ECUADOR - Land Tenure and Property Rights Portal

4.0 FINDINGSThis section analyzes the responses to key questions posed by the assessment related to CAIMAN and PSURinterventions and outcomes of interest.First, the outcome-side of the inquiry is examined to determine: What were the combination of causes that resulted ina given change or outcome? For each outcome of interest, the analysis includes: (i) a description of the indicatorselected to approximate it; (ii) the change in indicator state and the factors contributing to this change asperceived or documented by the multiple sources consulted; and (iii) the degree to which the LTPRinterventions of the respective projects contributed to achieving expected outcomes, according to the sourcesconsulted.The intervention-side of the inquiry is subsequently assessed and considers: What changes or outcomes resulted fromthe given intervention? Under each intervention, the analysis is organized as follows: (i) description of theintervention; and (ii) outcomes seen to emerge from those interventions.In an effort to provide a summative understanding of findings as well as highlight recurring data, theresponses by each of the informants consulted for the CAIMAN project have been included in Annex E andF.4.1 CAIMAN: EXPECTED OUTCOMES OF INTEREST4.1.1 Expected Outcome 1: Effectively Interacting with External Actors RegardingTerritorial Rights (MO-7)Description of Targeted Indicator: CAIMAN dedicated significant effort to the institutional strengtheningof Indigenous Federation for the Cofán Nationality in Ecuador (Federacion Indigena de la Nacionalidad Cofán delEcuador, FEINCE). The project’s efforts were aimed not only at creating an organization that can crediblyrepresent the Cofán people, but also at developing an entity that successfully defend the Cofán’s territorialclaims. Thus, the indicator (MI) selected to measure this mid-level outcome (MO) was: Perception that theFederation is effectively managing territorial issues with external actors (MI-1 and MI-7).Change in Indicator States and Contributing Factors: Evidence of the maturation of FEINCE sinceCAIMAN began its work with the institution is obvious. A large number of the informants consultedaffirmed that in 2002 FEINCE existed only on paper. It had no staff, office, phone or lines, it carried debt,and it possessed no credibility with its Cofán constituency. Today, 19 individuals work in FEINCE’s wellequippedoffices. According to informants, the institution has established financial and accountingprocedures, manages projects, and receives funding from international organizations and the government ofEcuador, indicating significant institutional improvement.However, the question corresponding to the indicator remains: is FEINCE effectively managing territorialissues with external actors? From the perspective of the majority of those sampled, the answer is yes. Thecausal factor most cited for this improvement was CAIMAN’s institutional support of FEINCE. The otherprominent factor identified by multiple stakeholders was FEINCE’s relationship to and support by theFundación para la Sobrevivencia del Pueblo Cofán (also know as Fundación Cofán).INDIGENOUS TERRITORIAL RIGHTS IN ECUADOR: RAPID IMPACT ASSESSMENT 9