Pasar al contenido principal

page search

Biblioteca Conceptualizing Fair, Full and Prompt Compensation – the Tanzanian Context of Sustaining Livelihood in Expropriation Projects

Conceptualizing Fair, Full and Prompt Compensation – the Tanzanian Context of Sustaining Livelihood in Expropriation Projects

Conceptualizing Fair, Full and Prompt Compensation – the Tanzanian Context of Sustaining Livelihood in Expropriation Projects
Cover photo

Resource information

Date of publication
Junio 2014
Resource Language
Pages
16
License of the resource

Objections to assessed compensation for expropriated land in Tanzania have been on increase irrespective of the changed ideologies of the country. The basis of valuation assessment as provided in the laws governing land acquisition is ‘market value’ while the local valuation practice has had limited use of the basis in compensation and resettlement assignments. With a large number of investment projects being funded by donors, a new dictate on the basis of valuation for compensation and resulting relocation has been introduced often disguising the respective national laws as being not protective enough for the loss of livelihood of the affected persons. Safeguards requirements mainly Resettlement Policy Framework (RFP) and Environmental and Social Management Frameworks (ESMF) by global financial organizations such as the World Bank, the Africa Development Bank and a number of bilateral aid/grant organizations have further complicated a rather delicate valuation practice opening up what appears grey areas that local experts have no hands-on experience on one hand and, on the other due to the burgeoning financial benefits from consultancy fees payable, a large number of opportunistic and often irrelevant disciplines have taken up the challenge and masqueraded as the requisite professional advisers in this area.

 This paper is an attempt to review the current compensation assessment practice in Tanzania reflecting on the several interventions by government and donors such as the World Bank with a view of establishing best course of action to take when compelled to acquire occupied land. It is an intrigue on the rhetoric market value as glorified in the local practice and its surrogate ‘replacement value’ as a concept found in the World Bank nomenclature that is perceived as the panacea for the compensation problem. On the other hand it is an attempt to evaluate the extent to which Tanzania law provisions that demand full, fair, and prompt compensation in a compulsory purchase scheme are being complied by those acquiring land for various projects in Tanzania. 

Share on RLBI navigator
NO