Component title: Land Administration
Component scope:
This component covers the following topics:
 Survey and mapping
 Land registration
 Land information
 Dispute resolution
 Legislation
 Valuation
These topics with the exception of dispute resolution are covered in the current Road Map.
Valuation, which is a separate topic in the Road Map, has been included as part of the Land
Administration component.
Background:
The current overall objectives for the Land Administration Component are perhaps best
summarized from elements of the long-term objectives set out in the design for LAMP 1. These are:
 A clear, coherent and consistent set of land administration policies and laws;
 Accelerated programs to formally recognize the rights of eligible land holders and to have them
recorded in a strengthened land administration system;
 An efficient land administration system operating throughout the Philippines in accord with
government policy and responsive to the needs of the people, supported by a sustainable
financing mechanism;
 An effective and transparent land valuation system, in line with internationally accepted
standards that serves the needs of all levels of government and the private sector.
Under LAMP 1 the following progress was achieved:
 A major review of the legislative framework was completed in 2002 as one of the six policy
studies (LAMP Report A2, in 2 volumes)
 A policy study on forest boundary delineation was completed (Final Report Forest Boundary
Delineation Study, May 2003)
 A review of dispute resolution in rural areas was undertaken (LAMP Report F11)
 Review of DAO 98/12 and the preparation of a draft amendment in early 2004 (which was not
implemented)
 Investigations of survey procedures (LAMP Report C59, Chapter 6, and LAMP Reports C60 and
D34)
 Development and testing of systematic titling activity in PIO 1 (LAMP Report C59, Chapter 9)
 Review of experience with the One-Stop-Shop (OSS) in PIO 1 and initial steps in the
development of a long-term OSS management plan (LAMP Report C59, Chapter 5; and LAMP
Reports C54 and C55)
 Development and testing of procedures to compile cadastral index maps (LAMP Report C59,
Chapter 7)
 Development of a National Strategy for Land Records Management (LAMP Report D22)
 Review of the ROD registration operations and options (LAMP Reports C11 and C12)
 Development and testing of procedures to validate land records (LAMP Reports D32, D24)
 Development and testing of procedures to detect fake titles (LAMP Report D18)
 Review of experience with the OSS in PIO 2 (LAMP Report D17)
 Major reviews of land valuation in 2002 (LAMP Report A1 Land Valuation Policy Report, in 2
volumes) and 2003 (LAMP Report A13 Land Valuation Study Report)
The major lessons from LAMP 1 are documented in LAMP Reports E40 and E41.
1
The proposed activity under LAMP II includes:
 Amendment of the Free Patent Law
 Preparation and promulgation of a Land Code to codify land administration legislation
 Development of a framework to manage government lands
 Scaling up of land titling activity using Free Patents in 5 provinces
 Improved service delivery in OSSs in 5 provinces
 Implementation of the National Strategy for Land Records Management
 Development of standards and guidelines for Valuation
 Simulation/field testing of valuation standards in 2 provinces
 Professionalisation and licensing of assessors
 Preparation of a plan to scale up the implementation of valuation standards
 Review of Tax Policy
 Introduction of CIM as a basis for tax mapping
Issues, problems and opportunities:
Survey and Mapping. The existing survey and mapping regulations (DAO 98/12) are dated and
focus on methodology rather than standards or outcomes. The regulations limit the application of
new technology such as GPS or graphical means such as orthophotomaps to map cadastral parcels.
DAO 98/12 specifies a rigid system of accuracy requirements. In some rural areas, the cost of
survey can exceed the value of the land and greater flexibility in survey methodology seems
appropriate. As demonstrated in the LAMP prototype in Leyte, the regulations are not well enforced
and many of the existing surveys are inaccurate and not to specification. Attempts were made under
LAMP to revise DAO 98/12 but these changes were resisted by the GEP. New regulations are being
prepared to support the use of Cadastral Index Maps (CIMs), the use of Parcel Information Sheets
(PISs), the use of GPS equipment and the use of Orthophotomaps (OPMs), but the updating of
DAO 98/12 seems necessary for the long-term development of the cadastral framework in the
Philippines.
Cadastral surveys under the Cadastral Act of 1913 have generally been conducted in areas of whole
municipality or city. In 1998 there were 1,610 cities and municipalities in the Philippines. Of these,
846 have been fully surveyed, 704 have been partially surveyed and 60 remain unsurveyed. Two
hundred and seventy five cadastral surveys were filed by Bureau of Lands prior to the Second
World War and all of these areas were titled under the mass/cadastral proceedings. It is not known
how many of the surveyed cities and municipalities have been titled under mass/cadastral
proceedings. With the passage of the Local Government Code (RA 7160) in 1991, the Department
of Natural Resources and the Environment (DENR) offered to devolve the cadastral survey function
to the Local Government Units (LGUs). No LGU has yet undertaken a cadastral survey and funding
for cadastral surveys in DENR has been significantly decreased. With the significant drop in
government funding, there has been an erosion of skills and capacity in both the public and private
sectors.
