Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities FINAL REPORT This report was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). It was prepared by Optimal Solutions Group, LLC, for USAID’s Learning, Evaluation, and Analysis Project (LEAP) Contract Number: AID-OAA-C-11-00169. UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT LEARNING, EVALUATION, AND ANALYSIS PROJECT (AID-OAA-C-11-00169) PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF INSTITUTO LIBERTAD y DEMOCRACIA (ILD) ACTIVITIES FINAL REPORT Prepared for the United States Agency for International Development Prepared by Optimal Solutions Group, LLC University of Maryland Research Park, M Square 5825 University Research Court, Suite 2800 College Park, MD 20740 www.optimalsolutionsgroup.com Prepared by Christabel Dadzie, M.I.A., Team Leader Peter Murrell, Ph.D., Senior Economist July 14, 2014 Disclaimer The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States government. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 2 CONTENTS List of Exhibits................................................................................................................................ 6 Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................... 7 Acronym List .................................................................................................................................. 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 10 Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) ..................................................................................... 10 Purpose of Study ....................................................................................................................... 11 Methodology ............................................................................................................................. 12 Findings..................................................................................................................................... 13 Strategic Objective 1: Building Awareness for Legal Empowerment and Social Inclusion. 13 Strategic Objective 2: Institutionalizing Legal Empowerment of the Poor (and Women) in Client Countries..................................................................................................................... 14 Strategic Objective 3: Strengthening ILD’s Operational Platform and Ensuring a Sustainable Expansion .............................................................................................................................. 15 Strategic Objective 4: Transforming Expressed Demand for ILD Services into Actual Projects and Reform Efforts .................................................................................................. 17 Recommendations ..................................................................................................................... 18 Strategic Objective 1: Building Awareness for Legal Empowerment and Social Inclusion. 19 Strategic Objective 2: Institutionalizing Legal Empowerment of the Poor (and Women) in Client Countries..................................................................................................................... 19 Strategic Objective 3: Strengthening ILD’s Operational Platform and Ensuring a Sustainable Expansion .............................................................................................................................. 19 Strategic Objective 4: Transforming Expressed Demand for ILD Services into Actual Projects and Reform Efforts .................................................................................................. 19 I. INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................... 20 Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) ..................................................................................... 22 USAID Funding for ILD Activities .......................................................................................... 23 Report Structure ........................................................................................................................ 27 II. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 28 Performance Evaluation Purpose and Assignment ................................................................... 28 Data Gathering .......................................................................................................................... 28 Desk Review.......................................................................................................................... 28 USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 3 Site Visit to Peru.................................................................................................................... 29 Evaluation Design ..................................................................................................................... 30 Data Verification....................................................................................................................... 32 Subsequent Site Visits: Nigeria and Tanzania....................................................................... 33 Limitations to the Evaluation .................................................................................................... 33 III. EVALUATION FINDINGS.............................................................................................. 35 Detailed Findings Categorized Within USAID Grant Agreement Performance Indicators ..... 35 Strategic Objective 1: Building Awareness For Legal Empowerment And Social Inclusion35 Strategic Objective 2: Institutionalizing Legal Empowerment Of The Poor (And Women) In Client Countries..................................................................................................................... 43 Strategic Objective 3: Strengthening Ild’s Operational Platform And Ensuring A Sustainable Expansion .............................................................................................................................. 51 Strategic Objective 4: Transforming Expressed Demand For Ild Services Into Actual Projects And Reform Efforts ................................................................................................. 59 IV. EVALUATION RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................ 69 Strategic Objective 1: Building Awareness for Legal Empowerment and Social Inclusion. 69 Strategic Objective 2: Institutionalizing Legal Empowerment of the Poor (and Women) in Client Countries..................................................................................................................... 70 Strategic Objective 3: Strengthening ILD’s Operational Platform and Ensuring a Sustainable Expansion .............................................................................................................................. 70 Strategic Objective 4: Transforming Expressed Demand for ILD Services into Actual Projects and Reform Efforts .................................................................................................. 71 V. APPENDICES ................................................................................................................... 74 Appendix 1: USAID Evaluation Statement of Work for the LEAP team................................. 74 Appendix 2: Evaluation Report Reference List ........................................................................ 88 Appendix 3: Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Plan in USAID ILD Grant Agreement 2009......................................................................................................................................... 106 Appendix 4: List of ILD Participation in Conferences, Presentations, and High-Level Meetings ................................................................................................................................................. 107 Appendix 5: ILD Organization, Staff, and Publications References and Citations Findings via Google Scholar and LexisNexis Academic............................................................................. 118 Appendix 6: Site Visit Interview Guides ................................................................................ 123 Appendix 7: Site Visit Agendas.............................................................................................. 134 USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 4 Appendix 8: List of ILD Stakeholders and Partners Interviewed for the Evaluation ............. 141 VI. ATTACHMENT: ILD RESPONSE TO USAID’s EXTERNAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION........................................................................................................................... 145 USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 5 List of Exhibits Exhibit 1. List of countries ILD has worked in during the grant period (2009–2013)................. 22 Exhibit 2. Overall ILD public engagement (including major presentations to governments and Exhibit 5. ILD-facilitated country cases with movement from Stage 1 to Stage 2 during the grant other donor agencies).................................................................................................................... 37 Exhibit 3. ILD training sessions and workshops offered during the grant period ........................ 38 Exhibit 4. Awareness and pre-diagnosis during the grant period (2009–2013) ........................... 42 period (2009–2013)....................................................................................................................... 44 Exhibit 6. Technical manuals and tools – Peru............................................................................. 56 Exhibit 7. Diagnostic study and reform proposal after pre-diagnostic work – All countries ....... 60 Exhibit 8. Diagnostic study and reform proposal after pre-diagnostic work – Peru..................... 61 Exhibit 9. Diagnostic study and reform proposal after pre-diagnostic work – Nigeria................ 61 Exhibit 10. Activities for transforming demands for ILD services by year – Peru ...................... 62 Exhibit 11. Activities for transforming demands for ILD services by year – MENA.................. 63 Exhibit 12. ILD Organization and Staff References and Citations in Google Scholar................. 65 Exhibit 13. ILD Organization and Staff Reference Searches in LexisNexis................................ 66 Exhibit 14. Hernando de Soto Source Mention in LexisNexis..................................................... 67 USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 6 Acknowledgments The LEAP evaluation team is grateful for the guidance provided by USAID/E3 TRR, in particular, Wade Channell, senior commercial law adviser; Nicholas Klissas, senior commercial law specialist; and Lita Echiverri, international trade specialist, who were responsive to the team’s questions and provided advice throughout the evaluation. Special thanks are also extended to ILD program staff members in Peru, who were very responsive to the LEAP team’s many questions and provided valuable guidance in identifying beneficiaries and key stakeholders during the site visits to Peru and Nigeria. The team would also like to acknowledge the MKURABITA team members in Tanzania, who spent time assessing their work and identifying key stakeholders and beneficiaries for interviewing. Finally, the project team leaders are grateful for support provided by Optimal supporting analysts Nicola Smith-Kea, research associate, and Kristen Schwartz, research analyst, for the many hours that they spent providing research support to complete this evaluation. Dr. Mark Turner, chief of party, is also acknowledged for his technical guidance and senior review. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 7 Acronym List ABCDE Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics ADB Asian Development Bank ALTA American Land Title Association CARE Cercle d’Action et Reflexion de l’Enterprise CEO Chief Executive Officer CINDER International Center of Registration Law CIPE Center for International Private Enterprise CLEP Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor COFOPRI Organismo de Formalización de la Propiedad Informal CONAP Amazonian National Confederation COR Contracting Officer’s Representative CSU Colorado State University DAC Development Assistance Committee DB World Bank’s Doing Business DFID Department for International Development E3 Bureau of Economic Growth, Education, and Environment EGAT Bureau of Economic Growth, Agriculture, and Trade ESRI Economic and Social Research Institute EU European Union FICCI Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry FNTC First Nations Tax Commission FUNGLODE Fundación Global Democracia y Desarrollo GIS Geographic Information System IBA Indigenous Bar Association IGD Initiative for Global Development IGDL International Global Development Leaders ILD Instituto Libertad y Democracia KPI Key Performance Indicators LASG Lagos State Government LGAF Land Governance Assessment Framework Program LIDS Harvard University—Law and International Development Society LEAP Learning, Evaluation, and Analysis Project LEP Legal Empowerment of the Poor LLSSC Limited Liability Single Shareholder Company LRDT Local Reform Design Team MBA Masters of Business Administration MDG Millennium Development Goals MENA Middle East and North Africa USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 8 MKURABITA Mpango wa Kurasimisha Rasilimali na Biashara za Wanyonge Tanzania MOU Memorandum of Understanding NGO Nongovernmental Organization NTE Not to Exceed OAS Organization of American States OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development PDA Personal Digital Assistants SEWA Self-Employed Women’s Association SMEs Subject-Matter Experts SOW Statement of Work SUNARP Superintendencia Nacional de los Registros Públicos TRR Office of Trade and Regulatory Reform UN United Nations USAID United States Agency for International Development UNDP United Nations Development Programme UTICA Union Tunisienne de l’Industrie, Commerce et l’Artissanat USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) provides core funding to the Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) to support its efforts to legally empower the poor. To accomplish its goal, ILD focuses on providing technical assistance, sharing research, and gaining support from partners to build awareness and advocate on behalf of the poor. Legal empowerment of the poor, as espoused by the United Nations– (UN-) hosted Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor (CLEP), focuses on four areas: formalization of real property rights, access to justice, labor rights, and business rights (meaning the right to participate as an entrepreneur in the marketplace). USAID and ILD have had a long-term relationship prior to the most recent grant instituted in 2009, spanning three decades and ranging from efforts to address poverty reduction and economic growth in a single, troubled South American country to a program that today has global reach and influences the decisions of world leaders. In January 2009, the USAID Bureau of Economic Growth, Agriculture, and Trade (EGAT)1 awarded ILD a $25-million grant titled “Program to Help Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legal Empowerment of the Poor.” The grant was initiated on January 26, 2009, and is slated to end January 25, 2014. 2 It supports only the pre-stage (Awareness Building and Political Engagement) and the first stage (Training and Team Building) of ILD’s methodology. During these stages, ILD focuses on providing technical assistance, producing and disseminating research, communicating a broad approach to property rights in the media, engaging in dialogue with influential actors (especially governments), and gaining support from partners who will help build awareness and advocate on behalf of the poor. Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Established in 1981 in Lima by Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto, ILD is a world-renowned think tank dedicated to the promotion of property and business rights in developing countries. ILD aims to assist governments in transforming their market economies by implementing institutional reforms in property and business rights that are fully within the countries’ rules of law and that, as much as possible, are built upon the organizational and contracting processes that already exist within the informal sectors of the economies. When the Shining Path—a Maoist guerilla insurgent organization—rose to prominence in Peru during the early 1980s, ILD campaigned to raise awareness about the informal sector and began calling for legal reforms. Since then, ILD has continued with its legal empowerment efforts in Peru and elsewhere. 1 EGAT Bureau was renamed the Economic Growth, Education and Environment (E3) Bureau in May 2012 2 The end date has been extended to May 31, 2014. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 10 ILD’s work in Peru led to the development of a model program that has been packaged as a product to be offered to other countries in an effort to promote economic development through legal empowerment of the poor. Since commencing the current grant in 2009, ILD has worked in 28 countries, assisting governments by providing the expertise and information needed to implement reforms in property and business rights. To attain its goals in these countries, ILD implements a five-stage program: 3 1. Training and Team Building 2. Diagnosis 3. Institutional Reform Design 4. Implementation 5. Capital Formation ILD considers its clients to be governments of developing countries, international development organizations, the media, and corporate investors. Purpose of Study Under the USAID Learning, Evaluation, and Analysis Project (LEAP), contract no. AID-OAA￾C-11-00169, Optimal Solutions Group, LLC (Optimal), was requested to conduct a performance evaluation of ILD’s work from 2009 through August 2013. According to the Statement of Work (SOW), “the purpose of the performance evaluation is to provide USAID with an external assessment of its current grant agreement with ILD, to examine the evolution of the various activities initially proposed and now being executed by ILD, and [to determine] whether these activities are leading to the expected results. The findings of this evaluation will be used both to enhance the effectiveness of existing implementation for the remaining performance period and to inform future USAID economic growth strategies and programming.” The evaluation team was requested to complete the following tasks: • Assess ILD’s performance in meeting the terms of the grant agreement, in particular in producing all deliverables identified in the grant agreement and yearly work plans, which include the following: o Building awareness for legal empowerment and social inclusion o Institutionalizing legal empowerment of the poor (and women) in client countries o Strengthening ILD’s operational platform and ensuring a sustainable expansion 3 Preliminary to actual implementation of any program, ILD will have conducted some initial, preparatory work that it calls “Pre￾Stage Awareness Building and Political Engagement.” USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 11 o Transforming expressed demand for ILD services into actual projects and reform efforts • Assess ILD’s success in reaching the objectives of the grant. The evaluation team is invited to consider measures of outcomes and may wish to consider the following: • Building awareness for legal empowerment and social inclusion • Institutionalizing land reform to empower the poor and women in client countries • Strengthening ILD’s operational platform and ensuring a sustainable expansion Methodology The LEAP team employed various methodologies to gather data on ILD’s work to inform the performance evaluation. These included an extensive desk review, compiling documents from ILD, USAID, Mpango wa Kurasimisha Rasilimali na Biashara za Wanyonge Tanzania (MKURABITA), and web searches of academic and media publications. The team also conducted three site visits, first to Peru to interview ILD staff, beneficiaries, and key stakeholders as well as to collect program documentation; then to Nigeria to observe ILD program implementation; and finally to Tanzania to observe program implementation of MKURABITA, a local formalization entity trained by ILD that is conducting implementation on its own. Evaluation Design: The LEAP team employed a qualitative approach to conducting the evaluation. Using observation, literature analysis, in-depth interviews, and small-group discussions, qualitative research evaluation helps identify the strengths and weaknesses of a program and indicates where improvements may be made in its outputs and outcomes. Where possible, quantitative approaches were also used to analyze and verify information provided by ILD. Data Verification: The LEAP team utilized different data-verification methods, including triangulation. Triangulation means collecting the same type of information, but from different sources and using different methods. Additional data verification was done through document searches using various search engines (Google, Google Scholar, LexisNexis, EBSCOhost), key￾informant interviews (stakeholders and subject-matter experts [SMEs]), small discussion groups (beneficiaries), and observations of programs during site visits. Throughout the evaluation, data received were carefully collated, continuously reviewed, summarized, and synthesized. This systematic approach helped identify trends and establish the authenticity, validity, and reliability of the findings reported. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 12 Study Limitations: Two main limitations exist for this study. First, several aspects of the grant agreement are difficult to quantify without conducting a full-fledged social-media analysis. For instance, being able to identify the number of people who have been influenced by ILD and have become change makers as a result is difficult to quantify, yet this is a requirement of the grant agreement, with no systematized process in place for how this count should occur. On the operational front, the evaluation team was not permitted to visit Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia due to security concerns at the time. Given that ILD had been actively engaged in these countries, the evaluation team relied on web information and documents provided by ILD to develop findings on ILD’s influence in these areas. Findings This report presents specific findings by categorizing according to the four main strategic objectives stressed in the USAID grant agreement: 4 Strategic Objective 1: Building Awareness for Legal Empowerment and Social Inclusion The overall objective is to publicize and promote ILD’s legal empowerment and institutional reform program to heads of state/governments, international organizations, academic institutions, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), donor groups, and any other agencies or organizations committed to development and poverty reduction.5 Within this strategic objective, LEAP focused on three specific results. Result 1: Delivering presentations to heads of state, ministers, public officials, corporate sponsors, and the leadership of donor agencies and philanthropic organizations ILD was involved in a total of 90 conferences, forums, seminars, and presentations to government officials and donor agencies during the grant period, 27 of which were identified as major presentations delivered to government officials and donor agencies. Result 2: Workshops and training sessions on legal empowerment of the poor (and women) for the purpose of building in-country talent and constituencies ILD conducted 12 training workshops as part of its pre-diagnosis activities during the grant period in 5 out of the 29 countries it worked in (Libya, Iraq, Colombia, Peru, and Nigeria). Result 3: Development of new client and partner strategies in response to changing global and regional conditions ILD engaged in and maintained relationships with 10 organizations and institutions working in international development in an effort to develop new client and partner strategies in response to 4 Outlined in accordance with the USAID grant agreement and evaluation SOW 5 Institute for Liberty and Democracy Work Plan 2010 USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 13 changing global and regional conditions. The organizations ranged from local NGOs (Cercle d’Action et Reflexion de l’Enterprise [CARE] in Algeria) to important donors (the Omidyar Foundation) to multilateral donors (the UNDP). Strategic Objective 2: Institutionalizing Legal Empowerment of the Poor (and Women) in Client Countries The goal of this objective is to improve policies that reduce extralegality in land ownership and business operation—that is, to move toward implementation. Result 1: Raising partner countries’ awareness of issues related to extralegality in land ownership and business operations and motivating their interest in moving through Stages 1 and 2 (training/team building and diagnosis) a. Country cases where, during the grant period, ILD has championed improved policies and facilitated movement from Stage 1 to Stage 2 ILD facilitated movement from Stage 1 to Stage 2 in only one instance within the grant period: Nigeria (Lagos State). This project is currently in the diagnosis phase. b. Effect awareness building has on increasing the appetite for legal empowerment reform work, regardless of whether ILD works past this awareness-building stage Pre-diagnosis in specific countries did lead to awareness building in other countries—for example, spillover from pre-diagnosis in Tunisia (2012) to Algeria (2012). During the grant period, the most noticeable influence of awareness building on increasing the appetite for legal empowerment can be seen (1) within ILD’s home country of Peru, through its research and publications on the Avatar Myths; (2) in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, through work conducted on the Arab Spring; (3) in review and analysis of the financial crisis in Europe and North America, referred to as “The Subprime Knowledge Paradigm”; and (4) review of property rights’ discrimination toward women in “The Backdoor Discrimination Against Women Paradigm.” c. How ILD’s ideas have influenced governments, in terms of policy change, and the development agenda in international organizations Evidence suggests that ILD’s work has influenced governments in such countries as Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, India, Mongolia, and Nigeria. It also shows that ILD was able to convince some government officials to accept its methodology and promote change. However, the changes that ILD promoted were not always effected for a variety of reasons, including lack of major buy-in or political turnover. ILD’s work has similarly influenced several international donor organizations. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 14 Result 2: Increasing partner countries’ institutional capacity to reach Stage 3 (institutional reform), whether through ILD itself, through another implementer, or via the country’s own efforts Within the grant period, ILD reached the institutional reform stage for projects in Tanzania and Egypt. In Tanzania, the local entity that ILD set up began the institutional reform and formalization implementation process on its own (after ILD had facilitated Stages 1 and 2). However, this entity cited the implementing agency’s lack of finances and political turnover as reasons for slow progress in reaching the institutional reform stage. a. Effect that team-building, training, and diagnostic studies have on increasing countries’ capabilities to undertake legal empowerment reform work, noting any significant trends and observations (donor support, local support, etc.) The most significant finding to support this result stems from the lasting effect of the work that ILD conducted in Tanzania, where the local entity is implementing formalization. The evaluation team does not have evidence to support ILD’s influence to this extent in any other country studied. Result 3: Developing strategies with partner countries to enhance their capacity to implement reforms ILD has worked to enhance the local capacity of partner countries to implement reforms. Local capacity building was instituted in Libya, Tanzania, and Nigeria. Women’s Empowerment in Property and Business Rights Beginning in 2011, ILD conducted a series of activities on women’s empowerment programs. In 2012, ILD conducted training of indigenous Peruvian women in the Amazon area. Overall, attention to women’s empowerment issues was limited as compared to other areas. However, it should be noted that such projects increased over time. Strategic Objective 3: Strengthening ILD’s Operational Platform and Ensuring a Sustainable Expansion Strengthening ILD’s operational platform is a key component in the efficacy and expansion of ILD’s influence. The aim is to build in-country capacity and ensure sustainable expansion of the ILD program by developing new tools and by networking with potential donors to diversify services and support to the general public. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 15 Result 1—Product Improvement: Developing new technical manuals and tools for in￾country technical teams involved in diagnosis, strategy, and institutional reform ILD did not produce new country-specific strategic-monitoring and technical manuals for all the countries worked in during this grant period. Such manuals have only been identified for three countries: Peru, Nigeria, and Tanzania. The LEAP team conducted a review of the major quantitative element of ILD’s methodology— the analysis of “dead capital,” or the assets of extralegal firms, as part of the review for product improvement. From the review, the team found that ILD’s estimates of dead capital are based on extensive field work measuring the activities of those firms and then producing an accounting, not an economic, valuation of dead capital. The difference between the accounting and the economic approaches lies mainly in the fact that the latter would take into account the fact that existing institutional rules reflect whether capital is “dead” and how much it is valued. For example, even though formal collateral arrangements might not be in place, some capital might be used within informal collateral arrangements and thus not be considered “dead.” Similarly, extrapolation of the behavior of formal businesses to informal businesses, a key element of ILD’s methodology, is only appropriate if the analysis recognizes the differences between the characteristics of businesses that are formal and those that are informal. Modern economics has standard techniques that would allow these problems to be addressed. Not addressing those problems—or even squarely acknowledging them—suggests a gap in ILD’s portfolio of skills. Result 2—Increased Funding and Cost Sharing: Networking with donors and gaining media attention to increase buy-in to ILD program The grant agreement set a cost-sharing target of $6,255,500 for the 5-year grant period. It also set a target of $14,120,721 raised from “Other Sources.”6 Up to August 2013, ILD had obtained commitments of $17,778,168 in funding from other sources. Of this amount, $7,272,269 had been already received and $4,917,787 had been spent. Therefore, it seems likely that ILD will meet its cost-share target but not its “Other Sources” target. Result 3—Increased Number of Local Technical Experts: Building a cadre of in-country technical teams and recruits ILD was effective in increasing the number of local technical experts in three countries (Tanzania, Libya, and Nigeria). The evaluation team saw no record of a holistic approach to building a directory of local technical experts to target for training and/or partnership, as required under this result. 6 No precise definition was found for the meaning of “Other Sources” and whether it references funding received or funding promised. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 16 Result 4—Increased Number of Local Technical Experts: Increasing the capacity of local technical experts to become indigenous change agents Based on the documentation made available to the evaluation team, ILD had minimal success in this area. Aside from the above-mentioned partnership with Tanzania, no direct evidence from within the documentation reviewed and site visits conducted suggests that local experts have become change agents in their countries as a result of ILD’s capacity building. However, it is important to note that quantifying such progress would be challenging to do, and therefore ILD might have influenced people in countries where it has worked; that said, without developing a systematic approach to identifying and following them, it would be difficult to respond to this result. Strategic Objective 4: Transforming Expressed Demand for ILD Services into Actual Projects and Reform Efforts Result 1: Awareness, training, and pre-diagnostics leading to full diagnostic studies ILD conducted pre-diagnosis in 19 of the 29 countries in which it was involved. Full diagnostic studies were completed in eight countries. Extensive training was conducted in two countries (Nigeria and Tanzania) during the grant period. Result 2: Establishment of technical credibility in legal empowerment with world leaders To evaluate ILD’s success in achieving this objective, the LEAP team attempted to identify various activities that would point to its establishment of technical credibility with world leaders in legal empowerment of the poor. a. Research activities conducted during the grant period that focused the attention of policymakers, academics, development experts, and other leaders on issues related to legal empowerment of the poor ILD engaged in four extensive research activities during this grant period—namely, Avatar Myths research, Arab Spring research, Financial Crisis research, and Empowerment of Women research, according to the property paradigms. b. How ILD engages its constituents and heads of state in its multistage process Evidence suggests that ILD has had a greater level of engagement with constituents and heads of state in the initial stages. However, given that very little movement has occurred in subsequent stages, little evidence was obtained through the evaluation process that identified organized or deliberate engagement with constituents and heads of state past the initial engagements. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 17 c. Frequency of citations of ILD research reports and studies produced under the USAID grant on topics related to LEP Recognition of ILD scholarship is focused almost entirely on the work of de Soto. Although de Soto has been cited an enormous number of times for work produced before the grant period, the number of citations for literature produced by de Soto during the grant period is not significant. De Soto’s ideas have had a marked impact in the news media, but references to ILD come only through references to de Soto. d. Supporting evidence demonstrating that ILD’s media and other awareness activities under this grant have sparked public debate for reforming economic governance in developing countries The LEAP team was unable to evaluate this requirement, given that doing so would require an extensive and expensive social-media research and trend analysis. USAID agreed that this type of analysis could not take place for the scope of this evaluation. e. Awareness-building activities leading to reform efforts, even if ILD was not the agent of implementation ILD has not been successful in translating awareness-building activities into reform efforts and implementation within the grant period. Within the 11 countries where awareness building was initiated during the grant period, only Nigeria moved on to the Diagnosis stage. Among the countries in which ILD was involved during the grant period, it has been able to reach the fourth stage—implementation—within two countries, including a local entity in Tanzania, which is positive and directly responds to this result. Throughout ILD’s life span, all five stages of ILD’s methodology been successfully completed only in Peru (and that occurred prior to this grant agreement). Recommendations Based on the findings of the evaluation, as requested in the SOW, the LEAP team developed recommendations to improve ILD’s activities. The overarching recommendation directly related to the outcome of this evaluation is that ILD improve its organization and reporting of specific countries’ activities within the respective USAID grant agreement strategic objectives, which will ultimately lead to the ability to appropriately measure ILD’s effectiveness in fulfilling the grant agreement. Additionally, the LEAP team recommends that ILD conduct internal monitoring of its programs in a consistent and continuous manner, which will reduce ambiguity in the organization’s ability to reach the specific strategic objectives defined within this grant agreement. Recommendations specific to the strategic objectives are provided below: USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 18 Strategic Objective 1: Building Awareness for Legal Empowerment and Social Inclusion • Consider organizing an annual ILD global conference or symposium to raise awareness on legal empowerment and social inclusion issues. • Increase publications by ILD as an entity and by ILD staff members. • Include local civil society in ILD national efforts. Strategic Objective 2: Institutionalizing Legal Empowerment of the Poor (and Women) in Client Countries • Increase focus on women’s and disadvantaged groups’ empowerment activities by including trainings for these groups as an integral part of activities within each country where work is conducted. These trainings should be tailored toward the unique needs of each country of focus. Strategic Objective 3: Strengthening ILD’s Operational Platform and Ensuring a Sustainable Expansion • Leverage local human capital/resources, especially within Peruvian universities. • Make a concerted effort through internal and external means to systematically collect data that can be used to analyze ILD’s impact. For instance, document direct (and indirect, where possible) beneficiaries/stakeholders who have received ILD’s assistance and maintain contact with key stakeholders over a period of time that allows for a systematic measurement of ILD’s influence and ability to create local change agents (upon completion of activities in a country). One possible method would be to track the work of such stakeholders over a period of time to demonstrate their involvement or leadership in activities that ILD influenced, such as continuing ongoing registration of titles after ILD has completed its work in a country. • ILD should clearly state its understanding of its commitment under cost-sharing requirements, ensure compliance with those requirements, and regularly report to USAID its performance in meeting those requirements. Strategic Objective 4: Transforming Expressed Demand for ILD Services into Actual Projects and Reform Efforts • Develop and maintain consistency in implementation of project activities. • Update its legal and economic models and make the methodology and analysis more accessible (possibly on ILD’s website) to various stakeholders, including experts in the field of legal empowerment, researchers and academics, and local experts. • Revisit some of ILD’s past work in Peru to identify and provide solutions to gaps that currently exist, particularly within the business-rights area. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 19 I. INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Asian Development Bank (ADB) first coined the term “legal empowerment” in its 2001 Asia Foundation Report.7 It began to receive greater attention in some development circles via the articulation of the concept in a 2003 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace policy paper. 8 The term garnered considerably greater attention as a result of a 2008 report9 of the Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor (CLEP). After the establishment of CLEP in 2005, hosted by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and the 2008 report, the concept of legal empowerment was broadened to emphasize the needs of the poor and disadvantaged, focusing on legal rights and other institutional tools to aid the poor in lifting themselves out of poverty and taking control of their lives.10 CLEP posited that legal￾empowerment efforts should be grounded in four main pillars: 1. Access to justice and the rule of law, including the right to legal identity, removal of discriminatory laws against the poor, and increased access to traditional and alternative justice systems 2. Property rights, including recognition of alternative methods of individual and collective ownership 3. Labor rights, including workers’ rights, protections, and benefits 4. Business rights, including access to credit and support for the poor (particularly poor women) to start and operate small businesses11 Traditionally, legal empowerment of the poor (LEP) consisted of a top-down, state-oriented intervention approach by which development institutions in collaboration with governments designed and implemented projects concentrated on law and policy change for the less fortunate.12 However, LEP has gained considerable attention and momentum in recent years in understanding the limits of such an approach—that is, how poverty manifests itself when the vast majority of the global economy operates in what is referred to as the “informal” or “extralegal” sector, outside the reach of those top-down reforms. 13 For Madeleine Albright and Hernando de 7 Golub, Stephen, and Kim McQuay (2001). “Legal Empowerment: Advancing Good Governance and Poverty Reduction.” Law and Policy Reform at the Asian Development Bank. 8 Golub, Stephen (2003). “Beyond Rule of Law Orthodoxy: The Legal Empowerment Alternative.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Working Paper, Number 41. 9 Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor (2008). “Making the Law Work for Everyone.” United Nations Development Programme. Working Group Reports, Volume I. 10 Banik, Dan (2009). “The Potential of Legal Empowerment in Eradicating Poverty.” Rights and Development Bulletin. Volume 1, Issue 3, June–July 2009, p. 5. 11 Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor (2009). “Making the Law Work for Everyone.” United Nations Development Programme. Working Group Reports, Volume II. 12 Golub, Stephen (2003). “Beyond Rule of Law Orthodoxy: The Legal Empowerment Alternative.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Working Paper, Number 41, p. 5. 13 Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor (2009). “Making the Law Work for Everyone.” United Nations Development Programme. Working Group Reports, Volume II, p. iii. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 20 Soto (2007), co-chairs of CLEP, their definition of legal empowerment connects to rule of law that is fair and enforceable, enabling nations to reduce poverty more quickly and efficiently.14 A United Nations (UN) Secretary General 2009 report15 that attaches importance to CLEP’s four pillars of legal empowerment takes a broader view of legal empowerment, assigning gender a more central role than does CLEP. The report also suggests additional priorities, including addressing how climate change affects the poor. Similarly a legal-empowerment expert emphasizes a broader focus on women’s rights and civil society. Other scholars focus on the role of the political and power dimensions of legal empowerment as well as on building the power and capacities of the poor, the marginalized, and their allies. Despite the differing angles of focus, ultimately, legal empowerment is defined around the use of rights and laws specifically created to increase disadvantaged populations’ control over their lives. A key element of legal empowerment is for development agencies to focus on initiatives that directly provide support for the poor and disadvantaged to reform laws and, often even more importantly, to get good laws implemented. 16 When those in poverty gain power over their legal rights as well as the opportunity to exercise those rights, they can work more freely, securely, and efficiently to better their lives and surrounding society while transitioning into the formal economy. It has been suggested that to facilitate proper execution of the rule of law at all levels (individual, household, community, and national), LEP must focus on the grassroots level.17 Central to legal empowerment is the security of property rights for all. It is widely accepted that property rights and economic performance are inextricably linked.18 In the last few decades, “the importance of having well defined and strongly protected property rights [has been] strongly recognized.”19 Gerald Driscoll and Lee Hoskins (2003) believe that the difference between prosperity and poverty is property and that nations prosper when property rights are well defined and enforced. The relationship between government and property rights provides a central element of economists’ deliberations on property rights. Although one tends to think about property rights as being defined by formal law, in fact property rights are often worked out among individuals or firms first and then only recognized by the law at a later time. Moreover, governments can also provide a threat to sound property rights because of the possibility of weakening property rights through regulations that could affect the use of private property.20 Property rights play an important facilitating role in a broader range of economic institutions. Although the economic 14 Albright, Madeleine, and Hernando de Soto (2007). “Giving the Poor Their Rights.” Time Magazine. July 5, 2007. 15 Golub, Stephen (2010). “What is Legal Empowerment?” International Development Law Organization Working Paper. 16 Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor (2008). “Making the Law Work for Everyone.” United Nations Development Programme. Working Group Reports, Volume I, p. 1. 