Land is not just what we step on – it is what lies beneath and above

Would you introduce yourself and briefly explain on what you are currently working on?

Faith Alubbe: My name is Faith Alubbe. I am a human rights lawyer who works with communities to advance land justice. I am also the Chief Executive Officer at the Kenya Land Alliance which is an organization that brings together actors who advance land justice – both state and non-state actors. We work through a membership of 80 organizations, operating in 30 out of Kenya’s 47 counties, at both county and national levels, and we also partner regionally and internationally.

 

What do you see as key lessons or priorities for the future of land governance?

As we speak about land governance, we should appreciate that there are emergent issues that need urgent attention. The commodification of land has led to different understandings of land. For the longest time we knew land as the surface area that we step on. But land is more than that, it is what lies beneath and what is above the surface. Beneath the surface, we talk about the extraction of precious minerals. On the surface, we have forests, lakes, and rivers. And in the air, we are dealing with issues like climate justice, environmental protection, renewable energy, and just transitions. All these have expanded our understanding of what “land” really means. So, as we think about the future of land justice, we must ask ourselves: how do we equip ourselves to engage in conversations that do not disenfranchise our communities? For a long time, land has been seen as the best appreciating asset, but is it truly an asset if we don’t understand how to manage it?

 

Another key lesson concerns interests. When we talk about the “bundle of rights,” there’s always a form of consideration – monetary or otherwise - involved in accessing land. You may want to use land without owning or controlling it. These interests must be viewed differently so that people can still benefit from land, even without ownership. This is especially relevant for youth and women, who are often excluded from land ownership. Intergenerational solidarity may not work as effectively as intended, but there are ways to ensure access and use so that people can make a living from land even without owning it.

 

Another issue is institutional strengthening. The multiplicity of laws at international, regional, and national levels can protect communities but can also become a bottleneck. Many communities simply cannot understand or navigate these laws, which ends up disenfranchising them. Institutional strengthening must therefore include not only formal institutions, like policymakers and duty bearers, but also traditional institutions, which have great influence over land matters. In Africa, nearly 70 percent of arable land is communally held, and traditional justice systems and cultural custodians play a key role. They must be empowered to advise their communities effectively.

 

We should also recognize the role of religious institutions at the local level. They hold community trust and can help people engage more confidently in land issues. So, reforming institutions isn’t just about policies, it’s also about strengthening all voices that shape land governance.

 

Finally, communities themselves must work together to identify, understand, and claim their rights. Human rights-based approaches only succeed when communities understand their struggles and take ownership of the process. That’s what ensures sustainability.

 

How can approaches to land governance and land titling more effectively guarantee access for marginalized groups, such as women, youth, and pastoralists, while avoiding existing hierarchies and power asymmetries?

When we talk about land titling in the broader context of land governance, it’s important for communities to understand that land ownership is inherent, they are the indigenous people of their land. However, when they title, register, and protect their land, they gain stronger opportunities to make decisions about it. In Kenya, for example, unregistered community lands are held in trust by county governments. This limits communities’ ability to decide how their resources are used. When communities register their land, they not only formalize an inherent right but also gain the ability to make key decisions, for instance, about benefit-sharing, Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC), or investment leases¹. Land registration enables them to shape their own future and pass on these rights responsibly.

 

Kenya’s Community Land Act² ensures women’s inclusion in every decision-making body involved in land registration. It gives women a legal voice in land ownership, something that was not possible before. When women participate in these spaces, they can benefit from investments, influence decisions, and safeguard their rights, regardless of marital status, physical ability, or social standing. The law ensures that any woman above 18 can take part in decisions concerning land. The same applies to younger adults. Since the law compels communities to register everyone above 18, young people are included and their rights protected. As long as communities understand their rights, land titling can become a tool for empowerment.

 

In Kenya, there are digital tools such as Haki Ardhi (which translates to “land rights”) accessible through mobile devices. What are the main challenges and opportunities of using such technology to improve land management, given existing inequalities in access?

When we talk about digitalization, we must acknowledge that not everyone benefits equally. In Kenya, it is mainly the elite who benefit – due to issues of access, affordability, and availability. Many rural villages still lack electricity, so digitalization remains abstract for most people. Another concern is historical land injustices. When governments rush into digitalization, we must ask: what exactly are they digitalizing? Are they digitalizing documents that reflect injustices, or accurate records that can empower communities? If this isn’t handled carefully, digitalization can create new injustices instead of resolving old ones.

 

Digitalization is a good thing, but it must be tailor-made to serve community needs. The process should be participatory and user-friendly. Communities must not just be informed that their land records are being digitalized, they must understand how and why, and how this protects their rights. Otherwise, the process becomes one-sided, imposed from above, and disconnected from the people it’s meant to serve.

 

You have attended many conferences on land rights, agricultural transformation, and similar topics. There are a lot of discussions and many declarations. What should be the next step to move from dialogue to action?

After such conferences, we often produce beautiful outcomes and declarations. But to make them meaningful, each declaration should have an annexure, a monitoring and evaluation framework. For example: if a meeting was held last June, there should be a way to review the milestones achieved since then. What can realistically be done in six months, in five years, in ten years? Which actions are resource-intensive, and which are achievable now? Such an annex would make the declaration a living document. Without it, declarations risk becoming repetitive – just like the previous ones – and we lose the chance to turn commitments into real progress.

 

 

This interview was edited for clarity.

 

¹ The new FPIC (Free, Prior and Informed Consent) Guide strengthens the right of Indigenous groups in the mining sector to access information and make self-determined decisions. It enables their active participation in decision-making processes, ensuring that the needs of Indigenous communities are identified and considered at an early stage.

 

² The Community Land Act (2016) in Kenya provides the legal foundation for recognizing, safeguarding, and formally registering community land rights, empowering communities to collectively own, govern, and sustainably manage their territories.