Description

A host of mapping techniques enabled by technological and technical advances have been used in land registration projects across the globe. From small-scale informal land tenure documentation projects often run by non-governmental organisations to large-scale formal and authoritative projects such the Land Tenure Regularization projects in Rwanda and Ethiopia, a mix of mapping approaches are selected based on among other things precision/accuracy, speed, scalability, cost, and availability of requisite skills. Some of the approaches include ground surveys using traditional land survey instruments such as the theodolite, manual digitization of aerial imagery, (semi-) automatic delineation of boundaries in aerial imagery, and sketching. There is, however, a lack of comparative studies that evaluate the different choices against each other to establish clear criteria for selecting one approach in lieu of another. This study will attempt to cover part of this gap using either qualitative or quantitative (or both) analyses of data from past mapping project and from field work to stablish common criteria used choosing mapping approaches and evaluate how the different methods addressed actually compare on these criteria.

Objectives and Methodology

The specific analysis and data collection methodologies used in this project will depend on the concrete questions that are being addressed by the thesis. A select but diverse set of mapping approaches must be chosen based on well-defined criteria and taking into account the Fit-For-Purpose land administration principles. The project could address primarily technical consideration or could also incorporate non-technical issues such as the influence of institutional arrangements and legal requirements. Care will have to be taken to address different mapping contexts and not just focus on official mapping projects. In particular, a number of small land parcel mapping projects should provide primary data for mapping methods where data may be lacking such as automated digitization of sketches on top of aerial orthophotos – provided there are tools available for this. Some broad questions to consider could include:
- What mapping methods are currently used? How do they differ? In which contexts are they used?
- What are their practical and cost benefits? In which contexts do these benefits accrue? How do institutional structures and procedures enable/impinge the accrual of said benefits?
- Why are some methods preferred as compared to others?

Further reading