To address these challenges of land regularization, a participatory FfP approach was developed in Tangará da Serra, in the state of Mato Grosso, Brazil during the year 2018. The initial goal of this pilot project was to develop a test case for the implementation of a fit-for-purpose methodology adapted to Brazil's legal and institutional framework, which could contribute to a viable model for a country-wide regularization process. Furthermore, an area in the Amazon region was chosen to test that reality. Therefore, the project was carried out by the Dutch Cadaster and Land Registry (Kadaster) and the State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), in collaboration with INCRA (the responsible national institution for rural land administration, cadaster, and certification), the local registry office ("cartório"), a local lawyer to represent the case, and a responsible engineer to certify the final maps.

The project consisted of a FFP approach on a small rural community with a selection of farmers, who could not afford to go through the usual process individually, starting with the social mapping of smallholder's properties that did not have any legal documents that officially stated their rights over their specific piece of land. This lack of formality is due to the time spent and financial burden that is required to seek regularization, and therefore, most of their parcels remained unregistered and unmapped.

The original focus of the project was to test a method for georeferencing properties (compliant with the accuracy standards demanded by the INCRA) as a viable solution for mapping tenure in adverse possession for smallholders in Brazil. By using a much more affordable technology and a social mapping strategy with the community including public inspection where neighbors sign to agree on the location of their boundaries, the intention was to optimize the timeframe and reduce costs at the maximum. As will be shown, this experience was very useful for all kinds of identification and land holding clarification.

First, Tangará da Serra is an interesting case because all types of land tenure and land use can be found there: commercial farms, small farmers, informal tenure, indigenous lands, natural areas, and state land, and all of them could be addressed in this pilot. Second, it is situated in the Amazon region where most land related problems are such as the overlapping of rights, the absence of clear rights, the invasion of public land, and others. Third, as all of the institutional stakeholders in Tangará da Serra had a keen interest in participating in this project, it was very feasible to prove the advantages of the FFP method with this arrangement. Especially considering the institutional complexity and limitations of the land registry as one of the top bottlenecks of securing land rights in Brazil, since in

22 Using an approximate exchange rate (from 15 June 2017) of 1 USD being 3,283 BR\$, according to the Brazilian Central Bank (https://www.bcb.gov. br/conversao).

23 Reydon (2010) [27] estimated the cost for georeferencing the whole country based on the regularizing experience at the municipality of São José das Pontas in the state of Pará.

Tangará da Serra they were partners, a strong case could be made in an integrated approach to improve land administration in the region.

In Figure 5, the mosaic of properties that are available on the cadaster from the state of Mato Grosso and the municipality of Tangará da Serra is visible. It offers a scattered view on the existing land situations and people relations: a discontinuous map of tenure, showing 'islands' of formalized properties within an uncertain background. In Mato Grosso, as in Brazil as a whole, there is still the need for a national complete georeferenced cadastral map (with continuous coverage of the whole country instead of the current 'patchwork' map of land tenure), registered, and integrated with all of these smaller plots and also those that still have not obtained formal recognition of their rights.

**Figure 5.** Land tenure mosaic of the Tangará da Serra region and intervention case location.

Tangará da Serra provides us with a unique opportunity of work in Mato Grosso and in Brazil due to its pioneer initiative of mapping all known properties that are already registered and by other secondary information from Brazil's official cadaster system that are within the municipality. Therefore, we were able to identify an unregistered community that could be formalized by the fit-for-purpose methodology. Then, the community of "São Joaquim do Boche", in the rural area of the municipality was chosen to be part of this initiative, with 60 known parcels that include formal georeferenced properties, informal georeferenced plots, and a vast majority of informal, not georeferenced plots. From those, we excluded the already registered plots and used the georeferenced ones for a precision survey comparison between thee FFP methodology and an official survey that had been done by a regular technician.

This test case started at the end of 2017 and within four months of coordinated work, 52 rural properties were regularized in January 2018 (with no costs to the smallholders, while complying with the current legal standards of the state of Mato Grosso and Brazil), as it can be seen on Figure 6. Although we managed to reduce the legal costs in the project to the minimum, there were still many costly procedures that are officially required during the regularization process such as the georeferencing by a verified engineer, the legal assistance provided by a lawyer, and the costs regarding the registry office practices. Nevertheless, the intentions on reducing costs allowed us to understand one important bottleneck for a national wide regularization, especially for smallholders, where many will not be able to pay for the process individually. As the Brazilian state is currently facing an enormous deficit, the public service is also not likely to cover these costs. Therefore, there is an urgent need to look for FfP solutions, leading to a fast, affordable, and complete land administration.

**Figure 6.** Images of the fit-for-purpose experience in Tangará da Serra.

The technical results obtained from this experience presented an average of error (using the R2 device, the most sophisticated one) of 0.31 meters, which is below the required standard. Furthermore, INCRA's normative requires a certified engineer to design the georeferenced map of the property (which is very costly), although an interpretation of the law allowed us to prepare the maps using the FfP approach and a hired engineer was only required to validate the maps, optimizing his work and the cost–benefit relation for the process of the regularization of smallholders. For private landowners, besides providing the legal security rights, it proved that social mapping helps smallholders to have considerably more secure tenure rights, which prevent conflicts.

The results from this project have already led to significant changes in national policies and made policy makers aware of the problem and complexity of the current requirements. Very much inspired by the technical results obtained by the FfP social mapping approach, an update in the National Cadastral System (SIGEF) was proposed and named as "SIGEF 2.0." The new proposed system will integrate the social mapping of adverse possessions of land use, confronting the obtained information with the already certified land properties (public and private) and (if not in conflict) certifying informal rural households. Through this, the INCRA will promote a "good-enough" tenure on land, securing land holders that are in areas where there are no conflicts of rights with any other claims in a complete mapping of the current situation.

#### **7. Conclusions**

As the burning and deforestation of the Brazilian Amazon forest and other rainforests in the world play such important roles in the global climate equilibrium and on the emission of greenhouse gases, its control plays a very important role in the SDG's agenda.

This article started showing that the deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon started growing again in 2019 and that it occurred mostly on public land or undesignated land. Based on recent studies, it was possible to show that these areas sum up to near 200 million ha, about 25% of the Brazilian surface. Not all of it is in the Amazon region or with forest cover, but in the Amazon region, this is the type of land that is mostly possible to be grabbed, deforested, and used for speculative reasons.

Furthermore, the article presented evidence, based on international literature, that clear property rights are essential to the preservation of primary forests all around the globe. The article concluded by showing one participatory land rights clarification case in the Amazon region using fit-for-purpose methodology to help forest preservation. From the study, it is expected to mainstream this methodology to help to clarify the ownership of small landholders, the rights of traditional population landholders as well as diminish potential conflicts over undesignated public land. It also aimed to find ways to improve the legislation and the institutional settings to make the clarification of property rights easier and thus ultimately help maintain the Amazon rainforest.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, B.R. and M.M.; methodology, B.R., M.M. and G.S.; software, N.P.; investigation, N.P. and G.S.; data curation, B.R., M.M., N.P. and G.S.; writing—original draft preparation, B.R.; writing—review and editing, B.R. and G.S.; project administration, B.R. and M.M.; supervision, B.R. and M.M.; funding acquisition, M.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** The funding of the publication costs for this article has been kindly provided by the School of Land Administration Studies, University of Twente, in combination with Kadaster International from the Netherlands.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable.

**Acknowledgments:** Acknowledge the contribution from the registrar José de Arimatéia for making this project viable and the good will of the people from Tangará da Serra.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

#### **References**

### *Article* **Quality Assurance for Spatial Data Collected in Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration Approaches in Colombia**

**Luz Angela Rocha \*, Jonathan Montoya and Alvaro Ortiz**

Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas, Bogotá 11021-110231588, Colombia<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(J.M<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(A.O.) **\*** Correspondence<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
**Abstract:** The Fit-For-Purpose Land Administration (FFPLA) approach uses flexible techniques under basic regulations, avoiding complicated systems and aiming to fulfill the objective of land tenure security for all. In addition, a land administration system should evolve, starting as a simple system in rural areas and gradually evolving into a more complex system in more populated areas where requirements and quality increase progressively. The system can develop to a precision system. Implementing the FFPLA methodology in Colombia has allowed processes to be developed for data capture in the field using real-time technology and efficient methods for information management. These processes are under quality control by applying technical specifications in alignment with the FFPLA principles. This article presents the results of creating a FFPLA quality assurance model, which includes the application of the ISO 19100 family of technical standards based on the product's life cycle and quality model concepts. Furthermore, the article documents essential aspects for controlling the quality of the parcel boundary data collected in the field, using direct and indirect methods to measure the applicable spatial data quality elements (logical consistency and positional accuracy) preserving FFPLA principles.

**Keywords:** land administration; fit for purpose; spatial data quality; spatial data quality assurance

#### **1. Introduction**

New policies in Colombia include the use of a multipurpose cadaster that allows for the formalization and registration of land and property rights in rural areas where cadaster systems and data are outdated. Many projects are being developed in Colombia that aim to update the Colombian cadaster, especially in rural areas. One of them is known as the 'Modernization Land Administration Project', the aim of which is the collection of cadastral data (physical, legal, and economic) as a basis for public policy design and implementation of a Land Management System, in which is essential the production of quality information according to the standards established by the cadaster and mapping agency (IGAC) [1]. Therefore, the possibility of implementing a fast, simple, and low-cost methodology for land administration, such as a Fit-For-Purpose approach, allows the right holders to register the boundaries of their parcels using a smartphone application connected to a GPS receiver. Using this methodology, landholders walk along the borders of their land to survey their parcels by collecting points, creating a polygon as a spatial representation of their land parcels. Then, in a public inspection process in a community meeting, the owners or possessors mutually agree on the boundaries of their parcels. This is related to an efficient process of conflict resolution and the parcels can be formalized by the government organizations in charge of this mission in the country [2].

In the Colombian context, the Fit for Purpose Land Administration methodology has been implemented in several pilot projects with the participation of governmental organizations involved in the land administration process and in join efforts with academic institutions such as ITC of Twente University and the Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas to evaluate this methodology in the Colombian context through a Memorandum

**Citation:** Rocha, L.A.; Montoya, J.; Ortiz, A. Quality Assurance for Spatial Data Collected in Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration Approaches in Colombia. *Land* **2021**, *10*, 496. https://doi.org/10.3390/ land10050496

Academic Editors: Stig Enemark and Christiaan Lemmen

Received: 9 February 2021 Accepted: 22 April 2021 Published: 7 May 2021

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

**Copyright:** © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

of Understanding with the Cadastre, Land Registry and Mapping Agency (Kadaster) of the Netherlands [3].

The implementation of Fit for Purpose Land Administration in Colombia is restricted by rigid rules regarding data acquisition procedures for cadastral information, especially in terms of the quality of the data. For this reason, it is necessary to determine how to control and measure the data quality for the data collected with the FFPLA methodology in order to ensure the correct application of the technical specifications for cadastral surveys in the country, and thus to show that it is not only about the question if the procedure of this methodology is applicable in Colombia, but also about ensuring the quality of the data.

This paper aims to show the results of a project that had as its primary purpose the creation of the Fit for Purpose Land Administration quality assurance model, which includes the application of ISO 19100 technical standards for spatial data and the concepts of the product life cycle and the FFPLA data quality model. In order to validate the quality assurance model, the quality elements of Positional Accuracy and Logical consistency were measured in order to demonstrate how well a dataset conforms to the product specifications and to determine whether FFPLA data are of sufficient quality for the Colombian multipurpose cadaster.

