Research4 Land Tenure Data

Land-Tenure Datasets in LATAM — A Carbon-Software Integration Audit

Scope: the actual data sources a v1 LATAM carbon-project software must integrate against to identify ownership, validate boundaries, detect overlaps, and verify rights to issue carbon credits. Priority countries: Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Peru, Paraguay, Argentina, Bolivia, with brief notes on Ecuador and Costa Rica. Snapshot date: 2026-04-25.

A. Country-by-country inventory

A.1 Brazil

Brazil’s tenure stack is the deepest in LATAM but also the most fragmented. The single most important fact for software design is that CAR (Cadastro Ambiental Rural) is self-declared and explicitly NOT a land title, while SIGEF / SNCR is the closest thing to a legal cadastre but covers only certified parcels. Carbon-project software that relies on CAR alone is structurally exposed to grilagem (land-grab) risk: a 2024 PNAS paper found that overlapping CAR claims correlate strongly with deforestation hot-spots and that only ~2% of CAR’s 618.8 Mha had been validated by state environmental agencies as of 2022 (PNAS 2024). The June 2025 SIGEF refresh introduced cross-validation between SIGEF, SNCR, CCIR and the Registries of Deeds — meaning automatic blocking on any divergence in CPF/CNPJ, mortgage number, CNS, or municipality (Buava & Medeiros 2025; INCRA SIGEF). For Indigenous and quilombola layers, the canonical sources are FUNAI (monthly-updated geoserver) and INCRA’s Diretoria de Territórios Quilombolas (created Sept 2024 by Decree 12.171/2024) (Ministério da Igualdade Racial 2024).

A second tricky property is the layered ownership stack: a single Amazon parcel may simultaneously sit inside a Terra Indígena (FUNAI), a Unidade de Conservação (ICMBio/IBAMA), a CAR self-declaration by a grileiro, and a SIGEF certified perimeter — and Brazilian law (Lei 15.042/2024) now vests carbon-credit ownership in Indigenous/quilombola/extractive communities by statute when those territories overlap (Planalto 2024; Mayer Brown 2025). Finally, the 2024 CAR migration from MAPA to MGI/Dataprev caused months of system instability and has impaired the streamlined-analysis module — software should plan for SiCAR API flakiness through at least Q4 2026 (Climate Policy Initiative 2024).

A.2 Mexico

Mexico is structurally distinct because roughly 51% of the national territory is propiedad social (ejidos and comunidades agrarias) administered by RAN, not the public real-property registries (RPP). The 2024 Atlas de la Propiedad Social explicitly maps this — 32,229 núcleos agrarios covering ~99 Mha (RAN 2024). RAN’s open-data portal is comparatively mature: the SIG-RAN provides ejido perimeters and an internal-parcel layer (PROCEDE/FANAR-derived), and datos.ran.gob.mx publishes shapefiles per state (RAN open data, SIG RAN). Most ejido geometries originate from analog cartography digitized in the 1990s — known georef errors of 5-50 m are common, and internal parcelas drift further than ejido perimeters.

For private property outside propiedad social, there is no national cadastre — RPP is fragmented across 32 state offices with wildly varying digitization, and INEGI’s Marco Geoestadístico provides only administrative boundaries (state, municipal, AGEB), not parcels (INEGI MG). For a carbon project on ejido land, the legal-validity gap is the acta de asamblea under Article 27 of the Constitution — RAN data tells you the polygon and the assembly’s existence but not the carbon-rights resolution; that requires PHINA (historical) + the assembly minute book, which is paper-based and FOIA-style.

A.3 Colombia

Colombia is in the middle of the most ambitious cadastral modernization in LATAM: the Catastro Multipropósito (CMP), funded by IDB ($50 M) and World Bank ($100 M), with a fresh $6.9 M alliance with South Korea announced Dec 2024 (IGAC 2024). As of early 2025, IGAC reports 26.8% of national territory updated under CMP, ~30.5 Mha — almost a tripling from 9.4% under the prior administration (IGAC 2025; ANT 2024). The 70%-by-2026 target is unlikely to land — La Procuraduría flagged $704 B COP shortfalls in late 2024 (Infobae 2024). Decree 0462/2025 finally regulates CMP implementation in Indigenous territories — a critical unblocker for Amazonian carbon projects (IGAC 2025 — Indigenous CMP).