The classification of land in the Philippines is incomplete – about 6% of the country is yet to be
classified – and the boundaries of classified land are unclear. This is particularly critical for forest
boundaries, which define the extent of alienable and disposable (A&D) land. The definition of
forest boundaries is based on rigid slope criteria and despite various studies investigating more
flexible, participatory processes to define forest boundaries, including the Forest Boundary
Delineation policy study under LAMP, no agreement has been reached on possible changes.
A new primary geodetic network was established in the Philippines in the early 1990s (PRS-92).
However the control marks for the cadastral surveys are not connected to PRS-92 and the
experience from the prototype in Leyte indicates that non-systematic errors in the coordinates of the
2
cadastral reference marks will mean that a significant program will be required to correct errors and
connect the surveys to PRS-92. These transformations are further complicated by the poor quality
of many surveys. The use of orthophotomaps from high resolution satellite imagery and aerial
photography to identify poor quality surveys has been successfully trialed in Leyte. Without a
connection to PRS-92 it is very difficult to integrate the survey plans themselves or to overlay data
such as topographic mapping or satellite imagery over the survey plans, or to use the data as a key
element in the spatial data infrastructure of the Philippines.
Some points that might be considered in the preparation of the long-term development plan include:
a) The relationship between land classification and the definition of A&D land has been discussed
previously. The topic of land classification and the demarcation of forest boundaries is covered
in the Land Management component. However there are important linkages to the land
administration component. Land classification has typically been approached on a
programmatic basis, seeking to classify all land in the Philippines. There have been delays in
land classification and improvements are warranted if a land classification system is to remain a
fundamental basis for land management in the Philippines. However, it is essential that efficient
and transparent processes are developed to be able to clearly define the boundaries of A&D land
on the ground in specific localities prior to any systematic registration activity.
b) New technology such as GPS, digital orthophotogrammetry workstations, high-resolution
satellite imagery, total-stations and survey/GIS computer hardware/software provide powerful
tools to address the above issues if impediments such as weak capacity, restrictive regulations
and limited funding and resources can be addressed. The study team should review carefully the
various attempts to update DAO 98/12 and recent experience under LAMP to reach consensus
with key stakeholders such as GEP on appropriate changes in the regulations.
c) Much of the difficulty in survey and mapping is due to weak capacity. The reluctance of LMS
staff to adopt the survey/mapping technology used on the DAR/Swedesurvey Project was due
largely to a lack of exposure of LMS staff to new technology. New technology is needed in the
sector and staff require training in the use of this technology. There would seem value in
developing a research capacity and involving academe. There should be clear linkages between
the capacity development and land administration components of the long-term development
plan.
Land Registration. The Torrens Title system was introduced in 1901, but is incomplete. A large
portion of privately claimed A&D lands (over 4 million ha) remain untitled resulting in high levels
of tenure insecurity and conflict. Many land holders are not aware of the benefits of registration,
and in some cases, there is little incentive to register. DENR stopped mass registration proceedings
in the early 1990s. The titling of public lands through administrative means is slow and prone to
errors, overlaps, conflicts among claimants. Judicial titling is very slow and expensive for
applicants.
The registration system is judicial rather than administrative in approach. Intervention by the courts
is required for many procedures, including: confirmation of imperfect or incomplete title, restitution
of lost or destroyed titles, removal of restrictions on reconstituted titles and amendment of
certificates of titles. The court system is unable to address these tasks in a timely manner.
There are inefficiencies in the title registration system such as the issuance of Transfer Certificates
of Titles (TOT) rather than the endorsement of existing titles as happens in virtually every other
country with a manual Torrens Title system. Another example is the use of a metes and bounds
technical description. But an over-riding issue is limitations in the records management systems in a
ROD. It is almost impossible to determine the number of active titles in a ROD or to search a title
by LGU or barangay. There are other problems such as the use of complex forms and deed
3
procedures.
The RODs currently operate without cadastral maps or survey plans. The land records in the RODs
are referenced by title number and owner’s name, both of which can be used to search the land
records in a ROD. There is no index to a parcel or map reference in the land records and
information in the ROD cannot be searched by parcel or cadastral map number. The RODs thus
cannot verify that a new title does not duplicate or overlap on a previously titled property.
The land registry is not easily accessible and there is a high transaction cost. It is unclear whether
the ROD records are public. In many countries the registry information is public, which strengthens
public confidence in the system and facilitates access to information. The need to obtain tax
clearance certificates from BIR and the LGU adds time and cost to a transaction. The registration
fees and taxes are high which is a disincentive to registration and leads to other problems such as
informality or the under-declaration of sale prices. As a result of all of this, confidence in the entire
titling system is being eroded. The LRA experience with the LARES project has demonstrated that
computerization is not the answer without significant reform. (The LARES project has not
demonstrated anything yet since it has not reached operational stage before it was suspended. The
business process re-engineering study, systems development and even the conversion phase of the
LARES project have shown that indeed there are a lot reforms necessary to improve the titling
system. In fact, if the project reached implementation, the system in the Registry of Deeds would
have the functionality to check the technical description and area of the lot applied for registration
and compares it with the surrounding parcels on the digital parcel map for overlaps or duplication.