#### **2. Materials and Methods**

The Fit for Purpose Land Administration methodology is based on gradual quality upgrades, which must guarantee total coverage of cadastral data with adequate quality to be included in the Colombian Multipurpose Cadastral System. This implies that the capturing and recording of land information must be maintained permanently until gradually reaching the highest levels of quality; in other words, the methodology involves the following five levels of quality [4]:

In Colombia, the Fit for Purpose Land Administration approach was focused for the Land Titling process; for this reason, we considered starting with a basic quality level, which means quality levels one to four, and then making continuous improvements to reach optimal quality with level five [4].

#### *2.1. FFP Quality Assurance Model*

The Fit for Purpose (FFP) quality assurance model, as shown in Figure 1, integrates the methodology's production flow, the product's life cycle (stage 1 to stage 5), and the quality evaluation specifications (Q1 to Q5); therefore, this model involves the following stages in the Colombian context [5]:

**Figure 1.** Fit for Purpose (FFP) quality assurance model.

The quality assurance model comprises five types of conformance (Figure 1), namely Q1, Q2, and Q3, associated with the conceptual quality assessment, Q4, associated with the internal product evaluation, and Q5, referring to the valuation of data confronted with those in the terrain. The conformance results in functions Q1–Q5 are registered in the verification system, a conformance report that allows for a clear vision of the product's quality and for improvement actions to be carried out based on that report.

#### Quality Model

The FFP quality model determines the first activity as defining the quality of the product framed in the product life cycle, which involves five stages, as follows (Figure 2) [6]:

In this way, the FFPLA quality model is defined as a model describing the quality of spatial data as a component of the quality assurance model (Figure 2). The conceptual model of the FFP quality model includes three components according to ISO 19157:2013, namely requirements, conformance, and evaluation processes, which address the following items [7]:

**P1**—Product specification: here, the definition of the specification of the desired product is given such as is specified in the international standard ISO 19131;

**P2**—Quality objectives: the quality objectives and requirements are identified, addressing the quality elements of the ISO 19157 standard, thus giving complete product specifications; **P3**—Production specifications: this item addresses product control, establishing requirements and production guidelines, where established procedures, manuals, and documentation are related to quality;

**P4**—Quality evaluation, reporting, and monitoring specifications: this item focuses on control methods, routine checks, quality sampling, and aspects to be used to evaluate the quality of the elements of interest. The quality is checked with levels of conformity pre-established according to the ISO 19157 standard;

**P5**—Quality improvement specifications: this item establishes the need for specific methods and tools for quality improvement in the product and production processes; thus, feedback on the quality of the product in each production process allows for the execution of improvement actions.

In addition, the quality model establishes an action framework for the quantitative information of the dataset from the quality elements; the production through its requirements and technical specifications; the evaluation specification that establishes control and checking methods, sampling methods, the way in which the quality of the product should be informed; and the production stage, articulated by a quality assurance model and a general quality scheme [7].

As a relevant component of the quality model, the "Technical Specifications Profile for the Fit for Purpose LA methodology in Colombia" defines the FFPLA dataset's characteristics. At the same time, it defines appropriate items that allow for the control of elements such as spatial and temporal reference systems, the type of spatial data, the conceptual

model of the dataset, and others. Therefore, as part of the action framework, the evaluation of positional accuracy and logical consistency evaluation was carried out considering the FFP quality model and the FFP technical specifications profile [6].

Quality Standards for FFP

For this work, the ISO 19000 standards of geographic information, published by the Spanish AENOR Technical Standardization Committee 148 [8], were adopted by the Colombian government. Therefore, these series of standards were formalized in the year 2020 by the Geographic Institute "Agustin Codazzi", the cadastral and mapping agency of Colombia, to produce cadastral information in the frame of the multipurpose cadastral project. Consequently, for this study, these standards were explored, and the definition of how to apply them to the FFPLA quality assurance model is presented in Figure 3.

**Figure 3.** Standards of the FFP quality assurance model.

An analysis of the applicable Colombian regulatory framework for field data collection and geographic information management was also made, taking into account the principles of the Fit for Purpose methodology. In this way, Resolution 471 of 2020 of IGAC [9] establishes the measures, methods, and levels of conformity for each quality element of topographic data, without the concept of the quality assurance model that is open to producers, who have to report the data quality in a document. This resolution makes an adaptation to the quality measures of ISO 19157, such as the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), which uses an external direct method for quality evaluation and implies the use of more accurate external sources and a confidence level of 95% [9].

In addition, the authors analyzed the IGAC resolution 643 of 2018 [10], which adopts the technical specifications for planimetric surveying of massive rural property data within the framework of the social ordering of rural property implemented by the National Land Agency (ANT). Therefore, based on this resolution, in the case of rural premises, the positional accuracy must ensure a 95% level of conformity and an RMSE of 0.41 m.

Finally, due to the Colombian context, the FFP methodology focuses on the capture of parcel borders and legal information related to the property. In this work, the authors adopted the specifications for capturing borders given by the ANT, which indicate the application of a direct method using GNSS equipment for small parcels or orthophotos for large parcels in order for the parcels to reflect their real form on the terrain.

#### Quality Scheme for FFP

The concept of a quality scheme, according to the NTCA\_01003, is the materialization and synthesis of a quality model and is a matrix tool with product-related categories and attributes arranged in a simple and orderly manner. The categories are the objects, which are established in columns, and the quality elements to be evaluated are arranged in rows, with their respective measures and sampling methods to be applied according to the nature of the predefined product [7].

The quality scheme is a simple way of organizing and showing the information depicted in the FFP methodology's general quality model applied in Colombia (Figure 4).

The quality scheme in Figure 4 shows the geographic objects defined for the FFPLA approach in the Colombian context, such as spatial unit, anchor point, and reference object. The quality elements to be measured for each object include logical consistency, completeness, positional accuracy, thematic accuracy, and temporal accuracy [11]. The quality scheme also includes the identifiers of the quality measure (ID) [11], the quality measure expressed in rate (T) or indicators as count (Co) and Boolean (B), and the conformity expressed as a percentage (%). The yellow color indicates the sampling criteria objects selected for evaluation, and the peach color means the inspection is conducted for 100% of the data.

For instance, for the Anchor point object in Figure 4, the quality element "absolute positional accuracy" is presented in the following way [5]:

In the case of the positional accuracy quality element, sampling can be carried out by selecting the geographical objects; however, the selection of the elements based on the area can also be considered. For this work, the population was defined for the sampling first the object-based selection and then the object area-based selection, according to the specifications given by ANT [12].

A procedure was performed, as shown in Figure 5, to evaluate the quality of the data regarding the positional accuracy quality element [13].

**Figure 4.** Quality scheme.

**Figure 5.** Procedure to evaluate positional accuracy quality element for FFPLA.

#### **3. Results**

Once the quality assurance model was determined based on the quality model and the quality scheme for FFP, the quality elements according to the ISO 19157:2013 standard [11] were determined to evaluate the quality of the data collected in the Municipality of Apartadó (Vereda Los Mandarinos) in the year 2018 using the FFP methodology. The results of this work are presented below, and the points related to the parcels are classified as presented in Figure 6 [6]:

**Figure 6.** Types of points in the FFP methodology. Source [14].

#### *3.1. Positional Accuracy Evaluation*

The quality evaluation of the positional accuracy element [11] was performed for data collected in the Vereda Los Mandarinos, using the following product specifications [5]:

*Quality evaluation method:*

The quality evaluation method applied was direct intern, where the population was based on the polygon area, and by criteria sampling. Data acquisition involved fieldwork using a GPS receiver.

*Conformance results:*

**Table 1.** Classification of anchor points (conformance level).

*The sampling criteria* were based on the following elements:

The anchor points were classified into four classes, as shown in Table 1 [5].

The Root Mean Square Error of planimetry (RMSE-P) corresponds to a measure in meters (m) of additional control that verifies the data's behavior in the evaluation process (Table 1). The radius in meters (m) describes a circle where the true location of a point with 95% probability is located (Table 1). Classes A, B, C, and D establish a quality classification to discriminate different levels of data quality. In this way, at least 90% of the points must have a classification so that the dataset can be considered reliable and conforming (Figure 7).

The result of this evaluation of data quality in Los Mandarinos, regarding the positional accuracy quality element for the total 52 points, was 96%, thus meeting the established conformance levels, and the points were classified within one of the four classes.

#### *3.2. Logical Consistency Evaluation*

Next, the logical consistency was evaluated in the post-processing phase, which began by loading information into PostgreSQL from the ArcGIS Geodatabase, since the latest version of Collector for ArcGIS can generate information in a PostgreSQL scheme. The post-processing activities are shown in Figure 8.

**Figure 7.** Point distribution in the dataset and classification.

**Figure 8.** Activity diagram for post-processing stage.

The spatial database was built using the following three schemes with specific purposes (Figure 9) [14]:

aries. The database is prepared to store all participants' concepts, digital signatures and fingerprints in the public inspections.

After loading the information into the database, the spatial information is included in the form of a polygon feature; likewise, the data can also be stored as points and its accuracy. If the points do not exist, it is necessary to generate them, because they will apply the algorithms that adjusts from the polygon representations of the parcel boundaries to real line (boundary)-based topology (starting from the situation as visualized in Figure 6). Figure 10 represents the objects and activities performed in the load schema.

**Figure 10.** Objects and activities for the load schema.

A distance tolerance between points is defined according to the scale. Those points (from polygon representations of the different parcels) within the tolerance distance will be merged unless a reference point is associated with a boundary parcel that includes the merge points. The adjustment between points is accomplished by the "Weighted Symmetric Adjustment Algorithm" (WSAA), which works with two (Figures 11 and 12), three (Figures 13 and 14), or four points, and the function of which is to find an adjustment point, where the other points converge, using the accuracy of the GPS points to obtain the best locations for the placement of each point.

**Figure 11.** Symmetric point between points A and B.

**Figure 12.** Weighted symmetric point between points A and B.

**Figure 13.** Symmetric point between points A, B, and C.

**Figure 14.** Weighted symmetric point between points A, B, and C.

For example, suppose that two points in two parcel boundaries have been captured with a GPS device (A and B), at different times, but which reference the same point. The distance between points A and B is 156.5 cm. If the precision of the GPS collected points is not captured, the best alternative is the automatic adjustment of the two points in a common position to find the midpoint of the line that joins the two points, assuming that the real point is found somewhere between the two points in the space between them, as shown in Figure 11.

However, as the accuracy values associated with each point are provided, an automatic adjustment can be made that favors the point with the best accuracy. Assuming that the real point must be somewhere between the two points, the two points A and B are identified as the limits of the distances of the accuracy of each point in the direction of the other point. Then, the midpoint of the line formed between the accuracy limits is determined, as shown in Figure 12. In the example, the new point is 19.91 cm nearer to point A with better accuracy.

When there are three points as an input, none of which register the accuracy, the algorithm finds the barycenter of the triangle, as shown in Figure 13.

In the event that the three points in three boundaries register accuracy, a new position is determined for each point as a percentage of the distance, according to the accuracy of the distance of the barycenter of the triangle, assuming that the adjustment error is in the barycenter direction of the triangle formed by the three points. Once the new points are found, a new triangle is created with a new barycenter as an adjustment point (Figure 14).

Figure 15 shows an example with some rural parcels where the Weighted Symmetric Adjustment Algorithm (WSAA) was successfully applied, which was one of the real cases where this algorithm was tested for the total number of parcels (100%) of the study area of Los Mandarinos.

**Figure 15.** Properties and their points before (**a**), and after (**b**) adjustment.

Once the adjustment is made, the parcels' geometries are updated in the database in the Survey scheme (Figure 16).

**Figure 16.** Structured dataset of Los Mandarinos.

#### **4. Discussion**

The quality assurance model for the "Fit-For-Purpose Land Administration" approach in Colombia is the framework of action of the implementation of the FFPLA methodology, which allows for quality control of the data collected in the field for the purpose of land titling in the country. The model supports the creation of a product quality life cycle and a quality model in the Colombian context, as shown in Figure 2.