The data architecture is the cleanest in LATAM: ANT, IGAC, SNR, DNP and Parques Nacionales operate ArcGIS Hub open-data portals on the LADM-COL standard — meaning consistent semantics across resguardos, consejos comunitarios, baldíos, FNA-administered lands, and protected areas (ANT open data, SIAC datos abiertos). The trick for carbon projects is that resguardos indígenas overlap heavily with mining concessions, oil blocks, and forest concessions — particularly in Vichada, Guainía, Vaupés and Putumayo — so software must cross-reference RUNAP, ANM mining, ANH oil, and Resguardo layers simultaneously to flag.

A.4 Peru

Peru’s land-tenure data is the most institutionally fragmented of the priority countries. Rural cadastre sits with the 25 Regional Governments (GOREs) via their Direcciones Regionales Agrarias (DRAs) — not a national agency. SUNARP holds the legal registry but not the cartography; COFOPRI built the historical rural cadastre layer through 2014; MIDAGRI now nominally consolidates (MIDAGRI Catastro Rural). The IDB-funded PTRT3 (Proyecto de Catastro, Titulación y Registro de Tierras Rurales — Tercera Etapa) is the active modernization, targeting 283,400 individual properties + 403 native communities across 10 regions for ~$80 M (PTRT3 / IDB). As of March 2025, ~644 of Peru’s native communities still lack titles, and ~4,023 communities (peasant + native combined) remain untitled (SPDA 2024 Tenencia).

The non-cadastre tenure layers are far better consolidated: SERNANP geoportal for protected areas and GEOSERFOR for forest concessions (timber, conservation, ecotourism, wildlife management, reforestation, local forests) — both publish full shapefile downloads and signed an interoperability protocol (GEOSERFOR, SERNANP geoportal, GEOIDEP). For carbon projects, the most important rule is that comunidades nativas titles legally cover only the suelo (soil), not the bosque (forest) — the forest is held in cesión en uso contracts, which themselves are administered by the GORE forestry authority and registered with SERFOR’s catastro forestal. Software needs to track both layers and the cesión-en-uso resolution.

A.5 Paraguay

Paraguay’s tenure data is the weakest of the priority countries. Catastro Nacional (under SET — Subsecretaría de Estado de Tributación, Ministerio de Hacienda) is fiscally driven and patchy outside the Asunción/Eastern Paraguay corridor; in the Chaco, where most carbon-relevant land sits, cadastral coverage is famously fragmented and historically corrupted by Stroessner-era illegitimate titles (IWGIA 2024). INDERT (Instituto Nacional de Desarrollo Rural y de la Tierra) handles agrarian-reform colonies — 23 new colonies were added to the cadastral register in 2024 (INDERT 2024). INDI (Instituto Paraguayo del Indígena) maintains the indigenous-community registry but its mandate has been weakened: in 2023, INDI publicly described itself as “defenders of private property,” contradicting its statutory role of advocating for Indigenous communities (IWGIA 2024). For software, this means Paraguay-side tenure validation will require manual on-the-ground triangulation; the IDB-supported land-administration loan signed in 2023 should improve this through 2026-2028 (IDB Paraguay land).

A.6 Argentina

Argentina is federal by constitutional design — every province runs its own cadastre (Direcciones Provinciales de Catastro), and there is no national-level cadastre or even a uniform schema. CFC (Consejo Federal de Catastro) coordinates standards but has no parcel layer. The most mature provincial cadastre is Buenos Aires (ARBA + IDEBA at ideba.gba.gob.ar) — most other provinces are 1-2 levels behind in digitization (CARTO ARBA).

