Deal #8261

In a paper presented by Alano (2015) during an international conference: "Traces of both gender equality and differences in access and control over land and in decision making can be observed in San Mariano. In this case, women do not benefit fully from individual land titling. Women may also exercise their land rights through informal and customary ownership. Men are privileged to benefit from the state regulation of land titling. Although both women and men have access to informal land market, women are favored in negotiations. This channel becomes a viable option for women than engaging the state and relying on land titling to provide them access to land. Market engagement gives more flexibility for women’s land claims than what state regulation offers them. Women may exercise autonomy in negotiating and transacting with other parties to buy land, rent out their land, or use land as loan collateral without the husband’s consent. Decision making based on asset ownership and the household’s economic need rather than gender also allows both women and men to benefit from the income derived from the land. However, there is also evidence that this may disadvantage women. San Mariano’s case demonstrates that women farmers may be incorporated into corporate agriculture in ways that threaten their rights to land. At the same time, however, they are able to maneuver and utilize non-state spaces to claim and retain their effective control over land, contrary to the largely negative outcomes experienced in other cases of land deals." (Alano, 2015)