In order to apply the quality assurance model, one of the objectives of the project was to measure the quality of FFPLA data. This objective was accomplished because the project showed how well a dataset conformed to its product specification and was able to determine whether FFPLA data were of sufficient quality for the Colombian multipurpose cadaster, specifically in the case of positional accuracy and logical consistency. The results show that the data quality assurance model for the FFPLA approach allows one to evaluate how the dataset meets the criteria of the product specifications defined for FFP data according to the quality scheme shown in Figure 4. In addition, as the quality scheme is a tool for supporting the understanding and application of the quality model, it also allowed us to understand the methods, measures, and the evaluation procedures for the quality elements and attributes of the dataset in order to accomplish the required levels of conformity [10,13].

The technical specification profile for the positional accuracy quality element was an essential issue for the project and permitted us to evaluate the quality of the dataset according to the national standards and ISO 19157. The quality classification permits one to determine whether the classes are heterogeneous; in other words, the anchor points in a parcel may have all the quality classes, but classes C and B are pre-dominant for this evaluation since they are related to scales of representation between 1:1000 and 1:5000 in those areas with low land densities. As a result, the quality evaluation of the positional accuracy for the complete dataset (52 points) was 96% in conformity, a value that is adequate for the FFP perspective.

The weighted symmetric adjustment algorithm (WSAA) allows one to save time in the topology construction, and it processes most cases to adjust the boundaries between neighbors. It can be used with rural and urban properties effectively with the appropriate tolerance values. However, a review of the results is needed to ensure that everything was correctly processed. It is important to highlight that the algorithm was built specifically for this FFP project.

As the FFP quality assurance model is essentially producer driven, it is important to include the level of conformance that permits the usability of the data to be evaluated from the user's point of view. In the same way, it is suggested that the other quality elements, such as completeness, also be evaluated.

One of the problems in measuring the positional accuracy element in the country under study is that Colombia experiences tectonic plate displacements that can reach several centimeters per year, which generate accuracy problems between geographic datasets.

It was, therefore, necessary to adapt the MAGNA-SIRGAS reference system (WKID: 4686) and the reference year to 2018. Therefore, not only should international standards such as ISO 19157 be taken into account, but they must also be adaptable to national standards generated by the geographical and physical conditions of the country.

#### **5. Conclusions and Recommendations**

The study results were positive, showing that the FFPLA methodology can be established for the land administration processes in the country, as framed by the Modernization Land Administration project with a highly participatory approach and with a simple user interface [15]. This concerns not only the implementation of processes, but also the quality of the data collected in the field according to the standards used in Colombia for a rural cadastral survey. However, as the FFPLA methodology is still in the process of being implemented, this work is significant because it is the first project carried out in Colombia to apply new FFPLA data quality standards.

Finally, in future work, it is recommended that the FFP quality assurance model be applied in the process of implementation of the FFP methodology to facilitate the comparison and selection of the dataset best suited to application needs and technical requirements in the framework of the multipurpose cadaster and according to variations in the data of the terrain.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization and writing—original draft preparation, all authors; writing—review and editing, L.A.R.; J.M. and A.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** Funding of the publication costs for this article was kindly provided by the School of Land Administration Studies, University of Twente, in combination with Kadaster International, the Netherlands.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable.

**Acknowledgments:** The authors would like to acknowledge the support of Kadaster International, ITC Faculty, University of Twente, and the Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

#### **References**

### *Article* **Do Design Science Research and Design Thinking Processes Improve the 'Fit' of the Fit-For-Purpose Approach to Securing Land Tenure for All in South Africa?**

**Simon Hull and Jennifer Whittal \***

Division of Geomatics, School of Architecture, Planning and Geomatics, University of Cape Town, Private Bag X3, Rondebosch, Cape Town 7701, South Africa<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
**\*** Correspondence<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
**Abstract:** In South Africa, land tenure security is a challenge for 60% or more of the population who hold interests in land outside of the formal system of registered title. There is a need for the cadastral and land administration systems to be reshaped, and for new land tenure forms to be developed to record all land rights and interests so as to improve land tenure security for all. In this paper, we undertake a reflective retrospective of the processes of land administrative reform in South Africa using a thematic framework that includes fit-for-purpose, design science research, and design thinking processes. Literary sources are coded using the thematic framework to identify potential contributions of foregrounding design science research and design thinking in fit-for-purpose land administration (FFP LA) approaches. Design science research paired with tools of behavioral science add value in understanding the context, problems, needs, and objectives and in communicating the results of critical reflection. The design thinking process has much to offer in capitalizing on the human abilities of empathy, deep understanding, and challenging assumptions, setting the scene for unconstrained creative thinking. Design science research and design thinking within FFP LA may promote innovations in land administration systems reform initiatives that deliver restorative justice in the South African land sector.

**Keywords:** land rights and tenure; land administration; fit-for-purpose approach; human rights; design science research; design thinking

#### **1. Introduction**

Post-colonial countries may exhibit an awkward combination of *inherent* and *inherited* land administration systems. The *inherent* system is that which was already in existence prior to colonization. It was administered by traditional authorities and structures according to cultural norms and standards. These prioritized the relationships between people and land for purposes of landholding (both individual and communal), grazing, agriculture, and other such land uses [1]. Colonization introduced an *inherited* land administration system (LAS) that is based on the norms and standards of the colonizing nation. This 'formal' LAS was designed to secure property rights for the colonizers and promote a land market [2]. The inherited view of land as a commodity was in opposition to the inherent view of land as an integral part of the community and an essential aspect of the indigenous social network [3]. The inherent LAS was thus largely ignored by the inherited system. However, colonial authorities codified the inherent customary traditions creating official customary law. They also employed traditional authorities with elevated political powers to serve the needs of the colony rather than to continue the system of pre-colonial governance. Thus, the inherent LAS post-colonization is no longer a true reflection of its pre-colonial self and exhibits both inherited and inherent attributes [4].

The resulting duality of the LAS, coupled with intentionally discriminatory colonial and (in South Africa) apartheid policies, has led to land dispossession being a symbol of

**Citation:** Hull, S.; Whittal, J. Do Design Science Research and Design Thinking Processes Improve the 'Fit' of the Fit-For-Purpose Approach to Securing Land Tenure for All in South Africa?. *Land* **2021**, *10*, 484. https:// doi.org/10.3390/land10050484

Academic Editor: Stig Enemark

Received: 23 March 2021 Accepted: 29 April 2021 Published: 4 May 2021

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

**Copyright:** © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

oppression [5] that cuts to the core of dignity and personhood [1]. This continues to be manifest as land tenure insecurity for those land rights-holders who live outside of the inherited LAS. Estimates suggest that in 2011 this was the reality for 60% or more of the population of South Africa who live in the so-called communal areas (former apartheid 'homelands'), as farm laborers and their families, in informal settlements, and on former mission stations [6]. Although the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (the Constitution) [7] recognizes these customary and 'informal' land rights, such recognition has not carried through to a national LAS. Instead, South Africa has a fragmented LAS characterized by a legislated and well-functioning 'formal' (inherited) system of land registration and cadaster existing alongside an off-register, informal (amended inherent) system administered by traditional authorities, civil society groups, non-government organizations (NGOs), slumlords, and anyone else with the appropriate acquired or appointed authority. Such fragmentation is detrimental to the realization of the objectives of Section 25 of the Constitution, particularly sub-sections (5)–(9) of the Constitution. These sub-sections obligate the State to promote equitable access to land for her citizens, improve tenure security for those whose tenure is insecure due to colonial and apartheid laws and policies, and allow for restitution of land for those dispossessed of land under the same. According to an advisory panel report on land reform and agriculture constituted by the presidency [8], read with the *Report of the High Level Panel on the Assessment of Key legislation and the Acceleration of Fundamental Change* [9], this fragmented LAS is a major contributor to land tenure insecurity in South Africa.

Thus, there is a need for the South African land administration and cadastral systems to be reshaped to allow for the recognition and recordation of rights and interests in land in the country and the improvement of tenure security for all. However, the manner of this reshaping must consider the pressing need for restorative justice, not only related to the outcomes of reform, but also in respect of the process through which it is conducted. Such reform should also improve economic development through improved investment opportunities (for local and international investors) and clear administrative procedures. South Africa's National Development Plan [10] has broad and bold aims to eliminate poverty and reduce inequality by 2030. These 'Vision 2030 objectives are linked to transformation and development and have relevance to a FFP LA system design accompanied by a range of strategies and programs—some formal and others that have not been passed through democratic processes of governance [1].

The goal of increasing recognition and recordation of rights and interests in land and of delivering security of tenure for all is in keeping with Aspirations 1, 3, 4, 6, and 7 of the African Union's Agenda 2063 and associated calls to action [11], as well as several of the Sustainable Development Goals (most notably goals 1, 2, 5, 11, and 15) [12], summarized in Table 1. The FFP LA approach is promoted as one way of addressing this need [13].

**Table 1.** Aspirations of the African Union and SDGs that align with FFP LA.

FFP LA is intended to include processes that lead to a deep understanding of problem situations and needs, and to design solutions to meet these. FFP LA seeks to "understand the social, cultural, legal and institutional dynamics of their own Communities" [13], but achieving this at all scales and for all role-players, particularly in complex contexts, is challenging. The approach focusing on the spatial, legal, and institutional frameworks of FFP LA may lead to false assumptions of hegemony and fail to reveal contest between needs within an area or state. Behavioral science and human-centered approaches have different points of entry and focus. Foregrounding their strengths within the FFP LA approach may be useful to address South African land challenges that endure even after more than two decades of change—a deep understanding and creative approaches are required. The consequent aim of this paper is to identify contributions of design thinking and design science research paired with behavioral science to enhance the appropriateness of the FFP process in addressing the shortcomings of land administration and improving tenure security for all South Africans.

It may be noted that the authors do not separate 'fit' from 'purpose'. Purpose may stand alone, and the purpose of LAS reform is discernible from the reviewed literature: in South Africa, the general purpose is to address land tenure insecurity. This problem situation demands creative solutions developed from a deep understanding of complexity in context. The method/approach adopted should fit this purpose. In this paper, we argue that the method/approach can benefit from foregrounding design science research (paired with behavioral science) and design thinking into an FFP approach. This would lead to a better 'fit' of the method/approach to the purpose.

This paper adopts a critical realist ontology as per Whittal [14] and Carlsson [15]. This overcomes the toolbox approaches of pragmatism and experimentation associated with positivist ontologies, and the purely social/behavioral approaches associated with constructivism. Carlsson [15] critiques ad-hoc pluralist approaches that fail in assessing causes for success and failure, and the attempts of others to mix the approaches of pragmatism, experimentation, and social/behavioral science without a defensible ontological position. Critical realism overcomes the drawbacks of some common approaches and even of the ad-hoc combinations of these. It also supports the use of a suitable suite of mixed methodologies. Critical realism underpins this investigation and should be considered as a suitable theoretical approach for interventions aimed at improving land administration systems that are 'fit-for-purpose'.

#### **2. Theoretical Framework**

#### *2.1. Overview*

The FFP approach has been developed with extensive consultation and testing. It is not the aim of this paper to critique the FFP approach directly, but to explore approaches that may offer improvements in designing interventions for challenging situations, especially for the South African context. The findings should have relevance for similar post-colonial states. Design science research partnered with behavioral science (DSR-BS) and design thinking (DT) are identified as potentially complimentary approaches to the FFP. DSR-BS is chosen since it is highlighted by Ça ˘gda¸s and Stubkjær [16] as a suitable over-arching approach from their detailed analysis of literature on cadastral research. The DT approach is included since it is starting to receive traction in organizational and policy change where its human-centered approach to innovation is valued [17,18].

