CASE STUDY: IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY OF GEODESY, CARTOGRAPHY AND LAND

OFFICE

SURVEY REPORT

INDEPENDENT RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF MONGOLIA

11/15/2013
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The Independent Research Institute of Mongolia (IRIM) has successfully completed a case-
based survey entitled Improving Transparency of Geodesy-Cartography and Land Offices.

This survey was conducted in response to a request from the Strengthening Transparency and
Governance in Mongolia (STAGE) project, implemented by Asia Foundation with funding from
USAID. We acknowledge the valuable assistance of P. Basanta, Chief of party at The Asia
Foundation; M. Naran, Senior Program officer at The Asia Foundation; A. Jargalan, Project
Consultant at The Asia Foundation; and D. Davaadamdin, Project Officer at The Asia
Foundation.

The survey team also extends its gratitude to Commissioner B. Bat-Otgon, Head of Prevention
and Public Awareness Department, Independent Authority Against Corruption; Commissioner L.
Narantuya, Prevention and Public Awareness Department Officer; and the staff of the
Independent Authority Against Corruption.

Our sincere thanks go to all local residents who were involved in and responded to our survey,
and to senior managers and officers of Land Departments and field researchers; we offer all
best wishes for their future work.
 SURVEY TEAM
This survey was conducted by IRIM NGO in response to a request from the Asia Foundation,
on 6-23 September 2013. This survey report reflects only the views and opinions of survey
team members.

Chultemsuren Tamir (Sociologist) Project team leader

Namjinbaatar Minjirmaa (Sociologist) Coordinator

Sarantuya Moiltmaa (Lawyer) Senior researcher

Lkhagva Munkhbat (Sociologist) Senior researcher

Lkhagvasuren Erdenesaikhan (Sociologist) Researcher

 CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................iv
SURVEY TEAM ..........................................................................................................................v
TABLES AND FIGURES ...........................................................................................................ix
ACRONYMS .............................................................................................................................11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................12
ONE. SURVEY METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................13
1.1 Need for the survey ............................................................................................................. 13
1.2 Survey goal ......................................................................................................................... 13
1.3 Survey design ...................................................................................................................... 14
1.4 Data collection process ....................................................................................................... 14
1.5 Survey sampling and scope ................................................................................................. 15
1.6 Data analysis ....................................................................................................................... 16
1.7 Data quality monitoring ...................................................................................................... 16
1.8 Problems in data collection ................................................................................................. 17
1.9 Survey restrictions .............................................................................................................. 17
2. Key concepts ......................................................................................................................... 18
TWO. RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ........................................................................19
2.1 Present day situation of land privatization in Mongolia ..................................................... 20
2.2 Baganuur district ................................................................................................................. 20
2.3 Bayanzurh district ............................................................................................................... 20
2.4 Songinohairhan district ....................................................................................................... 21
2.5 Darhan-Uul aimag ............................................................................................................... 21
2.6 Dundgobi aimag .................................................................................................................. 22
2.7 Hovd aimag ......................................................................................................................... 22
2.8 Hentii aimag ........................................................................................................................ 23
2.9 Data on survey respondent citizens..................................................................................... 23
THREE. INFORMATION ON LAND OWNERSHIP/PRIVATIZATION AND ACCESSIBILITY TO
INFORMATION ........................................................................................................................26
3.1 Information on land............................................................................................................. 26
3.2 Information on possibilities to own land that citizens occupy ............................................ 28
FOUR. DOCUMENTS REQUIRED FOR LAND OWNERSHIP AND RELEVANT STEPS ........32
4.1 Access to information ......................................................................................................... 32
4.2 Documents to be filled in for land ownership ..................................................................... 34
4.2.1 Getting official letter/certification from the Governor ................................................ 35
4.2.2 Notarization of documents ........................................................................................... 35
4.2.3 Filling out application forms ........................................................................................ 35
4.2.4 Cadaster mapping......................................................................................................... 35
4.2.5 Attaching land possession contract and certificate ...................................................... 37
4.3 Submitting land ownership application to the land office .................................................. 37
4.4 Waiting for three months for the final decision .................................................................. 38
FIVE. ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS/DOCUMENTS AND RESOLVING .................................42
5.1 Receiving, checking and registering applications ............................................................... 42
5.1. Number of citizens applying to the land office .............................................................. 42
5.1.2 Reasons for long queues and potential solutions ......................................................... 43
5.2 Developing a draft resolution for the governor................................................................... 46
5.3 Responding to citizens in accordance with the governors resolution ................................ 46
5.4 Marking boundaries and size of the land for ownership on site and identifying coordinates
................................................................................................................................................... 47
5.5 Issuing the land ownership decision (conclusions for state assurance for land quality and
status to be submitted together) ................................................................................................ 48
5.6 Registration of land cadaster database ................................................................................ 48
5.7 Creating land parcel file ...................................................................................................... 48
5.8 Other difficulties and obstacles that citizens encounter in getting their land privatized .... 49
SIX. RECEIVING LAND OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE.............................................................52
6.1 Getting information related to land ownership rights certificate ........................................ 52
6.2 Formulating documents ...................................................................................................... 53
6.3 Receiving the certificate ..................................................................................................... 54
6.4 Problems ............................................................................................................................. 55
6.4.1 No access to information ............................................................................................. 56
6.4.2 Isolation from offices ................................................................................................... 56
6.4.3 High workload of property registration office ............................................................. 56
EIGHT. LAND DISPUTES ........................................................................................................57
8.1 Complaints and grievances to Land Office ......................................................................... 57
8.1.1 Disputes caused by Land Offices ................................................................................. 58
8.1.2 Disputes caused by citizens ......................................................................................... 59
8.2 Submitting claims to court .................................................................................................. 59
SEVEN. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ON THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY LAND OFFICE,
QUALITY AND ACCESSIBILITY TO SERVICE .......................................................................61
7.1 Bureaucracy of land offices ................................................................................................ 61
7.2 Drawbacks of land offices and officers .............................................................................. 63
7.3 Customer satisfaction .......................................................................................................... 65
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................................................68
APPENDIX ...............................................................................................................................72
 TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1. Survey sampling ..........................................................................................................16

Table 2. General data on survey respondents (by %)................................................................23
Table 3. How many days did you spend formulating all documents for land ownership? (rural vs
urban) .......................................................................................................................................37
Table 4. List of free services .....................................................................................................54

Figure 1. Data collection methods .............................................................................................14

Figure 2. Survey locations .........................................................................................................15
Figure 3. Flowchart for data quality assurance ..........................................................................17
Figure 4. Staffing and structure of district land offices ...............................................................19
Figure 5. Staffing and structure of Aimag Land Department ......................................................19
Figure 6. Sources of information where citizens get information on land ownership ..................27
Figure 7. Where do you get information about land ownership? (rural vs urban) .......................27
Figure 8. How does the Land Office disseminate information on land ownership? (results from
individual interviews) .................................................................................................................28
Figure 9. Where did you get information on whether it is possible privatize the land you wanted
to own? .....................................................................................................................................29
Figure 10. Where did you get information on whether it is possible to privatize the land you
wanted to own? (rural vs urban) ................................................................................................29
Figure 11. Factor analysis on obstacles and difficulties that citizens encounter in getting
information on land ownership ..................................................................................................30
Figure 12. Steps for privatizing land for household purposes ....................................................32
Figure 13. Do you know that soum and district Governors must respond to your application
within 3 months after they received the application and documents? (urban vs rural) ...............33
Figure 14. Did you encounter any difficulties in documentation necessary for land ownership? 34
Figure 15. On which part of formulating document for land ownership did you spend the most
time? .........................................................................................................................................34
Figure 16. If you have experienced difficulties in cadaster mapping, exactly what difficulties did
you encounter? .........................................................................................................................36
Figure 17. How many days did you spend formulating all documents for land ownership? ........37
Figure 18. How feasible is this three-month period? ..................................................................38
Figure 19. After how long (how many months) did you get a copy of a resolution to privatize land
after you had submitted your complete application to the land office? .......................................39
Figure 20. Did you experience the following issues after you have submitted your application for
land ownership? ........................................................................................................................39
Figure 21. Did you experience the following issues in privatizing your land? .............................39
Figure 22. Factor analysis on the difficulties that citizens encounter in getting land ownership
tenure .......................................................................................................................................40
Figure 23. Stages for processing submitted applications ...........................................................42
Figure 24. Difficulties and obstacles that citizens encounter in resolving document- related
issues in land privatization ........................................................................................................50
Figure 25. Steps to get ownership title certificate (rural vs. urban) ............................................52
Figure 26. Number of questions to an officer by citizens (by service type) % ...........................53
Figure 27. Status of citizens who have received land ownership title certificates (rural vs urban)
.................................................................................................................................................54
Figure 28. Time taken to get the land ownership title certificate ................................................55
Figure 29. Reasons for not obtaining the title certificates, problems ..........................................55
Figure 30. Steps through which citizens submit complaints and claims and get disputes resolved
.................................................................................................................................................57
Figure 31. Reasons for land disputes as identified by land officers ...........................................58
Figure 32. Main factors for the land disputes .............................................................................58
 ACRONYMS

IAAC Independent Agency Against Corruption

US United States
ALAGaC Agency for Land Affairs, Geodesy and
Cartography
CRKh Citizens Representative Khural
MPAD Municipality Property Affairs Department
USAID US Agency for International Development
GASR General Agency for State Registration

[11]
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This survey was conducted on 6-23 September 2013 in Baganuur, Bayanzurh, Songinohairhan
and Suhbaatar districts of Ulaanbaatar city, and in Darhan-Uul, Dundgobi, Hovd and Hentii
aimags (provinces). The survey process extensively involved a variety of methodologies
including questionnaires, document reviews, individual interviews and case studies.

Results: When land privatization began in 2008, the workload of the Land Offices rose
dramatically; to date, 11.8% of all citizens now own privatized land; 67.6% of Mongolians
received information on land privatization from the staff of district and soum Land Offices. The
rural land offices received 20-30% more requests for information than that received by the urban
offices. When citizens make application for land privatization, they encounter a number of
problems: land office operations are not seen as open and transparent; there is a high level of
bureaucracy; access to information is inadequate; and citizens possess only limited information
and knowledge. Citizens also encounter problems in getting cadaster maps developed for their
khashaa plot: [1] the number of cadaster companies in rural areas is limited; [2] companies
create erroneous cadaster maps; [3] land plots are allocated overlapping others; and [4] there
are problems involving conflict of interest. Weak policy and poor integration between
government agencies providing public services on land privatization can be exemplified by
coincidence of land plots: for example, a formal decision granting privatization of a plot of land
(khashaa plot) was given to two different persons. There are other problems: government
agencies do not resolve land applications speedily; there are long queues at land offices;
privatization-related decisions are not made in response to request or just disappear without
trace; citizens illegally settle on unpermitted areas; there are attempts to privatize land that does
not meet health and safety requirements. Citizens encountered fewer problems in getting land
privatization certificates, but they have often misunderstood that Local Governor resolutions on
privatization of land secure their land rights, but some citizens must go to a provincial center for
certificates and Ulaanbaatar City citizens had to wait in long queues to get their land ownership
certificates from GASR. 28.9% of all respondents who had contact with land offices said they
had to go to the office 4-7 times; 16.9% said they had to attend 8 or more times; this clearly
demonstrates a high level of bureaucracy. 23% of respondents said they met many difficulties
and obstacles in privatizing their land, 23.6% said they had bureaucratic problems, 10.1% had
problems in information access, 19% said they met problems related to the land office workload,
and 12.2% had problems with land office working hours. In total, 26.3% responded that it took
far too long to decide on a land privatization application. Respondents gave five main factors for
this: land offices have no regular monitoring and oversight on service delivery; the office has a
high workload; the structure and arrangement of the land office is insufficient to cope with the
large number of citizens wanting service; the laws and policies are outdated; and the staff
working conditions are poor. Land privatization applications have been increasing, with an
excessive number of land-related disputes between applicants. To complain or submit petitions
in relation to land privatization, citizens approach the land office that has granted ownership
rights, its higher level agency the Municipality Property Affairs Department, or the courts. The
main reasons for the excessive disputes on land were reported as relating to irresponsible land
officers or to incorrect citizen actions.

[12]
 ONE. SURVEY METHODOLOGY

1.1 Need for the survey

The survey, entitled Improving Transparency of Geodesy-Cartography and Land Offices, is a

component of the STAGE program implemented by the Asia Foundation and funded by USAID.
This survey was based on previous surveys on Identifying Public Perception on Corruption, and
on the Asia Foundation program Supporting Anti-Corruption Action in Mongolia. The survey
found that Ulaanbaatar City Land Department and local land departments were the most corrupt
agencies in 2006-2012. Since 2006 the Open Society Forum has implemented a Land Reform
Monitoring Program, surveying transparency of the land privatization process. The above
projects have collected a considerable amount of data on land offices and land-related issues,
and have revealed some important land-related issues. However, while previous surveys have
identified an overall picture of corruption in what citizens believe to be the most affected or most
corrupt agencies, they did not explore reasons for the corruption or what steps should be taken
in land-related public services. Moreover, no case-based surveys have been conducted on the
key topic of this survey, namely obstacles met by citizens wishing to privatize 0.07/0.5/0.35
hectares of land as permitted by law. This case study aimed to unveil the rationale for and
internal factors of present issues, differing from previous surveys in that it has been based on
multiple cases.

1.2 Survey goal

The survey goal was to help improve land office transparency, to identify problems and
obstacles for citizens applying to privatize 0.07, 0.5 or 0.35 hectares of land and factors
influencing results, and to develop recommendations for improved rules and regulations for land
office operations. The survey has the following objectives.

1. To explore land office operations, structure, staffing, internal mechanisms and

procedures.
2. To identify key factors hindering transparency of land office services.
3. To study the most frequently occurring problems and difficulties for citizens applying
to privatize land at all stages.
4. To evaluate land privatization policy, rules and regulations and improve transparency.
5. To disseminate information on the work of land offices and eliminate corruption.

[13]
1.3 Survey design

The overall survey design was based on a methodology involving multiple case-based research;
this design aims at getting responses to the questions How? and Why? and explores realistic
circumstances and root causes. Using a qualitative survey method as the main tool, we
identified a number of cases from seven selected areas; we clarified the special features and
specifics of each case and consolidated them, using some general indicators.

1.4 Data collection process

As well as the main case study tool, the survey team conducted interviews with land office
senior managers and staff, collecting data on 6-23 September 2013 using a specially designed
questionnaire, as well as document review.

Figure 1. Data collection methods

Case (Complaints and petitions

Questionnaire (4 districts, 4 aimags
submitted by citizens to IAAC and
and 7 soums)
district offices)
Data collection
methods

Individual interview (senior managers

Document review
of land offices, their staff)

Case study methodology. The key objects for the survey, the cases, were selected from
complaints and petitions to the IAAC regarding land offices, and materials stored at the capital
city and district land offices on resolution and redress of complaints and grievances. The survey
selected a total of 14 cases. For reporting purposes, we changed the first letter of the names of
people involved and used this letter instead of full names to protect respondent privacy.

Individual interviews. We conducted individual interviews with land office departmental officers,
collecting data on problems in land ownership, land office internal mechanisms and procedures,
and citizen participation. For each field of study, we conducted 4-6 interviews, a total of 40
interviews each lasting 35-45 minutes. The following officials were selected as interviewees for
each survey.

Chairman and senior officers of land offices.