It would then be easy to determine the number of active titles, do searches by parcel number, LGU,
barangay, etc. or trace the chain of titles backward and forward. There are lots of other things that
the project has done like the study on the title forms and even I think proposed amendments to the
land registration laws. Thus, computerization may not be the solution but it is a very big help in
ferreting out the problems and the extent of these problems so that the appropriate solutions can be
proposed.)
Some points that might be considered in the preparation of the long-term development plan include:
a) There are many ways of acquiring title in the Philippines. The rights of those in long term
occupation of land are unclear and there is inconsistency in the periods of occupation required
under the various laws and regulations. Some of these periods exceed 30 years and are
unrealistic. Informality is high in urban areas, particularly in metro Manila. The rights of tenants
in rural areas can be uncertain. A framework should be developed to clarify rights to property.
This framework may look at rights, restrictions and obligations in totality and should seek to
simplify and harmonise current requirements. It would be useful if this framework also address
a range of tenures, including leasehold (which has been suggested in the LAMP Land Laws
Policy study as a strategy for informal settlers in urban areas). This framework should be in a
form that can be embodied in the new land administration law(s).
b) The changes required in the registration system are fundamental and more than fine-tuning. The
changes necessary have largely been documented in the LAMP reports (particularly the Land
Laws Policy Study, the First Status Report on Land Document Registration and the NSLRM
report). There needs to be a shift from judicial to administrative processes. There also needs to
be a shift in emphasis from procedures to service delivery. The status of the registry records as a
public record should be discussed and resolved. Significant changes will be required in
legislation, particularly PD 1529. The activity to improve the registration system is therefore
closely linked to the activity on legislation.
c) Changes are not only required internally in the registries of deeds. The full scope of procedures
required by applicants should be reviewed, including the requirement to obtain LGU and BIR
tax clearance certificates. An option that might be explored is having BIR and the LGU
4
delegating authority to the ROD to collect taxes, perhaps based on the delegation by BIR to the
Customs Department.
d) The imposition of back taxes and penalties on back taxes has been a major barrier to
participation in the registration system. Various options such as waiving of back taxes and/or
penalties, and the recording of back taxes as an obligation to be cleared on registration of
subsequent transactions have been proposed. Consensus needs to be reached on the approach to
back taxes and penalties and this agreement needs to be implemented.
e) The absolute level of transaction cost is an issue and the schedule of fees and taxes such be
reviewed in the light of international experience that seems to suggest that where transaction
costs exceed about 5% of the property value, problems will occur with participation and/or
under-declaration of values. This issue is to be taken up in the Fees and Finance component.
(It might be worthwhile to consider making original registration free from all fees, including taxes,
as part of the strategy to expedite titling. Once most of the lots are titled, the government can easily
recover the costs from subsequent registrations and other spin-off activities. In urbanized or
developing areas, the cost of transaction is not so much a worry as the speed of transactions. In
actual practice, property developers or the transacting parties are spending more than what is
necessary just to fast track the transactions but these are sometimes delayed by problems so simple
as lack of title forms from the LRA.
Also, nobody has won a claim against the Assurance Fund while many frauds has been committed,
greatly eroding the confidence in the titling system. Thus, the process should be designed to
become more transparent, clear, subject to audit checks and with defined accountability of ROD
personnel.)
Land Information. There is substantial duplication and overlap in the functions and activities of
the key land administration agencies. This duplication is reflected in a number of areas, including:
 the primary classification of public land as alienable and disposable land (DENR/NAMRIA and
the NCIP respectively);
 undertaking of land surveys for titling purposes (DENR/LMB, DAR and NCIP);
 approval of subdivision surveys (DENR/LMB and DOJ/LRA);
 award of ownership rights in land (DENR, DAR, the Courts supported by LRA, NCIP);
 maintenance of separate versions of cadastral maps and records (DENR/LMB and DOJ/LRA);
 compilation of land maps and information (multiple agencies);
 land valuation and related mapping for tax purposes (DOF/BIR, local government units).
Land records in LMS offices and RODs are currently maintained in original paper form and there
are limited inventories of this information. A large proportion of records have been destroyed
through war, theft, fire and water damage. Many of the records are in exceedingly fragile condition.
A program in the 1990s to decentralise LMB/LMS records has increased the risk to the land
records. Security for the land records has been lax, and poor and inadequate storage facilities have
resulted in the theft and modification of the official records. The end result is that land information
is not easily accessible and not easily integrated.
The National Land Records Management Strategy study undertaken under LAMP identified a
number of specific issues related to land records, including:
 Inventories, if performed, do not result in the replacement, repair or conservation of essential
land records;
 There are no serious record retention/destruction policies in place.