Indigenous tenure is governed by Ley 26.160, which mandated the technical-legal-cadastral relevamiento of Indigenous-occupied lands. This was extended multiple times and was the responsibility of INAI (Instituto Nacional de Asuntos Indígenas) under the National Program of Territorial Survey. In December 2024, Decree 1083/2024 declared the emergency status concluded, ending the Ley 26.160 protections and freezing the relevamiento (Decreto 1083/2024; Argentina.gob.ar — Ley 26.160). For software, this means the INAI Indigenous-territory layer is now stale-by-default after Q4 2024 — projects must triangulate with provincial registries (only 11 of 23 provinces have indigenous-community registers) and with the relevamientos that did get filed pre-2024.

A.7 Bolivia

Bolivia consolidated cadastral and tenure functions under INRA (Instituto Nacional de Reforma Agraria) via the 1996 INRA Law and subsequent reforms. INRA executes saneamiento — the formal regularization of land claims through three modalities: simple, integrated with legal cadastre, and TCO (Tierras Comunitarias de Origen) saneamiento for Indigenous territories (INRA — tipos de propiedad). INRA’s 2024 reporting indicates ~24.8 Mha titled under TCO modality (~24% of national territory; lowland TCOs alone ~14 Mha) (INRA Memoria 2021-2023; Tierra 27 años).

For software, Bolivia is a single-source-of-truth jurisdiction in theory, but INRA’s geospatial open-data exposure is among the weakest in LATAM. GeoBolivia (geo.gob.bo) is the formal SDI but updates are erratic; SERNAP publishes protected-area layers through its own portal; ABT (Autoridad de Fiscalización y Control Social de Bosques y Tierra) handles forest concessions and PGMFs. The mid-2024 push under the sovereign-credit architecture (Bolivia’s REDD+ jurisdictional approach) is centralizing tenure data but the public APIs lag the policy — most carbon developers report needing direct INRA convenios to access TCO and individual-title shapefiles at scale.

A.8 Brief notes — Ecuador & Costa Rica

Ecuador consolidates rural cadastre under SIGTIERRAS (MAG — Ministerio de Agricultura), which runs a public geoportal with orthophotography, DTM, rural cadastre and thematic cartography (sigtierras.gob.ec). Coverage is strong by LATAM standards (>10 TB georef data), and SHP downloads are openly available (SIGTierras descargas). Indigenous-territory layer overlaps heavily with national protected areas (SNAP), administered by MAATE.

Costa Rica has Registro Inmobiliario (under Registro Nacional) with the Mapa Catastral via SNIT — Sistema Nacional de Información Territorial (snitcr.go.cr) — and SINAC for protected areas. Cadastral completion is uneven: 102 cadastral zones officially registered, with the Programa de Regularización de Catastro y Registro (PRCR) approved in 2001 and extending into 2024+ (Registro Nacional CR). For carbon projects, the small national footprint and high cadastre completion make CR the most data-friendly jurisdiction — but volumes are tiny relative to Brazil/Peru/Colombia.

B. Cross-country comparison and integration patterns

B.1 The land-tenure interoperability gap

Every priority country has its own schema for what constitutes a parcel, who owns the geometry, and how legal validity attaches. There is no continent-wide ontology of tenure. Colombia’s LADM-COL is the most schema-rigorous national implementation, with Brazil’s SIGEF/SNCR cross-validation (since June 2025) coming second. SIRGAS (Geocentric Reference System for the Americas) is the only continent-wide layer that mostly works — all priority countries align to SIRGAS-2000-derived national datums, so reprojection between cadastres is mathematically tractable (SIRGAS; SIRGAS Symposium 2024 Bogotá). For software, this means the spatial alignment is solved-ish; the semantic alignment (what is a parcel? what is a title? what counts as a community territory?) is unsolved per-country.

B.2 The “self-declared vs legally titled” gap

Self-declaration registries (CAR-Brazil being the prototype) are popular because they cover ~90% of the country fast, but they do not constitute legal title — and a carbon project relying on CAR alone faces serious credit-issuance risk if the CAR turns out to overlap public land, a Terra Indígena, or another producer’s CAR. The PNAS 2024 study showed the CAR overlap problem is empirically severe in the Brazilian Amazon (PNAS 2024). Mexico’s RAN ejido geometry has a milder analog of this problem (digitization-era georef errors), and Peru’s COFOPRI legacy layer has its own version. Software design rule: treat self-declared layers as inputs to be cross-validated, never as authoritative.