The research seeks to reflect on land administration systems (LAS) reform in South Africa in a retrospective analysis of relevant literature. The thematic framework of the DSR-BS, FFP, and DT approaches is used to assess whether the FFP LA approach can be improved by the inclusion of DT and DSR-BS approaches in guiding a process of LAS reform. Improvements to the approach adopted in reform processes may increase the likelihood of meeting identified outcomes (success), delivering solutions that last (sustainability), and that meet the needs of all stakeholders—the State and its organizations, and the land rights-holders, both individually and collectively (significance) [19].

#### *2.2. Fit for Purpose*

*Significance* is an important factor for ensuring the *success* and *sustainability* of LAS [19]. This means that LAS should use tools and procedures and deliver outcomes that are relevant to the end-users: the citizens and communities served by the system. A lack of significance may lead to the proposed system being abandoned by the would-be beneficiaries and a reversion to traditional, indigenous, extra-legal ways of doing things [20]. The issue of significance is partly addressed through a LAS designed along FFP guidelines.

FFP LAS "should be designed for the purpose of managing current land issues within a specific country or region" using an approach that is participatory, inclusive, flexible, and focused on citizens' needs [21]. Twelve principles grouped into three frameworks provide the foundation of the approach [13] (see Table 2). The spatial framework is concerned with how land is occupied and used. The legal (and regulatory) framework is necessary to support the adoption and implementation of the FFP approach. The institutional framework is required for effective management and administration of land rights and resources, and the delivery of accessible and inclusive services.

Implementation of the FFP approach to land administration is proposed to follow several steps [22], beginning with an analysis of the country context and ending with a benefits analysis (see Figure 1). The country context analysis is a crucially important first step because interventions should be designed to fit the local context [23,24]. Thus, the FFP approach is noted to be a set of *guidelines to be tailored for individual country contexts*, not a set of principles for guaranteed success [25]. An analysis of the existing spatial, legal, and institutional frameworks provides a baseline assessment for the gap analysis: what is the existing situation, what is the desired situation, and what needs to change to achieve the desired situation [26]? Using the FFP principles and frameworks listed in Table 2 as a guide, the country-specific strategy can then be implemented. Capacity development is a core concern and implementation should follow an incremental approach using intermediate goals and objectives. Detailed instruction manuals should be developed to provide guidance for all stakeholders to ensure that a consistent, cohesive approach is followed. Finally, an analysis of anticipated economic, environmental, and social benefits should include a cost comparison to indicate the anticipated benefits of adopting a FFP approach to land administration and hence garner political support for the process.

Taking the cautions raised by Barry [25] into consideration, these implementation steps should not be considered linear because any intervention changes the context. An analysis of the new country context should thus follow the benefits analysis cyclically to make sure that the newly designed and implemented LAS is 'fit' for the changed context (see Figure 1).

**Figure 1.** Country-level FFP implementation approach [22]

#### *2.3. Design Science Research Paradigm*

The design science research paradigm is becoming mainstream in Information System (IS) research. Most modern organizational management theories rely on a theory of design, focusing on creating or reforming the organization rather than an artefact or service [18]. These include systems thinking approaches to organizational change [18] as a necessary application of behavioral science to ascertain the problem situation in context prior to any intervention. This methodology has been followed in many cadastral research projects [16]. The design science research paradigm draws on existing knowledge and theories in the design of an artefact to meet the identified need in the form of an IS or to reform an existing IS. It considers both the design of the process of reform as well as the design of the product or artefact that results [27]. Thus, assessments of performance management should include assessment of both the process and of the product/artefact.

2.3.1. The Alignment of the Design Science Research Paradigm with Theories and Methods Underpinning LAS Reform

Ça ˘gda¸s and Stubkjær [16] promote the cadastral design science research paradigm consisting of socio-technical systems theory for the design of a Land Tenure Information System (LTIS) artefact or intervention, possibly augmented by Searle's theory of social reality (STS) [28]. STS includes technical elements that do not display intent, stakeholders (natural persons, collectives/groups, legal persons, and organizations) that do possess intentionality, and social elements such as laws, norms, and practices. Searle's theory separates physical reality (tangible) from institutional reality (which is real but not necessarily tangible). Institutional reality in the cadastral domain includes the rules of land rights and tenure codified into cadastral statutory law, African customary laws of landholding and administration, and legitimate, extra-legal but uncodified rules that may exist in informal urban social tenure contexts, as examples.

Additionally, within the design science research paradigm, methods from behavioral science, such as soft systems methodology (SSM) [29], are promoted by Ça ˘gda¸s and Stubkjær [16] to understand the context in which the LTIS is to operate. SSM has been (and continues to be) used to good effect in a number of case studies conducted within the research group of the authors, such as in Whittal [14] and Mabesa [30]. More recently, Augustinus has highlighted the explanatory power of SSM [31]. The Two Streams Analysis of SSM includes Gap Analysis, in which the difference between the current state and the desired state is identified [29]. Change management processes are necessary to move from the present state to the desired state [14]. Social Network Analysis (SNA) [32] adds the sensitivity to transactions between stakeholders. Power differentials, differing and even competing goals, and other aspects of relational complexity may be appreciated and modeled using SNA. New institutional economics (NIE) [33] focuses on institutions (intangible rules, transactions, and laws) and organizations relating to the cadaster (such as the Surveyor-General's and Deeds Offices, and professional registration bodies). NIE is promoted as underpinning the evaluation of efficiency and adoption of the artefact [16].

The pairing of design science research processes and behavioral science (DSR-BS) adds important sensitivity to context—design science research on its own is inadequate.

#### 2.3.2. Relevance of DSR-BS Processes to LAS Reform

Design science research is conducted according to the following six steps [16]:

As mentioned, for design science research based on a critical realist ontology, the socio-technical system and process of change, not only the artefact, would be evaluated and results communicated in steps 5 and 6 [27]. This compliments the FFP process. Additionally, the pairing of behavioral science methodologies with the design science research process (DSR-BS) adds sensitivity to context and hence value to the FFP process. However, focus on contextual analysis in FFP is at the spatial/legal/institutional level—the DSR-BS approach does not refocus the analysis to the individual, family, kinship group, or customary area, which may be necessary. Additionally, the DSR-BS does not appear to add value in the design phase.

#### *2.4. Design Thinking Process Model*

Design thinking (DT) is at its heart a human-centered approach that may help to solve complex problems that will not submit to technical-only solutions [35]. DT is used in policy reform and service design and follows developments in organizational theory (reinventing government, New Public Management (NPM), entrepreneurial state) [17]. There is an assumption that innovation goes hand in hand with disruption rather than through gradual processes of incremental change as are preferred in bureaucracies (though it is noted that this assumption can be challenged) [17]. What DT brings to the change management field is "a framework for more participatory and cross-disciplinary approaches to social problems" [17].

Public Sector Innovation Labs (PSI labs) adopt DT—an inclusive and experimental approach to problem solving that provides a balance to rational positivism with the inclusion of empathy, curiosity, emotion, and intuition. With respect to policy intervention case studies, various steps are identified by McGann [17]. However, these are not wellaligned to pure DT, relying instead on the instrumental rationality of positivist framings of 'evidence-based policymaking' [17].

Of important interest to FFP approaches to land administration reform, DT is complementary as it identifies that "Participatory, user-centred [*sic.*] approaches may excel in producing ethnographically informed insights and in collaboratively generating ideas that have 'buy in' from stakeholders." [17] Furthermore, DT promotes "enhancing the lives of individuals" [18]. This aim aligns with the aspect of Significance highlighted by Hull and Whittal [19,36]. In addressing the challenges of FFP LA in complex situations, DT may

offer an interesting approach to "deliver implementable solutions to problems that are structurally complex and necessitate interconnected solutions" [17]. A core premise of DT is that the world is complex.

The usual approach in design thinking follows these steps:

Some of the steps are familiar to well-known change processes (steps 1, 2, 4, and 5). However, the framing of step 1 as 'empathize' firmly positions the approach as humancentered and encourages the researcher to see through the eyes of the other. Step 3 is novel—this step encourages participants to think differently, expand their understanding, and be innovative in 'ideating'.

In contrast to DSR-BS, DT has at its essence imagination, cognitive processes, the "spirit of creativity and value" [18] within all elements and units of an organization, and creative inquiry (including synthesis—informed intuition) in the process of problem solving. Creative inquiry includes four 'moments' [18]:

Buchanan highlights creative inquiry as the most essential feature of DT, but DT does not end with concepts and ideas—embedded in DT is making and doing [18].

Most importantly for LAS reform,

"The principle of design ... is grounded in the quality of experience for all of those served by the organization. This includes the individuals who directly use the products and services of the organization, but it also includes those who are affected by the internal and external operations of the organization and by those in society at large who are ultimately affected by the vision and strategies of the organization". [18]

Buchanan explores the meaning of "experience". It can refer to an individual's perceptions and sensations, but could also refer to an individual's relationship with the environment (consisting of "objects and activities, signs and symbols" [18]). This relationship is initiated by human intent and human selection of certain aspects of the environment with which to engage. Human engagement creates meanings for that individual. Ideally, DT enhances the unity between humans and their environment—it removes obstacles to meaningful human experiences. These obstacles can be physical/practical, ones of intellectual understanding, and emotional engagement. Furthermore, Buchanan reflects on Asmal, in reference to the Constitution, that:

"Human-centered design is fundamentally an affirmation of human dignity. It is an ongoing search for what can be done to support and strengthen the dignity of human beings as they act out their lives in variety social, economic, political, and cultural circumstances ... the quality of design is distinguished not merely by technical skill of execution or by aesthetic vision but by the moral and intellectual purpose toward which technical and artistic skill is directed.". [35]

A truly FFP LAS will strive to deliver this type of unity between all stakeholders (internal and external) and the system in order to deliver on sustainability, success, and significance [19,36], but perhaps most importantly in South Africa, to deliver on human dignity for all who suffered extreme loss of dignity in the colonial and Apartheid years. DT may assist in this process.

#### *2.5. Comparison*

In comparison, these methodologies all begin with understanding the context. Design thinking stands apart in its human-centered approach to this process. It highlights empathizing with the stakeholders, involving engagement with their feelings. Feelings are necessarily related to the stakeholders' experiences. The FFP process is specific in its analysis of "country context" which could include aspects such as history, development, legal pluralism, and culture—both organisational and societal. The design science research paradigm is importantly paired with behavioural research methodologies for this phase—on its own it would be insensitive to context. It is complementary to the FFP process.

Each of the methods includes a stage of identifying the problem. All methods include evaluation/analysis of the results. The DSR-BS methodology requires the design and development of an intervention and a demonstration of the effectiveness thereof. The DT approach has a significant addition of the ideate phase, while its human-centered focus throughout the process is significantly different from the other two.

The thematic framework thus derived appears as Table 3 and forms the basis for the analysis.

**Table 3.** Thematic framework: the DSR-BS, FFP, and DT approaches.

#### **3. Materials and Methods**

#### *3.1. Materials*

This paper draws on a range of secondary data sources including papers, reports, policies, critiques, books, media articles, and others to identify challenges relating to land reform processes and delivery in South Africa since 1994: the advent of democratic government. These sources reflect on land reform policy, general nationwide implementation, and specific land reform interventions that cover a variety of contexts such as urban, peri-urban, rural, and customary communal land reform to improve land tenure security. International and sub-Saharan literature, where identified as relevant to the use of these approaches in the South African context, is also included.

The strategy used to identify the sources was as follows:

1. Using various combinations of keywords (FFP LA, FFP, fit-for-purpose, land administration, land reform, South Africa, Africa), online search engines (Google Scholar, Google Books, Google, ResearchGate, International Federation of Surveyors (FIG), University of Cape Town (UCT) library databases including EBSCOhost, Elsevier, Emerald, HeinOnline, Springer, Taylor and Francis, Thomson Reuters) were interrogated for peer-reviewed journal articles, doctoral theses, conference proceedings, books, policy documents, and technical reports.