Land Offices: Land administrators, cadaster specialists and land fee officers.
Questionnaires. One of the main survey methods was the questionnaire involving citizens who
had privatized their land. For involvement, the following factors were applied.
At least 18 years old.
Formally registered in the soum or district surveyed.
Applied to the land office within the past 1-3 years and privatized 0.07, 0.35 or 0.5
hectares of land allocated free by the government to citizens, or is still going through the
process of privatization of land.
[14]
Researchers asked the questions and registered the answers themselves. The questionnaire
covered all privatization stages, from beginning to completion, plus socio-demographic
information, level of satisfaction with service, and comments and opinions about the land office.
Each questionnaire took about 30 minutes to complete. The questionnaire form is attached
(Annex One).

Document reviews. Document review was carried out on three different types of documents: [1]
reports and materials of 18 other surveys on this topic; [2] 9 policy documents; and [3] 7
documents related to the others, with closely associated themes. Documents reviewed are
listed in the Literature Section.

1.5 Survey sampling and scope

The survey covered 4 districts of Ulaanbaatar city (Baganuur, Bayanzurh, Songinohairhan and
Suhbaatar) and the 4 aimags of Darkhan-Uul, Dundgobi, Hovd and Hentii (7 soums).

Figure 2. Survey locations

There was a total of 343 respondents; 145 were from the capital city, 198 from local areas. Only
4 questionnaires were filled out by respondents in Suhbaatar district as land privatization had
not taken place extensively in the past three years in this district, and many of the people who
had privatized land had sold up. As a result, we added Songinohairhan district to the sampling.
However, 5 interviews with respondents from Suhbaatar district have been included in the
survey report. The following table shows the survey sampling design.

[15]
Table 1. Survey sampling

Aimags and Interview (senior

city covered Soum and officers of land
Questionnaire Case
by the district offices and their
survey staff)
2 cases
1 Suhbaatar 5 6 from land
offices
2 cases
2 Bayanzurh 5 41 from land
offices
Ulaanbaatar 2 cases
3 Songinohairhan 5 60 from land
offices
1 case from
a citizen
4 Baganuur 5 38
and 1 from
IAAC
5 Jargalant 5 40 3 cases
Hovd from
6 Buyant 11 citizens
7 Herlen 5 27 1 case from
Hentii
8 Murun 20 a citizen

9 Mandalgobi 6 35 1 case from

Dundgobi
10 Delgertsogt 15 a citizen
1 case from
11 Darkhan-Uul Darkhan 4 50
a citizen
Total 40 343 14

1.6 Data analysis

The data was entered into MS Excel software, and the soft data checked against the hard copy
(completed questionnaire forms). The data was then analyzed and processed on SPSS 17.0
software and the necessary calculations made. In terms of qualitative survey data, all individual
interviews were recorded by a voice recorder. For analysis of qualitative data, we used tools
such as clustering and plotting on QDA Miner, qualitative data analysis software.

1.7 Data quality monitoring

Data quality monitoring and assurance was carried out between 24 September and 3 October
2013. In terms of sequence for quality monitoring, we did content monitoring, phone monitoring,

[16]
checking the record with questionnaires and entry control; 4 types of data quality monitoring
were applied to all data collected from the field.
Figure 3. Flowchart for data quality assurance

1.Field work 2. Content check 3. Phone check

6. Data entry quality 5. Data entry 4. Audio check

1.8 Problems in data collection

1. Citizens of suburban ger areas of 4 Ulaanbaatar districts were involved with the survey,
though it was difficult to find respondents fitting the sampling design as the street
addresses and location of ger areas were messy; the survey team worked closely with
kheseg leaders and khoroo governors to resolve these issues.
2. Survey timing closely followed local assembly elections and many government officers
were newly-appointed. As senior managers of aimag and district land offices were
mostly new appointments, researchers found it difficult to collect the necessary data, to
complete interviews with responsible officers and get statistics and other relevant data.
3. The survey target group was limited; some respondents refused to answer questions,
and some were not able to answer (the main person in the family who handled
privatizing land was absent). However the field researchers managed to achieve a
sample size of the required level.
4. Information about land offices and courts was often closed to the public and accessibility
to such information was limited. In addition, judges are prohibited from giving interviews
and information; this was encountered frequently by the team during the survey process.
5. When respondents were cautious about giving direct answers about corruption, we
asked alternative questions, such as Did you give a bribe?, Did you have other
additional costs in privatizing your land? and If yes, how much and for what purpose?

1.9 Survey restrictions

The survey content/theme and scope were limited to the following.

1. The survey did not aim to collect data from respondents representing the whole country.
Rather, it focused on selected target groups: households that privatized 0.07, 0.35 or 0.5
hectares of land given free to citizens.
2. The questionnaire content was limited to the stages of land privatization through to
completion of the privatization process.
3. The survey results represent only the areas in which the survey was conducted.
4. The survey aimed at identifying the present situation and revealing causes.
5. As it was difficult to obtain some documents, some statistics may be incomplete; this
could be a disadvantage to and restriction on the survey.

[17]
2. Key concepts

1. Corruption. Article 3.1.1 of the Anti-Corruption Law describes corruption as any act or
omission by a person identified in Provision 4.1 of this law, and any unlawful violation or
attempt to misuse an appointed position and authority for personal gain, giving
advantage/privilege to others or advantage/privilege for other citizen and/or entity.
2. Local area. This refers to aimags (Darhan, Dundgobi, Hovd and Hentii) covered in the
survey.
3. Privatization of land to citizens. Transfer of land ownership as stated in the Constitution
of Mongolia to citizens in compliance with the described size, conditions, requirements,
regulations and terms as stated in the law.
4. Land ownership. Citizen ownership of land to the full extent of rights permitted by law.
5. Land possession. Citizen possession of land within the extent of rights permitted by law
in compliance with purposes stated in the agreement, terms and conditions in the
respective law.
6. Land ownership rights certificate. A certificate issued by the GASR guaranteeing the
rights of the owner as regards the privatized land.
7. Petitions and complaints. Complaint or petition that a citizen submits to a district land
office or MPAD should they think their land rights have been violated.
8. Land Office. Land offices shall have a consolidated and centralized management;
aimags, the capital city and districts shall have a land office, while soums shall have a
designated land administrator. For instance, the Municipality Land Affairs, Construction
and Urban Development Agency shall be in charge of land issues in the capital city,
while a soum land administrator shall be responsible for all land-related matters in the
respective soum.
9. Information relating to land. This involves general information on land privatization and
ownership and refers to the process of giving and receiving of information; it includes the
process by which citizens get information on land ownership from land offices and
related sources.
10. Information on the possibility of privatizing land for use/possession. This refers to a land
plot that is included in the annual management plan of the capital city, aimag, soum or
district, and having no impediment to private ownership. Such impediment may include
floodway or water flow, under power lines, protection of drinking water resources.
11. Land office bureaucracy. Problems and obstacles in service met by citizens mainly
because of the service providers poor performance, structure and organisation.
12. Problems with land office/officer. Problems, difficulties and obstacles in the way of a land
office carrying out duties normally and transparently.
13. Service satisfaction. This refers to an evaluation of receipt of service by a citizen from a
land office.

[18]
 TWO. RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHIC DATA

This section outlines general data about the 4 districts and 4 aimags covered by the survey in 4
indicators: demography, land office structure, staffing and present situation of land privatization.
Staffing and structure of land offices in aimags and districts is shown on the following chart
(Figures 3 and 4)

Figure 4. Staffing and structure of district land offices

Chairman

Land Land fee Registration Land Finance officer Secretary Driver,

manager specialist officer privatization and archive Cleaner
officer officer

At the district level, land department staffing and structures vary according to population size
and workload. For instance, the Baganuur District land office, serving a population of 27,036,
has a staff of 20, while the Songinohairhan district land office, serving 257,140, has 17 staff.
Using the Baganuur District Land office staffing as a benchmark, the Songinohairhan district
land office should have a staff of 95 staff, 5.5 times the present number. Land offices in the 9
capital city districts are affiliates of the Municipality Property Affairs Department (MPAD), and
MPAD staffing and structure are jointly approved by ALAGaC and Capital City Governor
resolutions.
Figure 5. Staffing and structure of Aimag Land Department
Chairman of Land Affairs and
Urban Construction Agency

Land affairs Admin and finance

Senior officer for land affairs Accountant

Internal affairs, archive and

Land valuation, fee and tax documentation officer
officer

Driver
Land privatization officer

Cleaner
Land cadaster officer
Stock taker

Geodesy and cartography

officer

IT officer

[19]
Aimag land offices are in three main divisions: Land Affairs, Administration and Finance, and
Construction; however, the Construction section has not been included here.

2.1 Present day situation of land privatization in Mongolia

Nationally, 336,106 citizens (11.8% of the population) have now been granted their own land
free (37,044.4 hectares) through the privatization process, as of March 2013.

2.2 Baganuur district

Population: Baganuur district has 5 khoroos (administrative units), with a population of 27,036
(7,540 households); 36% are between the ages of 13 and 36, 32% are aged 0-18. 42% (3,160)
of households are in apartment blocks, while 58% (4,410) are in ger districts.

Territory: Baganuur district is 130kms east of Ulaanbaatar, covering 62,200 hectares. This area
is divided as follows: 40,687.7 hectares agricultural, 20,249.8ha in cities and villages, 472.2ha
roads and utility networks, 502.3ha forest, 94ha water resource areas and 14.3ha for state
special purposes.1

Staffing and structure of land office: Baganuur District land office currently has 9 staff2: 2 senior
managers, 2 land managers, 2 officers for property and land affairs, 2 land fee inspectors, a
cadaster specialist, an archive officer, a document controller, a driver and a cleaner.

Present situation of land privatization: As of the end of June 2013, 3,188 citizens had taken
ownership of their land (15% of the population). Officers made extensive use of the media to
disseminate information on land privatization and related legislation, and worked in the khoroos
to provide information and hold discussion sessions. As a result, there were four times as many
citizens owning land as in 2012, when 137 citizens had privatized land.3 As of 11 November
2013, Baganuur district had privatized 212.57 hectares of land to 3,278 citizens.4

2.3 Bayanzurh district

Population: Bayanzurh district is divided into 28 khoroos (administrative units), with a population
of 283,289 in 75,126 households; 35% (98,939) people live in apartment buildings, while 65%
(184,350) live in ger areas.

Territory: Bayanzurh district is in the south east part of Ulaanbaatar, occupying 124,412
hectares. The area includes 52,509.50 hectares agricultural, 5,800.23ha cities and villages,
1,021.29ha roads and utility network, 34,659.86ha forest, 2,315.90ha water resource areas and
28,105.22ha for state special purposes.

1
2012 Unified land territory report. MPAD
2
Structure and staffing scheme approved by MPAD
3
Semi-annual report on property and land affairs, 2013.09.13 http://bnd.ub.gov.mn/?p=4039
4
Statistics on privatizing khashaa plots in the Capital City in 2003-2013. MPAD, Land ownership and property management
department
[20]
Land Office staffing and structure: Bayanzurh district land office has 24 staff: 1 senior level
manager, 6 land managers, a registration officer, two property and land affairs officers, three
land fee officers, a cadaster officer, a secretary, a driver and a security guard.

Present situation of land privatization: As of 11 November 2013, Bayanzurh district had

privatized 1,235.83 hectares of land to 23,721 citizens.

2.4 Songinohairhan district

Population: Songinohairhan district is divided into 32 khoroos (administrative units), with a

population of 257,140 (62,423 households); 28% (17,589 households) occupy apartment
buildings, while 72% (45,231 households) live in ger areas.

Territory: Songinohairhan district is in the west of Ulaanbaatar around the Songinohairhan

mountain, covering 120,063 hectares, including 87,487.6 hectares agricultural, 8,558.4ha cities
and villages, 1,444.5ha roads and utility network, 21,430.3ha forest, 71.00ha water resource
areas and 1,071.2ha for state special purpose.

Land Office staffing and structure: Songinohairhan district land office has 19 staff: 1 senior level
officer, 6 land managers, 2 privatization officers, 2 registration officers, 3 land fee officers, an
accountant, a secretary, an archive officer and a driver.5

Present situation of land privatization: Songinohairhan district land office has received over 615
applications for privatization of land; the applications and draft resolutions were sent on to the
Capital City Governor; subsequently two resolutions granted land ownership and rights to 615
citizens. Of the applications, 359 were received on 3 July 2013, with 49 excluding co-owners
from registration and 51 applications requesting change to the cadaster map; all were resolved.
On 16 July, the Office resolved 149 applications for land ownership and 2 applications for
change to the cadaster map, taking the resolved applications to 615.6 As of 11 November 2013,
29,006 citizens had privatized 1,614.88 hectares of land.

2.5 Darhan-Uul aimag

Population: Darhan-Uul aimag has a population of 93,657, 79.5% living in the provincial center
of Darhan City; 64.5% are under 35 years of age. The whole aimag has 24,989 households,
with 67.5% in private apartment buildings, the rest in ger areas.

Territory: Administratively, Darhan-Uul aimag has 4 soums and 24 baghs (rural grassroots unit),
covering over 330,000 hectares; Darhan-Uul aimag occupies 0.2% of Mongolia. The provincial
center (Darkhan City) is 220kms from Ulaanbaatar; 70.7% of the aimag (231,700 hectares) is
agricultural.7

Land Office staffing and structure: Darkhan-Uul aimag land office has 16 staff, 7 of whom are
responsible purely for land related issues: 1 senior officer for land affairs, a land valuation, fee

5
Songinohairhan District Property and Land Affairs Office http://www.umch.ub.gov.mn/
6
July report, Songinohairhan District Property and Land Affairs Office
7
Darhan-Uul aimag. 2011.07.04. http://info.e-darkhan.com/
[21]
and tax officer, a land privatization officer, a land cadaster officer, a geodesy and cartography
officer and two IT officers. Other staffing is for administration, finance and construction.

Present situation of land privatization: As of 31 December 2010, 13,260 citizens had applied for
land privatization; 43.2% applied to privatize the land on which they resided, the other 56.8%
wanted to privatize new land plots. By Local Governor resolution, 7,734 citizens were given land
as private ownership, of whom 66.3% got land they resided on, 33.7% were given new land.
The total area of privatized land was 915.29 hectares, 72.1% being land on which the owners
resided, 27.9% was new land granted to individuals.

2.6 Dundgobi aimag

Population: Dundgobi aimag has a population of 46,841: 64.6% are of working age (15-49),
28.2% are aged 0-14 and 7.8% are senior citizens (over 60).

Territory: Administratively, Dundgobi aimag has 15 soums and 66 baghs (rural primary unit),
covering 74,700 hectares of area, 4.5% of the nation. The provincial center is 265kms from
Ulaanbaatar, and borders Tuv, Gobi-Sumber, Dornogobi, Umnugobi and Uvurhangai aimags.8

Land Office staffing and structure: Dundgobi aimag Land Office has 7 staff: 1 senior officer
responsible for land affairs, a land valuation, fee and tax officer, a land privatization officer, a
land cadaster officer, a geodesy and cartography officer and two IT officers; other staff are
responsible for administration, finance and construction.

Present situation of land privatization: As of 31 December 2010, there were 4,687 applications
for land privatization, of whom 58.1% wanted ownership of the khashaa land they occupied,
41.9% asked for ownership of new land. The total area of privatized land was 431.55 hectares;
54.6% was land already used for khashaa plots, 45.4% was new land given to citizens.