B.3 The Indigenous-territory authoritative-source gap

In Brazil, FUNAI is canonical — its monthly geoserver is the source of record. In Colombia, ANT + Ministerio del Interior co-publish, but the Indigenous federations (ONIC, OPIAC) maintain their own overlays that often add proposed/pending territories not yet in ANT. In Peru, no government layer is canonical — IBC’s SICNA is the de-facto consolidated dataset because no single GORE is authoritative. In Argentina post-Milei, INAI is effectively frozen (Decreto 1083/2024), making provincial registries plus Indigenous-federation overlays the only fresh source. Pattern: the more political the IP recognition status, the more the canonical-source layer drifts to the Indigenous federation rather than the cadastre.

B.4 Third-party platforms that have aggregated already

• MapBiomas (Brazil → Pan-Amazonia → Bolivia, Peru, Indonesia) — annual land-cover and land-tenure overlays at 30 m (now 10 m for Brazil), CC-BY-SA. Coll. 10 (2025) covers 1985-2024 (MapBiomas Brazil, MapBiomas Amazonia, MapBiomas Bolivia).
• RAISG (Red Amazónica de Información Socioambiental Georreferenciada) — pan-Amazon Indigenous + protected-area aggregation across 9 Amazonian countries; ~5,943 areas covering 414.9 Mha as of Dec 2024 (RAISG, RAISG Amazonia 2023 — Stable forest).
• Restor — open geospatial platform; September 2024 launched Restor Enterprise / Nature Transparency Tool for governments and corporates to map nature footprint (Restor 2024).
• Tenure Facility — funds and aggregates Indigenous and community-tenure mapping in 30+ countries, including Bolivia, Peru, Colombia.
• Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI) — annual global tenure datasets with country-level IP/community statistics (RRI Carbon Rights 2025).
• WRI / Land & Resource Rights — tabular + spatial aggregation; useful for cross-country baselines.
• OpenStreetMap — patchy tenure tagging; useful for field-truth rural roads and small holdings, not authoritative for tenure boundaries.
• MAAP / ACA Conservación Amazónica — independent monitoring of Amazonian Indigenous territories with overlap analyses (MAAP Indigenous Territories).
• geobr (R package) — ipea-maintained, the cleanest programmatic access to most Brazilian official spatial layers (geobr).

B.5 Commercial aggregators

• Planet — Forest Carbon Diligence product (Canopy Height, Cover, Aboveground Carbon at 30 m global; 3 m carbon monitoring product targeted for 2024 release) — does not include tenure, but layers cleanly on top of tenure overlays (Planet FCD docs).
• Esri Colombia — packaged LADM-COL ArcGIS solution for Catastro Multipropósito (Esri CMP).
• Geofinanciera, Ata Carbon — Brazil-focused diligence aggregators; privately sold.
• Trase (SEI / Global Canopy) — supply-chain to municipality-level tenure for soy/beef in Brazil; not parcel-level.

C. Carbon-software-specific implications

C.1 Boundary-overlap detection — the disqualifier matrix

For each project polygon, software must run an overlap check against (at minimum):

1. Indigenous territories (FUNAI/ANT/INAI/INDI/INRA — country-specific) — overlap without FPIC = hard disqualifier.
2. Public conservation units (ICMBio/CONANP/SERNANP/SERNAP/RUNAP/SINAC) — overlap on integral-protection categories = disqualifier; overlap on sustainable-use categories may be valid with the manager’s authorization.
3. Other private CARs / SIGEFs (Brazil) — overlap = title-conflict flag.
4. Forest concessions (SERFOR-Peru, ABT-Bolivia, IBAMA-Brazil) — overlap = double-allocation flag.
5. Mining/oil concessions (ANM/ANH-Colombia, ANM-Brazil, ANH-Peru, MEM-Bolivia) — overlap = subsoil-rights conflict.
6. Embargo layers — IBAMA embargos in Brazil are a hard exclusion (encoded into Lei 15.042’s safeguards).
7. Self-declared but un-validated CAR layer — yellow-flag overlap, never red.