A list of the 37 sources and coding data is presented in Appendix A. Saturation sampling logic was used—the sources are not intended to be inclusive, but representative. Sufficient sources were included such that additional sources are not likely to cause data divergence or change the research outcomes.

#### *3.2. Coding and Extraction Process*

Guba [37] suggests that researchers should establish an audit trail that allows someone else to examine the process of data collection and analysis. To this end, we made use of computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) called Nvivo. CAQDAS is useful for making sense of dense, detailed qualitative data in a variety of different formats: textual documents, audio-visual recordings, and pictures [38–40]. Categorization of the source documents and coding were undertaken using this software. This allows for transparency of data analysis, improves the credibility of the findings, and makes it possible for others to replicate the research (dependability).

The source texts were imported into NVivo version 12 and categorized as non-South African and South African. Each source was then read through, coding text that relates to the thematic framework in Table 3 as illustrated by the concept map in Figure 2. The coding process involves selecting text in NVivo and associating that text with one or more elements in the thematic framework—these are called codes. Each theme and its associated coded text were then extracted using the export functions of NVivo. The result is a set of documents, each one containing the selected source texts that relate to that code.

**Figure 2.** Concept map of coding in NVivo.

#### **4. Results**

The text extracts relevant to each code and subcode were analyzed. This involved the researchers synthesizing this information using the thematic codes illustrated in Figure 2 The issues identified are not as relevant to this paper as whether the DSR-BS, FFP, and DT processes would be sensitive to them and could direct appropriate responses. The full suite of themed issues resulting from the coding would be valuable data for another study.

#### *4.1. The Process of Understanding the Context*

The assessment of context is tackled differently in the various approaches as shown in Table 4.

**Table 4.** Extract of context aspects.

DSR-BS relies on a partnership with behavioural science tools that focus on description since DSR-BS does not explicitly include this aspect. FFP focuses on analysis and in particular on the spatial/legal/institutional frameworks, while DT focuses on empathizing with the needs. Embedded in empathy is understanding through the eyes of the stakeholders, in particular, the beneficiaries of land tenure projects. For this reason, the DT "empathize needs" is placed at this level of the intervention—it is impossible to empathize without an understanding of the context and situation—so the process of understanding the context is implied. Similarly, analysis of the context and frameworks relies on knowledge of these—usually in some kind of descriptive form. The three approaches are thus seen as complementary—FFP and DT relies on DSR-BS while DT relies on FFP as well.

There are few if any land tenure interventions that do not spend a good deal of effort on describing the history of the land issues in a country—South African texts show no exception. The essential aspect of understanding land institutions and their functioning in context is also a given. In many cases, the increasingly popular systems thinking approaches are used to describe and assess frameworks, for example legislative, technical, and political systems; e.g., [13,29,41]. The Human-Rights-Based Approach is endorsed as promoting integration between these systems while also promoting the acknowledgement and fulfillment of the South African State's vertical obligations [42] (i.e., the obligations of the state towards their citizens). Unfortunately, a Human-Rights-Based Approach is seldom or only very briefly mentioned in State policy (e.g., in the Communal Land Tenure Policy [43]) with a shift away from this approach to one of indirect rule used in past oppressive regimes [26].

A combined approach involving description and analysis of the context, while empathizing to include sensitivity to stakeholder needs, would be more useful than any of the approaches alone. This would help in complex cases, where there are unhelpful power relations, and to understand the impact of new technologies in the context [25,26,41,42]. It would include identification of the drivers of change in context—this is an important aspect that influences design later on in the process [14,26]. Hull and Whittal [42] highlight that conceptions of human rights and land rights are culturally nuanced—land rights should be viewed through a socio-cultural lens in the understanding of context. Seeing through a socio-cultural lens different from your own is the essence of empathy, endorsing the DT approach.

Pushing this step further to empathize with the needs of stakeholders also has the potential to:

ple [26], and multigenerational views of landholding that include subjects that are deceased or not yet born [47]; and

• understand customary laws and institutions and community perceptions of their functioning [26].

In the South African context, appreciating such aspects is key to restoring dignity through delivering secure land tenure to all. Furthermore, empathizing facilitates an understanding of land as an essential aspect of a way of life underscored by ubuntu and human solidarity—prioritized in South African land policy [44,48].

#### *4.2. The Problem Identification Process*

Assessing the problems prior to any intervention to improve land tenure security is a widely accepted and essential element of development programming. Without adequate understanding of the problems, a solution cannot be designed or will be poorly designed [25]. Table 5 gives the problem identification aspects of the various approaches.

**Table 5.** Extract of problem identification aspects.

The DSR-BS approach specifies problem identification to motivate change. With the FFP approach, this appears to be implied by the analysis of the context discussed in the previous section. The DT approach specifies the definition of needs and problems. These will be influenced by the rich data resulting from empathizing in the prior stage. The aim of this section is to assess the process of problem identification rather than to reflect the problems, needs, and motivations so identified.

#### 4.2.1. Use of a Framework

In some cases, an established framework is used to assess problems. Bennet and Alemie [49] use the framework of Zimmerman—their paper highlights a number of issues, some of which have relevance to the overall process discussed here: capacity development and institutional support, communication and public–private collaboration, as well as use of standards in assessment and monitoring and evaluation processes. Enemark and McLaren [22] suggest using the Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF) developed by the World Bank [50]. Zein assesses business processes using SWOT analysis and assessing the legislation [51]. Flores et al., in designing a FFP response, relied on an extensive literature review and grounded theory case study approach [52]. They propose the FGAF–FFP Governance Assessment Framework, which views the seven FFP principles as governance elements. These are assessed using their Governance Assessment Tool (GAT). Hull proposes a framework developed to deliver land administration systems that are significant, successful, and sustainable [26]. This framework incorporates many aspects of others but is assessed for application in customary land rights contexts. Hull also reviews the theories underpinning land administration reform and places these on a continuum from conservative to adaptation and replacement theories [19]. He contends that "the theory informing development [often] goes unspoken and unnoticed. Conscious decisions at the theory level are important, especially when seeking to undertake cadastral systems development in contexts differing from well-understood western norms, because the value and meaning of land to land rights-holders is context-specific" [26]. Some frameworks will be more sensitive to certain types of problems than others—the choice of framework is important.

#### 4.2.2. Reading and Listening

With regard to methods used to identify problems in South Africa, there have been some very extensive summits, investigations, and reports. The 2005 Land Summit engaged 1500 stakeholders and academics. The investigation that resulted in the High Level Panel report of 2017 involved multiple stakeholder engagement and public hearings across the country supported by two national colloquia on land reform [9]. Submissions from stakeholders and academics as well as working groups, consultative round tables, and commissioned reports were used to identify issues relating to a task list of identified themes. The 2019 Final Panel Report of the Presidential Advisory Panel on Land Reform (the Advisory Panel Report) underwent a diagnostic process that began with existing information and included a detailed consultative process [8].

Empathy for problems and stakeholder needs is an aspect of DT. The White Paper on South African Land Policy of 1997 identified deep resentment over layers of ongoing dispossession of land rights and interests [44]. The 2005 Land Summit suggested a Restitution Truth and Reconciliation Committee at which people's experiences of dispossession could be heard. The aim would have been to bring healing and to restore relationships, but this suggestion early in the process of land reform was never enacted. Healing the wounds of the past is also identified in the National Development Plan of 2012 [10]. However, communal area residents have little voice [5]. The approach reflected by Abubakari et al. [45] also borders on empathy with detailed investigations into the effects of codification, and who was affected. The High Level Panel report of 2017 as well as the 2019 Advisory Panel Report paid particular attention to hearing first-hand the lived experiences of people who live in South Africa [8,9]. The Advisory Panel Report highlights that "rural and urban spaces define people's identities, social standing and the participation in the mainstream economy". This reveals that empathy for how problems affect stakeholders is an important aspect of the process, further endorsing the DT approach. Abubakari et al. [45] highlight the importance of identifying problems with sensitivity to geographical and actor variations in the practices and norms, as well as including socio-political factors and sensitivity to the effects of codification. This counters the drive to find solutions that can be delivered at scale and promotes a more nuanced approach that could also benefit from DT at the design phase since it challenges assumptions and promotes creative thinking.

#### 4.2.3. Sensitivity to the Problems

The problems identified in South Africa with respect to land delivery have been extensively reviewed [1,6,8,9,19,42,44,48,53–58]. With comprehensive reports forming part of the review, saturation sampling was reached—the list of problems is comprehensive and spans those identified in the early stages prior to the implementation of land reform, as well as those identified reflectively. Similar problems have been identified in applying a FFP approach internationally as reflected in the FFP literature and selected case studies [13,21,22,45,49,51,52,59,60]. However, the intention of this paper is not to summarize the problems but to assess the combined thematic framework.

The methods of DSR-BS (see Section 2.3) are likely to be sensitive to problems that would not be revealed by the employment of exclusively non-social science methods. Barry highlights some of these—competing goals, the influence of power, corruption, and contrasting organizational cultures [25]. Abubakari et al. identify political, economic, and sociocultural contingencies to which the FFP approach is not particularly sensitve [45], although the FFP approach's use of spatial, legal, and institutional components reveals some level of systems thinking. Sensitivity to gender issues with respect to land is also important in South Africa [8,44]. Systems thinking could reveal South African insitutional issues such as:

The DT approach that emphasizes human engagement is clearly aligned with the High Level Panel Report and Advisory Panel Report processes. The meaning of the process for individuals and collectives can be enhanced through the shared understanding of problems and emotional engagement. Thus, the unity between individuals, collectives, and their environments may be improved. The usual aspect of public and stakeholder participation is executed at a deeper level using social science methods with the aim of building a deep understanding and empathy. Since the identification of problems is undertaken at the start of the process, deep engagement at this stage sets the scene for success. Although participation is a FFP element, the DSR-BS and DT approaches offer value to augment the FFP approach at this stage of problem identification.

#### *4.3. The Process of Identifying Objectives and A Strategy*

Table 6 shows the identification of objectives, a strategy, and goals in the various approaches.

**Table 6.** Extract of the aspects of the identification of objectives, a strategy, and goals.

Although the DT approach does not specify the identification of goals, objectives, or a strategy, the DSR-BS approach focuses on defining the objectives of an intervention and the FFP approach focuses on developing a strategy. 'Strategy' is the approach used to implement change in order to achieve each goal. The interim steps are the 'objectives' these form part of the overall strategy. Thus, the DSR-BS and FFP approaches are not substantively different although the terminology is not identical.

Hull, Kingwill, and Fokane [62] highlight the systemic nature of land administration, as illustrated in Figure 3. At the policy level, the vision is set. At the management level, strategies for achieving the vision are laid out. At the administration level, actionable objectives are carried out to realize the strategies and hence the vision. Such an articulation highlights the synergy between the DSR-BS and FFP approaches and their appropriateness for land administration studies.

**Figure 3.** Hierarchy and functions of elements of Land Administration Systems [62].

4.3.1. Underlying Assumptions and How They Influence Goal, Objective, and Strategy Formulation

South African land reform to date is criticized for failing to interrogate assumptions about land access, land rights and tenure, and land administration. Strategy is linked to the type of intervention and whether it follows a conservative, adaptation, incremental, replacement, or systematic titling approach [26]. A bias in favor of replacement theory is based on the belief that a formal land administration system, aligned with the civil law system, is superior to other options aligned with a hybrid civil, common, and African customary law system [26]. The capital value of land to landholders as espoused by de Soto underpins this belief but is strongly criticized for the South African context [61]. Strategies to deliver land rights in customary communal areas are based on contested assumptions about the processes of land administration employed by traditional authorities and the rights in land and land-based resources of individuals and families in these areas [26]. False assumptions about the hegemony of groups such as customary communal and informal settlement residents, the poor [61], and women may also result in misdirected goals, objectives, and strategies for South African land administration reform [8].