2.7 Hovd aimag

Population: Hovd aimag has a wide range of ethnic groups and a population of 90,389; 34.0 are
aged 0-15, 60.8% are of working age (16-59), and 5.2% are senior citizens (over 60).

Territory: Administratively, Hovd aimag has 17 soums and 91 baghs, covering 76,100 hectares
(4.8% of Mongolian territory). The provincial center is 1,580kms from Ulaanbaatar, and Hovd
aimag borders Bayan-Ulgii, Uvs, Zavhan and Gobi-Altai aimags.

Land Office staffing and structure: Hovd aimag Land Office has 16 staff, 7 of whom are purely
responsible for land affairs: 1 senior officer for land affairs, a land valuation, fee and tax officer,
a land privatization officer, a land cadaster officer, geodesy and cartography officer and two IT
officers; the other officers are in charge of administration, finance and construction.

Present situation of land privatization: As of 31 December 2010, 10,793 citizens had applied for
land ownership: 77.6% wanted the khashaa plot they lived on, 22.4% applied for a new land
plot. The local governor issued a resolution giving land ownership to 8,008 citizens: 96.9% took

8
Brief intro of Dundgobi aimag http://dundgovi.gov.mn/
[22]
ownership of their khashaa plots, 3.1% privatized new land plots. The total area privatized was
1,168.93 hectares, of which 97.6% were occupied khashaa plots, 2.4% new land plots given to
citizens.

2.8 Hentii aimag

Population: Hentii aimag has a population of 72,854 (21,800 households), 35,000 of whom are
male. The provincial center of Undurhaan town has a population of 19,300.

Territory: Administratively, Hentii aimag has 18 soums, 4 villages and 88 baghs, covering
80,300 hectares (5.1% of Mongolia). The provincial center is 330kms from Ulaanbaatar and
borders Dornod, Suhbaatar, Dornogibi, Gobi-Sumber, Tuv and Selenge aimags.9

Land Office staffing and structure: Hentii aimag land office has 16 staff, including 7 officers
purely responsible for land related issues: 1 senior officer for land affairs, a land valuation, fee
and tax officer, a land privatization officer, a land cadaster officer and a geodesy and
cartography officer; other staff work in administration, finance and construction.

Present situation of land privatization: At 31 December 2010, 9,267 citizens had applied for land
ownership: 4,753 wanted ownership of their current khashaa plots, 4,506 wanted a new area,
and 8 applied for land for commercial purposes. The local governor issued a resolution giving
land ownership rights to 9,080 citizens, of whom 4,730 gained ownership of their khashaa plots
and 4,348 got ownership of new areas. The total area of privatized land was 1,318.13 hectares:
793.98ha were khashaa plots, 524.05ha were new land plots.

2.9 Data on survey respondent citizens

The questionnaire survey involved 343 respondents with privatized land or who were in the
process of acquiring privatized land free for household purposes, in compliance with the
legislation, in 4 aimags and 4 districts. Table 2 below shows demographic data and social and
economic characteristics of respondents in detail.

Table 2. General data on survey respondents (by %)

District Aimag
INDICATORS

Songinohair

Darhan-Uul
Bayanzurh
Baganuur

Dundgobi

Median
Hentii
Hovd
han

Below 19 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6

20-29 18.4 12.8 17.7 15.7 4.0 15.7 8.7 13.7
AGE

30-39 26.3 30.8 25.8 23.5 24.0 31.4 32.6 27.4

40-49 10.5 17.9 27.4 25.5 34.0 25.5 32.6 25.7

9
Hentii aimag, http://khentii.mn/web/taniltsuulga/
[23]
 50-59 23.7 23.1 17.7 15.7 28.0 13.7 15.2 19.0
60-69 13.2 15.4 9.7 9.8 6.0 7.8 8.7 9.9
70+ 2.6 0.0 1.6 9.8 4.0 5.9 2.2 3.8
Male 50.0 35.9 24.2 29.4 32.0 29.4 32.6 32.1
SEX

Female 50.0 64.1 75.8 70.6 68.0 70.6 67.4 67.9

No education 5.3 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.3 2.0
EDUCATION LEVEL

Primary education (1-4 5.3 0.0 3.2 9.8 8.0 5.9 4.3 5.5
grades)
Secondary (5-8 grades) 13.2 7.7 1.6 9.8 24.0 11.8 28.3 13.1
High (9-11 grades) 47.4 53.8 61.3 41.2 30.0 47.1 26.1 44.6
TVET school 0.0 7.7 4.8 2.0 6.0 9.8 0.0 4.4
College 7.9 2.6 8.1 19.6 10.0 5.9 8.7 9.0
University 21.1 28.2 21.0 15.7 20.0 17.6 28.3 21.3
Unemployed 34.2 17.9 29.0 21.6 12.0 35.3 19.6 24.2
Public administration 5.3 2.6 1.6 3.9 12.0 5.9 13.0 6.1
agencies
Public service agencies 10.5 17.9 9.7 19.6 28.0 9.8 30.4 17.5
NGO 0.0 0.0 1.6 2.0 0.0 0.0 4.3 1.2
International 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
organizations
INCOME EMPLOYMENT

Private company 2.6 10.3 17.7 15.7 14.0 3.9 8.7 10.2
Entrepreneurs 10.5 15.4 25.8 15.7 14.0 29.4 6.5 18.1
Pensioners 31.6 33.3 14.5 21.6 0.0 15.7 15.2 19.8
Students 5.3 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2
Herders 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 2.2 1.7
Up to MNT 100.000 7.9 2.6 4.8 5.9 10.0 5.9 13.0 7.0
MNT 100.001- 250.000 21.1 20.5 11.3 25.5 34.0 25.5 10.9 20.7
MNT 250.001- 500.000 39.5 30.8 40.3 41.2 34.0 45.1 37.0 39.1
HISTORY ON LAND (HOUSEHOLD)

MNT 500.001-750.000 13.2 17.9 27.4 19.6 12.0 15.7 17.4 17.8
MONTHLY

MNT 750.001-1.000.000 15.8 23.1 8.1 5.9 8.0 3.9 13.0 10.8

Above MNT 1.000.000 2.6 5.1 8.1 2.0 2.0 3.9 8.7 4.7
New land plot 86.8 33.3 66.7 43.1 74.0 56.9 60.9 59.5
Khashaa plot previously 7.9 28.2 0.0 15.7 0.0 17.6 32.6 17.5
PRIVATIZATION

resided on
PREVIOUS

Land previously used 5.3 38.5 33.3 37.3 24.0 25.5 4.3 20.4

Land used by others 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 2.0 0.0 2.2 2.6

[24]
Respondents comprised 30-39 years old (27.4%); 40-49 years old (25.7%); and 50-59 years old
(19%); 67.9% were male. Respondents with high school education predominated (44.6%), but
the survey questionnaire included all education levels. The average monthly household income
of respondents was MNT 320. Survey data was mostly collected during working hours, so it
involves mainly women, the unemployed (24.2%) and senior citizens (19.8%). Of respondents,
51.5% of women, 47 % of unemployed and 57.4% of senior citizens said that they got
information from land officers in their respective soum or district). However, information
provided by these respondents did not significantly affect the results of this survey, as the
designated target group was those who had privatized land for household purposes or who
were in the process of privatizing land one time and for free, as stated in the law. 60% of all 343
respondents had new land, 37.9% had obtained their khashaa plots. Citizens who obtained
ownership of new plots did so as the period for privatizing land to citizens for household
purposes had been extended, the government pursued a policy of commercializing land and
sorting out land affairs, and public understanding on land was changing.

[25]
THREE. INFORMATION ON LAND OWNERSHIP/PRIVATIZATION AND ACCESSIBILITY TO
INFORMATION

3.1 Information on land

This section describes citizen access to information on land ownership and privatization, and
how and to what extent land officers distributed information and ownership.

Officer A of the Songinohairhan District Land Office said, Information on land ownership is
adequately disseminated nowadays. Since the land privatization law was promulgated back in
2003-2005, the privatization period has been extended 2-3 times. At that time, citizens had
almost no access to information except via some small TV ads and short TV programs. Citizens
had to read the respective legislation to gain information. The situation has changed now; if
citizens want information, adequate information is available. They can get a handout from the
district administration and the Municipality Property Affairs Department; this explains the law,
commenting on the advantages of private land ownership and advising on the documents
required to apply for land ownership. Since July 2012, the Mongolia Millennium Challenge
Account has implemented a one-year project called Supporting Registration of Land Ownership
Rights in Peri-Urban Areas, a project which is almost finished. Under this project, many different
handouts were prepared and distributed. At the same time, we gave information to our clients
and publicized our website address. All handouts, guidelines and application forms are available
free of charge. When citizens apply to us to own land, we give them a template approved by
ALAGaC. This shows that much more information is available than in earlier years.

Officer E of the Bayanzurh District Land Office said, Our office has put up three digital
information boards for citizens. When planning and re-planning for district development is
underway, geographical maps are put on the info boards, with information at the same time
posted on the district website. For uninformed citizens, we have three receptionists at the Land
Office, responsible for providing primary information, counseling, advising on filling out
application forms and giving information on where they should be lodged.

In Darhan, the geoportal.gazar.gov.mn website displays the years overall land management
plan. If citizens enter their civil registration ID and their Land Office application ID, they can find
stages of the application process and who is dealing with their application. We have started this
system as pilot, said Officer S of the Darhan-Uul aimag land office. To sum up, aimag and
district land offices are taking action to make information available for citizens.

However, there is still no complete access to information on land privatization and land
ownership. The results of the questionnaire below show where citizens get information on land
ownership (Figure 6).

[26]
Figure 6. Sources of information where citizens get information on land ownership

Info board at Hotlines (0.3%)

Land office
(16.3%)

Through land TV (19.2%)

office (67.6%) Hand-outs
(1.2%)
Newspaper
(1.2%)

Land officers
(50.1%) Friends (5.2%)
Citizen

Family (3.2%)

Not through
land office Websites (0.3%)
(32.4%)

International Bagh/khoroo
organizations (2.1%)
(0,9%)

This chart shows that 3 of 10 respondents get information on land ownership from their own
sources (TV, friend, etc) rather than directly from a land office. The most frequently used
sources of information are (by number of responses) 1. TV; 2. Friend; 3. Family member; 4.

Figure 7. Where do you get information about land ownership? (rural vs urban)

Bagh or khoroo administration; 5. Newspapers. Seven of 10 respondents get information

directly from a land office; half of all information is provided by land officers.

Soum/District Land officers 58.6%

38.6%
Soum/District Land Office Info Board 13.1%
20.7%
TV 19.2%
19.3% Rural
Friends 3.0%
Urban
8.3%
Other 4.5%
7.7%
Family members 1.5%
5.5%

[27]
Comparative data on information sources for land ownership by rural/urban setting show that
rural citizens generally get their information from a land office; 205 more rural than urban
respondents did so. This is perhaps because [1] local citizens have limited access to information
other than from their local land office; and [2] the land officer workload in rural areas is lower
than in urban areas. In other words, local citizens get most of their information on land
ownership from local land offices, fewer from an information board. Conversely, urban citizens
get less information from land officers; they get most from an information board. The Other
response covers sources of information such as bagh or khoroo administration, newspapers,
international organizations, hot lines, websites and handouts.

Media in responses refer to TV, FM radio and websites (Figure 8)

Figure 8. How does the Land Office disseminate information on land ownership? (results
from individual interviews)

Media 15.7%
Land officers 8.9%
Open day event 6.8%
Info board 6.3%
Meetings, discussions 4.7%
Hand-outs, leaflest 2.1%

Interview results show that land offices make most use of the media to disseminate information.
Questionnaire respondents said that they basically get their information on land ownership from
land officers, while the interviews with land office senior and line officers show that they
disseminate information through their offices. Commenting on this, Officer S of the
Songinohairhan District land office said, It seems that we must disseminate information to
citizens better. It seems that citizens dont properly understand information, or do not check the
information board; then they come to us several times; or they bring in incomplete documents,
and then they blame us, saying that we made them come in several times. They come in one,
two or three months after their first visit, but they say they have been coming to the land office
for four months. These are issues. Otherwise, we comply with timing and rules. This
demonstrates that land offices dont give enough information and counseling to citizens, so they
need to attend offices several times.

3.2 Information on possibilities to own land that citizens occupy

Citizen A lives in Hovd aimags Jargalant soum, and said, I got a new plot of land in 2012. I
found out I could apply to own it from personal connections and rumors, and started the
process. Two citizens of Baganuur district (Z and A), A from Songinohairhan and M and M
(Bayanzurh district) also found out that they could own the land they occupied from relatives
and friends. This shows that (on the one hand) information on land ownership is not efficiently
disseminated to citizens and (on the other hand) citizens often listen to rumors and word of
mouth for information instead of asking land offices. Figure 9 shows where questionnaire
respondents obtained information on the possibilities of ownership of land they lived on.

[28]
Figure 9. Where did you get information on whether it is possible privatize the land you
wanted to own?

Soum/District land officers 79.3%

Cadaster company 11.4%
Friends, personal connections 2%
By ourselves 1.7%
Bagh 1.5%
International organizations 1.2%
Khoroo 1.2%
TV 0.9%
Hand-outs, boards 0.9%

Almost 80% of respondents said they found out that they could own the land they lived on from
the soum and district land administration. Officer A of the Songinohairhan District Land Office
comments on this linking to need for information and counseling. He said,In Songinohairhan
district, on average a land officer is questioned by 80-90 people a day and has to give advice
and information till their throat is dry. Citizens have poor knowledge and information, and use
information poorly. They even ask for advice such as which direction they should go, so officers
get angry, tired and frustrated when they have to keep explaining everything to everyone. For
example, I work as a land fee officer, so I have to collect MNT 300-400 million in taxes every
quarter. To do this, I have to check over 1,000 contacts for which I am responsible, and must
check the payment of fees against the bank statements. That is vital work, but I have to stop
and give advice and information to 40-50 people every day on top of my work. They ask
questions, but sometimes we do not respond; then they get angry and shout at us, Talk! You
are not working! We tell them to look on the information board, but they say we have to tell
them. They want to get their hands on information, so they are pleased when we tell them
something. It seems that land offices should hire additional staff as receptionists and
information officers; this kind of service is currently being implemented in Bayanzurh district.

Figure 10. Where did you get information on whether it is possible to privatize the land
you wanted to own? (rural vs urban)

Soum/District land 90.90%

officers 63.40%

Cadaster company 5.60%
19.30%

Other 3.50%
17.30%

On where citizens get information on land ownership, it was found that 30% more rural
respondents used the land office than their urban counterparts. Urban citizens dont always
address the land office as they have access to many other types of information sources
(khoroos, handouts, information boards, relatives, friends, TV, international organizations);
however this low number could also be connected to the frequent low confidence in the land
office, the bureaucracy and the high workload. Officer A of the Songinohairhan District Land
Office said, The land office itself has a bad reputation as being bureaucratic, so citizens always

[29]
 carry the perception that they are entering a bureaucratic agency when they open the door to
the office.

Figure 11. Factor analysis on obstacles and difficulties that citizens encounter in getting
information on land ownership

No knowledge and
experience

Due to Poor time Improve

management oversight
faulty acts
system
of land
officers
Bureaucracy

NO PROVISION
OF INFO No customer
relations skills

Discrimination

LAND OFFICE CITIZENS

Info not posted on

Due to nit web, not updated Make
optimal coordination
structure
No info board
and
INFO PROVIDED arrangeme
nt
High workload

Long queue
(III) Due to
wrong acts of
(IV) Due to lack citizens
Dont use info
of funding and
board
budget

Disseminate
Requires hands-on
info in simple
info
and easy ways
No frequent and No hand-outs are Info board other
step-by-step distributed information are not
Not interested in
advertisement regularly updated
info provided
through media

Dont understand

Resolve investment [30]

and financing issues
Although the land office is one source (Figure 6) that disseminates information on land
ownership, it does not disseminate information adequately. Figure 11 above displays the main
reasons that respondents believe that land offices fail to disseminate information.

