Colombia Case 2

  • 48 million people

  • 30% lives in rural zones

  • National poverty: 27%

  • Urban poverty: 24,4%

  • Rural poverty: 36,1%

*Data from DANE for 2018 

9M people are victims from the armed conflict 8M victims of forced displacement

*Data from the “Unidad de la Atención y Reparación integral a las Victimas (UARIV)”

Productive Projects Program (PPP)

N

Coverage:

As of December 2018, the population treated by PPP was located in 141 municipalities from 18 departments.

N

Beginning of the program:

2013

N

Targeted population:

Victims from forced displacement that, through a court order, have the rights over their lands restored.
N

Institution in Charge:

Unidad Administrativa Especial de Gestión y Restitución de Tierras (URT).
N

Components:

  • Economic stimulus for the beneficiary families to design, execute, or strengthen their Productive Projects.
  • Technical support for those projects for 24 months.
N

Objective

The objective of PPP is to offer a sustainable process of land restitution for its beneficiaries, fomenting economic stability. It guarantees accompaniment and actions posterior to the restitution, aiming to create a life plan with dignity and stability for the families, and contributing to their right not to repeat their victimization. 

The articulation between social protection and rural development can help poor and vulnerable households overcome poverty traps and break its intergenerational transmission.

The Productive Project Program (PPP) of the “Unidad de Restitución de Tierras(URT)” in Colombia has positive effects in variables such as assets and farming products, food security, and the perception of the wellbeing of the households, as well as the empowerment of households with a female head of household.

Many of the impacts on the households were not only because of the PPP but a combination of multiple interventions and self-investment from the households. This is consistent with the fact that 87% of the surveyed households reported to benefit from programs other than PPP.

Despite these positive results, the formal coordination mechanisms between interventions aimed at victims of the armed conflict (specifically victims of forced displacement) are still scarce and can be strengthened.

Results

Impact Evaluation

  • There are positive results in thehousehold´s asstes value and the number of farming products as the time of the intervention increases. Food security also improves, specially in households with a female head of household.There is a positive and statistically significant effect on the wellbeing perception of the households, social capital, and empowerment.
  • The households also exhibit high aspirations and expectations, accompained by clear strategies and plans to achieve them.

 

 

Institutional Analysis

  • Articulation opportinities arise from the simultaneous interventions to the households, which aim to an integral reparation of the victims.
  • There is informal coordination at the local level, which has possitive effects on savings, social capital, and the creation of markets for the gods produced by the beneficiaries.
  • The “Sistema Nacional de Atención y Reparación Integral a las Víctimas (SNARIV)”, has not been able to provide an effective cooperation strategy.

 

 

 

Entities

Unidad Administrativa Especial de Gestión y Restitución de Tierras (URT)

The Ley de Víctimas y Restitución de Tierras (law for Victims and Land Restitution) creates a legal procedure to restore and formalize the land of victims of forced abandonment and destitution. To achieve the effective legal and material restitution of the land, the law creates the URT, an entity affiliated to the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, with the express purpose of “serving as an administrative body of the National Government for the restitution of the land of those who were deprived of It” (Translation by the author). The URT, in turn, creates the PPP, which provides technical and financial aid to the affected families for the development of productive life plans that contribute to their social and productive inclusion by creating and/or strengthening the family economy; fomenting a fair income distribution, productivity, and food security; and protecting the environment.

Evaluation Methodologies

Impact Evaluation

  • Implementing Institution:  Uniandes – CEDE
  • Type of analysis: Treatment intensity analysis.
  • Objective: To evaluate the PPP by taking advantage of the variation in the entry time to the program (determined by the date of the court order).

The was implemented with three different methodologies over the years. The first methodology took place from the beginning of the program until December 2016. The second methodology was designed in 2016, and it operated from January 2017 until February 2018. The third and current methodology started in March of 2018.

The study compares the different cohorts of PPP to determine the short and mid-term effects of the program.

The evaluation strategy is based on the premise that the time of exposure to the program, determined by the date of entry to the program, has differential effects on the interest variables, which allows to differentiate the long, medium, and short term effects.

Tools:

  • Qualitative:
    • 46 semi-structured interviews to the restituted households
      • 8 departments
      • 12 municipalities
    • Quantitative:
      • 880 surveys to the restituted households
        • 7 departments
        • 18 municipalities

Institutional Analysis

  • Implementing institution: Uniandes – CEDE
  • Objective: The institutional analysis aims to understand how service integration and the articulation between different institutions and sectors can produce benefits that improve the effectiveness of Rural Development and social protection programs. To understand the articulation mechanisms that can take place between the Rural Development and Social Protection programs, the methodological framework of this research focuses on three aspects: (1) the spaces and levels of articulation, (2) the institutional design, and (3) the operational design of the programs.
  • Tools:

Different information collection methods were used, both qualitative and quantitative:

  • The revision and systematic analysis of laws, rulings, and operational guides to understand how the programs work and the normative framework in which they take place.
  • Interviews with actors both at the central and territorial levels.
  • In the household survey implemented for the impact evaluation, a “Processes” section was added. This section asked the participants about the activities, the usefulness, and the efficiency of their participation in the programs.
  • Two sessions of group interviews were conducted with the beneficiaries of the programs with the aim of learning their perceptions about the restitution process, and the planning and implementation of their productive projects.

Todos los derechos reservados por el proyecto Sinergias Rurales 2020 ©

Cra 1 # 18A - 12  Bogotá - Colombia Código Postal 111711

 

Cra 1 # 18A - 12  Bogotá - Colombia Código Postal 111711

 

Universidad de los Andes | Vigilada Mineducación. Reconocimiento Personería Jurídica resolución 28 del 23 de febrero de febrero de 1949 Minjusticia