A v1 overlap engine should output a typed conflict report that ranks overlaps as DISQUALIFYING / RED / YELLOW / INFORMATIONAL based on the typology above.

C.2 Title-history detection (grilagem patterns)

For Brazil specifically, the canonical grilagem-detection pattern is to overlay:

• CAR polygons for the candidate parcel
• SIGEF + SNCR to check if the same CPF/CNPJ holds multiple suspicious parcels
• PRODES (INPE) deforestation history — grileiros’ parcels show characteristic post-claim deforestation pulses
• IBAMA embargo layer
• Mining (SIGMINE) overlap
• Property registration history at the cartório (RGI) — for cross-checking title-chain vintage

This is the methodology used by Pulitzer Center and Mongabay investigations to expose the “largest land grab in the Brazilian Amazon” (Pulitzer Center). For software, encoding this as a “grilagem score” — likelihood that a CAR is fraudulent — is a defensible proprietary product, since no public agency publishes one.

C.3 Carbon-rights overlay — country-specific statutory rules

• Brazil — Lei 15.042/2024: Indigenous, quilombola, and traditional/extractive communities own carbon credits originally on their lands. Software must flag any project polygon overlapping these tenure types and route to the community as the rightful credit-owner (Mayer Brown 2025, AmazonCCarbon).
• Colombia — Decreto 0462/2025 + Resolución 1447/2018 (MinAmbiente): REDD+ benefit-sharing rules tie carbon rights to land tenure as established in the cadastre + collective-title registries.
• Mexico: Article 27 + Ley Agraria — ejido-asamblea decisions are determinative; carbon-rights are exercisable only through formal asamblea resolution.
• Peru — Ley 30215 (Mecanismos de Retribución por Servicios Ecosistémicos) + DL 1090: forest carbon rights vest with the cesión-en-uso holder for forest, with the community for soil — software must encode the suelo / bosque split.
• Bolivia: Ley Marco de la Madre Tierra (Ley 300) — carbon credits from sovereign architecture; private projects on TCOs require INRA + CIDOB consent.
• Argentina: no federal carbon-rights statute; provincial fragmentation means tenure validation under provincial cadastre + INAI-frozen Indigenous layer is a significant risk.

C.4 Data-quality red flags — known-issue catalog

C.5 The minimum viable land-tenure stack for v1

For a LATAM-wide carbon-project software v1, the recommended P0 integrations (in priority order):

1. MapBiomas Land Tenure / Land Cover (Brazil + Pan-Amazon) — single API, CC-BY-SA, harmonized 30 m grid; gives baseline tenure stratification across 9 countries. Partner, don’t rebuild.
2. SIRGAS-aligned country admin geometries (IBGE, INEGI, IGAC, IGN-PE, INDEC, IGM-Bolivia, IGN-AR, IGN-PY, IGM-Ecuador, RN-CR) — for spatial reprojection and admin-level joins.
3. Per-country Indigenous-territory authoritative source — FUNAI (BR), ANT (CO), IBC SICNA (PE), INRA (BO), INDI (PY), INAI snapshot pre-2024 + provincial registries (AR), RAN (MX), SIGTIERRAS (EC).
4. Per-country protected-area authoritative source — ICMBio (BR), CONANP (MX), RUNAP (CO), SERNANP (PE), SERNAP (BO), MADES (PY), APN (AR), SINAC (CR).
5. Brazil-specific: SiCAR + SIGEF + IBAMA embargo + SIGMINE — required for any Brazilian project.
6. Colombia-specific: Catastro Multipropósito + ANT + RUNAP + ANM + ANH — once CMP coverage in the project zone is sufficient.
7. RAISG (Pan-Amazon overlay) — secondary cross-check for Indigenous + PA layers across borders.

