Title: Land governance failures and the performance of District Land Boards in Uganda's local governments
Authors: Dr. Arinaitwe Julius
Ahumuza Audrey
Nabaasa Desire
Volume: 10
Issue: 7
Pages: 202-213
Publication Date: 2026/07/28
Abstract:
District Land Boards (DLBs) constitute the primary statutory institutions responsible for land administration at the local government level in Uganda, holding mandates over land allocation, dispute adjudication, certificate of customary ownership processing, and oversight of land use planning within districts. Despite the decentralization framework established under the Local Governments Act and the Land Act (Cap. 227) that vests these institutions with considerable authority, a persistent pattern of governance failure by corruption in land transactions, protracted dispute resolution timelines, weak land record and titling systems, inadequate staffing and logistical capacity, and rising encroachment on both public and customary land has continued to undermine their institutional performance. This study examined the relationship between land governance failures and the performance of District Land Boards across four regions of Uganda (Central, Eastern, Northern, and Western), drawing on a simulated dataset modelled on the structure of a cross-sectional survey of 380 respondents nested within 20 districts. The study employed a quantitative, cross-sectional design and analysed the data using univariate descriptive statistics, bivariate tests of association (independent samples t-tests, one-way analysis of variance, and Pearson correlation), and a three-level linear mixed-effects model that accounted for the clustering of respondents within districts and districts within regions. Descriptive results indicated that respondents rated DLB performance as generally weak, with a mean composite performance score of 24.6 out of 100 (SD = 13.1), and that governance failure indicators - particularly corruption (mean = 6.11/10) and delay in dispute resolution (mean = 6.63/10) - were rated as moderately severe. Bivariate analysis revealed statistically significant differences in performance across education levels (F = 9.35, p < 0.001), respondent categories (F = 8.01, p < 0.001), and regions (F = 55.24, p < 0.001), alongside a significant negative correlation between the composite failure index and performance (r = -0.47, p < 0.001). The mixed-effects model confirmed that corruption (? = -2.35, p < 0.001), delay in dispute resolution (? = -1.81, p < 0.001), weak record and titling systems (? = -1.68, p < 0.001), encroachment (? = -1.19, p < 0.001), and inadequate capacity (? = -0.64, p < 0.001) were all significant negative predictors of DLB performance, while tertiary education attainment and years of experience were significant positive predictors. A substantial share of the unexplained variance in performance was attributable to district- and region-level clustering, underscoring the importance of contextual and institutional factors that operate above the level of the individual respondent. The study concluded that land governance failures are systemic rather than isolated, cutting across administrative levels and undermining the capacity of District Land Boards to fulfil their statutory mandate. It recommended strengthening anti-corruption safeguards within land administration processes, investing in digitised land record and titling systems, and enhancing the staffing, logistical, and technical capacity of District Land Boards, particularly in chronically under-resourced regions.