Cleaning up land records

Business Standard     28th May 2020     Save    
QEP Pocket Notes

Context: Instead of forcing a top-down approach to clean up all the land records at once, it is more prudent to consolidate land records already collateralised under the formal financial systems.

Failures in Land Reforms:

  • Distorted Policies: due to the incapacity of states in addressing the issues has led to the deterioration of both landowners and farmers alike.
  • Poor Record Keeping: adding to the cost and risk to the lenders and non-updation leads to fewer incentives for the borrowers who are using the land as collateral.

Way Forward: Creating a land register with the already present collateralised land data with banks and financial institutions. This has the following advantages:

  • Quick and Easy Gains: As the data is already available with the financial institution, it will be easy to implement.
  • Distributed Risks: As with the case of Dematerialisation of stock records where the risks were distributed among various stakeholders.
  • Objectivity: Similar to credit profiling of borrowers to minimise the risks, banks can be objective in credit disbursal.
  • Minimum Government: There is minimal state interven­tion needed since it does not infringe the sovereignty of the government over the land records.
  • Technology Upgradation: The use of technology like blockchain to ensure integrity through distributed responsibilities becomes easier in this model.
  • Lower interest rates: With lower risks, banks are likely to increase loan to value ratio and could lower their interest as well.

Conclusion:

  • Real reform takes place when the incentives of multiple stakeholders are naturally aligned. The proposed land registry works in the best interests of all.
QEP Pocket Notes