Fallbacks and gap-fillers:

• For Peru cadastre gaps → IBC SICNA + COFOPRI legacy GEO LLAQTA + GORE manual pulls.
• For Argentina-INAI freeze → provincial + ENDEPA + IWGIA Indigenous-community data.
• For Paraguay Chaco → MAATE Paraguay overlap + manual on-the-ground field data.
• For Bolivia INRA-API gap → bilateral convenio for shapefile pulls.

D. Recent regulatory and technical moves (2024-2026)

D.1 Colombia — Catastro Multipropósito modernization

CMP went from 9.4% to 26.8% of the national territory in ~18 months under the Petro administration (IGAC 2025). Total foreign financing: ~$150 M from World Bank ($100 M) + IDB ($50 M), with a fresh $6.9 M South-Korea alliance announced Dec 2024. Decree 0462/2025 now regulates implementation in Indigenous territories — a critical unlock for Amazon carbon projects (IGAC Indigenous CMP 2025). 70%-by-2026 target unlikely; budget shortfalls flagged by Procuraduría (Infobae 2024).

D.2 Brazil — CAR/SIGEF modernization + SBCE

The June-2025 SIGEF/SNCR/CCIR cross-validation requirement is the most consequential cadastral change in Brazil in a decade — it forces consistency across systems and will progressively expose CAR’s fraud surface (William Freire 2025). Lei 15.042/2024 (signed Dec 2024) creating the SBCE regulated carbon market and vesting carbon rights in IPLCs is the most consequential policy change (Planalto 2024). The 2024 CAR migration to MGI/Dataprev caused months of system instability and the streamlined-analysis module is still impaired (CPI 2024). Decree 12.171/2024 created the Diretoria de Territórios Quilombolas at INCRA — first institutional uplift for quilombola tenure in years (Igualdade Racial 2024).

D.3 Peru — PTRT3 progress

PTRT3 (IDB co-financed, ~$80 M) is upgrading rural cadastre across 10 jungle/jungle-edge regions, targeting 283,400 individual properties + 403 native communities; ongoing through 2026 (PTRT3 Diagnostic). Defensoría del Pueblo continues to demand publication of an official MIDAGRI-managed CCNN/CC database — currently IBC’s SICNA is the de-facto canonical layer (Defensoría del Pueblo).

D.4 Mexico — RAN digitization

RAN’s 2024 Atlas de la Propiedad Social consolidates 30 years of PROCEDE/FANAR digitization into a single cartographic reference. SIG-RAN is mature enough for production integration (RAN Atlas 2024). The 2024-2026 administration’s Plan México reportedly includes incremental ejido-modernization funding but no major catastre-overhaul has been announced.

D.5 Argentina — INAI freeze post-Milei

Decree 1083/2024 (Dec 2024) ended Ley 26.160’s emergency status, freezing the Indigenous territorial-survey program. Resolutions 53/2024 (October) and 5/2025 (January) are the most recent INAI administrative acts before the freeze (Bolet. Of. Res. 53/2024, Res. 5/2025). For software: treat the INAI Indigenous-territory layer as frozen at end-2024; cross-check with provincial registries and Indigenous federations.

D.6 Bolivia — INRA centralization under sovereign-credit architecture

Mid-2024 onward, INRA’s Reconducción de la Reforma Agraria push is centralizing TCO and individual-title saneamiento data, anchored by Bolivia’s jurisdictional REDD+ approach (INRA Memoria 2021-2023, INRA Reforma en Cifras 2025). Public APIs lag the policy — partner channels remain the practical access path.

D.7 IDB Lab + World Bank flows 2024-2026

The 2024 World Bank Land Conference theme — “Securing Land Tenure and Access for Climate Action” — explicitly framed land administration as climate infrastructure (WB Land Conf 2024). Active 2024-2026 LATAM land-administration loans/grants include: Colombia CMP (WB+IDB $150 M), Paraguay land-security IDB loan ($80 M), Peru PTRT3 (~$80 M), and Bolivia consultative-only support. For software: expect significantly improved cadastral data quality in CO, PE, PY through 2027.