When citizens seek information, they encounter the following obstacles and difficulties
(comments on Figure 11).

(I) Citizens fail to get information as a fault of land officers, such as lack of knowledge, skills and
experiences, poor customer service and time management, bureaucracy and discrimination.
Therefore, the system of oversight at land offices must be improved to resolve these issues.

(II) Citizens fail to get information because of less than optimal structure and arrangements at
the land office. For instance, Baganuur district has a much lower population than
Songinohairhan District; the total staff numbers at Songinohairhan District Land Office should be
increased by 5.5 times, to 95. This imbalance means that some land agencies have a high
workload with long queues; this situation must be better managed and coordinated.

(III) Inadequate access to information was because citizens gave no importance to the
information board; some offices have no website and information is not transparent. On the
other hand, citizens do not properly use and understand the information board; instead they
insist on getting information from land officers. Therefore, land offices must disseminate
information in ways that are clear and understandable.

(IV) Lack of budget and financing. Figure 6 shows the findings from an interview with a senior
land officer, who said that land ownership information is best disseminated via the media.
However, extensive media use is expensive, so the land office budget for information
dissemination is always insufficient. If these offices had sufficient budgets, they would be able to
prepare more handouts and leaflets and update information on the boards.

[31]
 FOUR. DOCUMENTS REQUIRED FOR LAND OWNERSHIP AND RELEVANT STEPS
This section explores the obstacles and difficulties that citizens encounter in submitting the
necessary documentation for land privatization/ownership.

Citizen D of Hovd aimag said, When we show up at the land office to apply to privatize our
land, there is no list of documentation needed, so the officers must tell us what document I must
fill in. If there were a list of documentation on the board, we would not have to stand in a queue.
The information board does not have information about land privatization/ownership, it shows
the agency goals, announcements and classifieds. They treat citizens very bureaucratically...
dont know if it is their normal behavior or if they are just annoyed by the workload. When we
wanted to own land, it takes a very long time.

This invites the conclusion that citizens have little access to information on land privatization, it
is unclear what documents are necessary, and the entire process is tiring and bureaucratic. The
following flowchart shows the steps that citizens have to overcome in order to own their land.

Figure 12. Steps for privatizing land for household purposes

Step I Step II Step III Step VI

Receiving Formulating Making request Resolution

info materials for for land made in three
ownership ownership months

Rejected if
Get letter from contains
local Governor violation

Receive copy
of resolution
Notarizing the and land
documents quality
certificate

Filling out an Cadaster Enclosing land

application mapping possession
form contract/certificat
e,

4.1 Access to information

Citizen O said, When we show up at the Land Office, the staff are not in the office, and we are
told they are out surveying. They actually take a long time out of the office. I have come to the
Land Office many times to apply to get land for my younger brothers and sisters, who take care
[32]
of our old folk, so there is no one except me to go to the office. Generally, the officers use very
formal language and they ought to use simple language when giving out information. They
make us go in several times, there is usually a long queue, go here, go there, come back in the
afternoon, and so on.

Conversely, Officer M of the Darhan-Uul Aimag land office said, If a person gets information
from our officers and fills in the proper documents, it should only take a short time. But for those
who insist on information from our mouths, it takes a long time. For example, both land
possession agreement and certificate must be submitted as valid documents. But some citizens
lose one of the documents. We ask them to bring the documents, but they dont know where
they put them. That means they go back and forth several times; then they get frustrated and
complain about bureaucracy and corruption. We always give instructions and guidelines, but
they dont understand.

Figure 13. Do you know that soum and district Governors must respond to your
application within 3 months after they received the application and documents? (urban
vs rural)

Yes No

63.1%
47.6% 52.4%
36.9%

Ulaanbaatar city Aimag center

Article 20.6 of the Law on Privatizing Land to Citizens says, The relevant Governor authorized
for land privatization shall decide on an application for land ownership within three months of the
date of receipt of application. More than half of respondents were not aware of this provision,
showing that they had insufficient knowledge and information on land privatization legislation.
Figure 13 above shows that rural citizens have less information than urban citizens. Citizens
first address their khoroo or soum for information on where to go and what documents to fill in to
privatize land. Because some citizens dont know where to go they waste a lot of time. More
details on these findings can be found in Section Three.

[33]
4.2 Documents to be filled in for land ownership

Figure 14. Did you encounter any difficulties in documentation necessary for land
ownership?

In developing cadaster map 89.5%

10.5%
In filling out application form 93.6%
6.4%
In submitting application 93.9% No
6.1%
In getting officcial letter/certificate of local governor 97.7% Yes
2.3%
In notarizing possession contract and cetificate 98%
2%
In getting documents notarized 98.5%
1.5%

28.8% of respondents said that they found it difficult to complete an application for land
ownership; urban citizens had most difficulty. According to land officers, filling in the necessary
documents is not very difficult; the main reason for such a high response was that many citizens
have limited knowledge and education, lack information, ignore the importance of
documentation and have low financial capacity. In particular:
1. They make mistakes when filling out the form.
2. Their civil registration data are outdated.
3. They present insufficient documentation, and come back and forth several times.
4. They had to wait for the notary as they must submit notarized documents.
5. They ignore certain requirements: e.g. their land possession right has expired before
they apply for ownership.
6. They cannot get a proper cadaster map as it is expensive.
Figure 15. On which part of formulating document for land ownership did you spend the
most time?

getting letter that no land was owned before 0.4%

On land allocation 0.4%
On single window service 0.6%
Obtaining certificate 1%
Filling out an application 3.8%
Getting letter from local governor 4%
Notarizing civil IDs 5%
Notarizing land possession contract and certificate 5.8%
Submitting application 7.1%
Overview cadaster mapping 23.2%
Same time for all 48.6%

[34]
Although half of respondents spent the same amount of time on documentation, they spent
more time on some documents, possibly due to bureaucracy, so we have checked all steps one
by one.

4.2.1 Getting official letter/certification from the Governor

2.3% of respondents said the most trouble they had was getting an official letter/certification
from the local governor. Governors are often not in the office in work hours, they delay the letter
for a long time, they give priority to their staff (28.6%) and addresses coincide (14.3%); these
were found to be frequent reasons for difficulties; 4% of respondents cited these as why they
had to spend so long in getting an official letter/certification from the local governor.

4.2.2 Notarization of documents

To obtain land ownership, citizens must attach a notarized copy of their civil ID; but 3.5% of
respondents said they had most difficulty in getting their ID notarized, which is the part on which
they spent most time, said 10.8% of respondents. Notaries often refuse to notarize documents
which have breaches or if they have a long queue to deal with. It is much harder to get the civil
ID notarized in rural areas than in urban areas.

4.2.3 Filling out application forms

Citizens must fill out an application form for privatization. Citizen D of Baganuur district said, I
stood in the queue and finally got the application form. I got this filled out by people standing
together in a queue. No one tells us how to fill it out or even how to get the form. They never
give additional advice. The forms were not displayed and we had to look for them. 6.4% of
respondents said that major difficulty in making application was filling out the forms. They
commented that the main reason for this response was that they didnt know how to fill it out
(33.3%), needed assistance from others (42.9%) and the form was unclear and hard to
understand (23.8%). 3.8% of respondents said that of all stages of application, they spent most
time filling out the application forms; it seems to be difficult for some citizens to fill out the forms.

4.2.4 Cadaster mapping

One of the most difficult stages of documentation is cadaster mapping. Citizen B of Bayanzurh
district said, We have to drive the cadaster surveyor in our car for him to draw up the cadaster
map. There is a long queue for surveying. Citizen D said, We cannot get a cadaster map
developed as there is no cadaster company, or it takes a long time and is expensive and long
process. Senior manager O of the Baganuur District Land Office said, There is no professional
cadaster survey company in our district. They come out from the capital city to draw up a
survey, so everyone has to get their map developed when they come. When someone has an
immediate need for mapping, there is no available service provider. That is why it takes so long.
People are also very frustrated on how much they have to pay for the cadaster map, about MNT
40-50,000 per map. It is particularly hard for low-income families to afford the service.

In some places, land officers/administrators do the cadaster mapping and mark the boundaries
of the land plots. They put poles to mark out the boundaries of the plot, but sometimes they
cannot find these border marks again, said a cadaster officer of the Dundgobi Aimag Land
Office. He continued, If the Land Office does the mapping, it is hard for citizens to get us to do

[35]
it as we have so much other work to do. Although we want to shift this work to the private
sector, we are reluctant as it is an income source for us.

The survey shows that citizens spent more time on cadaster mapping than on any other stages
of preparing documentation. Getting a cadaster map developed in a rural area takes longer than
in an urban area.

Figure 16. If you have experienced difficulties in cadaster mapping, exactly what
difficulties did you encounter?

Professional compnay was not available

6.7 11.1 4.4 Expensive

11.1
Long queue
13.3
Cadaster maps coincide with other's land

Time consuming
13.3
40
Casater map was incorrect

For excluding plots from existing cadaster

maps

Of 343 survey respondents, 36 (10.5%) said cadaster mapping was the most difficult step. The
main reason was the time it takes, that cadaster maps may cross other plots, there are long
queues, there is no operational cadaster company in rural areas, and maps are incorrectly
drawn. Of these difficulties, long queues were most common in rural areas (83.3%), while
incorrect mapping was found to be common in urban areas (60%).

Individual interviews with Land Office senior and line staff revealed the following difficulties in
cadaster mapping.
1. No professional cadaster survey company.
2. Surveyors make mistakes when defining coordinates.
3. Cadaster maps dont match with the database.
4. Timetabling: citizens do not attend on an agreed surveying date or surveyors are busy
with other work.
5. Citizens know little or nothing about cadaster maps.
6. Poles or markers define boundaries, but citizens fail to build fences, so the marks
disappear.
7. Citizens cannot afford to get cadaster maps drawn up.
8. Citizens build fences in non-compliance with cadaster maps; they extend the area
without permission.
9. When cadaster companies survey, they extend fence boundaries in response to a
citizens request or develop maps on other locations.
10. There is a high workload and lack of vehicles.
11. Equipment for surveying is inadequate.
12. With inadequate tools and equipment, we have to go back to soums again.

[36]
4.2.5 Attaching land possession contract and certificate
Those who are given land ownership are issued with land possession certificates. When they
receive the right to land possession, they make a contract with the local land office. They can
then request land ownership, when they are required to submit the original copy of the land
possession contract and certificate. If newly planned areas are directly privatized by allocation,
land possession certificates are not issued, so citizens dont need to submit possession
certificates.

Figure 17. How many days did you spend formulating all documents for land ownership?

64.4%

13.4% 14.6%
0.9% 0.3% 2.3% 4.1%

1-7 days 8-15 days 16-23 days 24-31 days 40-47 days 56-63 days 88+ days

Respondents said they spent an average of 2.2 days in preparation land ownership
applications, while interviewed land officers indicated that 2.3 days is adequate for the process.

Table 3. How many days did you spend formulating all documents for land ownership?
(rural vs urban)

1-7 8-15 16-23 24-31 40-47 56-63 88+ Total

Ulaanbaatar
49.7% 17.2% 2.1% 22.1% .7% 2.1% 6.2% 100%
City
Aimag centers 75.3% 10.6% 9.1% 2.5% 2.5% 100%
Total 64.4% 13.4% .9% 14.6% .3% 2.3% 4.1% 100%

Citizens of rural areas spent less time formulating land ownership-related documentation than
those in Ulaanbaatar city.

4.3 Submitting land ownership application to the land office

Officers do not remain in the office for all working hours, and are not punctual. People are kept
waiting for them. When we ask something, they dont respond quickly. They take a long time to
find something. I submitted 3-4 applications, but they never responded. I also asked them to
check where my application was, but they refused, said citizen B. When citizens have all
documentation for an application for land ownership, they submit them to the land office of their
district. This land office checks the application against the overall land management plan and
rejects the application if it is found contradictory to the plan. If the applicant amends the
application, they can resubmit the application. If the violation is found to be serious, the
application is completely refused. Respondents cited applications being returned as conflicting
with the plan (42.1%), officers not staying in the workplace, making people return several times
[37]
(31.6%) and long queues (26.3%) as the main reasons for their difficulties. 10.3% said it was
7.3% more difficult to apply at urban land offices than at rural officers.

4.4 Waiting for three months for the final decision

There are many undecided land ownership applications. People hoping for a response wait in a
queue. There are people who submitted their applications 5 years ago. I submitted my
application in 2007. I provided all documentation and paid the service fee. At the time, the land
administrator agreed to privatize the land, but this has never been formally resolved. I was
required to exempt my land before 23 September. Since we moved in, a new street has been
built at the back of our land. A cadaster company came from the capital city and mapped the
area, but they built a fence in front of us and took possession of the land. People living behind
my land got a cadaster map drawn up including our land plot, and got the ownership certificate. I
have written and submitted my complaint. That family moved in in 2007, the same time as us.
They occupy a different plot, but got ownership of our land by getting their own cadaster map
drawn up. Now, they live on the plot. This case exemplars others in which applications for land
get no response for a long time, and the land plot is given to somebody else. Lets check how
the respective rules and regulations coordinate such issues.

A formal decision on land privatization is made by the aimag or capital city governor, by soum or
district, and citizens must wait three months after application submission. Land officers check
the applications, and if they find any mistake or conflict, they must notify the applicant and ask
for amendment. If the citizen disagrees with the proposed change, the land officer may directly
reject the application. If there is no conflict or violation in the application, a formal decision on
land privatization is made, after which the applicant receives a copy of the resolution and a
validation sheet.

Figure 18. How feasible is this three-month period?

Too short Fine Too long

67.1%
53.8%
42.3%
31.5%

1.4% 3.8%

Aimag center Ulaanbaatar

54.3% of respondents said that three months is an adequate time for the authority to decide on
the application; 43% said the period should be shorter, and felt they had to wait for too long.

[38]
Figure 19. After how long (how many months) did you get a copy of a resolution to
privatize land after you had submitted your complete application to the land office?

49.3%

18.4%
14.6% 14.9%
2.9%

1 month 2 months 3 months More than 3 months Not yet received

One in 5 respondents said they received a copy of the final resolution later than the legally
prescribed three months. Such late resolution is more common in Ulaanbaatar City than in rural
areas.
Figure 20. Did you experience the following issues after you have submitted your
application for land ownership?

3.3% 6.6%

Application returned

Application filled out again

No comments

90.1%

Outright rejection of applications was found only in Ulaanbaatar City. Asking for amendment of
applications for resubmission was pretty much similar: 3.65% in urban areas and 2.7% in rural
areas.
Figure 21. Did you experience the following issues in privatizing your land?

Paid bribe to land officer 0.3%

Proposed viable options 0.8%

Used khoroo/district officers as intermediaries 0.8%

Used my own power and reputation 1.1%

received assistance from colleagues 1.4%

Land officers demanded money 1.4%

Used friends with connection to land office 2.3%

None of above 91.8%

[39]
About 5% (14) of respondents said that they had to use personal connections to gain ownership
of their land. In addition, there are some cases where citizens used their authority and
reputation, and some even paid an extra amount in mutual interest. Land offices in the urban
areas required bribes (80%), urban citizens used (got help from) personal connections (60%),
and paid bribes (1 case). In rural areas, citizens used the influence of friends and relatives with
connections with the local land office (62.5%) or used their own authority and reputation (75%);
these two cases are common in rural areas. An analysis of difficulties met by citizen reveals the
following.