17 Golub, Stephen (2003). “Beyond Rule of Law Orthodoxy: The Legal Empowerment Alternative.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Working Paper, Number 41, p. 5. 18 Driscoll, Gerald, and Lee Hoskins (2003). Property Rights: The Key to Economic Development. Policy Analysis 482, 2003; Bethell (1998). The Noblest Triumph: Prosperity and Property Throughout the Ages. St. Martin’s Press. 19 Driscoll and Hoskins (2003). Property Rights: The Key to Economic Development. Policy Analysis 482, 2003. 20 Driscoll and Hoskins (2003). Property Rights: The Key to Economic Development. Policy Analysis 482, 2003. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 21 approach is not the only way to think about property, and economic analysis is often misused, this approach serves an important function in understanding why property rights are important to liberty and human progress. Economic analysis can offer important insights that help understand two fundamental aspects of property rights: how they change and the types of problems they solve.21 Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) has the overarching goal of facilitating the movement of individuals from the extralegal (informal) sector to the formal, legal sector of market economies, thereby releasing their “dead capital” so that it can become a powerful productive force in the formal economy. Established in 1981 by Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto, ILD is an institute devoted to the promotion of establishing property and business rights in developing countries. ILD’s mission is to catalyze interest in the need to bring all economic agents into the formal sector of the economy and to provide governments with the expertise and information to implement institutional reforms in property and business rights, thereby enabling all citizens to be included in the market economy and consequently allowing the poor to pull themselves out of poverty and prosper. When the Shining Path—a Maoist guerilla insurgent organization—rose to prominence in Peru during the early 1980s, ILD started a campaign to raise awareness about “the informal sector” and began calling for legal reforms in Peru. Since then, ILD has continued its legal￾empowerment efforts in Peru and beyond and has established four paradigmatic applications within its Property Rights Program—namely, “Arab Spring,” “Avatar Myths,” “Knowledge Crisis,” and “Discrimination Against Women.” Since 2009, ILD has worked or is currently working in 29 countries, listed in the chart below. USAID funding has contributed to projects in most of (if not all) these countries in various fashion, as discussed in detail in subsequent chapters. Exhibit 1. List of countries within which ILD has provided consultations during the grant period (2009–2013) Africa Asia Europe Latin and South Middle East and (Soviet Bloc) America North Africa Canary Islands India Albania Colombia Algeria Cape Verde Mongolia Dominican Republic Azerbaijan Ethiopia Papua New Guinea Haiti Egypt Mali Russia Panama Iraq Niger Timor-Leste Peru Libya22 Morris, Andrew (2007). The Economics of Property Rights. Retrieved May 30, 2013, from http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/the-economics-of-property-rights/#axzz2Vt8gbDtu. 22 The LEAP team reports on ILD activities in Libya, because this evidence is relevant to making judgments on the reputation and status of ILD on LEP activities. However, the reader should note that according to Attachment D “List of Approved Countries” of the USAID grant agreement with ILD, USAID funding could not be used for work in Libya. ILD has assured the USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 22 21 Africa Asia Europe Latin and South Middle East and (Soviet Bloc) America North Africa Nigeria Tunisia Rwanda Senegal Tanzania Uganda Zimbabwe ILD aims to assist countries in transforming their market economies by establishing property and business rights that are fully within the countries’ rules of law and that, as much as possible, are built upon the modes of organization and contracting that already exist within the informal sector of the economies. To attain its goals, ILD implements a five-stage program for the development of LEP. Beginning with preliminary research and awareness and concluding with the ultimate goal of spurring increases in capital formulation, this program has a continuum of phases representing a range of ILD’s program activities. (It is important to note that ILD reform efforts are preceded by Awareness Building and Political Engagement, which include an initial “Prediagnostic Assessment,” not to be confused with the diagnosis stage described below.) The stages are as follows: 1. Training and Team Building 2. Diagnosis 3. Institutional Reform Design 4. Implementation 5. Capital Formation ILD considers its clients to be governments of developing countries, international development organizations, the media, and corporate sponsors. USAID Funding for ILD Activities The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and ILD had a long-term relationship prior to the most recent grant instituted in 2009, spanning three decades and ranging from efforts to address poverty reduction and economic growth in a single, troubled South American country to a program that today has global reach and influences the decisions of world leaders. In 1982, USAID/Peru awarded its first grant of $150,000 to ILD to reduce poverty through the simplification, legalization, and formalization of rules and practices governing real property, business activities, and dispute settlement. The aims of the program were to provide evaluation team that it structured its operations during the grant period to comply with this requirement and that evidence of compliance is contained in the analyses of the independent external auditors who filed yearly reports. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 23 support for a study of Peru’s urban informal sector and its implications for private-enterprise development. This grant was initiated during a time when the Shining Path was challenging the existing system with the goal of developing a “New Democracy” that would have established a Maoist Communist system. De Soto and ILD began exploring the difficulties inherent in the prevailing legal system, in part to counterbalance the Shining Path ideology.23 Through various research studies, ILD estimated that within the existing legal system in Lima, it would take an urban squatter approximately 6 years, 11 months, and 207 steps to receive a legal title to the property in question.24 Using this study (among others) as a springboard, ILD gained government and donor support, including funding from the World Bank, for the establishment of Organismo de Formalización de la Propiedad Informal (COFOPRI), the Peruvian public agency in charge of the large-scale formalization of property rights over immovable assets in Peru. With this funding, ILD generated initiatives and assisted in the development of laws and regulations that changed Peru’s system of economic governance. For example, ILD designed the reform of Peru’s property system, which gave titles to more than 1.2 million families. The organization also helped some 380,000 firms, which previously operated in the “gray” economy, enter the formal, legal economy. This work continued through September 1995 under several different agreements.25 ILD’s work in Peru led to the development of a model program that could be packaged as a product to be offered to other countries. This program provided the impetus for expanding ILD’s work into other countries, with some support for this work coming from USAID. USAID/Peru provided funding to ILD over a 14 year period through a series of grants with its apogee in the period 1989 through 1995: • USAID/Peru grant August 1982 ($210,000) • USAID/Peru grant May 1984 ($530,000) • USAID/Peru grant April 1985 ($1,941,400) • USAID/Peru grant March 1989 ($12,188,192) • USAID/Peru grant October 1994 ($354,260) • USAID/Peru awarded a grant in December 1995 titled the “Enhancement of the Institutional Framework for the Formalization of the Urban Property and Establishment of the Basis for Extending the Program Nationwide.” ($900,000) In the early 1990s, ILD (with USAID’s support) gradually expanded its operations outside Peru. Different studies were funded by USAID mission offices in the following countries: • Honduras (January 1992) ($150,000) • El Salvador (January 1991) ($503,000), and 23 SOW for the Performance Evaluation of the Instituto Libertad Y Democracia Activities. 24 The Mystery of Capital, p. 20. 25 SOW USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 24 • Honduras again (May 2001) ($124,375) 1996 marked a shift in USAID’s financial support for ILD with USAID Washington bureaus directly funding the organization. • USAID/Washington awarded a grant to ILD in July 1996, ending April 1998, titled “Globalize the Programs of ILD.” ($3,559,238) • USAID/Haiti, in August 1997, awarded a major grant titled the “Urban Real Estate Formalization Program,” which continued through May 2002. ($4,793,837) • The Latin America/Caribbean Bureau, in May 1998, awarded a grant titled the “Program in Property Formalization in Latin America.” ($7,450,000) • USAID/Egypt, in September 1999, awarded a cooperative agreement titled “Formalization of Egypt's Urban Informal Sector,” which continued through March 2002. It was immediately followed by a second cooperative agreement titled “Business Formalization Project in Egypt” that ran from May 2002 through September 2003. ($4,841,678) • The USAID’s Poverty Reduction Office in the Economic Growth, Agriculture, and Trade (EGAT) Bureau, awarded a grant named “ILD Program to Promote and Create an Inclusive Rule of Law” in September 2003 and ending January 2009. Programs were implemented in several countries, including Ethiopia, Tanzania, Nigeria, and Pakistan. ($26,129,000, with $4,000,000 contributed by USAID/Ethiopia for project work in that country.) • The current grant “Program to Help Developing nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor” is funded by the EGAT Bureau and has an expected total obligation of $25 million by the time of its conclusion. The total expected funding by the time of the conclusion of the grant now being evaluated equals $88,674,980.00 in nominal dollars. USAID Current Grant to ILD: Program to Help Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor In 2009, USAID’s Poverty Reduction Office of EGAT26 awarded ILD a grant to promote awareness, training, and research for implementing its legal-empowerment program over the course of 5 years. Following an unsolicited proposal for the purpose of legally empowering the poor, the grant, titled “Program to Help Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legal Empowerment of the Poor,” was awarded to ILD on January 26, 2009, and is slated to end January 25, 2014. 