Unlocking the Power of Open Land Data for Sustainable Development and Resilient Governance

This analysis of the Global Data Barometer land management thematic cluster was compiled by Charl-Thom Bayer, Acting Team Leader, at the Land Portal Foundation.

Nearly every service that supports society—whether public or private—operates within a spatial context, with land at its core. Public and private sector activities for service delivery, governance, and economic transactions all have land serving as the foundational reference point. Core public services—such as infrastructure development, water and sanitation systems, transportation networks, environmental management, and natural resource governance—are intrinsically linked to land administration systems and geospatial frameworks. Real estate markets, a key driver of household wealth and national economies, rely on transparent and efficient land tenure and registration systems.

Agricultural value chains—from subsistence production to global commodity trade in crops like coffee, sugar, grains, fruit, and livestock—are deeply embedded in the institutional and legal frameworks that define land rights and use. These tenure systems are particularly critical for smallholder and subsistence farmers, for whom land access and tenure security are central to food security and economic resilience. Furthermore, the impacts of climate change—and the effectiveness of mitigation and adaptation strategies—are mediated through sustainable land governance.

In this context, open land data is essential not only for operational efficiency and policy coherence but also for enabling a holistic understanding of the land information ecosystem. Open, interoperable, and standardized land data improves transparency, enhances cross-sectoral data integration, and supports evidence-based decision-making. It strengthens the feedback loops between stakeholders—including governments, civil society, and the private sector—thereby enabling more inclusive and sustainable development outcomes.

Current State of Land Data: Progress, Gaps, and Regional Dynamics

1. The first key trend is that the state of data in Africa has improved since the first edition of the Global Data Barometer when 14 countries scored 0 or 1 in Africa. In this dataset that number has dropped by half to only 7 countries scoring 0 or 1 in Africa. While this might not yet be classified as good, it does indicate progress in the data ecosystem. 
2. Across action areas, land use data is more available than land tenure data. Countries collect more land use data than they do land tenure data.
3. Across regions, LAC is performing better than Africa (although Africa is improving).
4. If you look at the regional analysis, it appears that countries’ performance is spatially related. By this I mean that the Caribbean region as a whole is underperforming as well as the North Africa region. This could be important information and potentially shows how “neighbours” can positively or negatively influence one another. This is an issue that perhaps needs to be followed up with more detailed research.

Key Problems/Obstacles

1. In assessing the availability of data, we need to be constantly aware that data can be distributed between national and local authorities. The scope of the research lends itself more to a national perspective, however this could potentially obscure regional centres of excellence which are localised. Such regional approaches can be the results of a system of governance, but are also sometimes the results of policy choices made by leadership as well as access to resources that are not evenly distributed in the country.
2. There is a great deal of variation, nationally and regionally, but generally the data ecosystem is still very incomplete. There are multiple dimensions to land data and much more needs to be done to improve, not only, data collection, but the governance and open publication of existing digital data collections.
3. A key issue that is not yet fully resolved is around the quality of the data. Quality is difficult to assess as it is related to being fit for purpose and one cannot assess data for every purpose. Issues such as precision and accuracy come into play, but are also very much context dependent. At the same time quality can be interpreted to refer to how readily that data is made available for use (or how usable the data is). Quality is often raised by the researchers, but often in different context and imbued with different meaning. Information Technology is an important issue but now fully included or excluded in what is being recorded for the land sector.

Looking Ahead: Strengthening Land Data Ecosystems through Collaboration and Capacity Building 

Data Collaborations and Partnership

The partnership between the Global Data Barometer (GDB) and the Land Portal has proven its value not only in operational terms but also in contributing to strategic thinking and advocacy efforts. While it is valid to critique indicators for potentially oversimplifying complex realities, adopting a partnership-based approach to indicator development can help mitigate this limitation. By incorporating diverse perspectives, such an approach offers a more nuanced and comprehensive view of the global land data ecosystem, while also strengthening the advocacy case for the use of indicators.

The global land data landscape is inherently complex, with no single metric, index, or organization capable of capturing its full breadth. Multi-stakeholder partnerships are essential to developing, sustaining, and documenting this ecosystem. They bring complementary expertise and insights that enrich our collective understanding. Meaningful collaboration, however, depends on the open sharing of data and resources—an imperative for addressing persistent data gaps and ensuring equitable access to information across the land sector.

Developing Data Capabilities in Tandem with Legal Frameworks

There is a critical need to develop data capabilities in parallel with legal frameworks to ensure effective data governance. While strong legal foundations are vital, they must be complemented by investments in digital infrastructure, data accessibility, human capacity, and institutional readiness. Without these elements, the potential of open data remains underutilized. In particular, the case of Africa illustrates this gap: despite the existence of robust legal frameworks in many countries, limited data capabilities and low levels of data openness persist. This underscores the importance of adopting holistic, context-sensitive approaches to data governance that address both legal and operational dimensions.

This analysis comes from more than just the GDB dashboard but includes some analysis of legal frameworks for open data as part of my work. So perhaps it is not appropriate here. Also this is not something that is directly addressed by the index or the data collection, but must feature in the advocacy and ultimate improvement of the ecosystem.