Figure 22. Factor analysis on the difficulties that citizens encounter in getting land
ownership tenure

Information Poor Not present at

financial workplace Bureaucrac Weak
unclear y oversight
ability

,
Long queue
Poor knowledge No Citizen
and information
understanding Dorj

High
workload
No Discriminatio
Citizens are not n
explanation Use
informed
advantages
Lengthy and personal
Does work process connections
incorrectly, no
Incomplete Makes
application people come rsponsibility
many times Agree on
bribe

Lack of
equipment, Request bribe
Frustration
Citizens outdated and give
and fatigue
ignorant

1. Land officers not present in their workplace; long queues; high workloads; discrimination;
bureaucracy; job performed inadequately; irresponsibility; inadequate and outdated
equipment; poor provision of information; these reasons are given for difficulties in the
privatization process.
2. Excessive bureaucracy is related to weak oversight, though it also indicates inadequacy
in the legal environment. For instance, staff numbers are not based in the population
size; the same staff numbers are appointed regardless of population. In some cases, this
leads to an excessive workload, creating long queues and fuelling bureaucracy. In these
cases, staff may often fail to perform adequately, do their jobs incorrectly or work
irresponsibly; then citizens have to wait a long time to get their land privatized.

[40]
3. Citizens are not given sufficient information and advice on procedures, and coupled with
their poor knowledge, applicants often submit incomplete applications and have to return
several times. Citizens are also often careless and may have poor financial capacity,
which circumstances often create obstacles.
4. As a result of the above conditions, the overall process of land privatization takes a long
time. To speed the process, citizens may offer bribes, use personal connections and try
to persuade officers; on the other hand, land officers sometimes ask for a bribe.

[41]
 FIVE. ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS/DOCUMENTS AND RESOLVING
This section describes stages in which land offices accept documented applications and making
final decisions, and existing obstacles and difficulties in the stages.

Officer S of the Songinohairhan District Land Office detailed the following steps in deciding
applications. According to the form on ownership rights, citizens must fill out and submit their
applications, and get a registration sheet certifying that the application has been received. All
submitted applications are registered and logged according to order of receipt. In 2011 we listed
7,000 applications for land ownership in our register. In our district, we have selected three
locations for land privatization. We have received applications, but the privatization will only
begin after we have developed a plan and maps for these areas. Families with possession
rights who already have a khashaa plot can submit an application for ownership. For this, a
citizen must get an official letter/certification from their khoroo, a copy of their civil ID and the
certificate for the land they possessed before. After we receive all this documentation, we send
it on to MPAD. When the final decision is made at the municipality level, we issue a certificate.

Figure 23. Stages for processing submitted applications

1. Receive, check 2. Drafting 3. Respond back to

applications, and Governors citizen about
register if ok resolution Governors decision

Return if
4. Identify land
application
plot coordinates,
incorrect/violatio
mark
ns
boundaries

5. Resolution on
5.1.
land privatization
Conclusion

on land
quality
Comments: and
status 6. Registration in 7. Creating
land cadaster file for land
database parcel

Actions in which citizens participate

Actions in which citizens dont participate, carried out by land officers

5.1 Receiving, checking and registering applications

5.1. Number of citizens applying to the land office

Officer O of the Baganuur District Land Office said, Citizens are lazy in applying to privatize
land and dont know the rules and regulations. When they need collateral for credit or when they
need to transfer the rights, thats when they come in to apply to privatize their land. Citizens are
[42]
allowed to apply for 0.07 hectares, the amount legally allowed for free privatization, and they
actually have to submit three applications. Officer B of the Songinohairhan District Land Office
said, Citizens who have no certificate for land possession must write out their application by
hand in order to get a possession certificate. After that, a citizen fills out the form requesting
ownership of the plot. Finally, they must write an application for a state property registration
certificate. A citizen must occupy land before owning it. For a new settlement area (unsettled),
ownership certificates are given directly to the citizen. For those who live in a settled area, they
must first get a possession certificate. However, there are times when a citizen must submit
additional documents to get ownership rights. Land officer B of Hovd aimags Jargalant soum
said, In our soum, applications for both possession and ownership can be submitted at the
same time. We charge MNT 2,000 for a one-time service, so we register both possession and
ownership applications at the same time. That means a citizen needs only to come in once.
People who cannot get the land plot they want can re-apply for another land plot. Senior officer
L of the Hentii Aimag Land Office said, A person can submit three different applications. If we
say that the requested land plot cannot be privatized, they may submit another application for
the land plot just in front of the previously requested plot. Sometimes, land officers directly
accept the application by checking if the application is complete and there is no reason to
refuse. In some cases, there may be disputes or problems over the requested land, when the
application is returned. This is when citizens start encountering issues. Land officer L of Hentii
aimags Murun soum said, We accept applications on the assumption that the requested land
plot can be privatized. But there are cases where the land was given to another person 10-20
years ago. Land officers dont initially know about this, or the old registration may be unclear, so
in some cases the land allocation conflicts with the land of other people. It is not the direct fault
of our staff, but is related to multiple steps, timing and government structure. However, it is
undeniable that some land officers might misuse such conditions.

Officer B of Darhan-Uul aimag Land Office said, To organize all the necessary documentation,
a citizen may need to take a day, or even three days. If we have to carry out an on-the-spot
survey, we do this in a day. Then we enter the data in a governors draft resolution. The
governor collects the drafts and makes a decision once in fortnight.

Interviewed land office senior and line officers said that they thought it was acceptable for
citizens to come to the land office 2-3 times after formulating all their documents.

5.1.2 Reasons for long queues and potential solutions

The system that we use when giving land for possession first, then for ownership, hugely
increases the workload of each land office. People dont read the available materials and
papers. When we explain, they say, I understood, but later they say they did not understand.
When we ask for a copy of the civil ID, they ask where they can get it. When we tell them to
bring the original copy of the land possession certificate or contract, they ask what I mean by
original. They ask one thing in many ways. This often leads to the creation of long queues. If
people were able to understand clearly after being told just once, or if they read the available
materials carefully, such difficulties would not occur, said officer O of the Songinohairhan
District Land Office. Officer Z of the Bayanzurh District Land Office commented on resolving this
problem, saying, Our district is the largest in the capital city. 30% of the entire city population
lives in this district. Therefore we have asked the Capital City Land Agency for permission to
[43]
increase our staff numbers. We used to have two officers responsible for ownership, now we
have four. This has greatly reduced the waiting times. We also installed a queue-numbering
machine, which we stopped for a while, then restored. We reckon that it makes it possible for
citizens to receive services without bureaucracy. We have also introduced receptionist
services.

The length of queue varies according to population size, the zones where land plots are
allocated and how many plots are being allocated. Land office staff said that the queues have
been reduced in recent times. They explain the long queues as follows.

1. When we stipulate specific deadlines for any action, long queues result. If we announce
application submission deadlines, citizens trying to meet the deadline make long
queues.
2. For the land plots closer to downtown and allocated in limited numbers, citizens make
long queues. Citizens apply in large numbers for land plots close to the center and
connected to utilities. Officer O of the Songinohairhan District Land Office said, Citizens
want land plots close to downtown, but we allocate land in areas formally approved by
the Citizens Representative Khural for the given year. We do not have the right to
allocate land which violates the restrictions. People argue a lot, saying that the allocated
plots have no infrastructure, no electricity and they dont like the land. If we could better
advertise the law and if citizens would study the legislation and have access to all
available information, there would be no problem. We keep announcing land allocated in
certain areas, but citizens often come late.
3. Long queues are created when there are restrictions. For example, we have limitations
such as only having a certain number of plots allocated in specific areas, but so many
citizens try to get land in the area that there are queues.
4. With a limited number of land office staff, people have to stand in a queue. In large
settlement areas with a large population, there are too many citizens for an officer to
deal with quickly, so there are long queues.
5. The land office does not often supply enough information. Citizens who therefore have
no knowledge and information create queues looking for information. For citizens with
limited information and poor knowledge, we have to explain several times, which takes
time and creates queues.
6. Queues are created as the database has a high workload; the equipment is outdated
when there is a high workload, citizens have to wait.

However, land offices have taken a number of measures to sort out the problems, as follows.

1. Introduce a take-a-number system. Citizens are able to come to the land office and take
a number, which helps them see how long they will have to wait for service, so that they
dont stand in a long queue, and can plan their time (currently implemented in Bayanzurh
District).

[44]
 2. Give numbers manually to those seeking service. For field surveying or cadaster
mapping, numbers can be distributed or supplied according to their application ID.
Without such numbering, some get served first while others are marginalized.
3. Increase staff numbers, especially in the land offices of districts with a large population.
Officer H of the Songinohairhan District Land Office said, We have to manage land
covering 28 khoroos and 100,000 hectares. We have never had enough staff and
resources to deal quickly with applications and allocate land possession and ownership.
Citizens sometimes block off access to land they own or possess - it is impossible to
control such actions. We have 28 sections but only 7 land officers responsible for these
zones. It is hard to visit the sites and control what is going on in there. At each section or
zone, we do have surveillance. If there are violations, we remove the blocks, barriers
and fences, and get the guilty person pay for the cost. One day a week we go out to
check the situation and for surveillance, but that is not enough to deal with all violations
and breaches, and we do not have enough staff. People often argue that cadaster maps
are incorrect. The capacity of the land office is weak, which citizens often criticise,
saying that the land office is not doing its job.
4. Introduce receptionist services. When citizens arrive at the land office to claim land
ownership, there are not enough service staff, so the office cannot provide fast quality
services. Some land offices have begun offering receptionist services, aiming to give
information and advice to citizens. This service has been found to be useful for
uninformed citizens.
5. Put a timetable on the door, visible to all. Many officers are away during work hours on
field work, so they can put a timetable of availability to meet citizens on the door, visible
to everyone. This would enable citizens to avoid long waiting.
Respondent land officers said that they use the following process in dealing with applications.
First, they register all the application data, including date of application, day, hour and minute of
submission, and all attached documents, assigning a number. For example, if number 313 is
given to a citizen, the number and registration document are attached to the application and a
copy given to the applicant, who is told when to come back as shown on the numbered
document. The applicant returns to the office on the stipulated day and gets a response to their
application.
Relevant rules and regulations state the procedure as following: land offices in aimags, capital
city and districts, and a land officer in the soums, must check all applications for completeness,
and return the application if it is not accompanied by the necessary documents. If the
application is complete and acceptable, the application is registered in the log book, numbered
and registered in the application database. A certificate of acceptance of the application is then
given to the applicant.
However, a land officer in Murun soum, Hentii aimag, said, The registration log book which was
released lately is kind of complicated; its tables are not properly allocated. We used to have a
log book called the Yellow Book, which was quite easy to manage. Actually, it is hard for the
land officer to register applications.

[45]
5.2 Developing a draft resolution for the governor

After the application is processed, land offices of aimags, capital city and districts and the soum
land officer must develop a draft resolution for the respective governor. This must have all
necessary documents attached, and shall be stored with the land parcel file.

5.3 Responding to citizens in accordance with the governors resolution

Officer B of the Hentii Aimag Land Office said, For soum-based land officers, it takes about 90
days to compile applications and follow procedures. Sometimes it takes more than 90 days
because the land officer may be changed; in this case, a newly-appointed land officer must re-
check the piled up applications. So, we sort out the applications, filter them and check if there
are any violations, only sometimes exceeding the allocated time. This is actually quite long: one-
month is usually fine. Citizens who submitted the earlier applications often ask if the resolution
is ready; they may come 2-3 times. They then complain that they have been waiting months
after submitting an application. In fact, any application on land possession or ownership can
usually be decided within 30 days. People should be able to submit applications on time. As to
the time that a governor takes to decide on applications, an officer of the Suhbaatar District land
office said, Three months is the time we used to comply with. Now local governors issue
resolutions every month. Since the start of the year, 12 resolutions have been issued on land
ownership. 90 days is the time we applied in the past when there were lots of resolutions to be
made and the workload was high as land privatization started. For people who possessed and
owned land, it is no longer essential. Land-related resolutions are made every month, which is
very important for citizens. We must not pile up 600-700 applications in three months, but need
to decide on 250 in 45 days. The process can be faster than 90 days. However, there are
cases for which the application process takes more than 90 days, according to Officer B of the
Baganuur District land office. There was one case that took longer in the past year. A vendor
company selected by the Capital City Land Agency made the overall planning exceed the
deadline. It was not an average period. Land officer E of Hovd aimag said many illegal acts are
committed during the waiting period. For the soums, applications are collected and piled up,
then we make the final decisions. However, sometimes external pressure (personal
connections) influences the process. For instance, there are applications submitted in 2009 that
have not been decided, but people are demanding decisions on applications of 2012 and 2013.
There are grounds for suspicion. However, it is not correct to delay these 2009 applications
without returning them and saying it was impossible to decide them during that year. We have
now decided all 2012 applications and have begun deciding 2009 applications. Moreover, there
are cases where applications have been returned or rejected because of faulty action by land
officers. For instance, land officer B of Hovd aimags Jargalant soum said, We have had one or
two cases in which applications for a land parcel were rejected and returned by guilty action of
officers. I refer to Resolution 187 (2009), when we sent a draft resolution to the land office. The
applicant had no land possession certificate, so was unable to collaterize with the bank. So his
resolution was terminated. We checked the applications, but he had a copy of a resolution made
by the soum governor. We make mistakes from time to time.

Although there are cases where applications are returned because of faulty action by land
officers, there are other cases as shown below.
[46]
 1. Officers have not included applicant names in the draft resolution.
2. No resolution of the application due to a high workload.
3. Officers develop erroneous cadaster maps.
4. One land parcel is given to two owners.
5. Computers and equipment were not working when the application was submitted.

Officers said that the key reasons for the return of land applicationsare illegal action or
carelessness of applicants, as here described.
1. Submission of incomplete material.
2. Citizens settle on unpermitted land.
3. Citizens have previously privatized land.
4. Land parcel clashes with land owned by others.
5. Citizens settle on land not included in the land management plan.
6. Citizens want land on drinking water resources.
7. Citizens settle on land blocking entry and exit.
8. Citizens settle in groves and flood-prone areas.
9. Citizens settle under high voltage power lines.
10. Citizens settle next to a main highway.
11. Citizens settle near a green zone or green areas.
12. Illegal possession of land.
Land officers stressed that 3 months is a relatively long time for a final decision to be made, so
this should be reduced. Both respondents and land officers say that one month is quite sufficient
to process most applications. Although the law says 3 months, some land offices can make a
quick decision within a fortnight or a month.
When a draft resolution is submitted to the governor and rejected, the land officer must return
the application to the applicant, clearly stating the grounds for refusal, and close the application.
If the application is accepted by the governor, but conditions for land use are changed, the
altered decision should be presented to the applicant. If the applicant disagrees with the
changed terms and conditions, the decision is terminated and the application is closed, as
stated in the relevant legislation.

5.4 Marking boundaries and size of the land for ownership on site and identifying
coordinates

When a governor makes a decision in favor of land privatization, the applicants must hire a
cadaster company formally licensed to identify coordinates and mark boundaries, upon
notification (on identifying coordinates and marking boundaries) by the land office.

