ECUADOR - Land Tenure and Property Rights Portal

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Although data analysis was iterative across the evaluation, its emphasis took place upon the conclusion offieldwork. The analytical phase kicked off with the presentation of preliminary findings to USAID/Ecuadorstaff for feedback and recommendations. A content and frequency analysis was performed afterward inproject outcome and intervention data organized in Excel spreadsheets. Triangulation techniques wereutilized to analyze the responses of key informants and identify repeated attributions that highlight patterns ofcausality and impact as well as important differences in perceptions.2.2 RESEARCH SAMPLEA purposeful non-random sampling approach was utilized to examine PSUR and CAIMAN stakeholders. 1 Inexamining this sample (composed principally of project beneficiaries, public sector officials and key NGOactors), the evaluation sought to determine the level and sustainability of impact upon a segment ofindigenous beneficiaries.TABLE 2.1: CAIMAN SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICSSAMPLEPOPULATION ASSESSMENT METHODIndigenous project Rapid appraisal workshops, semi-structuredbeneficiaries (Cofán interviews, group observation and inquiry,nationality)individual interviewsGovernment stakeholders(local and national levels)NGO stakeholders (localand national levels)SAMPLE GENDERSIZE CHARACTERISTICS79 22 women57 menSemi-structured interviews 8 1 woman7 menSemi-structured interviews, supplementary 19 2 womeninterviews17 menTOTAL: 106 25 women; 81 menTABLE 2.2: PSUR SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICSSAMPLEPOPULATION ASSESSMENT METHODIndigenous projectbeneficiaries (Shuarnationality)SAMPLESIZEGroup observation & inquiry 70 27 women43 menGENDERCHARACTERISTICSGovernment stakeholders(local and national levels)Semi-structured interviews 3 1 woman2 menDonor (GTZ) Semi-structured interviews 1 1 manNGO stakeholders (localand national levels)Semi-structured interviews 13 1 woman12 manTOTAL: 87 29 women; 58 menAs seen in Tables 2.1 and 2.2, a total of 193 informants were interviewed across the assessment. Selectioncriteria for the participants included: gender and indigenous nationality (in the case of communitystakeholders) and project affiliation or technical sector focus. Data from these key stakeholder groups weresystematically collected and compared across each project.1Selection of informants within this sample was principally driven by the implementing organizations: CARE (for PSUR) and the ex-CAIMAN Grants Manager (for CAIAMAN).4 INDIGENOUS TERRITORIAL RIGHTS IN ECUADOR: RAPID IMPACT ASSESSMENT
2.3 LIMITATIONSThis assessment had various limitations that warrant illumination. First, the team was simultaneously chargedwith addressing two statements of work: one calling for the assessment of USAID/Ecuador’s LTPR effortsand another for the pilot testing and appraisal of ARD’s LTPR assessment tool. This dual focus prevented amore robust assessment, as sacrifices were required in terms of scope, level of effort, and time on the ground.Another key constraint was the challenging logistical nature of examining LTPR efforts in remote indigenouscommunities. This reality, combined with limited fieldwork time, precluded a more extensive sample. Instead,it required fieldwork to take place in the most logistically convenient indigenous communities within theCofán and Shuar territories.The study recognizes the limitations of an impact assessment that focuses upon select communities withintwo of Ecuador’s numerous indigenous nationalities. From the geographic location, to the level oforganization among representative entities, to the type and level of external threats, each nationality (andcommunities within) is distinct. While recommendations drawn form the analysis attempt to provide somegeneral LTPR guidance, it is far form prescribing a one-size-fits-all approach.Equally important, this study was not able to interview external stakeholders that may have been impacted byLTPR interventions or have alternative views about their outcomes (e.g., bordering indigenous nationalities,colonists, or companies). As external stakeholders are seen to possess an interdependent relationship to theefficacy of LTPR interventions and sustainability of succeeding outcomes, their absence in this analysis wasconsidered significant.Finally, and as seen in Tables 2.1 and 2.2, the level of time and effort spent reviewing PSUR activities wascomparatively less than CAIMAN due to limited time and resources. While this constraint was discussed withUSAID/Ecuador at the outset of the assignment, a rapid assessment of PSUR’s LTPR activities in Macas wasnonetheless considered valuable to Mission learning.INDIGENOUS TERRITORIAL RIGHTS IN ECUADOR: RAPID IMPACT ASSESSMENT 5
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 12 and 13: While CAIMAN and PSUR contributed t
Page 15: 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OFASSESSMENTU
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?