 Existing policies dictate that all the supporting material must be stored in perpetuity.
5
 There is no overall common approach applied when indexing or referencing the land records.
 Most agencies concerned with land registration require the same documents to be presented for
examination and each demands separate certified copies of those documents.
Some points that might be considered in the preparation of the long-term development plan include:
a) Some consideration needs to be given to identifying common usage access keys to the data.
Under LAMP two parcel identifiers have been tried. Spatial Parcel Identifiers (SPIs), which are
the lot in approved survey, have been used in PIO1 and Unique Parcel Identifiers (UPIs), which
are the lot in a CIM, have been used in PIO2. It is unlikely that electronic maps would be
available on a widespread basis for some time. Physical parcel maps and assessment Property
Identification Numbers may not be practical methods of parcel identification for wider usage. It
would be useful to evaluate the practicalities of using street numbers and names, although there
may be difficulties with this approach. Owners name in conjunction with neighbourhood is also
a common identifier but increasingly there can be personal privacy issues in this respect.
b) For their own very good business reasons, agencies are examining the cost/benefits of
introducing a variety of computerisation initiatives. The LRA, for example, is undertaking a
BOO project to computerise its land titling system and the DAR had a project with
Swedesurvey to computerise their survey functions for CARP. There are presently no agreed
data standards or information sharing agreements in place nor have the means of interfacing
these various initiatives been established. Agreement should be reached on data standards and
data sharing.
c) The assessor acts as a consolidator of property information and has a set of data with national
coverage. The assessor’s property data could be of use for wider publication to the public, other
government agencies and the private sector with the objective of facilitating an informed
efficient property market, efficient government and efficient property industry. General
electronic access to the fiscal cadastre may precede similar access to the legal cadastre, and it is
important to understand weakness and strength of the assessor’s data for wider purposes. Also
the assessor may benefit from any land data alignment initiatives, and if assessor’s data is made
available for mobile use, the assessor could be a beneficiary.
d) Document and record retention is a serious issue. This issue is aggravated by the predisposition
to store multiple copies of documents e.g. a deed of sale is retained by the Registry of Deeds
with copies retained by the notary and the court. Documentary evidence to support a registration
activity is a reasonable demand. Consensus should be reached on document retention policy and
this agreement should be implemented.
(Its not viable to use the street number and names as parcel identifiers since they are not unique. In
a given place, for example, there maybe many streets name Rizal. Also, most roads in the rural
areas especially, don’t have numbers or names. The same goes for owners name and neighborhood.
That leaves the choice between the SPIs and UPIs as parcel identifiers. If I’m not mistaken, the
CIM is produced first before you can assign a UPI. This makes the SPI more practical to use. Its
readily available, being inscribed in the survey plan or title, and can be easily used. Moreover, it is
created at the same time the parcel is created; hence there is no need to trace back the plans or titles
just to assign parcel identifiers. If DENR and LRA can simplify and standardized the SPIs, it would
be facilitate the widespread use of the SPIs.)
Dispute Resolution. There are many land disputes in the Philippines and many disputes have a
long history, particularly those relating to rights and family matters. Culturally there is a strong
reliance on litigation to resolve disputes. There is general agreement and much anecdotal evidence
that the reliance on the court system both for many registration procedures as well as the resolution
of disputes has resulted in a slow, costly land administration system. The LRA is an Administrative
office that implements court decisions and has no authority to adjudicate or resolve disputes. Land
6
matters are dealt with by the Provincial and Municipal Trial Courts who have responsibility for
both civil and criminal matters. Although there is anecdotal evidence that land matters constitute a
major proportion of court case load, land matters are often treated with low priority. As a result
many land matters can take an inordinate amount of time to resolve – years if there is no dispute or
decades if there is dispute.
There are alternative dispute resolution processes. There is a dispute resolution process in the
barangay, but this system does not have formal authority and can only intervene where both parties
agree to participate. There is a Commission for the Settlement of Land Problems (COSLAP) but
this too does not have formal authority. Under LAMP, the Systematic Adjudication Teams (SATs)
have had a role in dispute resolution. In the pilot systematic registration activity the SATs had some
success in resolving boundary disputes but little success in resolving family disputes.
Some points that might be considered in the preparation of the long-term development plan include:
a) It is unlikely that legislation is required to strengthen dispute resolution mechanisms. Increased
public awareness is likely to be necessary, supported by the development and dissemination of
IEC material.
b) Consideration could be given to strengthening the existing barangay and COSLAP dispute
resolution processes.
Legislation (Land Code). Much of the law is outdated and supports processes and procedures that
are not in keeping with international best practice. In particular, the laws and processes to provide
secure title to persons in long-term possession and occupation of land have not served the
community well.
The laws are administered by different agencies. Many of the laws have been introduced over a
long period of time without consideration of the impact that consequential amendments will have
on existing legislation.
Operating an efficient and equitable land administration system under this framework has been
difficult and has resulted in long delays in adjudication and registration of land rights and in
considerable jurisdictional overlap and duplication of functions.
