Evaluation of the results and impacts of the PTTT showed, among other things, a positive correlation between the increase in titled and untitled land prices, demonstrating with this increase a positive impact on the capability of beneficiaries to obtain credit through the tenure documents obtained². In fiscal terms, in 1996 after the end of the second phase of the PTTT, a 600% increase was reported in the amount raised in property and property transfer tax in areas covered by the project. An increase in both the value and quantity of agricultural production per parcel was similarly reported on titled land, as for resources used in production³.

One of the great limitations of the PTTT was dealing with forest land. Fifty percent of land in Thailand is considered forest, and the routine registration of land could only operate in non-forest land. The lack of an appropriate legal framework and uncertainty about the limits of some forest land were serious obstacles to the titling and registration of this land.

PETT, the programme funded by the IDB, aimed to support the quick, transparent operation of the land market by regularizing rural property, expanding the cadastre and consolidating registration. In its first phase, the project focused on titling and regularizing rural coastal land with individual tenure, while in its second phase it focused on cordillera and forest areas predominantly with communal tenure. The third phase, under preparation, will carry out titling in peasant and indigenous communities and also activities to ensure sustainability of the rural cadastre. While for coastal land, the PETT was able to use cadastral surveying which helped to reduce titling costs, but in cordillera and forest areas where communal properties existed and there were disputes with organizations, this was not possible. At the end of the second phase of the project (2007), the PETT had succeeded in surveying and registering 83% of rural properties on the coast, and 53% in the cordillera; a total of 45% of all rural parcels had been titled. One of the most significant results regarding support for regulatory aspects and system modernization is that at the end of the second phase of the project, the PETT had supported the regulation of Law 28294 (passed in 2004) which created a National Integrated Cadastral System. This law linked the cadastre with the register and established the respective functions of the institutions involved, which is progress in regulatory terms considering the complexity of the Peruvian institutional cadastral and registration system. As for the modernization of the rural cadastre, the PETT set up a digital information system (SICAR) which streamlined cadastral functions. To speed up the work of regional offices in registration, updating and consulting files, the PETT set up an automatic monitoring system called SSET.

The lessons learned mentioned in the final evaluation of the second phase of the PETT project include in particular: (i) the need to construct a baseline at the start of the project, which was not done in the PETT, and to define indicators to evaluate how the proposed objectives have been met during implementation and at the end of the project. It was also found to be important to have a professional team to follow up, monitor and evaluate the project, and also specific mechanisms for collection and periodic analysis of data; (ii) the role played by the application of public investment policies, agricultural policy and rural development policies in achieving financial impacts, particularly in rural intervention areas. The regularization, titling and registration of land increase security and legal certainty of tenure but this increase alone will not result in financial improvement for families, unless it is accompanied by the application of these public policies⁷.

The PDUP proposed increasing security of property and wellbeing in disadvantaged groups living in settlements in large urban areas by creating a registration and titling system to guarantee formal rights to property. To do this the PDUP supported a National Regularization Plan which included the physical and legal regularization of property, titling and registration. The PDUP additionally supported the formulation of legal and methodological frameworks to standardize registration and to facilitate a cheap, efficient urban cadastral system. It similarly supported the institutional strengthening of counterpart agencies, the Commission for Regularizing Informal Property (COFOPRI) and the National Superintendency of Public Records (SUNARP). The key results of the project include the design and application of a mass, efficient and cheap method of regularizing urban property; there was also support for SUNARP to implement the Property Registration Law which involved the unification of the land register and its efficient operation and decentralization.
The regularization method was developed by means of mass regularization campaigns including establishing boundaries and surveying, titling and registering properties, activities which were carried out with simplified procedures and the active participation of community leaders and the residents of neighbourhoods included in the campaign. They took part in measuring lots, positioning boundary stones, and discussing results in community meetings. The campaigns included the application of simplified procedures specific to each category of informality (settlements, low-cost accommodation, “casas populares”, etc.). Using these procedures, the whole property regularization process (titling and registration) was completed in 50 days and registration of subsequent property transactions in 10 days.
PDUP support for SUNARP to implement the Property Registration Law reduced the costs of urban property registration, and improved its efficiency and transparency by automating processes and digitizing registration files, which meant that they could be consulted electronically. The use of standardized formats was also introduced for registration processes, along with the involvement of lawyers, not only notaries, in certifying documents, a reduction in the number of documents to be submitted with the registration application, training and specific supervision of registration staff to prevent corruption, decentralization of functions to regional and local offices, and the promotion of a culture of registration among the population. The implementation of all these measures has allowed SUNARP to increase transparency when determining the costs to the user and to introduce schemes to prevent corruption.

Despite the achievements of both the PETT and PDUP projects, an evaluation by the World Bank and the Peruvian government in 2009 of governance in the land sector showed that only some of these achievements have been sustainable over time, and these include the few advances made in the implementation of the Cadastral Law. Five years after it was passed, coordination problems between institutions and insufficient human and budget resources in local government have limited progress in the standardization of criteria such as the determination of roles between notaries public, private legal professionals and other participants in the processes. The lack of a cadastral basis in more than half of the registration files often causes boundary disputes about properties, particularly in rural and peri-urban areas.

As regards registration, property transactions are not always registered due to the high costs of regularizing a property transaction, which has an impact on keeping the land register up to date. According to the 2009 evaluation, the total cost of registering a property transfer in Peru can sometimes be more than 5% of the total value of the property. Furthermore, the decentralized SUNARP offices are not self-financing owing to the small number of transactions registered. Consequently, the existing 58 decentralized offices and 23 windows are unable to meet the potential demand that would exist in the country’s 194 provinces.