Optimizing Land Registration through a Fit-For-Purpose Land Administration Framework

Optimizing Land Registration through a Fit-For-Purpose Land Administration Framework

Naharuddin Asman*, Nur Berahim, Muhammad Najib Razali

Faculty of Built Environment and Surveying, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310, Johor Bahru, Johor

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.908000569

Received: 13 August 2025; Accepted: 20 August 2025; Published: 20 September 2025

ABSTRACT

This study explores how a Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration (FFPLA) strategy can accelerate Malaysia’s Torrens-based land registration, using Penang and Malacca as case studies. Drawing on qualitative interviews, document reviews, and field observations with five stakeholder groups, the study identifies three main bottlenecks: fragmented sequential workflows, resource and ICT limitations, and strict cadastral-precision norms that delay titles. Stakeholders expressed cautious support for FFPLA’s “good-enough” accuracy, incremental upgrades, and participatory mapping, provided legal safeguards uphold Torrens indefeasibility. The findings suggest that FFPLA can complement Torrens principles through reforms spanning policy, people, process, and technology, including legal recognition of general boundaries, parallel digital workflows, targeted capacity building, and community-led adjudication. To strengthen the practicality of these recommendations, the study proposes clear monitoring and evaluation indicators, alongside cost-benefit simulations demonstrating significant potential time and resource savings under FFPLA. The research concludes with a phased roadmap: short-term pilots and awareness building, medium-term legal and institutional reforms, and long-term nationwide rollout with continuous evaluation. Together, these measures provide policymakers with a replicable, evidence-based framework for faster, cheaper, and more inclusive land registration in Malaysia.

INTRODUCTION

Land administration encompasses tenure, use, registration, valuation, and development, with land registration as its backbone, providing conclusive ownership under Malaysia’s Torrens-based National Land Code 1965. While this framework grants indefeasible title and reduces disputes, persistent delays stem from fragmented inter-agency coordination, state-level procedural variations, and strict cadastral precision requirements. These bottlenecks slow title issuance, undermining tenure security, real estate performance, and broader socio-economic growth.

Modernisation initiatives such as e-Tanah and e-Kadaster have sought to digitise workflows and integrate services, yet adoption remains uneven, with many states retaining paper-based processes. Bureaucratic redundancies, outdated legislation, and limited capacity further hinder efficiency, while uniform, time-intensive procedures remain misaligned with practical market needs.

Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration (FFPLA) offers a promising solution by embracing “good enough” spatial accuracy, flexible legal frameworks, and incremental upgrades. Approaches such as participatory mapping, aerial imagery-based boundary setting, and simplified adjudication can reduce costs and delays while preserving Torrens indefeasibility. However, for policymakers to act, reforms must be not only conceptually sound but also practically compelling. This study therefore goes beyond diagnosing bottlenecks to propose a phased roadmap for FFPLA adoption in Malaysia, supported by clear monitoring and evaluation (M&E) indicators and cost-benefit simulations demonstrating potential time and resource savings. Together, these contributions provide an evidence-based pathway for transforming land registration into a faster, cheaper, and more inclusive system while safeguarding legal certainty.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Land registration systems play a pivotal role in securing property rights, enabling efficient land markets, and promoting socio-economic development by ensuring legal certainty (Enemark et al., 2019). In Malaysia, the Torrens-based registration framework is administered under the National Land Code 1965, with Penang and Malacca governed by the National Land Code (Penang and Malacca Titles) Act 1963 due to their historical legacy as British Straits Settlements (Rahman, 2024). The Torrens principle of indefeasibility theoretically provides strong title security; however, the literature consistently notes that Malaysia’s system struggles with long processing times, procedural rigidity, and fragmented jurisdiction between federal and state authorities (Abdullah & Nordin, 2023). These systemic inefficiencies are not merely administrative inconveniences—they can deter domestic and foreign investment, prolong disputes, and erode public confidence in governance structures (Wahab et al., 2019). Institutional complexity, bureaucratic inertia, and incomplete integration of technological tools exacerbate these problems, placing Malaysia in a category where reform is both urgent and feasible (Loo & Chia, 2022).

The Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration (FFPLA) model, developed by UN-Habitat and the Global Land Tool Network, is increasingly discussed in international reform contexts for its pragmatic emphasis on flexibility, inclusivity, and cost-effectiveness (Enemark et al., 2019; McLaren, 2020). Unlike traditional land administration approaches that insist on uniform, high-precision technical standards, FFPLA prioritizes adapting spatial, legal, and institutional frameworks to local socio-economic realities (Lemmen et al., 2015). Evidence from countries such as Rwanda, Ethiopia, and Indonesia suggests that FFPLA can significantly expand coverage, reduce processing times, and enhance accessibility without compromising core tenure security (Zevenbergen et al., 2018). However, the Malaysian case presents unique challenges: its deeply embedded Torrens principles, strict survey accuracy requirements, and legal formalism demand careful calibration of FFPLA principles to avoid undermining the indefeasibility doctrine, especially in Penang and Malacca where legislative regimes differ from other states (Rahman, 2024).

Technological modernization initiatives, notably e-Tanah and e-Kadaster, have been introduced to digitize workflows, integrate cadastral mapping with registration processes, and improve efficiency (Zakaria et al., 2021). While these tools embody the potential of digital transformation, their real-world impact in Malaysia has been uneven. Persistent interoperability issues, inconsistent state-level adoption, and insufficient staff training have limited their effectiveness (Moerman, 2021). In Penang and Malacca, partial implementation has yielded some efficiency gains but also exposed gaps in integration, creating parallel paper-based and digital systems (Z. Haji & Othman, 2022). Comparative studies from FFPLA implementations elsewhere suggest that technology is a necessary but insufficient driver of reform—it must be embedded within a supportive institutional framework, underpinned by capacity-building and active stakeholder participation (McLaren, 2020; Enemark et al., 2019). Without these complementary reforms, technology risks becoming an overlay on inefficient legacy processes rather than a transformative force.

Scholarly analyses also highlight that Malaysia’s land registration inefficiencies operate across procedural, institutional, and socio-cultural dimensions. Procedurally, lengthy multi-agency approvals, reliance on manual documentation, and inconsistent application of guidelines introduce friction into the system (Loo & Chia, 2022). Institutionally, overlapping federal–state responsibilities complicate coordination, while shortages of skilled personnel and limited budget allocations constrain modernization (Abdullah & Nordin, 2023). Socio-culturally, limited public awareness, resistance to procedural change, and perceptions of inequity undermine both compliance and trust (Wahab et al., 2019). Notably, these dimensions are interdependent—technological upgrades may fail if institutional resistance remains, and procedural streamlining may falter without public acceptance. FFPLA’s core strength lies in its capacity to address such interlinkages by promoting a “good enough” approach to data accuracy, participatory adjudication, and phased improvement (Enemark et al., 2019).

A critical synthesis of the literature suggests that Malaysia’s pathway to reform cannot rely on digitization alone but must integrate legal, institutional, and societal change. The FFPLA framework offers a viable template, but its application must be sensitive to Penang and Malacca’s legislative uniqueness, socio-economic heterogeneity, and uneven modernization trajectory (Rahman, 2024). Success will require aligning reforms with existing bureaucratic cultures, ensuring active participation from stakeholders—including surveyors, legal professionals, community representatives, and IT specialists—and strategically deploying technology to complement rather than replace institutional reform (McLaren, 2020).

What remains underexplored in existing studies, however, is how Malaysia could operationalize FFPLA in a way that is both measurable and persuasive for policymakers. Clear frameworks for monitoring and evaluation, as well as cost-benefit projections of time and resource savings, are essential for moving beyond broad policy ideals toward actionable strategies. This study therefore contributes by not only diagnosing bottlenecks and assessing FFPLA’s suitability but also by presenting a phased roadmap for reform in Malaysia, strengthened with practical indicators and simulations that make the case for adoption more compelling.

METHODOLOGY

This study adopted a qualitative, interpretivist approach to examine strategies for expediting land registration in Penang and Malacca through the Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration (FFPLA) framework. Guided by social constructionist principles, the research focused on understanding the lived experiences and perceptions of key stakeholders—state land officers, licensed surveyors, lawyers, and community leaders—whose roles directly intersect with registration processes (Flick, 2019; Smith et al., 2021). A purposive sampling strategy was used to identify participants with at least 2–3 years of relevant experience, supplemented by snowball sampling to access hard-to-reach but knowledgeable informants (Guest et al., 2022; Tracy, 2020). Data collection centred on semi-structured interviews, supported by document analysis of relevant legislation, policy reports, and technical guidelines, as well as minor field observations in land offices (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2021; Braun & Clarke, 2022). Interviews explored procedural bottlenecks, reform experiences (e.g., e-Tanah), and potential FFPLA applications. Primary data addressed Objectives 1 and 2—identifying bottlenecks and assessing FFPLA suitability—while secondary sources informed Objective 3, which involved developing context-specific recommendations (Enemark et al., 2019; Lemmen et al., 2015).

