(Act 462); Town and Country Planning Ordinance of 1945(CAP 84); Fourth}

Republic Constitution (L. I) 1241; National Development Planning Commission Act 1994 (Act 479); Na- tional Development Planning (Systems) Act 1994(Act 480); Land Commission Act, 2008(Act 767) which repealed the Lands Commission Act 2000 (Act 483).Constitution of the Republic of Ghana, 1992; Ad- ministration of Stool Lands Act, 1994(Act 481) which repealed the Administration of Stool Lands Act; State Lands Act, 1962 (Act 125); Deeds Registration Ordinance of 1883; Land Registry Ordinance of 1895; Land Registry Act 1962 (Act 122); Land Title Registration Law, 186 (PNDCL 152); Land Title Regulation, 1986 Legislative instrument.

of the Administration of Stool Land (OASL) to work on all financial matters on stool land in- cluding disbursement of all stool land revenues like rents and royalties, which traditional au- thorities do.

Several authors including Kasanga (2002), Kasanga and Kotey (2001), and Ubink (2008) have alluded to the dual land ownership system in Ghana between the state and the customary authorities. As mentioned earlier, 80% of lands in Ghana is owned by the traditional authorities while only 20% is owned by the state. It is difficult to know what percentage of the land belongs to private holders since it is hard to determine whether those lands are customary freeholds as in Article 267(5) or not. Da Rocha and Lodoh (1999) are of the opinion that as of 7 January 1993, no one could acquire a freehold interest in stool land. Gyan (2005) disagrees and argues that this article does not prohibit the grant of customary freehold in stool land and family land where the grantee is a subject of the land owning stool.

The above section shows that ambiguities in the land tenure system in Ghana have led to many overlaps in land administration between traditional and state authorities, and even among different state land agencies. These conflicts and how the uneasy relationship between the state and the chieftaincy institutions have shaped the present dual land tenure system in Ghana are further discussed in chapter 5. The overlapping and conflicting land statues are exploited by farmers in their struggle to gain access and control over lands for agricultural activities. Chapters 6 & 7 discuss this.

Another important resource whose access poses serious challenges to farmers is wa- ter. The next chapter briefly examines the customary and statutory laws that regulate access to, and the use and control of, of different water sources in Ghana.