[雙語(yǔ)翻譯]--外文翻譯--土地信息管理與土地所有權(quán)安全問(wèn)題由國(guó)家法院系統(tǒng)加以證實(shí)（節(jié)選）

1、2250 單詞， 單詞，12000 英文字符， 英文字符，4300 漢字 漢字出處： 出處：Abdulai R T, Owusu-Ansah A. Land information management and landed property ownership security: Evidence from state-sponsored court system[J]. Habitat International, 2014,

2、42(2):131-137.Land information management and landed property ownership security: Evidence from state-sponsored court systemRaymond T. Abdulai, Anthony Owusu-AnsahAbstract It is commonly argued that land information man

3、agement via land registration guarantees landed property ownership security in the developing world. This has, therefore, triggered various studies into the relation between land registration and ownership security. Th

4、e findings from these studies are divergent. Whilst some studies claim that it is land registration that guarantees ownership security, others have established no discernible link between registration and ownership se

5、curity. This ground- breaking study contributes to the debate by investigating the nexus between land registration and ownership security from a new dimension. It focuses on the perspective of the State-sponsored court

6、 system on ownership security. Data from a High Court in one of the cities in Ghana covering a period of 10 years was extracted and analyzed. The evidence adduced shows that land registration per se is incapable of gu

7、aranteeing security as landed property ownership can be contested whether or not it is registered and owners of registered landed property can lose their ownership via civil litigation in the State-sponsored court syst

8、em e cases are not automatically decided in favour of owners of registered landed property when disputes are brought before the courts for resolution. Thus, the argument that land registration guarantees ownership secu

9、rity is unsustainable - land registration is made to serve the wrong purpose. The paper, therefore, defines the right and critical role of land registration. It is concluded that land title or ownership insurance, alb

10、eit may appear to be expensive, is a tool that can potently address the problem of landed ownership insecurity. The findings provide useful lessons for international donor organisations like the World Bank and United N

11、ations that are supporting land registration programmes as a panacea to the problem of ownership insecurity in the developing world. Keywords: Court; Ghana; Guarantee;Registration ;Ownership; SecurityIntroductionThe im

12、portance of landed property1 in the economies of nations cannot be over-emphasized. For instance, land provides the space for various socio-economic activities and as Lund (2008), USAID (2005) and Deininger (2003) note

13、, it is the most basic and vital aspect of subsistence for many people around the world and, therefore, a strategic socio-economic asset, especially in poor societies where wealth and survival are measured by control o

14、f, and access to land. It is, thus, not surprising that in many developing countries, land accounts for about 50%e75% of the national wealth (Bell, 2006). Regarding the developed world, the immense contribution of lan

15、ded property to its development has been well documented by economic historians like Goldsmith (1995), Torstensson (1994), and Rosenberg and Birdzell (1986). Due to the critical role that landed property plays in human

16、 societies, insecurity of its ownership is a major concern to the citizenry and governments in the developing world as well as international donor agencies like the World Bank and United Nations. Landed property owners

17、hip security refers to the certainty that a person’s property rights will be recognized by law and, especially, by community members and protected when there are challenges or disputes over the property (Abdulai FAO,

18、2005). It legal system, which is what landownership security is about. Indeed, investing in a plot of land that one does not rightfully own will in itself trigger disputes or insecurity rather than reduce or eliminate

19、the disputes. Thus, in- vestment in land-based activities per se cannot provide the investor with indefeasible/guaranteed land rights - the mere fact that a disputant has constructed buildings or any other permanent st

20、ructures on a disputed plot of land cannot in any way provide him with an unassailable case. It is premised on the role of landed property ownership security as a determinant of land- related investments that insecurity

21、 is a major concern as earlier indicated. This has, therefore, triggered the search for a system that will establish landed property ownership security. There is a considerable body of literature on the link be- tween

22、land registration and landed property ownership security. At one end of the spectrum is a school of thought that claims that it is land registration, which guarantees security. The apologists of this school of thought

23、include Wannasai and Shrestha (2007), MacGee (2006), Bloch (2003), Feder and Nishio (1998) and Larsson (1991). Larsson (1991), for example, even argues that land registration prevents the occurrence of disputes over l

24、and, which significantly reduces the work of the State-sponsored courts. Extending this school of thought it is asserted that land registration provides a secure form of collateral for mortgage purposes and, therefore,

25、 guarantees access to formal capital for investment, wealth creation and development (Derban, Derban, Ibrahim, de Soto, 2000). At the other end of the spectrum is a school of thought that argues that land registratio

26、n per se cannot guarantee landownership security (Abdulai Benerjee, 2002; Bromley, 2008; Durand-Lasserve Fitzpatrick, 2005; de Janvry, Platteau, Gordillo, McAuslan, 2000; Sims, 2002). There is, thus, an ambivalent li

27、terature on the nexus between land registration and landed property ownership security. How- ever, the arguments of the apologists of the above two schools of thought are based on studies that have concentrated on the

28、views of purchasers and suppliers of land regarding ownership security. Using Kumasi in Ghana as a case study, the object of this is to contribute to the current debate by investigating the link between land registrat

29、ion and security from a completely different dimension. It focuses on the perspective of State-sponsored courts on landed property ownership security. To intimate what follows, the next section describes Ghana’s landhol

30、ding systems. Sections three and four discuss the land registration systems and sources of legal validity of landownership in Ghana respectively. The penultimate section presents and discusses the data collected from

31、the State-sponsored courts whilst the last section deals with conclusion.Salient features of Ghana’s landholding systemsIn Ghana, there are mainly two systems of landownership, viz, private and State landownership syste

32、ms. Private land refers to traditional land (land vested in communities represented by chiefs and families) whilst State land refers to land that has been acquired by the State from the private land sector using variou

33、s enactments. Sandwiched between the State and private land is vested land, which is a form of split ownership between the State and tradi- tional owners. Traditional land constitutes about 90% of the total land area i

34、n Ghana (Abdulai, 2010, chap. 6), implying that accessibility to land is mainly through the traditional land sector. The traditional system of landownership in Ghana has been extensively described in the work of Abdul

35、ai (2010), chap. 6, which is encapsulated as follows. The country has over 30 different ethnic groups and traditionally land is vested in communities represented by chiefs or families depending on the ethnic group. In

36、southern Ghana chiefs as traditional rulers sit in state on specially designed stools/chairs whilst in northern Ghana, they sit on specially pre- pared skin of an animal (cow or sheep). The symbol of authority is, there