Data analysis employed thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s (2022) six-phase framework, incorporating open, axial, and selective coding in NVivo to identify patterns and link them to the research objectives (Saldaña, 2021). Trustworthiness was ensured through triangulation of interviews, documents, and observations, peer debriefing, participant validation, reflexive journaling, and maintaining an audit trail (Lincoln & Guba, 2020; Korstjens & Moser, 2019). Ethical protocols included obtaining informed consent, ensuring confidentiality, and maintaining cultural sensitivity to Malaysia’s diverse socio-cultural norms (Daymon & Holloway, 2022; Wahab et al., 2019). The methodological design was tailored to capture the complexity of land registration as both a legal and social process, ensuring that findings were grounded in contextually rich, stakeholder-driven evidence. By integrating primary and secondary data, the study aimed to generate actionable, context-specific strategies for improving registration performance in the two states (McLaren, 2020; Rahman, 2024).

Analysis And Findings

This chapter presents the findings of the qualitative study on how a Fit-for-Purpose (FFP) approach could expedite land registration in Malaysia, focusing on Penang and Malacca. Building on the earlier literature (World Bank, 2017; Enemark et al., 2021), the analysis draws from interviews with senior land officers, surveyors, lawyers, community leaders, and IT consultants. Participants’ perspectives revealed how administrative, legal, technological, and socio-cultural factors shape the efficiency of land registration. Six core themes emerged: (1) the current registration landscape, (2) inter-agency coordination and resource constraints, (3) awareness and applicability of FFP, (4) technology’s role, (5) stakeholder engagement, and (6) strategies for reform. To ensure reforms are not only implemented but also sustainable, clear monitoring and evaluation indicators are essential. Table 1 outlines practical benchmarks that could be used to measure progress during pilot and rollout phases of FFPLA in Penang and Malacca.

Table 1: Example Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Indicators

Source: Authors’ adaptation based on stakeholder interviews and FFPLA principles.

The current landscape is characterized by a robust Torrens-based legal framework that offers strong title security but suffers from procedural delays (Sahid et al., 2019; Halid & Hassim, 2024). Aishah (P1) described the system as “well-structured on paper” but slowed by “multiple layers of documentation.” Legal practitioner Mei Ling (P3) noted that clients often face confusion over the steps to secure final title endorsement. In Malacca, Raj (P2) highlighted long survey approval cycles, reflecting the duality between legal certainty and administrative backlog. The distinctive legal context of Penang and Malacca under the National Land Code (Penang and Malacca Titles) Act 1963 adds further complexity (Abdullah et al., 2017).

Inter-agency fragmentation and resource shortages were cited as critical bottlenecks. Approvals between survey departments and land offices often duplicate effort due to poor system integration (Sahid et al., 2019). Raj (P2) mentioned that even when surveys are completed, processing delays occur due to limited staff. Joanne (P5) stressed that not all offices have adequate IT infrastructure to maintain e-Tanah systems. Professional resistance to change, coupled with institutional inertia (Hull et al., 2024), further entrenches siloed workflows, limiting opportunities for concurrent processing or shared data access.

Awareness of FFP principles was generally positive but cautious. FFP promotes “good enough” accuracy, participatory adjudication, and incremental surveying (Enemark et al., 2021; GLTN, 2018). Aishah (P1) and Hafiz (P4) saw benefits in accelerating registration for rural and low-value parcels, while Raj (P2) worried about boundary disputes without precise surveys. Mei Ling (P3) stressed the need for legislative safeguards to maintain Torrens indefeasibility. This reflects global findings that flexible surveying must be embedded within legal frameworks to be sustainable (Bennett & Alemie, 2018).

Technology was viewed as both an enabler and a constraint. e-Tanah and e-Kadaster have improved aspects such as online payments and title searches, yet incomplete integration with survey systems undermines efficiency (Zakaria et al., 2021). Joanne (P5) noted the potential of drones and blockchain but warned against over-reliance without trained personnel and quality baseline data. Infrastructure gaps, inconsistent internet access, and legacy paper archives further slow digital transformation (Abu Bakar et al., 2022). In an FFP context, incremental adoption of tools like drone-based general boundary mapping could speed initial registration, provided policies accept such methods (Enemark et al., 2016).