#### 4.3.2. Methods Used to Identify and Report on the Goals, Objectives, and Strategy

In much of the literature both internationally and relative to South Africa, the methods used to identify goals, objectives, and a strategy are not explicitly identified. Authors in research institutions may be specific, such as identifying spatial and social science methodologies [46], while others, for example Balas et al. [59], identify frameworks such as those of Williamson et al. [2] and Lewis [63]. Many frameworks used to identify the context and problems (including the FFP approach, Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure—the VGGTs) are also used indirectly to identify goals and objectives of a change process. The literature appears thin regarding information on strategy, except where change management processes (The FFP approach is also described as a change management process [22]) are explicitly identified, e.g., [13], where there is an extensive process such as national land summits [50,53], detailed investigative reports [8,9,58], or in new land policy, such as South Africa's White and Green papers [44,48] and Rwanda's policy and legal reform, in which clear goals and objectives are identified. Strategy is then linked to state-led programs such as the South African Reconstruction and Development Programme and the current National Development Plan with its Comprehensive Rural Development Plan. The National Development Plan resulted from a commission of experts that consulted widely [10].

Acknowledging that the IT/IS aspects are important for any LAS (noting that land information forms the foundation for the LAS and feeds into every level as illustrated in Figure 3), the IT strategy, specifically for capacity development, is sometimes highlighted [22]. The FFP approach specifies formal acceptance of the strategy by senior civil servants and politicians [22]. Apart from embedded strategic components, the FFP approach is also referred to as a strategy [22], but the FFP as a strategic tool is critiqued by Barry in favor of the rational comprehensive strategic planning process [25].

Barry [25] highlights that once a strategy, or pathway, is formulated, there is an important process of stakeholder participation that should be followed prior to implementation. This is a focus of Moreri et al. [60], who highlight that a strategy for public participation is needed. Hull and Whittal promote a Human-Rights-Based Approach that views participants in the process as active rights-holders rather than passive beneficiaries [42]. Top-down and bottom-up processes of engagement and formulating goals, objectives, and strategy should be considered [60]—the duties of the state are paired with citizen and community rights [42]. On the same note, the strategy of FFP is critiqued by Barry [25] for a missing link between community-level problems and national policy. As can be seen in South Africa, policy exists and is in the process of being redrafted. The deep and inclusive analyses, such as expressed in comprehensive reports in South Africa over the last 20 years, go a long way to linking problems to policy amendments, highlighting goals, formulating measurable objectives, and defining a comprehensive integrated strategy for implementation that is approved by the government departments tasked with implementation. These comprehensive reports have benefitted from years of behavioral science research in South African communities to generate a deep understanding.

#### 4.3.3. The Role of Politics in Land Administration Reform Strategy

The strategies employed in South Africa are categorized by Cousins [5] according to successive presidential terms associated with general policy shifts: the Mandela years (1991–1999), the Mbeki era (1999–2000), and the Zuma period (2000–2016). This reflects that the strategic direction is strongly linked to the politics of the day. This is not surprising given the importance of land in political rhetoric, which can often distract the strategy and blur goals and objectives [5].

#### 4.3.4. Commentary on the Process

The gap in this process for the DT approach (see Table 6) necessitates a jump from knowledge of the problems and needs to developing solutions. This seems counter to mainstream change management theory such as Kotter' eight stages [64] and the nudge theory [65] that rely on a vision for the development or reform process. Bringing the strength of DT's creative thought into this stage in some manner may assist stakeholders with deep knowledge and empathy for problems and needs to formulate suitable high-level goals and objectives. This would provide some direction for the next state in DT while maintaining a space for creative and free thought in the design phase.

Linear models in which one stage follows the other are critiqued by Whittal [14] and Barry [25] in favor of a spiral model of continual reflective engagement with prior stages, acknowledging that over time, goals, objectives, and the strategy must change to meet changing circumstances. The process of change is never considered to be over—once objectives have been achieved and goals have been met, the context is likely to change, necessitating ongoing adaption. A slow, methodical, and reflective process is advocated rather than a 'big bang' rapid approach to change. Ongoing assessment as to whether an intervention is realizing its intended objectives is required [14,25]. Furthermore, cultural change is highlighted as Kotter's eighth stage [64] and is endorsed by Whittal [14] and Barry [25], not only within land administration institutions, but regarding societal changes

in relationship to land through LAS. The FFP approach is intended to be repetitive as illustrated in Figure 1, acknowledging that FFP initiatives are socially constructive—this is appropriate for the South African context.

#### *4.4. The Design Process*

The design phases of the various approaches are summarized in Table 7. The DSR-BS and FFP approaches are well-aligned with respect to design, with the FFP approach adding some domain-specific detail regarding the spatial, legal, and institutional frameworks. The FFP design phase is thus directly informed by an understanding of these frameworks from the context assessment stage.

The FFP design criteria are well-expressed in the key FFP texts [13,21] and summarized in Section 2.2. There are an additional 10 special design elements for pro-poor land rights recordation [13]. The components of the FFP approach should be weighted up in view of the identified needs and essential elements for the South African context given in Sections 4.4.2 and 4.4.3.

DT offers a fresh approach to problem solving, bringing together human capacity to think of new ideas and possibilities, to be innovative and creative, to encourage the discipline and practice of asking and answering questions, to broaden our cognitive processes to understand, create meaning, synthesize, and make decisions, and making the product in practice. This is described as 'pluralism of design thinking'.

As highlighted in Section 2.4, Hull's framework of Success, Significance, and Sustainability [26] is aligned exactly to the judgment 'moment'—one of the four key 'moments' of design thinking. Design thinking is human-centered and affirms human dignity. In reflecting on the importance of this aspect in South Africa's land history in Section 2.4, DT appears to have a great deal to offer as an addition to the DSR-BS and FFP approaches. The FFP approach is stated to be a human-rights approach [21] and is also intended to be human-centered—the focus of DT is compatible and complementary in the design phase.

#### 4.4.1. International Innovative Design

New approaches are promoted in the FFP strategy [21] although the principles appear prescriptive [13] and may limit design thinking. Innovative thinkers now reject the binaries of informality versus formality, communal versus individual, traditional, customary, and neo-customary versus modern Western forms of rights and tenure as these are identified as possibly unhelpful and limiting in understanding and hence in design. Innovative ideas such as spaghetti boundaries, point cadasters [21], rights and interests recordation (rather than registration—an example is a pro-poor land recordation tool [46]), and flexible land tenure systems show evidence of DT. Spaghetti boundaries have not gained much traction, probably failing on one or more of the four DT 'moments' (see Section 2.4). However, point cadasters are promoted as a first step in recording [21], while flexible land tenure systems are now legislated and piloted in Namibia along with the innovative concept of para-professionals. Multidirectional flexibility in landholding type is further evidence of the need for innovative thinking [66].

Conceptual models and domain models such as the new continuum of land rights [21,67] and the Social Tenure Domain Model [68] also reflect innovative thinking. The UN Habitat Global Land Tools Network (GLTN) has for many years supported development of new FFP tools. Its4land prioritizes innovative tool design, revealing some DT elements such as: transdisciplinary work, gender-sensitive analysis, technical innovation for community mapping, localized domain model development, comprehensive stakeholder participation, design focused on end-user interests and actor preferences, as well as generating innovation capacity and knowledge sharing [41]. Technological innovations are often implemented in pilot test projects; some include social methods of data collection, which also enhance participation [21,69].

Fisher and Whittal [1] highlight future areas of innovation in property definition. These may include fuzzy areas, time-varying areas, multiple overlapping rights and interests, family titles, multidirectional flexibility and conceptions that can reflect mobility of rights holders. Legal freehold space units (or property objects), a three-dimensional cadaster with volumetric representations and registry procedures for titling are also discussed [1]—some of these concepts are in the process of development for dense first-world cities [70]. These concepts have application in the offshore environment as well as for underground and above ground space. The recordation of land-related debts and claims not based on contract, but related to land, such as claims against the State, licenses, permits, and quotas are additional innovative aspects of land rights and interests that are highlighted as possible additions in an inclusive land administration system to improve land tenure security [1]. The suitability of unique parcel identifiers is questioned while spatial location is argued as accessible and thus highly usable for all stakeholders. A mind-shift away from the parcel identifier as the basic unit of the cadaster would be required. The shifting nature of South African Constitutional property law, which now embraces contextual and non-hierarchical thinking, sets the platform for DT from the top down [1].

#### 4.4.2. South Africa's Need for Innovative Design

Case studies and reports on South Africa's land reform process between 1997 and 2021 [1,6,8,9,26,42,44,48,54,56,61,67,71] include repeated calls and suggestions for innovative approaches ("a radical and rapid break from the past" [58]) such as:

	- challenge the parcel as the basic unit of the cadaster;
	- include boundaries that are fluid (shifting over the short or longer term), fuzzy (imprecisely defined in space), and adaptable (changing in nature);
	- represent the third spatial dimension;
	- define spatial rights that may be of variable nature, nested, overlapping, and time-varying;
	- relate to rights holders that are individual, family, and kinship (including multigenerational landholding: living, dead, and unborn), and other collectives based on voluntary affiliation (preferred over tribal affiliation);

#### 4.4.3. Essential Elements Identified for South Africa

The following essential elements are identified from sources (only some of a plethora of sources are referenced) relating to South Africa as key aspects of the land administration design and reform process to improve land tenure security; these essential elements are echoed in international sources:

In the South African context, the essential elements and need for innovative design overlap with aspects of the FFP approach. However, in order to retain the creativity of the ideate process of DT, the tools and methods favored in the FFP approach (see Section 2.2) should only be considered as options late in the design process and should not be prescriptive (noting that FFP is a guide and is not intended to prescribe).

#### *4.5. The Capacity Development Process*

Capacity development is highlighted in almost all literature dealing with land reform in the developing world. It is interesting to note that it is not an explicit stage in either DSR-BS or DT (Table 8). It is identified as a need at the innovative design stage and is an essential element for implementation.

**Table 8.** Extract of the capacity development process aspects.

The need for capacity development is not restricted to technological interventions such as the IT/IS strategy although this is often highlighted [22]. People working within the land administration sector also need knowledge and skills development—this extends to capacity building at societal and organizational (governmental, private sector, community) levels [21]. Similarly, capacity development is highlighted as important for the would-be beneficiaries of land reform programs. Some evidence suggests that the concept of land rights is still poorly understood by customary land rights-holders [74]. They need training and resources to claim their land rights and support use of the new systems (technological, legislative, administrative) that have been developed. There is often a gulf between beneficiaries' capacity and the plans of developers [5]. This is a noted shortcoming in South Africa regarding Communal Property Associations [75] and traditional authorities [76]. Hence, while land rights might be recognized and protected in law, administrative incapacity means that people are unable to realize them in practice [77].

Capacity development is identified as a process, not an event, in the FFP literature [21]. Public–private partnerships may assist in the process, which can benefit from a wellformulated incremental strategy [13,22,61,78] with performance measurement [13,22,41]. Balas et al. [59] identify issues such as land law, gender, equity, land administration, technical spatial data collection, as well as monitoring and control as core areas of capacity development. Training should also be focused on the importance of a harmonized methodology [59]. In addition to the community-level support highlighted above, specific South African needs for capacity development are identified: provision of local services [44]; assistance with agricultural processes and infrastructure [44,57]; financial services to beneficiaries [44,57]; understanding of authority and responsibility to act; and empowerment [42]. Implementation of policies and laws has been restricted by insufficient institutional capacity. This limitation was noted in both the South African policy White [44] and Green [48] Papers (published in 1997 and 2011, respectively), yet since then there appear to have been no plans to address these constraints and it seems as if the situation is worsening [5,79]. At national, provincial, and local levels, the South African government appears to lack the capacity for proper land administration [75]. Cousins & Hall [80] and Cousins [5] noted that State capacity for implementation of land reform law and policy is inadequate. The High Level Panel [9] found that many policies and laws were sound, but there are serious concerns around their implementation and enforcement.