A citizen who has been granted the right to land ownership by governors resolution must get a
cadaster map from a licensed company and the aimag land office. The applicant must provide
the original cadaster map to the land officer, who must check the map and enter the data in the
Land Information System. After the cadaster map is accepted, the applicant must fence the
land. Although the law does not require fencing, land offices do require this as there is a high
likelihood that boundary markings could disappear.

[47]
5.5 Issuing the land ownership decision (conclusions for state assurance for land quality
and status to be submitted together)

A land office chairman or soum land officer must communicate the governors decision to the
applicant; conclusions on assurance of land quality and status shall be given in writing to the
applicant.

5.6 Registration of land cadaster database

After a privatization decision is made, the cadaster officer of the capital city, aimag or district
land office shall make changes in the data (graph and tables) in the cadaster database. The
cadaster officer of the capital city, aimag or district land office, or the soum-based land officer,
must provide a hard copy of the cadaster map to the applicant.

5.7 Creating land parcel file

In the creation of a land parcel file, approved forms and templates from the central
administrative agency in charge of land affairs must be used. The land parcel file must contain
the following documents.

1. Information sheet on state land registration.

2. Copy of civil ID and state registration certificate.
3. Overview map showing administrative areas, size, boundaries and location of the land
parcel.
4. Map marking the boundaries and co-ordinates.
5. Official document certifying boundaries of the land parcel officially communicated to
applicants.
6. Copy of the land ownership title certificate.
7. Original copy of land ownership contract.
8. Cadaster map.
9. Certificate of land quality assurance and status monitoring.
10. Document on land fee payments.
11. Other.

By law, the cadaster officer of the capital city, aimag or district land office, or soum-based land
officers, are responsible for creation and maintenance of land parcel files.

There is no established standard on how the land office should archive materials and
applications from citizens applying for land ownership and possession, as well as complaints
and feedback. In the aimags and districts where we conducted the survey, land offices use
various archiving systems, which was found to be a serious issue. There is a need to
standardize archiving and document storage. For example, no statistics are available on the
number of complaints and dispute petitions for the last three years. The agencies that have
statistics often display general data, not disaggregated by types of complaint and application,
but just mixed and archived together. No information was available on the content of grievances
and complaints for the year, so all these messy documents must be sorted out and
standardized.
[48]
5.8 Other difficulties and obstacles that citizens encounter in getting their land privatized

1. Citizens encounter many difficulties and challenges because of the poor linkage and
integration of inter-agency operations. Citizens may extend the boundaries of the land
they possess; sometimes their addresses coincide with each other and they get their
address changed for an election; when such a land parcel has been privatized to a
household, a new arrangement may take place and they may privatize land of a
neighboring family, using the new address. A privatization application is then made from
the registered address to the bagh governor. The citizen comes with the old address and
re-applies for land. For the previous address and land parcel, a neighbor or their legal
entity already owns that land, so they have to go back to their bagh for clarification. They
say that is the address on their civil ID, but it is an address provided by the bagh
administration, so they have to yo-yo between the agencies; finally they have to notify
the civil registration office of an official address change. Because of the poor integration
and linkage between government agencies, there are many cases where people must
yo-yo forth and back several times, said Officer L of the Hentii Aimag land office.
2. Officer M of the Darhan-Uul aimag land office highlighted that when land privatization
started, land was given to a family, not to an individual, so citizen registration applied to
one family members, and the others all owned the land. He said that initially, land was
privatized for household use, so the privatization certificate included everyone in the
family - dad, mom and children. Now, as every citizen is able to own land, the family co-
owners have lots of work to do to get their names excluded from the household-owned
land certificate. This has been formally excluded by capital city governor resolution, so
the process is fraught with difficulty.
3. As some citizens earn a low income, they cannot afford to build a fence, so their land is
then confiscated. The land office requires all citizens who own land to build a fence
around the plot; citizens who have little or no money to spare for fences may have their
land ownership cancelled.
4. Lots of citizens settle in prohibited and unpermitted land such as floodways.
5. One issue that frustrates citizens is the long time it takes for a final decision to be
reached.

[49]
Figure 24. Difficulties and obstacles that citizens encounter in resolving document-
related issues in land privatization

Insufficient # Incomplete Resolution Expanding

of officers application takes long fences
time

Wants land
Limitations
No in
are imposed Long queue
Land infrastructur downtown
office e (remote)

Deadlines Manageme
are imposed Multiple nt change
Settling in
steps prohibited
land
Address
Viable changes
location
1st

possession,
nd
2 ownership No good
Citizens registration
unknowledge and
Settling in
able information
unplanned
land

Obtain temporary
Workload on settled kashaas
Outdated Low
database equipment amount of
investment

In the process by which citizens achieve ownership of a land parcel, the following difficulties are
common.
1. There are often long queues for citizens applying for land privatization. Mainly, this is
because there are too few land office staff and few citizens know much about the land
privatization process, so applicants often present insufficient and incomplete
applications. Also, land office equipment is outdated, slowing down the process with a
big workload. This forces citizens to wait for a long time in a queue. Resolution of such
problems requires expenditure, and we have no budget for solutions.
2. Land is sometimes held by several owners. Land officers and governors of bagh and
khoroos can change frequently, but they often have address changes, with poor
registration, as there is no unified registration system; as the government agencies are
poorly integrated, one parcel of land may be privatized to several owners. This creates
more burden on citizens and significantly increases the workload of land officers.
[50]
3. Citizens often settle on land that is included in the privatization plan and is excluded from
permissible settlement areas, such as under high voltage power lines, in forest areas,
under flood dams or too close to a main highway. This increases the land office
workload, as it may endanger health and economics. Citizens also settle on land that is
not set aside for planned privatization, which creates problems. These issues have been
more extensively covered in previous sections.
4. Citizens often expand their fences to increase the size of their land parcel. This is a
serious issue, because they may block entrances and exits, and their claim may
encroach on land owned by others or on public land. This is the most common reason
for a land dispute. To resolve this, the land office requires claimants to build their fences
strictly according to the cadaster map. However, some citizens do not conform with this
requirement, which again increases land office workloads (Article 7 of the law states how
such violations must be remedied, and what sanctions may be imposed).
5. There are too many procedural steps. One citizen pointed out that land officers first
allocate land for possession, and then allocate ownership. If citizens were fully aware of
land privatization, it would then be better to directly privatize the land. With two steps to
be followed (first possession, then ownership) bureaucracy multiplies; this is also very
tiresome for citizens.
6. Formal decisions often take a long to be reached; citizens and land officers alike say that
the legal requirement of a three month period for decision-making on land ownership is
too long. During that time, all applications pile up and finally just one compound decision
is issued. Instead, decisions should be issued at least once a month. Recently, some
land agencies have been doing so, which has allowed them to serve citizens without
excessive bureaucracy and long wait-times.

[51]
 SIX. RECEIVING LAND OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE
This section describes the steps and challenges that citizens encounter at the general Agency
for State Registration, after they have received a formal resolution on land privatization, and
particularly covers obstacles to getting a land and immovable property rights certificate, as well
as identifying principal contributing factors to the difficulties.

Citizen N of Hovd aimags Buyant soum said, I received a favorable decision from the local
governor on getting ownership of land in 2011. I then prepared all the documentation which I
submitted to the Immovable Property Registration Agency at the province center, and received
my certificate one month later. During this one-month period, N several times contacted the
registration officers, who said that the certificates had not yet come back from the printer.
Cases such as this demonstrate that rural citizen feel it is much more difficult for them than for
urban citizens to get their official property rights certificate. Steps to be undertaken by citizens to
own land are as follows (Figure 25).

Figure 25. Steps to get ownership title certificate (rural vs. urban)

2.
FORMULATION 4. RECEIVE
OF DOCUMENTS CERTIFICATE
iInfo from GASR To Aimag/District
on necessary registration
documents Formulate Office
documents Within 14 days
required by law

1. GET INFO 3. SUBMITTING

DOCUMENTS

6.1 Getting information related to land ownership rights certificate

When citizens receive their use, possession and ownership rights from State Registry, they are
able to use their land for commercial purposes (of owned), and may sell, gift and collaterize the
land. To register their immovable property in the state registry, they must approach the
Immovable Property Registration Office, an affiliate of the General Agency for State
Registration, or its subsidiaries in the aimags.10

To get an ownership certificate, a citizen needs to know what materials and documentation to
prepare for the applications. At present, the General Agency for State Registration disseminates
information on required documents and application forms on its website. However, rural citizens
often have limited access to the internet for such information. Therefore the rural citizen must
show up at the registration office in person, to get information from the information board.

10
By law on rights to own property and other right, its article 13.2 says any property located on the territory of a soum is registered
at property registration office at aimag center, and registrar may arrive in the area for registration upon request by applicant.
[52]
6.2 Formulating documents

To get a property registration certificate, a citizen must file the following documents.

- Application for registration of land ownership title (must be notarized).

- Favorable decision on land privatization.
- Copy of the land quality and status assurance and monitoring (must be notarized).
- Cadaster map.
- Copy of land owners civil ID (must ne notarized).
- Completed application form.

This documentation are then submitted to the state registration office in their aimag or district. If
the state registrars find no grounds for refusal of the registration, they accept the application and
register the property.

Land officer B said, Under the procedure, we issue a resolution and submit both hard and soft
copies to the Immovable Property Registration office, and supply a copy of resolution to the
applicant, who takes it to the registration office to apply for the title certificate. Applications
addressed to the district governor for land ownership are verified by a resolution of the capital
city governor. When the governor approves the resolution, we provide a copy of this to the
citizen. The resolution is signed and sealed by the capital city governor, and states the area of
land to be privatized. The copy of the resolution comes with a copy of the cadaster map and a
certificate of land quality and status assurance. With these documents, the citizen must attend
the property registration office and submit their written application; they should receive their
certificate within a fortnight.

Citizens say they encounter difficulties in filling out the application form for registration of
immovable property. As they do not have a template or model to follow when filling out the
forms, they address many questions to the registration officers, and the officers refuse to accept
the application if it is seen as incomplete. This is clearly shown in the results of a survey called
Monitoring Services Provided by GASR.

Figure 26. Number of questions to an officer by citizens (by service type) %11

Property registration 46.5 53.5

Legal entitiy registration 28.6 71.4 Yes
Civil registration 31.3 68.8

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

This survey shows that the high number of questions from citizens to property registration
officers. Each citizen respondent addressed an officer 2-4 times. The basic reason for so many
questions was the lack of available information, according to more than half of the respondents.
A quarter of respondents said that citizens often submit incomplete documentation.

11
Monitoring on GASR services report, by IRIM in response to request by Ministry of Justice, 2013 (IRIM, 2013)
[53]
The certificate for land ownership title is issued free according to law, as is the registration of
immovable property.

Table 4. List of services delivered free of charge12

Immovable property registration

1 First time registration of immovable property 7500 Free of charge
2 Certification of title for the land privatized to 10000 Free of charge
citizens for free
3 Termination of collateral agreement 3000 Free of charge
4 Termination of special notes/records and 3000 Free of charge
preliminary registration records
5 Registration of collateral/mortgage agreement 0.1% of the total 0.05% of the total
amount amount
6 Re-issuing lost certificate 50000 20000
7 Re-issuing damaged certificate 25000

6.3 Receiving the certificate

Most respondents (75.2% of urban citizens, 85.4% of rural citizens) have already received a
certificate of land ownership title.

Figure 27. Status of citizens who have received land ownership title certificates (rural vs
urban)

Rural 85.4% 14.6%

Yes

Urban 75.2% 24.8% No

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%

Figure 27 above shows that more rural citizens than urban citizens have received a property title
certificate. Citizens basically file all documents at the registration office and receive their
property title certificate within 14 days, as mandated by the law.

The survey team asked respondents how many days it took to get their title certificate after they
had submitted the necessary documents and application form.

12
www.burtgel.gov.mn
[54]
Figure 28. Time taken to get the land ownership title certificate

More than 31 19.7%

days 39.4%

24-31 days 24.7%

29.3%

16-23 days 0 Rural

2.6%
Urban
8-15 days 33.7%
19%

1-7 days 21.9%

9.5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Figure 28 above shows that 10-20% of urban citizens and 20-30% of rural citizens received their
ownership title certificate within the legally mandated 14 days.13 There were 40% or urban
citizens and 20% of rural citizens who had to wait more than a month.

The difference between urban and rural waiting times depended on a number of factors:
workload of registration offices; population size; the work responsibility of registration officers.
As rural citizens often reside well away from the province center, they have to travel long
distances to get their certificates. In addition, the certificates are printed in the capital city, so it
also takes a long time for the materials to be sent to the capital city and for the printed
certificates to arrive back at the province center.

6.4 Problems

Most survey respondents (75%) said that they had already received a land ownership title
certificate; the other 25% of both urban and rural residents had still not obtained their certificate
for the following reasons (Figure 29).

Figure 29. Reasons for not obtaining the title certificates, problems

Incorrect
understanding
Uninformed
No access to
information
Citizens not
received
No time certificate

Knows about
Not important
registration

Isolated from
service

13
Law on right to own property and other rights related to it, its clause 15.1 says registrar receives application and makes decision
within 14 days.
[55]
6.4.1 No access to information
Some citizens who were still waiting for their property rights certificate had incorrect/misleading
information in their application, as was found by the survey. The Incorrect information often
means that many citizens understood that the decision from their governor on giving land
ownership was the final step, so they did not register their ownership right at the GASR. In
particularly, rural residents and recent urban arrivals were unaware of the need to do this. As a
result of not having their certificate for property ownership, they had encountered problems and
difficulties: [1] they were unable to use their land for commercial use such as selling or
collaterizing; [2] their property rights are not entered in the property registration database, so
subsequently other persons had obtained a property certificate for the land, which then fuelled
disputes.

6.4.2 Isolation from offices

Some rural respondents to the survey, and especially those in remote rural areas, have been
unable to get their property rights certificate because they can only apply for and receive a
certificate from the registration office in the province center, as stated in the Law on Registration
of Rights to Own Property and Other Rights to Property. Having to travel to the province center
to submit an applications, then again to collect the certificate, entails both financial and time-
related difficulties. This is especially so for citizens of a remote soum, who must pay for travel
and accommodation, so they still have not collected their certificates. The citizen may have
submitted an application to the registration office at the province center, but then must return
homes, being unable to wait for a long and unpredictable time to get the certificate.

Being aware of such difficulties, GASR now provides a mobile service once a year for the
remote soums. Prior to the mobile single window service coming to the soum, citizens are told
they need to have all documents ready, and if they do so properly, they can submit them and
get their certificates on the spot. This service has been found to be the most beneficial for
remote residents.

6.4.3 High workload of property registration office

The most frequent problem encountered by urban residents was the high workload and
bureaucracy in the Property Rights Registration Office. In the past year, citizens have been
increasingly registering their property and using it for commercial purposes, so the registration
office has increasing workload problems. Citizens have to spend many days getting their
property registered, and only citizens who are knowledgeable about the workload are able to
speed up the process for title registration.

[56]
 EIGHT. LAND DISPUTES
This section outlines disputes round land ownership, the causes of such disputes, and how such
disputes are resolved.

Citizen H of Suhbaatar District said he used to own 403 square meters of land under Resolution
277 (2005) of the Suhbaatar District governor. While he was in hospital, another citizen (B)
occupied the land illegally. H submitted a complaint to the Municipality Property Affairs
Department, asking them to look into the matter and to evict B. Many such citizens address to
the district land office, which gives land ownership rights, or its upper level agency the MPAD, or
the court, for settlement of such land-related disputes.