E. What this means for software (synthesis)

E.1 P0 integrations (sequenced)

• Week 0-4 — pan-LATAM baseline: MapBiomas + RAISG + admin geometries (IBGE, INEGI, IGAC, IGN-PE) + SIRGAS reprojection.
• Week 4-12 — Brazil core: SiCAR (WFS + scraper fallback), SIGEF/Acervo Fundiário (WMS + bulk shapefile), FUNAI geoserver, ICMBio UCs federais, IBAMA embargo, SIGMINE.
• Week 12-24 — Colombia core: Catastro Multipropósito (where covered), ANT Open Data Hub, RUNAP, SNR per-folio adapter, ANM + ANH.
• Week 24-36 — Peru + Mexico core: SERFOR/GEOSERFOR, SERNANP, IBC SICNA proxy, DRA per-region adapters, PROCEDE → SIG-RAN, CONANP, INEGI Marco Geoestadístico.
• Week 36-52 — Bolivia + Paraguay + Argentina: INRA convenio + GeoBolivia, ABT, SERNAP, INDERT, INDI, INFONA, MADES, provincial-cadastre-of-the-week (AR), INAI snapshot, APN/SIB.

E.2 Boundary-validation rules a v1 should enforce

• Mandatory: project polygon ⊆ candidate-tenure polygon; project polygon ∩ Indigenous territory ⇒ require FPIC evidence and route credits per local statute (Lei 15.042 etc.); project polygon ∩ integral-protection PA ⇒ disqualify.
• Hard checks: per-country grilagem-score >threshold ⇒ disqualify (Brazil); CAR-only tenure with no SIGEF backing ⇒ require additional title evidence; ejido perimeter without recent asamblea minute ⇒ require minute (Mexico); CCNN forest portion without cesión-en-uso resolution ⇒ require resolution (Peru).
• Soft checks (warn-and-route): provincial-cadastre quality score below regional mean (Argentina); Bolivia TCO without INRA-confirmed saneamiento status; Paraguay Chaco parcel pre-1989 without supporting deed history.

E.3 Evacuation profile — portable evidence pack

Every project’s tenure-evidence bundle should be exportable as a vendor-neutral pack: GeoPackage (tenure layers), JSON-LD (semantic relationships using a chosen ontology — LADM-ISO 19152 is the right baseline), supporting PDFs (titles, asamblea minutes, FPIC docs, cesión-en-uso resolutions), and a manifest with content hashes. This is the escape hatch — buyers, registries, auditors, and successor software all consume the pack without lock-in.

E.4 Where to build proprietary data products

• Pan-Amazon Indigenous + quilombola unified overlay — RAISG covers Indigenous + PAs but not quilombolas; FUNAI covers Brazil Indigenous but lacks Pan-Amazon; consolidating the two with a clean schema is a defensible product.
• Grilagem score for Brazil — no public agency publishes one; the methodology is publicly described but not productized.
• Per-country tenure-quality index — a 0-100 score per parcel-coverage zone reflecting cadastre maturity, georef accuracy, overlap density, embargo proximity. Useful as an underwriting signal.
• Cesión-en-uso registry for Peruvian CCNN bosque — currently scattered across GOREs; consolidation is high-value for forest-carbon developers.
• Provincial-cadastre adapter library for Argentina — 23+ adapters, harmonized to a common schema. Tedious but defensible, especially with INAI frozen.

E.5 Where to partner vs build

• Partner: MapBiomas (annual land-cover/tenure raster), Restor (basemap + project hosting), RAISG (Pan-Amazon Indigenous + PAs), Planet (carbon estimation rasters), IBC SICNA (Peru CCNN consolidation), Tenure Facility (community-tenure mapping data).
• Build: country-specific cadastre adapters (Brazil SiCAR/SIGEF/Acervo, Colombia ANT, Mexico SIG-RAN, Peru DRA bridges); overlap-conflict engine; grilagem detector (Brazil); cesión-en-uso registry (Peru); evidence-pack export.