From the foregoing, and drawing on the South African experience, it is clear that capacity development is an important stage in the FFP process that would possibly be omitted if the DSR-BS or DT processes were used without the benefit of the FFP approach.

#### *4.6. The Piloting/Demonstration and Evaluation Processs*

The piloting/demonstration and evaluation stages of the approaches are highly similar and hence grouped together as shown in Table 9.

**Table 9.** Extract of the piloting/demonstration and evaluation aspects.

Only the DSR-BS approach has a separate demonstration and evaluation process, while in practice these processes are usually undertaken as pilot studies that are then evaluated. This stage is key to uncovering aspects in the design that are not FFP, or fit for *local* purpose, and modifying the design accordingly. In the FFP approach, the evaluation appears to be focused on economic benefits analysis, but in the FFP literature this is extended to include economic, environmental, and social benefits. In DT, the *judgement moment* assesses desirability—whether the intervention meets the needs (significant for the users), feasibility (suitable in the context), and viability (sustainable over time). The DT *connection and development moment* assesses usefulness (does it perform the task), useableness (is compatible with human users), and desirability (does it deliver emotional satisfaction), while the *integration and evaluation moment* assess the worthiness of the solution for implementation considering all stakeholders, especially users, society, and the state.

#### 4.6.1. Pilot Studies

The literature reveals that pilot studies are used to test innovative technical solutions; these may include noting of boundary disputes for further processing [21,52,81]. The 2019 Advisory Panel Report advocates for the testing of new approaches, highlighting various challenging areas of land tenure delivery in South Africa [8].

#### 4.6.2. Performance Measurement

Change management is incomplete without measuring the performance of the new design. The land administration reform literature is replete with examples of performance measurement—called quality assurance, auditing, meeting of goals, etc. Broadly

speaking, "unlocking social and economic benefits" is aligned with successful reform [13]; however, metrics for this are necessary. The World Bank's "Doing Business" reports, the Corruption Perception Index of Transparency International, LGAF, and FGAF&GAT are suggested [13,22,52]. Whittal promotes the 7Es framework for performance measurement, including efficiency, effectiveness, elegance (acceptability), empowerment, emancipation, exception (inclusivity), and emotion [14]. The 7Es framework aligns well with the humancentered DT and could partner well in a process that accommodates DT.

Benchmarking is another possibility [49]. Balas et al. [59] suggest that key performance indicators should be designed for each stage. A well-designed monitoring and evaluation framework is necessary to provide feedback for improvements [14,22]. This promotes a culture of self-critique and self-motivated improvement in land administration organizations [22].

Evaluation and reporting on land reform outcomes include the appropriateness of technology, number of parcels registered, and the cost to do so. Quality assurance is particularly important with data collection using volunteered geographic information (VGI) [60]. There is a caution to not only use numeric indicators; rather, transformation (emancipation) indicators should be used such as those related to poverty, unemployment, and inequality, particularly related to land access [26,44]. Indicators of efficiency, effectiveness, acceptability, security, accessibility, timeliness, affordability, attainability, sustainability, upgradeability, flexibility, inclusiveness, transparency, clarity (especially in governance roles), simplicity, correctness/reliability [14,21], user-friendliness [49,59,81], and resilience (to disasters) are suggested.

Specific issues for South Africa are monitoring of land reform over time [44], monitoring the effectiveness of governance (especially the lack of Parliamentary accountability [9,10]), and the lack of traditional authority accountability [9]. There is a lack of institutions to execute the evaluation process [8], while there is also a need to develop and use 'outcomes indicators' that are appropriate to the local context. Hull and Whittal highlight the responsibility of the State to deliver on fundamental Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights [42]. Evaluation of the process of reform and the medium and long-term impacts is important in any process but is especially relevant in South Africa considering the need for dignity and restorative justice [14]. Processes of active participation, listening to suppressed viewpoints [26], consideration of emotion [14], and empowerment/capacity development (a FFP stage), should be evaluated and reported. It is suggested that the evaluation process should be undertaken independent of South African State institutions to avoid bias [26] and even as a political necessity [14].

#### 4.6.3. Commentary on the Process

The demonstration and evaluation included in the DSR-BS and FFP approaches are clearly imperative to understand whether the proposals meet the needs. Although these can include a human-centered approach, this is specified in the DT approach. It highlights sensitivity in line with the needs of all stakeholders and includes assessing desirability and emotional aspects. As discussed above, these are important in the post-colonial and post-apartheid context in South Africa.

#### *4.7. The Communication Process*

Change management theory promotes communication in line with meaningful public participation at all stages of an intervention. The placement of communication as an end stage belies the importance of this activity throughout a change process. Table 10 shows the communication aspects in the three processes.

**Table 10.** Extract of the communication process aspects.

DSR-BS focuses strongly on communicating findings, which is key to any research endeavor. FFP and DT are processes designed for project implementation domains rather than research domains and so communication of findings is not explicitly advanced. The FFP approach focuses on preparing manuals, outreach materials, and capacity building materials [59]. The latter may include gender equity, land law, conflict resolution, and other aspects of training required in order to ensure consistent implementation [22]. VGI data collection methods require special attention to communication [60].

Participants in communications include government officials, politicians and policymakers, and beneficiaries [59]. Where open-source tools are developed [41], there are accepted methods of communicating these beyond the project stakeholders. In land restitution in South Africa, communication between claimants and the Land Claims Commission has been a concern [57].

Communication is an important stage of the process of change and in this respect the DT process is deficient. The DSR-BS and FFP processes adequately cover this stage with complimentary emphases.

#### **5. Conclusions**

The analysis of the sample of literature against the thematic framework of the DSR-BS, FFP, and DT approaches reveals that the land reform program in South Africa could benefit substantially by mainstreaming elements of both the DSR-BS and the DT approaches within the FFP approach. This finding may be generalized (naturalistic generalization) to implementation of FFP LA in other similar contexts. We thus conclude below on the implications of this work for theory and for the South African land question.

The DSR-BS approach is suited to provide rich descriptions of and insights into the context and in identifying problems and needs. It also offers strength in the communication of a critical reflective review of change processes. The use of methods from the behavioral sciences is reflected in land administration reform literature, but such methods are not prominent in the FFP guidelines. The DT process is a human-centered approach that stresses empathy when assessing context, problems, and needs. Although the FFP is intended to focus on human needs and incorporate creative design, human-centered creative design thinking is not mainstreamed in the process and can easily be ignored, leading to mechanistic implementations.

The core strengths of design science research and design thinking are shown to be complementary to the FFP approach. Foregrounding these in FFP LA implementations will provide a focal point at the start of the process. Viewing the problem context (the first stage in assessing the purpose) through a local socio-cultural lens different from that of the implementors is the essence of empathy, which is fundamental to the DT approach (Sections 4.1 and 4.2). At the design phase, the creativity of the ideate process of DT should precede the consideration of the tools and methods of implementation favored in the FFP approach. The DT field of research and practice is relatively new—case studies explicitly implementing DT in land administration reform will most likely follow.

With the land question in South Africa still center stage after 27 years of democracy, it is very important to be boldly creative—approaches with different emphases may help unlock solutions. In dealing with the current complexities in South African land administration, design thinking may facilitate a deep understanding, challenge assumptions, and set the scene for unconstrained creative thinking. Human cognitive abilities such as empathy, questioning, judgement, creativity, and creating meaning have the potential to promote the design of interventions that are responsive to personal and social aspects in addition to

material/technical/procedural aspects (institutional, legal, and spatial frameworks) of LAS, as identified in Section 4.4.2. In seeking to restore dignity and deliver restorative justice in the South African land sector (considering its particular land history), and to deliver sustainability, success, and significance for all stakeholders, DT processes may help to dismantle barriers in thinking and lead to the unity so desperately needed. If an emphasis on a deep understanding and design thinking may help South Africa achieve its land reform aims, there is no doubt that the process could benefit other contexts with complex and intractable land administration challenges such as are found in other sub-Saharan African and post-colonial countries.

**Author Contributions:** This paper resulted from collaboration in the following manner: conceptualization, J.W. and S.H.; methodology, J.W.; formal analysis, J.W.; investigation, J.W.; resources, S.H. and J.W.; writing—original draft preparation, J.W.; writing—review and editing, S.H.; visualization, S.H. and J.W.; funding acquisition, S.H. and J.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** Funding of the publication costs for this article has kindly been provided by the School of Land Administration Studies, University of Twente, in combination with Kadaster International, The Netherlands.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

#### **Appendix A**

#### **Table A1.** Sources Coded in NVivo.

#### **Table A1.** *Cont.*

#### **References**

### *Article* **Geospatial Tool and Geocloud Platform Innovations: A Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration Assessment**

**Mila Koeva 1,\*, Mohammed Imaduddin Humayun 2, Christian Timm 2, Claudia Stöcker 1,3, Sophie Crommelinck 1, Malumbo Chipofya 1, Rohan Bennett 4,5 and Jaap Zevenbergen 1**

**Abstract:** The well-recognized and extensive task of mapping unrecorded land rights across sub-Saharan Africa demands innovative solutions. In response, the consortia of "its4land", a European Commission Horizon 2020 project, developed, adapted, and tested innovative geospatial tools including (1) software underpinned by the smart Sketch maps concept, called SmartSkeMa; (2) a workflow for applying unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV); and (3) a boundary delineator tool based on the UAV images. Additionally, the consortium developed (4) a platform called Publish and Share (PaS), enabling integration of all the outputs of tool sharing and publishing of land information through geocloud web services. The individual tools were developed, tested, and demonstrated based on requirements from Rwanda, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Zanzibar. The platform was further tested by key informants and experts in a workshop in Rwanda after the AfricaGIS conference in 2019. With the project concluding in 2020, this paper seeks to undertake an assessment of the tools and the PaS platform against the elements of fit-for-purpose land administration. The results show that while the tools can function and deliver outputs independently and reliably, PaS enables interoperability by allowing them to be combined and integrated into land administration workflows. This feature is useful for tailoring approaches for specific country contexts. In this regard, developers of technical approaches tackling land administration issues are further encouraged to include interoperability and the use of recognized standards in designs.

**Keywords:** fit-for-purpose; land tenure; land administration; UAV; feature extraction

### **1. Introduction**

Land tenure security supports orderly land dealings, poverty reduction, dispute minimization, and overall sustainable development. Delivering "tenure security for all" is one of the implied objectives of the sustainable development goals (SDGs)—target 1.4—set by the United Nations (UN) [1]. It can influence household income, food security, and equality [2,3]. However, millions of people-to-land relationships are still not recorded and remain unknown to governments [4].

This situation, unfortunately, is a fact in Sub-Saharan African countries [5]. With conventional cadastral surveying and mapping approaches, full completion would take decades, if not centuries [6]. Furthermore, there are many legal, social, and historical differences between the countries: it is hard to develop a unique scalable approach.

