ECUADOR - Land Tenure and Property Rights Portal

which to interact with society. Legal title also gives communities a sense of security in knowing that theycannot be arbitrarily removed from their land; this security may end up contributing to longer-termsustainable resource use and management strategies.4.2.3 LTPR Intervention 3: Conflict Mitigation/ResolutionDescription of Intervention: Resolution of conflicts between indigenous communities and theirsurrounding neighbors (colonists and other indigenous groups) were a primary focus of CAIMAN. Evenwhen indigenous communities have secured titles, conflicts still arise between actors. In order to enableresolution of conflicts, especially over boundary delimitation/demarcation or rights to specific naturalresources, workshops and meetings were facilitated by the project. Results of this intervention often resultedin the signing of good neighborliness agreements or paving the way toward titling. For example, conflictresolution in the Duvuno community led to the Kichwa-14 agreement.Outcomes: Typical responses demonstrated that conflict resolution was important to: (a) lowering theoverall level of conflict; (b) reaching agreements with neighbors; and (c) obtaining respect for territorial limits.The majority of outcomes articulated by respondents (agreements, demarcation, and conflicts reduced) referto output level outcomes as opposed to impact level outcomes. The responses did provide moderate evidenceof conflict resolution contributing to the high-level outcome, Territorial rights of indigenous communities respected(HO-2). However, contrary to project expectations that improved respect of territorial borders wouldcontribute to indigenous groups with adequate legal rights (HO-1), this link was not born out by the responses.Based on this picture, it appears that informants do not associate conflict mitigation with yielding formalizedtenure. This may be because titling was not a prominent activity within Cofán territory under CAIMAN, andsuch support was needed to fuel the linkage. Alternatively, while external stakeholders pointed to existingconflicts with colonists and other indigenous communities as a key issue confronting the Cofán, the objectiveof their resolution appears not to be titling.4.2.4 LTPR Intervention 4: Co-management AgreementsDescription of Intervention: In order to strengthen indigenous communities’ legal rights within protectedareas, CAIMAN helped establish co-management agreements between the MOE and indigenousorganizations. These agreements demonstrate state recognition of indigenous rights to land within theprotected area system. They also place obligations on indigenous groups to abide by specific regulations thatgovern use of natural resources. In the Cofán territory, CAIMAN facilitated co-management agreements for7,500 and 22,538 hectares within the Cuyabeno Wildlife Production Reserve and Cayambe-Coca EcologicalReserve respectively. In 2002, prior to CAIMAN, the Cofán had obtained a similar but legally weaker coadministrationagreement for 50,000 hectares within Cofán Bermejo Ecological Reserve.Outcomes: Respondents indicate that co-management agreements have fallen short in: (i) providing securelegal status; (ii) fostering a sense of tenure security, and (iii) advancing sustainable use of natural resources.On the first two points, the Cofán perceive that they are legally vulnerable with co-management agreementsand see them only as a step toward obtaining collective title. On the latter point, in most cases NRMrequirements contained within co-management agreements are not implemented by indigenous communities,nor are they adequately monitored or enforced by government agencies.Given the above, the CAIMAN’s support for co-management agreements had a limited effect on theexpected high-level outcome of Honoring of legal obligations by indigenous people (HO-3). Since no respondentsassociated the agreements with increased Respect for territorial rights of indigenous groups (HO-2), there wouldappear to be limited impact on this expected outcome. But it may also be that, between the Cofán and theirsupporters, the quest for titles overwhelmed their ability to find merit in co-management agreements.INDIGENOUS TERRITORIAL RIGHTS IN ECUADOR: RAPID IMPACT ASSESSMENT 15