There has been a much greater emphasis on the use of the overloaded Court system for land
registration matters than in many other countries.
One consequence of the complicated legislative framework is the fact that the land laws are not well
understood in the community.
It is very difficult to get land legislation updated in the Philippines. Attempts to update the Public
Land Act (1936) started in the 1970’s and continued into the 80’s and 90’s. The farthest that the
revised Act reached in congress was the third reading in the Lower House. A proposed new
National Land Use Act has been before Congress for at least the past decade.
Some points that might be considered in the preparation of the long-term development plan include:
a) A key strategic decision is the approach to legislative reform. Should the approach be a new
consolidated Land Administration Code as proposed by the LAMP Land Law study, or would a
better approach be a program of smaller packages of legislation? Although in theory it should
be easier to adopt a piecemeal approach, the DENR experience in revising the Public Land Act
would suggest that there is no simple process to legislative change.
b) It would seem logical for LAMP II to prepare a draft bill. Given the difficulty in making
7
changes to legislation it seems sensible to frame this bill as enabling legislation concentrating
on policy areas such as a clear statement on people’s rights and obligations to land and leaving
specific detail on implementation to implementing rules and regulations.
c) A coordinated program needs to be prepared to support the bill through the legislative process.
This program would be linked to the overall legislative program for the long-term plan.
d) There needs to be a comprehensive program to communicate land law to stakeholders and the
public. It seems worthwhile translating the law into key local dialects.
Valuation. There are several systems and methodologies for the valuation of real properties in
different government agencies and the private sector. These are utilized for different purposes,
including real property taxation, compensation for land acquired for public investment, valuation
under CARP, bank lending, insurance companies and purchase and sales of real property by
investors. The multiplicity of systems and methods has often produced doubtful valuations whose
contestation in court has at times caused long delays in the implementation of government
programs. While questionable valuations can be blamed on a lack of adequate and uniform
valuation standards and practices, an equally important cause is the lack of training of valuers as
there is no formal valuation training in the Philippines.
One of the LAMP 1 policy studies was concerned with Land Valuation. Recommendations were
made on institutional reform, legislation was prepared to create a National Appraisal Authority, and
draft valuation standards and guidelines were prepared. A simulation pilot study was undertaken in
two LGUs. A long-term plan for the development of valuation was prepared and LAMP II has been
designed on a conservative basis. The initial emphasis is capacity development, with the
development of a valuation profession. Additional pilot valuation activity is planned with activity
scaled up to cover 2 provinces.
With the proposed institutional reform, the imposition of new valuation standards and measures to
increase revenues, the assessor’s office faces increased workload and a need to achieve higher
valuation standards. The cost of assessment is an issue and assessors should understand their cost
structure and implement procedures to manage costs. The requirement for a 3 yearly cycle of
review of the LGU schedules of market values is set out in the LGC of 1991, however most LGUs
have not been able to achieve this in practice. The introduction of new valuation standards that will
apply to both LGU and BIR taxes will increase the pressure to implement a 3 yearly cycle of
review. A continuous 3 yearly cycle of revaluation/issuing new values/handling appeals will add
new work loads and may make the work/resource provision more cyclical.
Some points that might be considered in the preparation of the long-term development plan include:
a) There seems value in identifying and quantifying the requirement for valuation services across
government and developing a strategy for meeting these needs.
b) There would be benefit in conducting a basic national survey of assessor’s offices to gather
information on annual cost, staffing, number of assessments and a breakdown of assessment by
type at the beginning and end of that financial year (activity indicator). Information could also
be gathered on available computing resources. To support analysis of the cost of valuation,
more detailed information might be captured on the unit cost for major tasks (such as
assessment of new subdivisions, new construction, and maintenance of records including maps)
by inspection and interviews in a limited number of representative Assessor’s offices. In
undertaking the costing exercise it would be beneficial to identify business process reengineering opportunities. It would also be useful to analyze the existing control, time/work and
performance measurement procedures and make recommendations for improvements. Based on
this information an assessment can be made of the effect of a 3 yearly re-appraisal cycle on
staffing levels and mix. A TOR should be prepared for this study, which could be undertaken as
8
part of LAMP II.
c) It is important to develop mass appraisal techniques such as automated computer assisted
valuation or automated indexation procedures that reduce the need to inspect and manually
revalue properties. A national assessment should be made of the consistency and completeness
and degree of standardization in assessment records and the existing level of computerisation of
records. For those jurisdictions that have not computerised records, the cost of conversion and
the likely quantifiable and non quantifiable benefits should be estimated and recommendations
made on the approach towards computerisation.
d) In some overseas jurisdictions 20% of the assessments could produce as much as 80% of the
revenue. Special properties such as ports, airports, refineries, Telco’s and utilities are a case in
point. The approach and definition of values can make significant differences to the property tax
values and tax revenues. These cases would typically receive more scrutiny from the tax payer
and correspondingly require a higher level of professional input and support. Typically sales are
less frequent and there is a need for rental and profits information and a high level of expertise
for handling appeals.
