AbstractIt has been said that any discussion of the relative merits of one particular system of land registration over another can be faithfully relied upon to provoke a near riot at any conference of Commonwealth surveyors. The ownership of land and the rights appertaining thereto are emotional topics in all corners of the Earth and not surprisingly perhaps this emotion extends to those responsible for describing the parcels of land into which the Earth is divided. The reasons why the surveyor develops such feelings on these matters may lie deep in the subconscious but at a superficial level they are undoubtedly influenced by a general ignorance of the alternative methods for describing and recording parcels of land and the reasons why and how any other systems tick. Each system has evolved in its own setting over a period of time and has been adapted to meet local requirements. This is not to say that it has necessarily evolved in the most appropriate way or that radical changes might not be beneficial. It is however true to say that the biggest bottleneck in the whole registration process lies in the surveying and mapping of properties and that there are parts of the world where the cost of survey is greater than the value of the land. Thus a would-be mortgagee who wishes to register his land as collateral, must either payor be subsidised by an amount greater than he can borrow. It is with problems like this in mind that a resolution was passed at the last Conference of Commonwealth Survey Officers recommending that a study be instituted leading to a publication setting out the techniques used for, and the costs and efficiency of, marking, surveying and recording land parcels in the Commonwealth. Work on this has already begun and it is hoped that something positive will be available by the next Conference.