Mongolia - Property Rights - Land Registration System

Metadata Updated: February 14, 2020

IPA: Evaluation design: Impact Evaluation 1. Pre-post comparison of time and cost involving in select land-based transactions 2. Involve two main instruments of measurement: Back Office time tracking survey and the Banking survey 3. Qualitative interviews were conducted with registry officers to inform the understanding of how these measures affected workflow

Evaluation question: Did some of the institutional strengthening activities of PRP reduce time and cost of completing land-based transactions?

The institutional strengthening activities that can be evaluated are the installation of web-based electronic registry system (ePRS), the revision to law that govern access to property records law, and the digitization of paper archives.

Results: Back Office Time Tracking survey - Tracked 9 land based transactions at General Authority of State Registry (GASR) - Shortest process, registering a collateral agreement took 6 work days. Longest process, registering land or structure on land took 12 days. Transactions took 3-6 days longer than official time posted by GASR.

Banking survey - Tracked time it takes to apply for a mortgage or land-based loan including time it takes to prepare document, to submit and wait for bank approval, and to visit GASR offices to register for the mortgage or loan. Mortgage - 25 days for loan process and 14 days to prepare paperwork for loan application, total cost 360 USD. For land based loan - took 13 days for the loan process and 7.5 days to prepare paperwork, total cost 130 USD.

Informational interviews - Mixed responses. All officers agree that there has been changes to the registration flow. However, lack of consensus on whether the changes have shortened the weight time for citizens. While opening of district offices have shortened travel distance for some citizens, multiple locations meant that documents had to travel to the main office for official signatures. All officers agreed that workload increased yet workforce did not. There was consensus that more people are registering due to increased awareness and growing construction sector. Officers also noted that government mandated 8% mortgage has increased demand for mortgages. Officers agree that technical upgrades provided by PRP have improved efficiency and that outreach activity had educated the public regarding property rights.

CLOUDBURST GROUP: Evaluation design: Performance Evaluation

This is a follow-up endline evaluation that adapts an existing evaluation design developed by IPA. Five research questions drive this follow-up evaluation:

1) Did the land registry system strengthening component of the PRP lead to increases in demand and volume of formal land transactions, including land registration and related transfers at GAIPSR and mortgages at the banks? 2) What were the characteristics of those who conducted formal land transactions before and after the introduction of ePRS? 3) Did the land registry system strengthening component of the PRP result in changes in land transaction costs/time for land transactions? 4) Were there changes in gender ratio of land owners? Were there any differences in results for parcels held by women/men? 5) Did the land registry system strengthening component of the PRP lead to improvement in quality of property registration services? What was the significance of the land registry system strengthening component of the PRP?

This follow-up evaluation draws upon six main sources of primary and secondary data to answer the evaluation questions: ePRS land transaction data, pre-ePRS land transaction data, a banking customer survey, structured key informant interviews (KIIs) with GAIPSR registrars and bank loan officers, focus group discussions (FGDs) with key beneficiary groups, and open-ended KIIs with key project stakeholders. In addition, the evaluation will produce a final ERR calculation of this activity of the PRP based on the main expected benefit streams.

The PRP took place from 2008 to 2013, so this follow-up endline evaluation is occurring approximately five years after the close of project activities.

Access & Use Information

Public: This dataset is intended for public access and use. License: No license information was provided. If this work was prepared by an officer or employee of the United States government as part of that person's official duties it is considered a U.S. Government Work.

Downloads & Resources

Dates

Metadata Created Date March 31, 2018
Metadata Updated Date February 14, 2020

Metadata Source

Harvested from MCC Data.json

Additional Metadata

Resource Type Dataset
Metadata Created Date March 31, 2018
Metadata Updated Date February 14, 2020
Publisher Millennium Challenge Corporation
Unique Identifier DDI-MCC-MNG-IPA-CB-RSPS-2018-v1
Maintainer
Monitoring & Evaluation Division of the Millennium Challenge Corporation
Maintainer Email
Public Access Level public
Bureau Code 184:03
Metadata Context https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema/catalog.jsonld
Schema Version https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema
Catalog Describedby https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema/catalog.json
Harvest Object Id b6461af5-198e-4031-9a86-87cc4a3ea057
Harvest Source Id 56258383-6604-4f83-87c7-7d7be329c1b3
Harvest Source Title MCC Data.json
Homepage URL https://data.mcc.gov/evaluations/index.php/catalog/134
Data Last Modified 2018-03-29
Program Code 184:000
Source Datajson Identifier True
Source Hash 478063961a2dfc3e920c13a6b3f44a18869e12fb
Source Schema Version 1.1

Didn't find what you're looking for? Suggest a dataset here.