Tasks:
 Review background documentation
 Consult extensively with stakeholders (see Annex 2)
 Prepare a draft 20-year Road Map for the land administration component that, amongst any
other things:
- present the long-term objective(s) of the LAM program for the component
- specifies, in measurable terms wherever possible, the desired outcome(s) of the long-term
program for the component (and any intermediate outcomes)
- specifies, in measurable terms wherever possible, the desired output(s) of the long-term
program for the component (and any intermediate outputs)
- Identifies key assumptions made in preparing the long-term plan
- Identifies any high-level risks associated with the long-term plan for the component
- Identifies additional/new ways of building stakeholder commitment/support for the longterm plan for the component
- Identifies, in broad terms only, the nature and extent of donor assistance (if any) that may
be necessary to assist achievement of the long-term plan for the component.
 Contribute to preparation of the draft long-term plan as a whole
 Participate in stakeholder consultations on the draft plan for the component
 Produce a final long-term plan for the component endorsed by all key stakeholders
Outputs:
 An initial work plan covering the identified components of surveying and mapping, land
registration, land information, dispute resolution, legislation and valuation
 Monthly progress reports
 A draft long-term plan for the component, supported by:
Survey and Mapping
a) Agreement on the principles for an efficient, transparent, community accepted process to
define the boundary of A&D land in a locality prior to systematic registration activity,
and strategy to implement procedures.
b) Revision of DAO 98/12
Land Registration
c) Framework of rights and obligations to property as a basis for land administration law(s)
d) Agreement on a streamlined registration process that focuses on service delivery with
administrative rather than judicial implementation, in a form that can be supported by
9

the new land administration law(s) with a migration strategy from the current system
e) Mechanisms to eliminate the need for applicants for registration to gather data from
other offices such as the BIR and LGUs
f) Clear strategy to eliminate the problem of back taxes and penalties in being a barrier to
participation
Land Information
g) Unique property identifier that is accepted by all key agencies
h) Clear standards for data and mechanisms and protocols for data sharing
i) Workable policy on document retention and a strategy to implement this policy
Dispute Resolution
j) IEC material and a strategy for a public awareness campaign on dispute resolution
k) Strengthened dispute resolution procedure in the barangay and COSLAP
Legislation
l) Decision on the approach to land administration legislative reform and a TOR for the
preparation of a draft land administration bill(s) in a form that can be presented to
Congress and the Senate for consideration
m) Detailed plan to support the passage of the land administration law(s)
n) Initial IEC material and a comprehensive plan for a community awareness campaign on
land administration law
Valuation
o) Strategy for a valuation service across government
p) TOR for a study into the cost of valuation services and assessment of the implications of
moving to a 3-year revaluation cycle
q) TOR for a study into the valuation of special properties
r) Review of valuation record standards and strategy for computerisation.
A final long-term plan for the component endorsed by all key stakeholders.
Specification of the Planning Study Team:
Specialist Input
Component Leader/Land Administration Reform
Cadastral Surveying/Mapping
Land Tenure Specialist
Land Registration Specialist
Land Information Specialist
Land Law/Legislation Specialist
Valuation Specialist
Sub-Total International
Geodetic Engineering
Land Tenure Specialist/Deputy Component Leader
Business Process Re-Engineering
Information Technology
Land Law/Legislation Specialist
Valuation
Sub-Total National
Total Input
Int.
Int.
Int.
Int.
Int.
Int.
Int.
Nat.
Nat.
Nat.
Nat.
Nat.
Nat.
Month
Input
Output
1 2 3 4 5 6 (days)
90 Component Management, (a)
30 (b)
60 (c), (j), (k)
60 (d), (e), (f), (i)
30 (g), (h)
30 (l), (m), (n)
60 (o), (p), (q), (r)
360
20 (b)
60 Component Management, (a), (c), (j), (k)
60 (d), (e), (f), (i)
20 (g), (h)
20 (l), (m), (n)
40 (o), (p), (q), (r)
220
580
Other matters: It is assumed that the basic infrastructure for the institutional reform (LAA and
NAA laws) will be in place before the mobilization of the team that will be preparing the long-term
development plan. The outcomes listed above have been carefully selected based on the key issues
set out by the thematic group and key reference documents. The Land Law activities (outcomes (l),
(m) and (n)) cannot really start until much of the activity on outcomes (a) to (k) have been
completed.
10
Annexes:
1. List of key documents for the component
2. List of stakeholders to be consulted by the Planning Study team for the component
3. TORs for individual Planning Study team members for the component
11
Annex 1
List of Key Documents
LAMP Reports prepared by Technical Assistance
LAMP
Report
#
A1
A2
A13
C11
C12
C54
C55
C59
C60
D17
D18
D22
D24
D32
D34
E40
E41
F11
Report Title
Land Valuation Policy Study (2 volumes)
Land Law Policy Study (2 volumes)
Land Valuation Study Report
First Status Report on Land Document Registration
Parcel Based Systematic Land Rights Registration: Options with Reference to
Comparative Examples from Other Jurisdictions.