Figure 30. Steps through which citizens submit complaints and claims and get disputes
resolved

Dispute resolution
Citizen District Land Office commission

MPAD, Oversign and

City Court of Municipality Land Monitoring Unit
Administrative Cases Agency

8.1 Complaints and grievances to Land Office

When citizens believe that their rights to property ownership have been violated, they are
entitled to address a claim and complaint to the respective agency and the upper level agency,
as stated in the Law on Land and Law on Privatizing Land to Citizens of Mongolia.14
Alternatively, they apply directly to the court for remedial action.15 Usually, citizens who are
concerned that their ownership rights have been violated first apply to the governor and the land
office that concluded the land ownership decision. If they address the district office, a special
commission is appointed, tasked to check on the dispute between the two sides. If those
citizens do not accept the commissions decision, they can appeal to the Inspection and
Monitoring Department of the MPAD, which is then assigned to check the complaint and must
respond within 30 days. If the citizens do not receive a response from the agency, they can
appeal to the court.

Respondent land officers said that there is a growing number of land-related disputes between
citizens, for the following reasons.

14
39.1 Law on privatizing land to Mongolian citizens. In case government agencies delay the right to own land, citizens will send
compliant to upper level agency.
15
39.1 Law on privatizing land to Mongolian citizens. In case land ownership right is violated, court shall restore it
[57]
Figure 31. Reasons for land disputes as identified by land officers

Citizens expand fences 20.5%

Settling in unpermitted land 15.9%
Cadaster map incorrect 13.6%
13.6%
Sharing land between family members 6.8%
Bot building fence 4.5%
Don't like goven land 2.3%
Certificate lost 2.3%
Officers are changed 2.3%

Figure 31 above shows that over 20% of land disputes arise from illegal and unlawful acts of
citizens, such as fencing a wider area than their land parcel allows. By widening the fence, they
block entry and exit and encroach on the land occupied by others. Key factors for such disputes
can be seen in the following Figure 32.
Figure 32. Main factors for the land disputes

Incorrect
Resolution cadaster map
one two
Land office
owners
(wrong) Officers
changed

Land dispute Enlarging

No fencing
fence

Unpermitted
Citizens
land

Does not like

land

8.1.1 Disputes caused by Land Offices

A decision to give ownership of land is often complicated by its allocation to more than one
owner. This often results from the negligence of land officers, but the weak cadaster unified
registration system also contributes to the problem. District land offices and the MPAD receive
many such complaints; in most cases, when the agencies carry out an inspection, they often
award the land ownership rights to the citizen who first submitted an application.

Unified cadaster registration database is not optimal. The cadaster database contains some
incorrect data and some land maps are not entered, so the land is often allocated to two or
more owners, creating disputes.

Land office officers change frequently. This means that a citizens application for land ownership
is stored for a long time after a designated officer is replaced. In addition, some officers leave
their work without formally transferring the applications to the replacement officer, applications
are not fully resolved and the land may then be mistakenly privatized to somebody else.

[58]
8.1.2 Disputes caused by citizens
Many citizens broaden their fenced area, making the area larger than the allocated plot size.
Most complaints to the land office concern such unlawful acts, which involve blocked access
and encroachment into private property. In these instances, land officers will take measures
such as fence removal. This however increases land officer workloads and in turn increases the
amount of time an applicant may have to wait for service.

Many who have moved into the city from a rural area settle on unpermitted land, or onto land
that encroaches on land owned by others, resulting in a dispute. In these cases, land officers
deliver an instruction to vacate the land, and may find it necessary to enforce the eviction. Many
citizens fail to fence their privatized land, so households may settle there without knowing the
land is owned by others. Land officers commented that this is related to citizens not carrying out
their duty to fence their land plots; it is mandated by land offices that the citizen must build a
fence on land they wish to privatize.

In some cases, citizens dont like the land that has been allocated, or dislike the area that has
been planned as a settlement area. Ulaanbaatar city is expanding quickly, and often there is no
provision of basic infrastructure, as many areas for land ownership have no water or electricity
supply. This means many citizens complain about being given poor land.

8.2 Submitting claims to court

The complaint from citizen H was resolved by the MPAD; H opposed the decision and took his
claim to the Capital City Court of Administrative Cases. The capital city governor was a
defendant in the claim, and his representative told the court the following: Plaintiff X used to
own 403 square meters of land in Suhbaatar District under Resolution 277 of the Suhbaatar
District governor of 14 October 2005. His partner S and the wife of his brother (M) sold the land
to B, who received ownership rights over the land under capital city governor resolution 259 of 5
June 2007. However, the Suhbaatar District land office failed to check the application closely,
and privatized the land owned by B to H at the same time by Suhbaatar District governor
resolution 455 of 21 December 2012. B, the former owner of the land, passed away in 2009 and
the land was inherited by his daughter L. Therefore we request that the court deny the claim.16

This case shows that citizens who object to a decision of the land office can take their complaint
to the court.

The number of land disputes taken to the court has been increasing recently, as shown on the
following Figure 33.

16
(council, 2013)
[59]
Figure 33. Number of land disputes resolved by Capital City Court of Administrative
Cases in 2012 (by type and percentage in all disputes)17

21.8%
20.5%
Immovable property 12.7%
Tax 11.2%
Puboic office 8.6%
Procurement 5.9%
Election 3.6%

Basically, land disputes fall into two categories: [1] disputes over possession and use rights,
which are basically regulated by the Land Law; [2] disputes over ownership rights, which are
regulated by the Law on Privatizing Land to Citizens of Mongolia. Of all cases, 20-25%
considered by the Court of Administrative Cases are land-related.18 In particular, the number of
disputes over the 0.07% hectares of land designated for household use has been increasing, as
shown in the following Figure 34.

Figure 34. Number of land disputes resolved at Capital City Court of Administrative
Cases (2012 and first half of 2013 )19

274

161
Received
66 68 Resolved

2012 2013

The above Figure 34 shows that the number of claims and land dispute considered by the
Capital City Court of Administrative Cases increased by 70% in the first half of 2013 as
compared to 2012. In addition, 20-25% of all disputes considered by the Supreme Court in the
past few years have been land-related (court, 2013). The excessive number of such disputes
may be connected to the fact that the number of people moving into Ulaanbaatar is increasing
and to intensive land privatization over the past few years.

17
Court, 2013
18
Court, 2013
19
Court, 2013
[60]
 SEVEN. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ON THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY LAND OFFICE,
QUALITY AND ACCESSIBILITY TO SERVICE

7.1 Bureaucracy of land offices

This section explores whether land offices are particularly bureaucratic, and if so, how both
citizens and land officers consider that, and reasons for bureaucracy.
Officer B of the Darhan-Uul aimag land office said, It is important to know exactly what citizens
understand by the term bureaucracy. For instance, when citizens apply for land, we ask them
for their former land possession certificate. If it is missing, they shout at us and demand to know
why we want that old certificate. We will return the application to them if the letter/certification
from the bagh governor is missing or contains incorrect data, and they criticize us for being
bureaucratic. Obviously, we need the complete documentation to prepare the draft resolution.
We are going to privatize land to that person, so the application must be complete. The
understanding of the term bureaucracy varies. According to B, some citizens understand that it
is bureaucracy when the land office makes people come several times. In some cases this is
because they have submitted incomplete documentation. Officers have to work with lots of
clients, so they do sometimes make mistakes, like giving an incomplete explanation, though
sometimes those people just walk out without listening carefully; then they come back and claim
other things.
Land officer M of the same agency said, Bureaucracy is related to the workload. When we have
to serve many people, they say officers are bureaucratic.
Officer B of the Songinohairhan District land office said, We spend Tuesdays and Thursdays
working away from the office doing field surveying. People come to the office and complain that
staff are not at work and are being bureaucratic. When we work outside, removing enlarged
fences and illegal buildings, many people come to the office say that the land office is
bureaucratic. Officer A of the Suhbaatar District land office said, Citizens think that everything
is ok once they have submitted a document. However, we need time to visit the land parcel and
check properly. Sometimes there are cases that resolutions are issued for a land parcel for two
claimants, so we have to double check. Citizens dont understand this so they criticize us for
being bureaucratic and only helping friends and acquaintances.
The above cases identify the following types of so-called bureaucracy.

1. Officers give incomplete information to citizens while working with other clients at the
same time.
2. Officers have high workloads as they work on many cases.
3. Citizens come to the land office while officers at work elsewhere.
4. Citizens think thet have done all they need to once they have handed in the application,
but officers have to study the situation and undertake field trips.
5. Citizens are forced to come in several times because they have submitted incomplete
applications, but they think it is because of bureaucracy.

Figure 35 below is based on the questionnaire results in showing evaluations of the service at
land offices.

[61]
Figure 35. Flowchart for service logistics

Was not able to

resolve the issue
independently
3. What difficulties? (6.1%)

CITIZEN

Had to wit
because of lad
1. How many times a 2. Were there any Bureaucracy and officers guilt
citizens went to land difficulties in land difficulty in land (12.8%)
office? ownership? ownership
(23.6%)

1 time (7.6%) No good customer

Yes (23%) service (4.7%)

Info not
2-3 times (46.6%) Due to lack of info transparent
(10.1%) (10.1%)
No (77%)
High workload
(17.6%)
4-7 times (28.9%)
Due to high
workload (19%)
Long queue
(1.4%)

More than 8
(16.9%)
Due to time Not present at
management work during office
(12.2%) hours (12.2%)

Due to
irresponsibility of Discrimination
officers (8.8%) (4.7%)

Asked bribe Due to timing Serves only those

(0.8%) (26.3%) with money
(4.1%)

Asked Waited for resolving Waited for resolving Made citizens come
bribe(0,8%) the issue at high level the issue at high level again without
(2.7%) (5.4%) resolving complaints
(18.2%)
[62]
Figure 35 above uses some questions asked of citizens in the survey: [1] how many times did
you go to the land office to privatize your land? [2] Did you encounter difficulties in privatizing
your land? [3] if so, what difficulties?

Respondents who answered just once to the first question can be understood as people who
had just started the privatization process; those who responded 2-3 times had no major
difficulties and the land was properly privatized to them; those who responded that they went to
land office 407 times had some violations or disputes over the land, or had submitted
incomplete documentation, although the land office could have been bureaucratic. Those who
responded 8 or more times had violations or disputes related to land to explain their repeated
land office visits.

To the second question Did you encounter difficulties in privatizing your land? 79 (23%) of the
343 respondents said they had.

The third question If so, what difficulties? was asked of 79 respondents who had answered
Yes to the second question. This question involved 7 sub-questions with choices (total of 13).
Each table shows the number of respondents for each answer (arrows connect sub-answers to
the main question).

Although the answer land officers demanded bribes was not selected, 3 citizens (0.8% of all
respondents) responded Yes to the question Did you have any additional costs for privatizing
your land? These three said, Gave 100 liters of gasoline to the land office chair Gave MNT
300-400,000 and used influence of friends and Needed to pay MNT 50,000 lunch costs for the
land officer.

7.2 Drawbacks of land offices and officers

Senior officer B of the Bayanzurh District land office, talking about his officers, said, We are
working on transparency, with more thorough processing and improvement of information
availability. But we have no funding for this. My workers try to give complete and comprehensive
information. He added, As we have no law regulating bureaucratic acts, we actually use our
own internal rules and regulations. We have no one to handles citizen complaints. So the issue
is that citizens must go for it after making a complaint, go for evicting from the land. That is the
reason. Land officer E said, We are aiming to make information clear and transparent. We are
improving our internal structure, and making everything transparent, and we have the
Monitoring Division at the municipality level for this purpose. The Monitoring Division comes all
the time, advising and notifying us about what works and what does not work. They also check
the number of citizen complaints and grievances: how many have been submitted, how many
have expired without response, etc. We also give out queueing numbers. Actually, citizens do
not know very much about the process. To give them information, we employ receptionists, who
provide all possible information so that citizens can go to officers with complicated questions.
Senior officer B of the land office said, I have received over 7,000 applications for land
ownership. But, the general city development plan has not yet been completed by the City
Planning Department. If such issues are resolved at the district level, the service will become
quicker. Otherwise, our offices plan will not match the city plan, which we have to wait for.

[63]
Actually, we have taken some long strides. He continued, The various decision-making steps
at the municipality level must be reduced. All districts and offices do a lot to get draft resolutions
approved, working with citizens and waiting at the door of high-ranking decision makers. There
should be a designated time for us to meet high-ranking decision makers. It is not only at the
municipal level, but we also have to wait for decisions by the city governor and department
chairs. Land officer H said, As the city has limited land, disputes are many. Sometimes we
have to evict people from land. There is a Land Eviction Department at the Municipality, and we
think districts must also have such departments. We are called to the field to check violations,
while citizens wait for us here and get frustrated. Most importantly, we must have a department
that coordinates in disputes and evicts from land. These cases show that land officers have
difficulties that need remedy.
1. Make information open and accessible, process and improve the available information.
2. Land offices develop their district plans based on a general plan developed by the
Municipality Planning Agency; they have to wait for the overall plan, which often
contradicts the district level plans.
3. Making a resolution on land privatization passes through several stages.
4. Districts have no designated department for land eviction as the municipal land office
does. Officers are called out to the field, while citizens wait and get frustrated.

Asked about drawbacks of the land office and its staff, respondents said the following (Figure
36).

Figure 36. Drawbacks of land office and its officers

Irresponsibility 29.2%
Not well organized 28%
No drawbacks 24.4%
Customer relations 16.6%
Don't know 1.9%

Three of four respondents said land office drawbacks must be remedied, and suggested the
following drawbacks.

First, issues related to officer work standards must be immediately remedied, including
bureaucracy, bad time management and poor work habits.

Second, structure and arrangement issues must be remedied immediately; officer

responsibilities must be clarified and separated; service information must be made open;
unnecessary steps must be removed; workloads must be reduced.

Third, communications and customer relations issues must be dealt with at once, including poor
customer relations, discrimination between citizens and service influenced by money.

[64]
7.3 Customer satisfaction

This section outlines the evaluation by citizens and land officers on the quality level of services.
Songinohairhan District land officer B said, Unless we take measures to reduce the workloads,
citizens will continue to be very frustrated. In our district, each land officer or land inspector is
responsible for land in 6 khoroos. When one person works for many clients, the workload is too
heavy. Then citizens get frustrated and there is misunderstanding between officers. Land
officer A of Songinohairhan District has been working for 13 years, and said, Every year, we
receive thousands of applications. The most important thing is that the government service is
now filled with many young staff, with an average age of about 25. They have probably been
poorly or not trained, and are not good at explaining the process and then the land office is
blamed.
The above demonstrates that the following factors are decisive for customer satisfaction.
1. Too heavy a workload for an officer, which results in conflict between the officer and
client.
2. Citizens submit incomplete applications, and then they get angry and frustrated.
3. Newly appointed young staff are not trained.

Figure 37. Please evaluate the service of the land office using the following criteria.

9.6%
Responsibility of staffs 26.8%
47.5%
11.7%
Time management amnd punctuality 29.7%
40.8%
10.8% Poor
Internal structure for service delivery 22.2%
48.1% Fair
Quick resolution of comments on customer 16.6%
18.7% Good
relations 36.7%
15.2%
Customer relations 27.4%
53.4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

The survey shows that respondents gave higher evaluations to customer service skills, and the
worst evaluations to responses to citizen complaints and grievances.