**Citation:** Koeva, M.; Humayun, M.I.; Timm, C.; Stöcker, C.; Crommelinck, S.; Chipofya, M.; Bennett, R.; Zevenbergen, J. Geospatial Tool and Geocloud Platform Innovations: A Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration Assessment. *Land* **2021**, *10*, 557. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10060557

Academic Editors: Stig Enemark, Robin McLaren, Christiaan Lemmen and Francisco Manzano Agugliaro

Received: 14 April 2021 Accepted: 19 May 2021 Published: 26 May 2021

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

**Copyright:** © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

Across the 2000s and 2010s, significant effort was undertaken to improve the situation. In support of the development of an efficient land administration system, the Land Administration Domain Model (LADM), aimed at establishing a common ontology of land administration concepts, was proposed [7,8]. In addition, the Fit-For-Purpose (FFP) approach was developed, encouraging participatory, innovative, and scalable methods that match the needs [9] and challenges of a specific country context [4]. One of the key principles of FFP was to use "general" rather than "fixed" boundaries, using participatory mapping based on image interpretation [10]. Good examples of implementation of the FFP for land administration are found in Ethiopia, Rwanda, Namibia, and Indonesia, among others [11,12]. FFP includes principles that cover spatial, legal, and institutional country aspects [13]. The seven main elements based on the FFP concept [14] that the land administration system should take into account are:

In response to the need for innovative solutions based on FFP principles, the "its4land" H2020 project was initiated [15,16]. The project aimed to develop technologies that consider the needs and readiness of the users that are implementable and scalable. They include (1) smart Sketch maps—also known as SmartSkeMa; (2) a UAV workflow and ortho generator; (3) a boundary delineator tool based on the UAV images; and (4) the Publish and Share (PaS) platform providing geocloud services.

In the following section, the development of the tools is briefly described, referring to the publications over the years [5,16–19]. More emphasis is put on the description of the PaS platform, which was the last to be developed in the design sequence and has therefore undergone less formal assessment. Subsequently, the methods for assessing the tools and the platform against the seven fit-for-purpose elements are described. In Sections 4–6, from an academic perspective, a critical results assessment, feedback, and ways forward, in terms of future research and scaling activities, are provided. From a practical standpoint, it is suggested that the work at hand can help in improving the geospatial tool and geocloud platform solutions, and that focus should be placed on ensuring interoperable tools to support the successful upscaling to the its4land toolbox (suite of tools) and Fit-For-Purpose Land Administration (FFPLA) more generally.

#### **2. Background: "its4land" Tools and Platform**

#### *2.1. SmartSkeMa*

SmartSkeMa was developed to document land rights information, taking into account the local knowledge of the communities. SmartSkeMa tool includes: (1) a developed domain model that uses the land tenure characteristics as described by communities that live with them; (2) a spatial model based on hand-drawn sketchmaps; (3) a method for recognizing and georeferencing the sketchmaps and embedding them into the land information system (spatial datasets) [20]. The tool can be used in two ways (1) by overlaying the vector data on top of the Sketch maps; or (2) by aligning the sketches with an orthophoto image [21]. In addition, the nonspatial information can be processed via local domain model (LDM) which is connected to the Land Administration Domain Model (LADM). Spatial information is extracted via the object detection techniques. An example of the workflow and its implementation can be found in [15,16].

#### *2.2. UAVs*

The UAVs solution involved developing a workflow to incorporate the tasks of choice of the vehicle, investigation of the regulations and policies, pilot training and certification, flight permissions, data capture, processing, and quality assessment. During the project, numerous flights and missions were completed and assessed depending on the country aim. In Kenya, where pastoralism is a dominant land use and spatial information is not mapped numerous flights have been done and scientific comparison of the results was performed. More details on the data acquisition in September 2018 Kajiado and March 2018 Mailua with RGB sensors using DT18, a fixed-wing UAV and DJI Phantom 4 can be found in [16]. In Rwanda, the aim was cadastral map updating using UAV data, since the country supported by international donors, mapped over 12 M parcels in 2007/2008. Therefore, detailed explanations on the application of UAV data acquisition in Rwanda 2017 and 2018 can be found in [22]. In addition, in collaboration with the World Bank a joint survey and data quality assessment was performed in Zanzibar in July 2019. Moreover, the its4land team developed a tool called "OthoGenerator" which is based on the open-source image processing software called "OpenDroneMap" [23]. The tool integrates the processes of generating point clouds, digital surface models, and orthomosaics from images. This tool is integrated into the PaS platform, where the user must specify the required resolution of the output, overlap, context of the scene, and the mode for georeferencing.

#### *2.3. Boundary Delineator*

The "boundary delineator," or also called in some of the publication "automatic feature extraction" tool, was developed as an independent QGIS plugin. It incorporates a boundary extraction machine learning method based on RGB satellite, aerial, or UAV images. The methodology includes image segmentation, boundary classification, and interactive delineation [24–27]. The source code is available for download [25]. Numerous examples on the application of the tool have been shared for Kenya and Rwanda in [28–30]. A detailed explanation of the sequence of the work, with the individual tools integrated into the platform, for a case study in Ethiopia, is explained in [15].

#### *2.4. PaS Geocloud Platform*

The most recently developed tool in the its4land suite was the "PaS" platform. It aims to support workflows in projects related to land administration [31]. It was premised on the idea that while land administration systems worldwide may differ in detail, most of them have in common some generalizable requirements, functions, and outputs [12,32]. In this regard, a typical definition of land administration refers to "the processes of determining, recording and disseminating information about the ownership, value, and use of land when implementing land management policies" [31]. Every land administration system requires a generalized spatially related reference system as a basis. In contemporary systems, this spatial reference is provided and maintained by a GIS database. PaS focuses on providing the spatial reference for a land administration system.

The PaS platform offers a core set of features that can be customized and extended. The functionalities of PaS are primarily targeted at independent software vendors (ISV) or integrators to create services or applications for end-users. PaS provides a set of high-level geocloud-based services for developers of land administration systems to use or integrate spatial references for tenure registration. Using these services allows a vendor to concentrate on functionalities required by their customer instead of re-implementing existing solutions for common problems. These services are based on the concepts introduced by LADM. To improve or assist land administration workflows and tasks, four different usage models for the platform were developed:

The platform is capable of hosting and integrating tools and data to facilitate land tenure recording services and applications. This allows the complementary tools and methods, developed in the its4land project—which use images captured by UAVs [33–36], qualitative data processing using Sketch maps [21], and Boundary Delineation [18,37–40]—to be integrated coherently into existing or new land administration workflows. For seamless integration with existing systems, PaS is implemented on standards such as Representational State Transfer (REST) [41], LADM, and Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Web Services (OWS). It is composed of technical components shown in Figure 1.

**Figure 1.** Components of the PaS platform.

In more detail, these PaS elements are:

The implementation of the PaS platform follows a toolbox approach (integration of tools) and provides a framework consisting of standard APIs and services used by all other its4land tools. From this toolbox, users can select those its4land tools fitting their tasks best. All components developed for PaS are open-source (https://github.com/ its4land/publish-and-share, accessed on 24 May 2021). The components can be hosted in a cloud environment such as Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, or a private cloud environment.

The development of the PaS platform was one of the key exploitable results of the its4land project. The utility of the platform in implementing abstract concepts from LADM in a programmatic manner enables building usable land administration systems on top of it. Additionally, the platform also demonstrated how innovative tools serving a niche purpose could be tied together, enabling the use of innovative methods where traditional land tenure recording methods fall short or require immense effort.

The geocloud services provided by PaS are based on the conceptual model introduced by LADM. These concepts are abstract, and their concrete meaning depends on countryspecific interpretation. By providing a means to define and implement concepts from LADM, PaS can provide the necessary information to a land administration system that is needed for legal registration. A developer familiar with LADM will recognize concepts such as SpatialUnits or AdminSources and can map them to the structures and localized meanings needed by a specific land administration system.

The current version of PaS focuses on the capture of data for subsequent registration in a land administration system. Therefore, only a subset of LADM is implemented. In practice, this means that PaS can handle all those LADM concepts which deal with the evidence of land rights and thus enables a legally secure registration of rights by a land administration system. The following concepts of LADM are supported in PaS as shown in Table 1 below:

**Table 1.** Concepts from LADM supported by PaS.

The PaS platform offers developers and system integrators a Public API on top of which custom applications can be built or platform features integrated into existing land administration systems. The API provides an implementation for LADM concepts such as spatial sources and spatial units, among others, such that they can be used in a programmatic fashion in an information system. Linking different concepts, as required by the implemented workflow, can be performed by the API. A parcel can be linked to an orthoimage or a Sketch as their SpatialSource. It can also be linked to a file that documents the ownership of that parcel. During the legal registration in a LAS, the user of the LAS can access this information and relationships to prove the evidence easily.

The API itself is a REST API [41] and is served over HTTP(S). Implementing a REST API makes integration on any platform or programming language seamless. Figure 2 shows the main user interface of the online documentation of the Public API (Public API is used here to differentiate from an internal private API used to extend the platform itself). The document acts as a reference for developers to interact with the platform to perform tasks such as creating instances of concepts and adding and querying information to the instances. In addition to this, the platform website (https://platform.its4land.com, accessed on 24 May 2021) offers additional documentation and guides for developers, integrators and other users to familiarize themselves with its concepts and usage.

**Figure 2.** The main user interface of the online documentation of the Public API.

The Public API lends itself to multiple usage models discussed previously. These include an end-user who interacts using only a GUI client, a developer wishing to extend their legacy land administration system with features of PaS, or wanting to extend and customize the platform itself. The API is designed to achieve these workflows by following the OpenAPI 2.0 (https://spec.openapis.org/oas/v2.0.html, accessed on 24 May 2021) standard for specification, which allows the generation of interactive documentation that includes examples.

The platform's Data Dissemination Interface (DDI) provides an alternative means of accessing spatial data stored in PaS. Compared to the Public API, the DDI allows limited read-only access to data via OGC services such as WMS/WFS. The DDI is useful to access LADM spatial concepts such as spatial units or boundary face strings. DDI also provides high-performance access to orthoimages and other raster data stored in PaS via WMS services. The main advantage of the DDI is the ease of use. Nearly every popular GIS Tool can use OGC services out of the box. This allows lightweight data access by workflows

developed by the application or integration usage model. The Public API requires more effort on the client-side to handle requests and responses. However, on the other hand, the Public API allows better control, such as advanced filtering capabilities compared to the WFS interface. If data should be manipulated, the use of the Public API is required. Table 2 provides an overview of the available spatial data classes in PaS and their access services in DDI.

**Table 2.** Spatial data classes in PaS (X indicates support).

#### 2.4.1. Tool-Based Workflow

Tools and services built using features provided by PaS enable innovative workflows, which can be integrated into a land administration system. As depicted in Figure 3, the components provided by the platform support a workflow from capture to dissemination of data, including the intermediate steps, the output of which is ready for consumption by a land administration system.

**Figure 3.** Abstract workflow of PaS.

To add a tool, a developer creates an application in a programming language of their choice and uses the REST API to communicate with PaS. Tools may be made available and run on the platform itself. In this case, the tool is packaged using Docker (https://www. docker.com/, accessed on 24 May 2021), added to the PaS server and registered on the platform by the administrator. The its4land tools—UAV Orthogenerator and SmartSkeMa were made available this way. The alternative is for the tool to run outside the PaS environment, which was the model used by the Boundary Delineator tool, since it was a QGIS plugin. In both cases, the PaS API provides various endpoints to read and write data. Tools available and registered in the PaS environment may be started/stopped and their execution status queried via the tools endpoint. A PaS-based workflow consists of executing tools at various stages, often using the output of one tool as the input to another.

The its4land project demonstrated how innovative tools could be orchestrated to provide a coherent workflow to capture and process spatial information from non-traditional sources. This workflow used all the developed tools—UAV Ortho Generator, SmartSkeMa, and the Boundary Delineator. Likewise, a client web application used the public platform API to provide a user interface to carry out different steps in the workflow.

A typical workflow consists of the following steps, all of which are performed via the API:

**Figure 4.** Client Web Application—Adding Resources.