Review of the PIO1 One-Stop-Shop
The One-Stop-Shop Management Plan
Revised Methods and Methodology Report
GPS and OPM Pilot Report
Procedural Manual for PIO2 One-Stop-Shop
Fake Title Identification Procedural Manual
Development of a National Strategy for Land Records Management
Land Records Validation
Office Validation Procedural Manual Version 3
Orthophoto Mapping Report (Assignment 3)
Integrated Lessons Report.
Activity Completion Report
Review of Existing Mechanisms and Structures in the Resolution of Land-Related
Disputes in Rural Areas
Other LAMP Reports
Final Report Forest Boundary Delineation Study, May 2003
12
Annex 2
List of Key Stakeholders
-
Office of the Undersecretary for Lands, DENR
NAMRIA,
LMB/LMS,
LRA/ROD,
DLR-NCIP,
DLR-BLAD,
DLR-BLD,
DLR-BARBD,
DOF,
DOF - National Tax Research Center (NTRC),
DOF – BLGF
Central Board of Assessment Appeals
Commission for the Settlement of Land Problems (COSLAP)
Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC),
Land Bank,
DENR CARP,
Representatives from the LGU Assessor’s Offices,
Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR),
League of Cities in the Philippines,
League of Municipalities in the Philippines,
League of Provinces in the Philippines
Basic sectors (both Urban and Rural),
Geodetic Engineers of the Philippines (GEP),
Private sector survey and mapping companies
Association of Valuers and Appraisers (AVA),
Association of Philippines Real Estate Appraisers (APREA),
Municipal Assessors Association (MAA),
City and Provincial Treasurers and Assessors Association (CPTAA),
Chamber for Real Estate and Builders Association (CREBA),
Ateneo de Manila University School of Government, Economic Policy Reform and
Advocacy (ASG-EPRA)
Bankers Association of the Philippines
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP),
Office of Solicitor-General,
Courts,
National Housing Authority (NHA),
NEDA-ITCS
LAMP
13
Annex 3
Individual TORs
International Inputs
Component Leader/Land Administration Reform (3 months)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This adviser should have appropriate qualifications (survey, land law, land records
management, etc) and at least ten years experience, part of which would have been on the
management of large land administration projects involving high levels of planning and
coordination, and the reform of land administration systems. International experience is
essential and experience in the Philippines is desirable.
Key Tasks:
The management of the Land Administration Component and the integration of the various
land administration inputs into the overall long-term development plan. Agreement with key
stakeholders on the principles for an efficient, transparent, community accepted process to
define the boundary of A&D land in a locality prior to systematic registration activity, and
strategy to implement procedures.
Cadastral Surveying/Mapping (1 month)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This adviser should have a tertiary qualification in surveying or mapping sciences, with at
least 10 years experience in photogrammetry and its application in cadastral mapping
programs. This adviser should be a registered surveyor and have experience in the
management of processes to register surveyors. Experience in the preparation of cadastral
survey regulations and international experience is essential.
Key Tasks:
Input into the land administration component of the long-term development plan. Revision of
DAO 98/12
Land Tenure Specialist (2 months)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This adviser should have a tertiary qualification in land law, anthropology, surveying or
related area, with at least 10 years experience in land registration and adjudication of rights,
which should include experience on a major program to systematically register rights in land
and experience in land administration reform. International experience is essential.
Key Tasks:
Input into the land administration component of the long-term development plan, plus:
 Development with stakeholders of a framework of rights and obligations to property as a
basis for the land administration law(s).
 Preparation with stakeholders of IEC material and a strategy for a public awareness
campaign on dispute resolution.
 Development with stakeholders of a strengthened dispute resolution procedure in the
barangay and COSLAP.
14
Annex 3
Land Registration Specialist (2 months)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This adviser should have appropriate qualification and at least 10 years experience in land
registration, including experience gained in the implementation of major upgrade/reform in
land registration process, computerisation and process re-engineering. International
experience is essential.
Key Tasks:
Input into the land administration component of the long-term development plan, plus:
 Agreement with stakeholders on a streamlined registration process that focuses on service
delivery with administrative rather than judicial implementation, in a form that can be
supported by the new land administration law(s) with a migration strategy from the current
system
 Development with stakeholders of mechanisms to eliminate the need for applicants for
registration to gather data from other offices such as the BIR and LGUs
 Agreement with stakeholders on a clear strategy to eliminate the problem of back taxes and
penalties in being a barrier to participation.
 Agreement with stakeholders to a workable policy on document retention and a strategy to
implement this policy.
Land Information Specialist (1 month)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This specialist should have a degree in a relevant land-related science. This specialist should
have extensive experience, preferably international, in land information management,
including the coordination and development of comprehensive land information networks
across agencies of government, and the resolution of technical and institutional issues,
including organisation and management concerns, associated with such initiatives. Ideally the
specialist should have had a strong background in Land Information Management strategic
planning.
