ECUADOR - Land Tenure and Property Rights Portal

More documents

Recommendations

Info

While CAIMAN and PSUR contributed to attainment of targeted outputs and lower-level outcomes, findingssuggest that their contributions toward higher-level outcomes—associated with territorial integrity,productive investment, and/or biodiversity conservation—have been limited.What was the efficacy of project approaches for achieving sustainable impact?The sustainability of CAIMAN’s and PSUR’s distinct approaches to strengthening territorial rights wasassessed through multiple lenses.• Cultural and Social Sustainability: There have been positive changes in public opinion on naturalresource conservation both at the national and indigenous community levels.• Institutional Sustainability: Increases in financial, administrative, and technical capacities of FEINCEto defend Cofán territory clearly attained a level of sustainability.• Economic Sustainability: Effective, conservation-friendly methods to generate income for indigenouspeople have yet to be widely introduced and expanded in the northern and southern border areas.• Political Sustainability: The assessment revealed the importance of separating the technical aspects ofdefending territorial rights from its political elements. One factor that appears to be have contributed tothe Cofán’s success in defending and conserving its territories is that technical support for these actions iskept separate from FEINCE, the political arm of the Cofán.• Sustainability of CAIMAN and PSUR Impact: Since termination of CAIMAN, respondents did notindicate a decline in FEINCE’s effectiveness or in the Cofán’s commitment to securing their territorialrights. In the case of PSUR, although the federation was executing titling activities by the end of theproject, it has not developed the fiscal resources nor maintained the technical capacity to title land on itsown.What are the implications for future LTPR programming to support indigenous territorialrights?The findings of the assessment suggest various considerations for future USAID/Ecuador programming inthe realm of indigenous territorial rights.• Resist generalization across indigenous groups: Cultural, geographical, and contextual differences ofindigenous nationalities (and communities within) must be carefully considered. These factors will shapethe ultimate success of interventions.• Shifting indigenous value systems: Under traditional practices, indigenous groups may be goodstewards of natural resources; however, economic pressures and the absorption of western values areincreasingly challenging these traditions. Project designs need to address these changes.• Integrated approach: An LTPR approach that enhances both the legal and social recognition of rights,supports mechanisms to defend those rights, and strengthens local institutions such that they can carryon these functions, will yield more sustainable results. Titling by itself is unlikely to lead to tenure securityor sustainable natural resources management.• Community vs. individual titles: Inalienable community land titles are more suited to maintaining thelong-term territorial integrity of indigenous communities’ ancestral lands than are individual titles.• Government involvement: Government obligations around monitoring and enforcement need to befulfilled at local and national levels if impacts on securing territorial rights are to be sustained.viINDIGENOUS TERRITORIAL RIGHTS IN ECUADOR: RAPID IMPACT ASSESSMENT
• Relationship of livelihoods to conservation: Consideration should be given to livelihood activities thatoffset the need to rely on resource extraction to meet basic needs as well as respect indigenouscommunities’ priorities, values, and geographical constraints.• Focus on higher-level outcomes: LTPR projects need to monitor progress toward higher-levelobjectives (e.g., tenure security, reduced encroachment, biodiversity conservation) as much as outputs(e.g., titles, management plans).In light of the impacts sustained by past projects, continued support for strengthening the territorial rights ofindigenous nationalities within Ecuador is recommended. Projects should continue support for strengtheningthe capacity of indigenous organizations to secure and defend territorial rights as well as building the capacityof communities themselves to demarcate territory and defend their borders. Nevertheless, more concertedefforts should be directed toward: 1) introducing conservation-friendly livelihood opportunities; 2)augmenting the financial sustainability of indigenous organizations; 3) addressing the growth in outsidepressures confronted by indigenous groups in defending their territories; and 4) eliciting stronger supportfrom relevant government entities in enforcing territorial rights. Finally, it is critical that LTPR interventionsto support territorial rights are informed by indigenous communities and implemented in a manner thataddresses the differing circumstances of each nationality.INDIGENOUS TERRITORIAL RIGHTS IN ECUADOR: RAPID IMPACT ASSESSMENTvii
Page 1 and 2: ECUADORINDIGENOUS TERRITORIALRIGHTS
Page 3: INDIGENOUS TERRITORIALRIGHTS IN ECU
Page 6 and 7: 4.3.1 Expected Outcome 1: Tenure Se
Page 9: PREFACEThere is a continuing need t
Page 15: 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OFASSESSMENTU
Page 18 and 19: Although data analysis was iterativ
Page 21 and 22: 3.0 CONCEPTUAL MAPS:INTERVENTIONS A
Page 23 and 24: 4.0 FINDINGSThis section analyzes t
Page 25 and 26: concrete actions that provide indig
Page 27 and 28: 4.1.5 Expected Outcome 5: Biodivers
Page 29 and 30: which to interact with society. Leg
Page 31 and 32: outcomes were noted by respondents,
Page 33 and 34: targeted the high-level outcome ind
Page 35 and 36: 5.0 INSTITUTIONALSTRENGTHENINGInsti
Page 37 and 38: 6.0 SUSTAINABILITY OF LTPRAND NRM A
Page 39 and 40: 7.0 LESSONS LEARNED ANDCONCLUSIONAc
Page 41 and 42: • Financing: Financial sustainabi
Page 43: ANNEXESINDIGENOUS TERRITORIAL RIGHT
Page 46 and 47: ECOLEX, Diagostico Sociocultural de
Page 50 and 51: NUEVA LOJA (LAGO AGRIO)Maximo Abad,
Page 53: ANNEX C: CAIMANCONCEPTUAL MAP FORTE
Page 57: ANNEX D: PSUR CONCEPTUALMAP FOR NAT
Page 61: ANNEX E: CAIMAN OUTCOMEINDICATORS A
Page 64 and 65:
CAIMAN Outcome IndicatorsLegal and
Page 67 and 68:
Table F-1: CAIMAN Interventions and
Page 69:
ANNEX G: PARK GUARDMONITORING DOCUM
Page 72 and 73:
Figure G-2: Park Guard Monitoring D
Page 75:
ANNEX H: RAPID APPRAISALWORKSHOP PR
Page 78:
TABLE I-1: INTERVIEW SCHEDULEMacas,
show all

ECUADOR - Land Tenure and Property Rights Portal

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?