Generally, the concept of trust in poor countries is corrupted by centralized institutions, mostly as a means to redirect wealth. Rule of law is meager but in m

Generally, the concept of trust in poor countries is corrupted by centralized institutions, mostly as a means to redirect wealth. Rule of law is meager but in my experience, land rights are one of the few that maintain (as long as someone with power does not want what you have. There are few with both power and stupid greed enough that this is a very rare occurrence). Despite barely enforced laws, people are mostly good and largely follow rules. Human trafficking, armed robberies and kidnappings are a lot higher than in wealthier countries but it's still only a minority who succumb to that. It's mostly scams (including having a business but not paying employees) that a significant number participate in. With property, those that have less respect each other and those that have much more also have gated compounds and private security (among which we can count having police on call). It sounds weird but in disputes, even absent an actual justice system, a verifiable paper trail or record still carries a great deal of weight. Having suffered a lot from it, I think a lot about corruption. I've also read a fair few number of papers on the topic, from the sociological to the game theoretical. Lack of accountability and lack of transparency are major enablers. Public blockchains are of interest because of their (pseudonymous) transparency and virtually tamper-proof nature. Not a solution but of interest. A fully transparent and neutral system or layer of payment of last resort, where the powerful cannot forge records, for use where trust is non-existent would be useful.