Key Tasks:
Input into the land administration component of the long-term development plan, plus:
 Agreement of stakeholders to a unique property identifier that is accepted by all key
agencies
 Development with stakeholders of clear standards for data, mechanisms and protocols for
data sharing.
Land Law/Legislation Specialist (1 month)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This adviser should have an appropriate qualification in law, with at least 10 years experience
in the review of land legislation, particularly in the review and consolidation of land laws.
International experience is essential, particularly in the Philippines.
Key Tasks:
Input into the land administration component of the long-term development plan, plus:
 Working with stakeholders to reach a decision on the approach to land administration
legislative reform and a TOR for the preparation of a draft land administration bill(s) in a
form that can be presented to Congress and the Senate for consideration
 Preparation with stakeholders of a detailed plan to support the passage of the land
administration law(s)
15
Annex 3
 Preparation of initial IEC material and a comprehensive plan for a community awareness
campaign on land administration law
Valuation Specialist (2 months)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This adviser should have an appropriate qualification in land valuation, with at least 10 years
experience in the review of land valuation systems, particularly in the development of
computer-assisted valuation systems, computerisation. International experience is essential,
particularly in the Philippines.
Key Tasks:
Input into the land administration component of the long-term development plan, plus:
 Agreement with stakeholders to a strategy for a valuation service across government
 TOR for a study into the cost of valuation services and assessment of the implications of
moving to a 3-year revaluation cycle
 TOR for a study into the valuation of special properties
 Review of valuation record standards and strategy for computerisation.
National Inputs
Geodetic Engineering (1 month)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This adviser should have a tertiary qualification in geodetic engineering, with at least 10
years experience. A strong background in computing and mapping is desirable. This adviser
should be a registered GE and have standing with GEP and the profession in the Philippines.
Key Tasks:
Input into the land administration component of the long-term development plan. Revision of
DAO 98/12
Land Tenure Specialist/Deputy Component Leader (3 months)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This adviser should have a tertiary qualification in land law, anthropology, geodetic
engineering or related area, with at least 10 years experience in land registration and
adjudication of rights, which should include experience on a major program to systematically
register rights in land and experience in land administration reform.
Key Tasks:
The management of the Land Administration Component and the integration of the various
land administration inputs into the overall long-term development plan, plus:
 Development with stakeholders of a framework of rights and obligations to property as a
basis for the land administration law(s).
 Preparation with stakeholders of IEC material and a strategy for a public awareness
campaign on dispute resolution.
 Development with stakeholders of a strengthened dispute resolution procedure in the
barangay and COSLAP.
16
Annex 3
Business Process Re-Engineering (3 months)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This adviser should have appropriate qualification and at least 10 years experience in process
re-engineering and information technology. Experience in the land sector is desirable.
Key Tasks:
Input into the land administration component of the long-term development plan, plus:
 Agreement with stakeholders on a streamlined registration process that focuses on service
delivery with administrative rather than judicial implementation, in a form that can be
supported by the new land administration law(s) with a migration strategy from the current
system
 Development with stakeholders of mechanisms to eliminate the need for applicants for
registration to gather data from other offices such as the BIR and LGUs
 Agreement with stakeholders on a clear strategy to eliminate the problem of back taxes and
penalties in being a barrier to participation.
 Agreement with stakeholders to a workable policy on document retention and a strategy to
implement this policy.
Information Technology (1 month)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This specialist should have a degree in information technology. This specialist should have
experience in land information management, and the development of data standards and
guidelines.
Key Tasks:
Input into the land administration component of the long-term development plan, plus:
 Agreement of stakeholders to a unique property identifier that is accepted by all key
agencies
 Development with stakeholders of clear standards for data and mechanisms and protocols
for data sharing.
Land Law/Legislation Specialist (1 month)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This adviser should have an appropriate qualification in law, with at least 10 years experience
in land law, legislative drafting and the legislative process in the Philippines.
Key Tasks:
Input into the land administration component of the long-term development plan, plus:
 Working with stakeholders to reach a decision on the approach to land administration
legislative reform and a TOR for the preparation of a draft land administration bill(s) in a
form that can be presented to Congress and the Senate for consideration
 Preparation with stakeholders of a detailed plan to support the passage of the land
administration law(s)
 Preparation of initial IEC material and a comprehensive plan for a community awareness
campaign on land administration law
Valuation (2 months)
Qualification, Experience and Attributes:
This adviser should have an appropriate qualification in land valuation, with at least 10 years
experience in the review of land valuation systems.
17
Annex 3
Key Tasks:
Input into the land administration component of the long-term development plan, plus:
 Agreement with stakeholders to a strategy for a valuation service across government
 TOR for a study into the cost of valuation services and assessment of the implications of
moving to a 3-year revaluation cycle
 TOR for a study into the valuation of special properties
 Review of valuation record standards and strategy for computerisation.
18