The overall picture on reasons for citizen unhappiness with land offices is shown in Figure 38
below.

[65]
 Figure 38. Map showing the level of satisfaction on service
Irresponsible

Asked bribe

CITIZEN 1. BECAUSE OF LACK OF

OVERSIGHT
Serve for rich

Not present on workplace during office

hours

Information closed and not transparent

NOT SATISFIED WITH LAND

OFFICE SERVICE
Bad time management

Impossible to make independent

decisions

Waited for long time because of the land

officers wrong actions

2. BECAUSE OF LAND
OFFICERS
Discrimination of citizens

No customer service skill

Bureaucracy

Functions are not clear and not separated

3. STRUCTURE AND
ARRANGEMENT
High workload

Made to come many times holding the

5. BECAUSE OF WORKING 4. LAW AND POLICY complaints resolution longer
ENVIRONMENT

Waited for governors to resolve the issue Waited for land office chairs to resolve Unnecessary steps
the issue

[66]
Figure 38 above shows 5 main factors for citizen unhappiness with land office service: 1. Weak
structure and oversight system; 2. Poorly-performing staff; 3. Poor structure and arrangement;
4. Unsatisfactory legal policy; 5. Poor working conditions and environment.

The arrows connect factors and their relevance.

[67]
 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Conclusion One. Land privatization process and obstacles: In 2003, the Law on Privatizing
Land to Mongolian Citizens was adopted, followed by commencement of free land privatization.
In 2008, the law was amended and the clause mandating privatization of land to households
was changed to privatization to each citizen. Land office workloads increased drastically; 11.8%
of citizens have received land ownership. The land privatization/ownership process is different
in rural and urban areas, and the obstacles also vary.

1. Recommendation: An operational budget must be provided to each land office in

proportion to the total population served. An annual land office budget must be approved
in consideration of the number of citizens wishing to privatize their land as well whether it
is in a district or rural area.
2. Recommendation: The current practice of giving land first for possession, then for
ownership, must be replaced by direct privatization. The process of possession first and
ownership next has multiple stages; it causes an increased land office workload, so we
recommend direct privatization.

3. Recommendation: All local administrations must develop a land privatization plan and
infrastructure development plan, and publicize. Many issues in the land
privatization/ownership relate to the absence of a unified land policy and untimely
planning. So infrastructure issues must be resolved in areas where land will be
privatized in the future.

Conclusion Two. Information on land ownership and its accessibility. 67.6% of citizens get
land ownership information from land officers in their district. 20-30% more rural citizens than
urban citizens get their information from the land office. On one hand, this is because rural
residents have a more limited access to information; on the other hand, the rural land office
workload is minimal. Land offices fail to provide sufficient information to citizens due to: faulty
actions of land officers; no optimal structure and arrangement; citizen inefficiency or lack of
knowledge; and lack of financing. Media was found to be the second most used source of
information.

1. Recommendation: It is important to advertise the sources of information to public. Land

offices must use the media, and especially TV, more extensively in promoting land
ownership information. With a source for consolidated information, land office workloads
will ease, and this would also reduce the need for citizens to come to land office. The
survey shows that TV is the third main source of information.

2. Recommendation: It is important to have receptionists and information officers at high

workload land offices, especially for citizens coming for the first time. Land offices must
recruit new staff, receptionists who are trained and skilled in customer service and able
to give information on land ownership. If it is impossible to recruit new receptionists
within the existing budget, one officer could be selected and trained. Such a service is
currently being successfully piloted at the Bayanzurh District land office.

[68]
 3. Recommendation: Frequently update information boards and websites with information
on land ownership. Survey results show that citizens get most information from land
officers and information boards. So information on the boards must be frequently
updated; boards should be put up where there are none at the moment, in very visible
places, and should be more user-friendly. Land offices in all aimag where the survey
was conducted had websites, but no introductory material; statistics and progress
reports are posted. In the 4 Ulaanbaatar districts (not Bayanzurkh) have websites, with
good introduction or services, function and reports, but these are not comprehensive.

Conclusion Three. Documents necessary for land ownership, related steps. Citizens often
encounter problems in formulating documentation needed for land privatization; operations of
land offices are not open and transparent, staff are bureaucratic and insufficient information is
provided. Citizens have only limited information and knowledge about land ownership. There
are several difficulties encountered by citizens in developing a cadaster map, including [1] lack
of cadaster companies in rural areas; [2] cadaster maps developed incorrectly; [3] one piece of
land allocated to several owners; [4] conflicts of interest.

1. Recommendation: Create monitoring system over officers who provide information and
advice. This would be a key way to resolve the common criticism that land officers are
too often not in their work place and are reluctant to give advice and information. For
example, a land office could install a digital evaluation or vote counter. To speed up
customer service and ease conditions, queue numbering machines could be installed;
cameras could be installed in service areas so that senior managers could oversee
processes.
2. Recommendation: Review and amend the law coordinating cadaster mapping and
introduce the system that cadaster surveying licenses are given to companies
transparently and competitively. Government agencies doing cadaster surveying has
impacts, such as increased workload and overlapping of two different functions; so only
private companies should do the mapping. In addition, importance must be given to
improving performance and operations of existing companies, and their databases
should be integrated with the land office database. Conflicts of interest between a land
office and a cadaster company must be regulated by legislation.

Conclusion Four. Steps by which land offices receive applications, and the decision-
making process. There is poor linkage and integration between land offices and other public
service agencies involved with land privatization. Sometimes a parcel of land is given to more
than one person, each with a resolution. Other obstacles occur often, such as holding up an
application for a long time, excessive queue time and decisions not made at all. However,
citizens often settle on unpermitted land and try to occupy land that has health and safety
dangers; these events increase the land office workload and create problems.
1. Recommendation: Reduce the legally-mandated 3-month period for processing
applications to 1 month by amending the legislation. The current law says that
privatization-related decisions will take 3 months, which was fine when the law was first
enacted, but now this period should be reduced, say both citizens and land officers.

[69]
 2. Recommendation: It was clear that land offices must have a better system and norm
for receiving applications and complaints, for sorting, storing, delivering and responding.
The current mechanism by which applications and complaints are registered upon
submission is not standardized, but is messy and not transparent. As a result, land is
sometimes given to several people, applications and complaints are held up for a long
without decision, citizens receive no response and there is no accountability system;
these are negative and damaging consequences.

Conclusion Five. Receiving land ownership certificate. Citizens have fewer problems in
gaining a land ownership title certificate. However, one problem is that, after they submit their
application and receive a governors decision, they must register their property at the
Immovable Property Title Registration Office. Citizens sometimes misunderstand that the
governors resolution on privatizing land secures their property rights, but they still need to
register at the property registration office. In addition, people from remote soums have to travel
a long way to the province center for their property registration certificate, so often have not
registered their property. For the GASR, there are fewer difficulties in terms of document and
fees. Ulaanbaatar citizens may encounter long queues for service at the GASR.
1. Recommendation: Land office should inform citizens that they must get register their
property at the Immovable Property Registration Office of GASR after receiving a
decision from the local governor. Information on this issue must be displayed on land
office information boards, and land officers should provide information to citizens
(possibly get the list of provided information signed by the client).
2. Recommendation: Hold special events like the single window property registration
service for rural citizens, particularly those in remote soums. A local governor or office
could gather applications and documents from local citizens and send them to the GASR
subsidiary at the province center at regular intervals, and make it possible to receive
certificates quickly. This would ensure land owner rights, get data included in the
national database, and reduce land disputes.

Conclusion Six. Customer satisfaction over services of land offices, quality of and
accessibility to service. Land officers are often bureaucratic and make people come to the
office several times; 28.9% of respondents claimed they went to the land office 4-7 times; 23%
said they had difficulties in getting their land; 10.1% said they had difficulty getting information;
19% reported difficulties relating to land office workloads; 12.2% criticized land office time
management. Overall, 26.3% said the period required for land ownership processing is too long.
There were 5 main factors affecting this: infrequent monitoring of land office service; high land
officer workloads; land office structures and arrangement are inconsistent with the potential
demand; outdated law and policy; and working conditions for land officers.

1. Recommendation: Use tools such as a community score card to evaluate service

quality at land offices and customer levels of satisfaction, and publicize results. After
being served at a land office, citizens could complete a form evaluating the service
quality; the agency could respond to criticism with remedial action. This would help
improving levels of customer satisfaction. We propose a system in which performance of
each officer is assessed, with awards and incentives for good performance and
[70]
 demands for correction of poor performance. It is also recommended to pay differing
salaries according to skills and performance.
2. Recommendation: It is vital to develop norms for a days work for a land officer. For
instance, one officer must perform three functional steps: giving information, receiving
applications and processing documents. A thorough calculation would be made on how
much time is spent for each step. If the office has 12 staff, it could be estimated that 240
people may be served per month. The Songinohairhan district land office serves 200
clients a month. If the service is standardized and overseen well, the reputation of the
land office will improve.

Conclusion Seven. Land disputes. With intensive land privatization, there have been more
land disputes. Today, citizens take disputes to a land office, to its upper level agency (MPAD),
or to the courts. Reasons for such a rise in land related disputes include irresponsible land
officer actions and illegal citizen actions.

1. Recommendation: Create an improved system in which sanctions are imposed on land

officers if their incorrect actions result in loss and/or damages to citizens. Although the
dispute settlement process terminates illegal decisions that harm citizens, there is no
system to sanction officer wrongdoing. There should be legal sanctions for illegal actions
and omissions by land officers. The system of compensating for damage and loss of
citizens because of land officer actions must be improved and clearly regulated by law.
2. Recommendation: Make efforts to resolve land disputes in non-judicial ways. It is
important to have regulations and coordination so that any dispute regarding land is
resolved at the same level that the respective decision was made. Any judicial process
and judgment can be time-consuming and expensive, so the law must clearly regulate
how to resolve disputes more easily. In particular, the agency that issued the
privatization decision must revise its decision and restore the rights of citizens so that
time and resources for citizens will be minimized.

[71]
 APPENDIX

Appendix 1

/ /

:
(TAF)- (IRIM)-
.
- ,
- , ,
.

:
,
. 20-30
.
,
.

:
,
.

( , , )
. ,
.

.

: .

.
,
.
.

[72]


1. ? [. . . . . .]
2. :
1.

2.
3. 1.
? (/ 2.
(3/4 )
) 3.
(8/9 )
(10/11/12 )
4.
()
5.
()
6.
7.
4.
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6. /

7. /

8.
9.
10.
11. /
/................................../
5. 1. 100.000
? 2. 100.001-250.000
3. 250.001-500.000
4. 500.001-750.000
5. 750.001-1.000.000
6. 1.000.001-

[73]
6. ?
1. / 6.
7.
2. / 8.
9. /
3. /................................................................./
4.
5.
7. 2.
?
1. 3.
4./ //

8.
?
1. /
2.
3./ /......................................................................................../

9.
/ ?
1. 2.(11- .)
10. , ?
.
1.:/...............................................................................................................................
.............../
2. .

11.
?
/................................................................../

12. ?
1. , /

2. , /
3. ,
4. ,
5. ,
6./ /......................................................................................../
13.
?
/......................................................................................................................................................./

[74]
.

14.
?( .)

\
1 1 2 ...
2 1 2 ...
3 1 2 ...

4 , 1 2 ...

5 1 2 ...



6 , 1 2 ...

/
/

15. ?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6./ /......................................................................................../
16.
? .
/....................................................................................................................................................../
17.
? / 2 ./
1.
2.
3. ,
4. ,
5.

6. ,
/ /
7./ /......................................................................................../

[75]
. ,

18. ,
3 ?
1. 2.(21- .)
19. 3 ?
1.
2.
3.
4./ /......................................................................................../
20. 3
?
1.
2.
3.
4./ /......................................................................................../
21. ?/ 3
./
1. ,
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. ,
8. .
9./ /......................................................................................../
22.
?
1. 3.
2. 4.

23.
, ?
1. (25- .)
2. (28- .)
24. ?
/........................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................../
25.
?
1. 2.(27- .)
[76]
26. ?

/........................................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................................../
27. ?
/.........................../

28.
?

,


1. -2500 1 2 3 4

2. -40000 1 2 3 4

3. 1 2 3 4
,
- 20000,
, ,
, -10000,
-6000
4. 1 2 3 4
,
- 20000,
, ,
, -10000,
-6000
5. , 1 2 3 4

-6000
6. , 1 2 3 4

-12500
7. / ... ... ... ...
/............................................................./

29.
? .
/......................................................................................................................................................./

[77]
 . ,
,

30. ?
./.........................................................................................................................../
31. , ?
1. 2. (33- .)
32. ,
? / 3 ./
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12./ /...................................................................................../
33. ,
?/ 3 ./
1. 6.
2. 7.
8.
3. 9.
10./
4. /................................................................./
5.

34.
?
,


1 1 2 3 4
2 1 2 3 4

3 1 2 3 4
4 , 1 2 3 4

[78]
 5 , 1 2 3 4


6 /
/................................................................/

. , ,

35.
?
1. 2. (39- .)
36. ?
/......................................................................................................................................................./
37. ?
1. 5.
2. 6. /
3. /..................................................................../
4.
38. ?
/......................................................................................................................................................./

39.
?

,
.
/ //

1 .
. ( )
2 .
( )
3
. (
)
4 .
( )
5
.
( )

.
[79]
Appendix 2

: ,

:

, 0.07; 0.5; 0.35
, ,
,
.

1. , , ;
2.
,
3.
;
4.
, ;
5. ,
.

...

...

...

...

[83]


1. ?
2. ?
3.
?
4. , ?
?
5. ?

6. ?
7. ,
? ?
8.
?
9. ? ?
10. ?.
?.
?
11. ?
? ?
12.
?
13. ?.
?
14.
?

15. , 3
?. ?
16. ? /
, , /
17. , ?.
?

[84]
.

18.
?
19.
?.
?
20.
? ?

21. ,
?
22. , ,
?
23. , ?
24. , ?
25. ?

.
26.
?
27. ?
28. ?

[85]
Appendix 3

/ /

:
(TAF)-
(IRIM)- .
- ,
- ,
, ,
.

:
,
, . ,

.

:
,
.

( , , )
.
.

: .

.
,
.
.

[86]
 ,

.
6. ? [. . . . . .]
7. : 3.
4.
8. 8.
? 9. (3/4 )
(/ 10. (8/9 )
11. (10/11/12 )
) 12. ()
13. ()
14.
9. 12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17. /
18. /
19.
20.
21.
22. / /................................../
10. 7. 100.000
8. 100.001-250.000
? 9. 250.001-500.000
10. 500.001-750.000
11. 750.001-1.000.000
12. 1.000.001-

/
. ,
01. 1.
, 2.
?
02. 1.

[87]
 ? 2.
03. 1.
, , 2.

?
04.
,


05. 1.
? 2.
06. 1.
2.

?
07. 1.
, 2.
?
08. , 1.
2.


?
09.


?
10. 1.
? 2.
11. 1.
2.
?
12. 1.
2.
?
13. 1.
2.
?
14. 1.
, 2.

?
15. 1.
2.

[88]
 ?
16.
1 , 1.

6 , 2.



?
.
17.

18.




?
19.


?
20. 1.
2.

,




?
21.





?
22. 1.
2.


?
.
23. 1.
2.

[89]


?
24. 1.
2.

?
25. 1.
2.
?
26. 1.
2.




. ,
27. 1.
2.
3




?
. ,
28.

?
29.


,
?
30.



?
31. 1.
2.

[90]