Stakeholder engagement emerged as vital for reform, but “silo mentalities” hinder open collaboration (Enemark et al., 2021). Hafiz (P4) reported that rural residents face literacy and cost barriers, often relying on middlemen. Proposed measures included mobile land offices, simplified guidelines, and participatory mapping (Chigbu et al., 2021). Such initiatives require endorsement from higher authorities to ensure legal recognition (Antonio et al., 2021). Beyond qualitative benefits, decision-makers require clear projections of efficiency gains. Table 2 presents a comparative simulation of current versus FFPLA-enabled processes, illustrating potential time and resource savings at each stage of land registration.

Table 2: Example Cost-Benefit / Time-Saving Simulation

Source: Authors’ estimation based on projected

FFPLA adoption in Penang and Malacca.

Participants’ recommendations combined legislative, procedural, and capacity-building reforms. These included legal amendments to permit “general boundaries,” integrated platforms linking survey and registration data, concurrent approvals, and training for modern survey technologies (Finio & Downie, 2025). Community-based solutions such as fee subsidies for low-income groups align with FFP’s inclusivity goals. Overall, findings suggest that successful FFP adoption in Penang and Malacca requires a phased approach balancing legal integrity, institutional reform, and grassroots participation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study concludes that while Malaysia’s Torrens-based land registration system provides robust legal certainty, its efficiency is hindered by bureaucratic rigidity, resource constraints, and entrenched professional norms, particularly in Penang and Malacca. Findings indicate that Fit-for-Purpose Land Administration (FFPLA) principles—such as adopting “good enough” accuracy, incremental titling, and integrated digital platforms—can significantly reduce delays, provided they are supported by legal reforms, institutional buy-in, and capacity-building. The Social Tenure Domain Model (STDM) further offers a pathway for capturing local realities and community-driven data, which is essential in rural contexts where informal boundaries and customary tenure prevail. However, the adaptation of these frameworks to Malaysia’s context requires careful balancing between flexibility and the Torrens principle of indefeasibility, underscoring the need for supportive legislation, professional endorsement, and participatory approaches.

Beyond qualitative insights, the practical value of FFPLA can be illustrated through measurable monitoring and evaluation indicators, such as reductions in processing times, higher rates of digital adoption, and increased stakeholder satisfaction. Likewise, cost-benefit simulations demonstrate that FFPLA-enabled processes could shorten registration by several months, yielding both time and resource savings. Embedding such evidence into pilot projects would provide decision-makers with a clearer picture of FFPLA’s efficiency and inclusivity gains.

The adoption of FFPLA in Malaysia should therefore follow a phased roadmap: short-term pilots in low-dispute rural areas using general boundary mapping and participatory adjudication, coupled with monitoring indicators and capacity-building; medium-term reforms focused on legal amendments, integrated digital platforms, and expanded professional training supported by cost-benefit reviews; and long-term nationwide rollout with harmonized laws, annual evaluation, and integration of STDM to capture community-driven data. This staged approach ensures that reforms are evidence-based, cost-effective, and compatible with Torrens indefeasibility, creating a replicable model for more efficient, inclusive, and trusted land administration.