The strategic stance: the spatial substrate is increasingly commodity (Planet, MapBiomas, Restor), the country-specific tenure adapters are the moat, and the legal-validity logic encoded in software is the highest-leverage proprietary asset — because it’s the layer that determines whether a credit can be issued.

Key citations by country

Brazil

• SiCAR Public Consultation
• SiCAR Geoserver WFS
• INCRA SIGEF
• INCRA Acervo Fundiário
• INCRA SIPRA on dados.gov.br
• INCRA Painel dos Assentamentos
• FUNAI Geoprocessamento
• FUNAI Geoserver
• ICMBio UCs federais
• Lei 15.042/2024 — Planalto announcement
• Mayer Brown — Lei 15.042 + REDD+ safeguards 2025
• PNAS 2024 — Land conflicts from overlapping CAR claims
• CPI 2024 — Where Does Brazil Stand with Forest Code
• Pulitzer Center — Largest land grab in Brazilian Amazon
• Terra de Direitos — quilombola titling pace 2024
• MapBiomas Brazil
• MapBiomas Coll. 10 launch 2025
• geobr R package (IPEA)

Mexico

• RAN Open Data
• SIG-RAN
• PHINA
• RAN Atlas Propiedad Social 2024
• INEGI Marco Geoestadístico
• CONANP SIG ANP
• CONABIO ANP metadata 2024

Colombia

• IGAC Catastro Multipropósito
• IGAC 2025 — 26.8% coverage announcement
• IGAC 2024 — South Korea $6.9M alliance
• IGAC 2025 — Indigenous-territories CMP framework
• Catastro Multipropósito portal
• ANT Open Data Hub
• ANT 2024 — 17.56 Mha CMP update
• RUNAP — SIAC Open Data
• DANE Catastro Multipropósito
• Infobae 2024 — Procuraduría CMP shortfall
• Esri Colombia — LADM-COL

Peru

• MIDAGRI Catastro Rural
• SUNARP
• COFOPRI GEO LLAQTA
• SERFOR Catastro Forestal — datosabiertos
• GEOSERFOR
• SERNANP Geoportal
• SERNANP–SERFOR interoperabilidad (GEOIDEP)
• PTRT3 Diagnostic — IDB
• SPDA 2024 — Tenencia de Tierras (Baldovino)
• Defensoría del Pueblo — CCNN database demand
• Agraria.pe 2023 — 49.6% CC mining-overlap
• IBC/CEPES SICNA directory

Paraguay

• INDERT
• INDI
• INFONA
• MADES (SINASIP)
• IWGIA — Paraguay 2024
• IDB — Paraguay land-administration loan
• FIAN — Paraguay forced evictions 2024

Argentina

• Argentina.gob.ar — Ley 26.160
• Decreto 1083/2024 (end of emergency status, Dec 2024)
• INAI Resolución 5/2025
• ARBA — IDEBA
• ARBA Catastro y Geodesia
• SIB — Sistema de Información de Biodiversidad
• Datos Abiertos Argentina

Bolivia

• INRA
• INRA Plataforma Virtual
• INRA Memoria 2021-2023
• INRA Libro Reforma Agraria 2025
• SERNAP
• GeoBolivia
• Fundación Tierra — TCO 27 años

Ecuador

• SIGTIERRAS
• SIGTIERRAS Geoportal
• SIGTIERRAS Descargas
• Datos Abiertos Ecuador

Costa Rica

• SNIT
• Registro Inmobiliario
• Programa de Regularización del Catastro y Registro

Cross-cutting

• SIRGAS
• SIRGAS Symposium 2024 Bogotá
• RAISG
• RAISG Amazonia 2023 (released 2024)
• MAAP Indigenous Territories
• RRI Carbon Rights 2025
• Restor — Nature Transparency Tool 2024
• Planet Forest Carbon Diligence
• World Bank Land Conference 2024
• World Bank Multipurpose Cadastre Project — Colombia P162594
• FAO — Land governance in LAC
• FAO — Comparative study of carbon rights