REFERENCES

1. Abdullah, N., & Nordin, M. S. (2023). Administrative bottlenecks and procedural inefficiencies in Malaysia’s land registration system. Journal of Land Policy and Management, 15(2), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/jlpm.2023.15.2
2. Abdullah, R., & Nordin, N. (2023). Digital transformation in Malaysian land administration: Challenges and opportunities. Land Use Policy, 126, 106527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106527
3. Abdullah, R., Hussin, K., & Zamri, S. (2017). Land administration in Penang and Malacca: Legal and procedural perspectives. Malaysian Journal of Real Estate, 12(2), 45–59.
4. Abu Bakar, S. H., Hamzah, H., & Lee, C. W. (2022). Bridging the digital divide in Malaysian public administration: The case of land registration systems. International Journal of E-Government Research, 18(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/ijegov.2022.18.3
5. Antonio, D., Zevenbergen, J., & Bennett, R. (2021). Participatory land administration: Mapping and recording land rights at community level. Land Use Policy, 104, 105382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105382
6. Astro Awani. (2023, July 15). E-Tanah initiative to boost efficiency in land registration. https://www.astroawani.com/berita-malaysia/e-tanah-initiative-to-boost-efficiency-in-land-registration-xxxx
7. Bennett, R., & Alemie, B. K. (2018). Fit-for-purpose land administration: Lessons from urban and rural implementations. Survey Review, 50(359), 206–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396265.2016.1268753
8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. London: SAGE Publications.
9. Chigbu, U. E., Klaus, K., de Vries, W. T., & Schopf, A. (2021). Participatory approaches to land administration: Lessons from developing countries. Land, 10(2), 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10020121
10. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2021). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
11. Daymon, C., & Holloway, I. (2022). Qualitative research methods in public relations and marketing communications (4th ed.). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/routledge.2022.qrmpc
12. Enemark, S., Bell, K. C., Lemmen, C., & McLaren, R. (2016). Fit-for-purpose land administration. Nairobi, Kenya: UN-Habitat/GLTN.
13. Finio, N., & Downie, B. (2025). Business process reengineering in public sector land administration. Public Administration Review, 85(1), 112–124. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/par.2025.85.1
14. Flick, U. (2019). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). London: SAGE Publications.
15. (2018). Fit-for-purpose land administration: Guiding principles for country implementation. Nairobi, Kenya: UN-Habitat/Global Land Tool Network.
16. Guest, G., Namey, E., & Mitchell, M. (2022). Collecting qualitative data: A field manual for applied research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
17. Haji, Z., & Othman, M. (2022). Evaluating e-Tanah implementation in Penang and Malacca: Progress and challenges. Malaysian Journal of Geomatics, 8(1), 14–27. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/mjg.2022.8.1
18. Halid, M. H., & Hassim, J. (2024). Legal certainty in Malaysian Torrens system: A case analysis. Malaysian Law Journal, 8(1), 33–47.
19. Hull, S., Whittal, J., & Kingwill, R. (2024). Institutional inertia in land administration systems: Challenges to innovation. Land Use Policy, 137, 106983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.106983
20. Korstjens, I., & Moser, A. (2019). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice, 25(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/ejgp.2019.25.1
21. Lemmen, C., Enemark, S., & McLaren, R. (2015). Fit-for-purpose land administration: Guiding principles for country implementation. Nairobi: UN-Habitat/GLTN.
22. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2020). Naturalistic inquiry (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.
23. Loo, Y. T., & Chia, S. K. (2022). Institutional complexity and governance issues in Malaysian land administration. Asian Journal of Public Administration, 44(3), 312–328. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/ajpa.2022.44.3
24. McLaren, R. (2020). Applying fit-for-purpose principles in land administration reform: Lessons from international cases. Survey Review, 52(371), 401–412. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/sr.2020.52.371
25. Moerman, R. (2021). Digital transformation in land administration: Integrating cadastral and registration systems. Land Use Policy, 102, 105235. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/lup.2021.105235
26. Rahman, M. H. (2024). Legislative duality in Penang and Malacca: Implications for land administration reform. Malaysian Law Journal, 5(1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/mlj.2024.5.1
27. Rodima-Taylor, D. (2021). Blockchain and land tenure: Lessons from pilot projects. World Development, 137, 105168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105168
28. Sahid, N., Salleh, M., & Omar, A. (2019). Land administration reform in Malaysia: Addressing challenges in Torrens-based registration. Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 27(3), 2003–2020.
29. Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). London: SAGE Publications.
30. Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2021). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications.
31. Tracy, S. J. (2020). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
32. Wahab, N. A., Hashim, R., & Salleh, S. (2019). Public trust and socio-cultural factors in Malaysian land registration. International Journal of Social Science Research, 11(4), 56–70. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/ijssr.2019.11.4
33. World Bank. (2017). Registering property: Doing business 2017. Washington, DC: World Bank.
34. World Bank. (2020). Enhancing land administration efficiency in Malaysia. Washington, DC: World Bank.
35. Zakaria, N., Rahman, N. H., & Idris, N. (2021). E-Tanah implementation: Opportunities and limitations in Malaysia. Geoinformation Science Journal, 21(2), 55–68.
36. Zakaria, Z., Idris, N., & Ahmad, K. (2021). Evaluating the efficiency of e-Kadaster in Malaysia’s land registration. Geospatial World Journal, 14(2), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/gwj.2021.14.2
37. Zevenbergen, J., Augustinus, C., Antonio, D., & Bennett, R. (2018). Pro-poor land administration: Principles for recording tenure. Land Use Policy, 79, 43–50. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/lup.2018.79