27 The $25-million grant, which provides core funding to support ILD programming, is focused on designing and implementing property rights and formalization 26 Ibid 27 Note that the grant agreement end date was extended to May 31, 2014 USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 25 programs to stimulate capital formation and empower the poor in Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and former Soviet-Bloc countries. To accomplish this goal, ILD focuses on providing technical assistance; producing and disseminating research; communicating its broad approach to property rights in the media; conducting dialog with influential actors, especially within government; and gaining support from partners who will help build awareness and advocate on behalf of the poor. More specifically, USAID assistance to ILD has been aimed at the following broad goals: 1. Generating more knowledge and new products for global action 2. Building awareness for legal empowerment and social inclusion 3. Transforming expressed demand for ILD’s services into actual projects 4. Strengthening ILD’s products, services, and operational platform to ensure sustainable expansion Terms and Conditions ILD uses a five-stage methodology to conduct its work. Prior to application of the five stage methodology, ILD engages in awareness building and political engagement. This is one of ILD’s strategic objectives and comprises ILD’s efforts to inform and educate leaders and key decisionmakers about how ILD’s reform ideas can help a developing country transition to an inclusive market economy. Activities conducted by ILD during these stages are as follows: Stage 1—Training and Team Building: This is the first stage of ILD’s legal empowerment bridge, which aims to build local teams of home-grown personnel in client countries that are trained in ILD’s framework and methodologies. The goal of these sessions is for the trainees to become capable of carrying out diagnostic studies to identify legal barriers. Training and team￾building efforts are also aimed at building strategic linkages with top political authorities and other respected leaders to support program efforts. Training sessions may also be carried out during the awareness-building stage with potential clients. Pre-diagnosis is an awareness￾building tool used when needed, under which a small team from ILD in Peru undertakes a brief 2- to 3-week in-country analysis of the informal economy. Stage 2—Diagnosis: This is to be the sine qua non stage in which a country’s extralegal economy is examined and explored. Teams of ILD and local researchers are mobilized to detect and analyze defects in the legal system. The teams also document the local extralegal practices people resort to in order to protect their assets and do business. The diagnosis stage is typically preceded by a pre-diagnosis. Stage 3—Institutional Reform Design: At this stage, ILD and local teams design proposals for policy change and institutional reforms that build from the bottom up on well-established local legal and extralegal practices. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 26 Stage 4—Implementation: The proposed reforms lay the groundwork for a massive formalization campaign and its implementation. During this stage, the newly designed processes and systems together with record-keeping organization(s) are fully implemented and put into operation. Resistance to reform from vested interests is likely, which is why establishing local ownership is essential to ensure its sustainability. Stage 5—Capital Formation: This is the ultimate objective, at which time trained multidisciplinary professionals help implement recommendations for relating newly legalized property to opportunities in larger national and international markets. Tasks might include helping set up • credit and mortgage application systems; • collections systems for credit, rates, and taxes; and • insurance and information services. The current grant agreement only supports awareness building and political engagement (pre-stage) activities and the first stage of ILD’s methodology, training, and team building. Funding for the awareness and pre-diagnosis activities provides a global outreach for ILD’s methodology. The agreement assumes that ILD will secure supplementary and project-based funding for the subsequent program stages. The total cumulative cost-share target for the grant agreement is $6,255,500. Performance monitoring is based on ILD’s submission of a quarterly report for each core business process described above that responds to key performance indicators and specific deliverables outlined in the grant agreement and the evaluation team’s SOW. Report Structure The structure for this ILD program evaluation report developed by the LEAP team is as follows: The report begins with an overview—presented above—of legal empowerment and property and economic rights, the main activities supported by ILD; discusses USAID’s long-standing relationship with ILD; and then details ILD’s program, its project objectives and goals, and the current USAID and ILD agreement requirements (also provided previously). Starting with Chapter III, below, the report then provides an overview of the evaluation purpose, objectives, methodology, and design, prefaced by a summary of the desk-review and data-gathering processes used in this study. The subsequent chapter provides detailed findings from the evaluation, providing an analysis of ILD’s methodology, country project implementation, financial reporting, and successes and shortfalls within its overall approach. The next chapter outlines the preliminary recommendations for ILD program’s effectiveness and sustainability, and then the report’s conclusions are provided. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 27 II. METHODOLOGY Performance Evaluation Purpose and Assignment The United States Agency for International Development’s (USAID’s) Bureau of Economic Growth, Education, and Environment (E3) requested that Optimal Solutions Group, LLC (Optimal), through its USAID Learning, Evaluation, and Analysis Project (LEAP) contract, no. AID-OAA-C-11-00169, conduct a performance evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia’s (ILD’s) work from 2009 through 2013 (the grant period was recently extended to May 2014). The LEAP team was assigned the following tasks: • Conduct a performance evaluation of the current USAID grant with ILD. • Evaluate ILD’s performance in meeting its objectives and deliverables as identified in the USAID-ILD agreement and yearly work plans. • Determine ILD’s success under the grant in increasing legal empowerment of the poor (LEP), including women’s empowerment and gender equality.28 Upon initiation of this task order, the LEAP team held discussions with USAID to determine whether data were sufficient to conduct a performance evaluation with the stipulated rigor in the project statement of work (SOW). Through the discussions, USAID and the LEAP team agreed to implement a phased approach to first identify and gather data available for the evaluation, then determine the appropriate evaluation methodology, and finally conduct an evaluation of ILD’s work, given the data gathered. Data Gathering The LEAP team employed various methodologies to gather data on ILD’s work to inform the performance evaluation. The first stage was to conduct an initial desk review of legal empowerment and ILD’s work, after which site visits were conducted to interview ILD staff, beneficiaries of ILD’s work, and other stakeholders. The site visit to Peru was also used to gather additional data on ILD programming. Finally, based on the data gathered, an evaluation design was suggested to guide the evaluation process. Desk Review The LEAP team conducted an extensive document review of ILD’s program, evaluating the following documents (the full list of documents reviewed, which were obtained through web searches, from USAID, and from ILD, can be found in Appendix 2): 28 Refer to project SOW in Appendix 1. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 28 USAID provided the evaluation team with several ILD program-related documents, including the Grant Agreement (1); Annual Work Plans (4); Quarterly Reports (15); Financial Reports (3); and other desk-review documentation (8). A total of forty (40) documents was received directly from ILD. These consisted of Books (3); Documentaries (1); Manuals (12); Program and Country Reports (22); and Financial Reports (2). Finally, the team also conducted an extensive review of many research articles and reports related to legal empowerment of the poor and economic and property rights, plus documentation from implementing partners, such as Mpango wa Kurasimisha Rasilimali na Biashara za Wanyonge Tanzania (MKURABITA). The total number of documents reviewed was 136. Site Visit to Peru In Phase 1 of the evaluation, the LEAP team conducted a site visit to Lima and Iquitos, Peru, aimed at achieving the following objectives: • Gathering data for the performance evaluation of the current USAID grant with ILD • Conducting a preliminary evaluation of ILD in meeting its objectives and deliverables as identified in the USAID-ILD agreement and yearly work plans • Conducting an assessment of ILD’s success under the grant in increasing the legal empowerment of the poor, including women’s empowerment and gender equality The site visit was conducted by Christabel Dadzie, team leader and evaluation specialist, and Peter Murrell, senior economist, between April 27 and May 11, 2013. The site visit involved identifying and gathering data and conducting interviews with ILD program staff, beneficiaries of ILD programs, and other stakeholders, such as program implementers of formalization activities. (See Appendix 7 for the site-visit agenda.) The site visit was necessary for the evaluation team to understand the overall work of ILD, its philosophy, and implementation of its work prior to and during USAID funding as well as to identify whether the necessary data were available for conducting the evaluation. Most of the information gathered during the site visit was in connection with ILD’s work over the long term. Although data gathered prior to this grant agreement helped inform the evaluation, they are not reported in full, given that the evaluation is meant to focus only on ILD’s work during the USAID grant period (2009–2013). Prior to the site visit, the LEAP team developed in-depth interview guides for interviewing ILD program staff and beneficiaries (refer to Appendix 6). The team conducted individual and group interviews with ILD staff, key stakeholders (government officials, researchers), and beneficiaries. The list of stakeholders interviewed can be found in Appendix 8. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 29 Evaluation Design USAID E3 requested the implementation of a rigorous performance evaluation to assess the impact of ILD’s work. The project SOW states: The proposed methodology for this performance evaluation does not intend to document or assess broader accomplishments and impacts that may have been achieved by ILD over longer time periods. The intended focus is the outcomes and impact (both positive and negative) to date of the current grant. If the evaluation team determines a means to more rigorously quantify impact within the time and budget allotted for this performance evaluation, the evaluation team is encouraged to bring this to the attention of the USAID Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR). The evaluation team was initially requested to consider measures of outcomes and whether detailed data were available for the following: • Building awareness for legal empowerment and social inclusion—for example, existing attitudinal surveys of the poor in countries where ILD has been active—to gauge awareness of legal channels available to them, preferably drawn from time series or panel datasets; or statistics on the use of legal channels, disaggregated by poverty status and gender, and mapped over an appropriate period of time • Institutionalizing land reform to empower the poor and women in client countries—for example, statistics on possession of land-tenure rights or land titles, disaggregated by poverty status and gender, and mapped over an appropriate period of time, showing results of any reform programs associated with the current grant • Strengthening ILD’s operational platform and ensuring a sustainable expansion—for example, data on the evolution of ILD’s diversity of financial support, by donor and amount of support • Analyzing the correlation between the provision of ILD services to supported countries and corresponding local public debate on reform and reform implementation • Finding evidence of demand by reforming countries for ILD involvement in reform implementation and the nature of ILD involvement sought (including how such involvement was funded)29 However, conducting a rigorous performance evaluation as requested would require availability of consistent performance indicators across projects and ILD collection of statistical data on trends across programs that would inform the evaluation. Through discussions between the LEAP team and USAID, and review of the initial documentation provided, the LEAP team 29 SOW for Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia activities, p. 10. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 30 identified large variations in the following, which would make it challenging to conduct a quantitative impact evaluation of ILD’s work: • Varying start dates of project activities • Varying types of project activities (e.g., while one program may focus on legal empowerment, another may focus on land rights or market access) • The lack of a systematized approach to selecting beneficiaries • Varied goals and targets, even if the programs claim generally to perform similar activities • The ability to isolate ILD’s contribution to any changes that are identified statistically These differences between projects were confirmed during the site visit to Peru and discussions held with ILD team members. The LEAP team found the following: • Although ILD has rich data on its work that are intended for communication purposes, measurable data on performance indicators are not clearly defined and were not available. • Given that ILD’s influence on any country during the current grant did not lead to implemented reforms30 (except in Tanzania, where reforms and implementation are being undertaken by the local entity), its influence can only be assessed through changing public and elite opinion, which is difficult to measure and is subject to many influences, leading to great difficulties when trying to isolate ILD’s effect from that of other entities. • Further, given that ILD’s efforts in any particular country have been generally sporadic (media articles, conferences in many different countries) followed by a long period of hiatus of efforts, it is impossible to quantify their results. Consequently, the LEAP team has employed a qualitative approach to conducting the evaluation that would inform USAID of ILD’s work and make recommendations concerning any program improvements. Using observations, comprehensive verifications of information received, literature analyses, in-depth interviews, and small-group discussions, the qualitative research evaluation helps identify the strengths and weaknesses of the program and indicates where improvements may be made in its outputs and outcomes. This research methodology helps determine whether stakeholders and beneficiaries understood ILD’s methodology, which would help ensure buy-in of its “products,” and also assesses how stakeholders and beneficiaries benefited from ILD interventions. The interviews and group discussions were set up to address coverage and clarity of ILD’s message, including suggestions for improvements. The LEAP team utilized different data-verification methods, including 30 Note that the evaluation team was not permitted to visit the Middle East and North Africa region at the request of USAID. Significant activities are reportedly taking place in this region, but the team was unable to measure or assess them. Note, however, that the team relied on documentation provided by ILD to evaluate work conducted in all areas that were not visited within the evaluation period (up to August 2013). USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 31 triangulation. Triangulation was used as a way of verifying the information gathered through the various data-collection methods.31,32 Although most information was analyzed using a qualitative methodology, the team endeavored to provide in-depth information to USAID by also analyzing data quantitatively as much as possible. The LEAP team reviewed and analyzed the funding requirements of ILD and documented numerically the outputs across countries and within various years of ILD’s work in response to USAID deliverables. The qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis were conducted in a symbiotic manner, so the results of one type of analysis were used to inform the other. Data Verification Upon completion of the site visit to Peru to obtain ILD’s program documentation and interview program beneficiaries and implementers, the LEAP team began a process of verification of documentation received and developed an initial evaluation report to enable USAID to address the information gathered up to that point, define the evaluation methodology based on the data available, and identify gaps in the data received. Once the initial report was submitted and discussions were held with USAID, it was agreed that additional site visits to verify the data received would be useful, as would additional research to fill in data gaps. Data verification is a method used to determine the accuracy of data reported, and the LEAP team used this method to detect the accuracy and inconsistencies of data received through the desk review for ILD program evaluation. For the duration of the evaluation, data received were carefully collated, reviewed continuously, summarized, and synthesized. The LEAP team utilized different data-verification methods, including proofreading and triangulation. Proofreading data involved having team members conduct checks across different data sources but also check the data entered into the report against the original document. Triangulation meant collecting the same type of information, but from different sources and using different methods. Data verification was done through document searches via the Internet using various search engines (Google, Google Scholar, LexisNexis, and EBSCOhost) to check the accuracy of information obtained. This process helped fill gaps that were identified and was crucial in updating data that ILD reported. In addition to the review of documentation, verification was also done through key-informant interviews with stakeholders and subject￾matter experts (SMEs) and small discussion groups (beneficiaries) as well as observations of programs (visits to formalization entities) during site visits. This systematic approach helped identify trends and establish the authenticity, validity, and reliability of the findings reported. 31 Triangulation involves using various data sources in an attempt to validate the information being collected during the qualitative evaluation to help produce understanding. Triangulation also gives the evaluation team the opportunity to ensure that the account of the situation being presented in the project report is rich, robust, comprehensive, and well developed. 32 Qualitative research guidelines project (http://www.qualres.org/HomeGuid-3868.html). USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 32 Subsequent Site Visits: Nigeria and Tanzania The team conducted two additional site visits as a result of discussions with USAID and agreement on the need to further verify ILD’s work by observing its processes in countries beyond Peru. The team first visited Nigeria (July 14–20, 2013), where the Lagos governor contracted ILD to conduct a pre-diagnosis and diagnosis study of the city’s extralegal system. The team met with the local researchers who were trained by ILD to collect data that will be used to map out the extralegal climate in Lagos to understand how these local stakeholders were equipped to conduct the research. The team also met with the Lagos governor’s representative and toured some of the informal areas in Lagos. The LEAP team also visited Tanzania (August 19–25, 2013), where a local entity that was set up with ILD’s help is implementing reform proposals and formalization processes. At this stage, it is acting independently of ILD. The aim of this visit was to assess the effectiveness of ILD’s training of local staff and identify whether the local entity and its staff are conducting implementation in a manner that follows ILD’s philosophy. The two additional site visits were essential to the evaluation, because they allowed the LEAP team to obtain a firsthand view of how ILD trains local staff and how its processes are interpreted. Stakeholders interviewed in Nigeria and Tanzania are provided in Appendix 8. Limitations to the Evaluation This evaluation, although comprehensive, did have some limitations: • As mentioned previously, a lack of consistent performance data on ILD activities meant that the team relied on more qualitative methods to review the impact of ILD. This means that the findings in this report, although comprehensive and based on a large amount of information, do not reach a level of precision that would allow them to pass a rigorous test of statistical validity. Recommendations for improvement in this area are provided in subsequent sections. • Establishing impact as requested by USAID was difficult for this study, particularly because it takes several years to reach a significant level of impact for these kinds of programs. It is also virtually impossible to isolate ILD’s role separately from those of other organizations/institutions and/or national reforms and agendas that have been conducting similar programs. • The grant agreement, as mentioned previously, focuses on the pre-stage (awareness building) and Stage 1 (pre-diagnosis and training) components of ILD’s methodology. However, although these two steps are essential to setting the stage for promoting legal empowerment, the majority of impact is most evident during the implementation phases, when countries develop regulations and conduct activities to promote legal USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 33 empowerment, such as titling and making changes to business registration. It was difficult for the LEAP team to review ILD’s work in isolation as stipulated by this grant, and so members included information on the implementation phase as appropriate to provide a fuller picture of ILD’s work. The evaluation also sought to fill this informational gap via its desk review and by seeking to establish whether and to what extent ILD’s previous and longer-term engagements with various countries had affected LEP. • The LEAP team only visited two countries within which ILD has (or is) currently working (Nigeria and Tanzania). At USAID’s request, the LEAP team did not visit the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, where it is reported that activities are underway. However, findings provided within this evaluation for countries not visited were based on documentation provided by ILD and several discussions that were held during the evaluation process to verify activity of the institution. It is also important to note that some of the grant-agreement requirements are quite ambitious. For instance, moving through the stages in conflict areas could be challenging. Also, quantifying the number of people who have become change agents is almost impossible without an ongoing social-media study. The evaluation team, however, is bound by the requirements of the evaluation, which are to respond to ILD’s ability to progress through the grant’s requirements, and therefore has addressed them as directly as possible. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 34 III. EVALUATION FINDINGS A review by the evaluation team of ILD’s performance during the grant period (2009–2013) produced several findings. The review and findings are categorized by the four main strategic objectives of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) grant agreement with Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD; refer to Appendix 3 for the performance monitoring and evaluation plan in the USAID and ILD grant agreement). The main areas within the agreement are as follows: • Generating more knowledge and new products for global action • Building awareness for legal empowerment and social inclusion • Transforming expressed demand for ILD’s services into actual projects, especially as reflected in ILD’s ability to raise matching grants to fund this aspect of its activities • Strengthening ILD’s products, services, and operational platform to ensure sustainable expansion The findings are detailed subsequently and categorized within each strategic objective, by year and by country of implementation. The evaluation team has provided the findings in a synthesized and a detailed manner to address, as specifically as possible, USAID’s expectations for the evaluation. As requested, as much as possible, results from quantitative analyses are provided to complement the qualitative discussion. The findings from this study appear below. Detailed Findings Categorized Within USAID Grant Agreement Performance Indicators This section provides detailed findings of ILD’s work as categorized by the USAID strategic objectives outlined in the ILD agreement and evaluation statement of work (SOW). The findings stem primarily from the review of ILD work plans, quarterly and annual reports, and publications; an assessment of ILD’s influence through analytical literature review and media coverage; follow-up questions asked of ILD staff during and after the site visit to Peru; and information gathered during site visits to Nigeria and Tanzania. The team spent a significant amount of time verifying the information provided to ensure accuracy through telephone calls with stakeholders and data reviews. Strategic Objective 1: Building Awareness For Legal Empowerment And Social Inclusion The objective of the awareness-building and political-engagement phase is to publicize and promote ILD’s mission and its legal-empowerment and institutional-reform program to heads of state/governments of developing countries, international organizations, academic institutions, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), donor groups, organizations with an intent to fulfill “corporate-social responsibility,” and any other agencies or organizations committed to development, poverty reduction, or the legal reforms necessary to assist struggling economies USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 35 build inclusive, sustainable market economies under the rule of law.33 This phase comprises ILD’s efforts to inform and educate leaders and key decision makers about how ILD’s reform ideas can help a developing country make the transition to an inclusive market economy. Additionally, ILD trains local teams in understanding its framework and methodologies for the implementation of legal-empowerment activities. The teams trained are expected to be capable of implementing diagnostic studies to identify legal barriers, assess the importance of the informal sector, and estimate the amount of “dead capital” that might be released by formalization of property. The Learning, Evaluation, and Analysis Project (LEAP) team’s review is categorized within the following requirements of the USAID grant agreement: • Major presentations delivered to government officials and donor agencies during the grant period • Workshops and training on legal empowerment of the poor (and gender) for the purpose of building in-country talent and constituents • Development of new client and partner strategies in response to changing global conditions In addition to the activities specifically categorized within the above requirements, ILD also identified other activities that contributed to building awareness, such as conducting research, media-outreach campaigns, and meetings that contributed to awareness building. Documentation of these is provided by year and country of implementation. The LEAP team then provided an analysis leading to summary findings on the activities conducted to build awareness. Result 1: Delivering presentations to heads of state, ministers, public officials, corporate sponsors, and leadership of donor agencies and philanthropic organizations The team found that ILD was involved in a total of 9034 conferences, forums, seminars, and presentations to government officials and donor agencies during the grant period (see Appendix 4 for the complete list). These involvements included attending as well as participating by delivering presentations at the various events. If compared by year, 2010 was its most active, with ILD involved in 31 events across 13 countries. Of the 90 ILD involvements listed, 27 were identified as major presentations delivered to government officials and donor agencies during the course of the grant period. From the list of major presentations, 2012 was the most active year, with a total of 12 major presentations delivered to government officials and donor agencies across eight countries. 33 Institute for Liberty and Democracy Work Plan 2010. 34 Information obtained from review of ILD quarterly reports 2009–2012 and web-based searches. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 36 The exhibit below provides the public-engagement activities conducted by ILD during the grant period. Exhibit 2. Overall ILD public engagement (including major presentations to governments and other donor agencies) Grant year Overall involvement Major presentations to government and donor organizations 10 2 31 7 23 3 23 12 3 3 90 27 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Result 2: Workshops and training sessions on legal empowerment of the poor (and women) for the purpose of building in-country talent and constituencies ILD conducted 12 training workshops as part of its pre-diagnosis activities during the grant period in 5 of the 29 countries it worked with (Libya, Iraq, Colombia, Peru, and Nigeria). a. Stage 1—Training and Team Building (including Pre-diagnosis) Training and team-building efforts are aimed at building strategic links with top political authorities and other respected leaders to support program efforts. ILD also carries out some training with potential clients during the awareness-building stage. Pre-diagnosis is included in this phase, which is an awareness-building process in which a small team from ILD/Peru undertakes a brief 2- or 3-week in-country analysis of the informal economy and provides the findings to the government and appropriate officials. Pre-diagnosis usually includes quantitative estimates of the relative importance of the informal and formal sectors and the amount of dead capital in the country. Exhibit 3, below, details ILD’s training sessions and workshops offered during the grant period, providing the type of training, duration, audience, and location. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 37 Exhibit 3. ILD training sessions and workshops offered during the grant period Grant year Participating Duration Location Intended audience Training/workshop country 2009 Libya35 4 days December 7–10, 2009 Lima, Peru High-level members of the Libyan government Strategic training session Iraq36 3 days Cairo Government officials from Iraq and private-sector leaders 3-day workshop 2010 Libya37 12 days August 8–19, 2010 Lima, Peru Local technician teams of the Libya Project [Classroom] Training courses 2011 Colombia38,39 1 day September 13, 2011 Lima, Peru Government officials from Columbia and Columbian Central Bank officials and land agencies Strategic training sessions regarding the Colombian Land Formalization Program 3 days November 16–18, 2011 Lima, Peru General director and the counselor of the Land Formalization Program Strategic training sessions in Colombia 2012 Peru40 3 days October 11–13, 2012 Iquitos, Peru Peruvian indigenous women leaders in Amazon Basin Capacity-development workshops 3 days November 26–28, 2012 Cusco, Peru Peruvian indigenous women leaders in Peruvian Andes Capacity-development workshop 2013 Nigeria 12 days February 11–22, 2013 Lagos, Nigeria 17 LASG team members and 8 ILD team members LASG/ILD Informal Sector Reform Program: Training courses for local technician teams in Nigeria 1 day April 29, 2013 Local legal team and project manager and 4 ILD members LASG/ILD Informal Sector Reform Program: Training courses for local technician teams in Nigeria 1 day May 20, 2013 Local legal team and project manager and 4 ILD members LASG/ILD Informal Sector Reform Program: Training courses for local technician teams in Nigeria 35 2009 Fourth Quarterly Report, p. 3. 36 2009 First and Second Quarterly Report, p. 5. 37 2011 Work Plan, p. 18. 38 2011 Fourth Quarterly Report, p. 9. 39 2011 Third Quarterly Report, pp. 7–8. 40 2012 Third Quarterly Report, pp. 5–9. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 38 Grant year Participating Duration Location Intended audience Training/workshop country 1 day May 31, 2013 Local legal team and project manager and 4 ILD members LASG/ILD Informal Sector Reform Program: Training courses for local technician teams in Nigeria 1 day June 26, 2013 Local legal team and project manager and 4 ILD members LASG/ILD Informal Sector Reform Program: Training courses for local technician teams in Nigeria USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 39 Result 3: Development of new client and partner strategies in response to changing global and regional conditions Based on information provided by ILD and verification interviews conducted by the LEAP team, during this grant period, ILD engaged in and maintained relationships with 10 organizations and institutions working in international development in an effort to develop new client and partner strategies in response to changing global and regional conditions. ILD engaged with several international organizations during this grant period. The LEAP team conducted follow-up interviews with ILD points of contact at these institutions to confirm their engagement with ILD. The team confirmed partnerships with all the institutions listed below except with the Union Tunisienne de l’Industrie, Commerce et l’Artissanat (UTICA) and the World Bank, which did not respond to the request for interview. • The Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), part of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. ILD has worked with CIPE since 2009. In 2009 and 2012, respectively, CIPE supported ILD’s Avatar project and Peruvian Amazon and Andes regions indigenous women leaders’ training on the importance of business rights and property formalization. CIPE also supported ILD’s work on the Arab Spring in 2012–2013. • The Tunisian Private Business Organization “Union Tunisienne de l’Industrie, Commerce et l’Artissanat” (UTICA). UTICA became interested in ILD’s work in 2011 and helped promote it within the Tunisian government. Together with ILD, UTICA also launched a book reporting ILD’s findings on Tunisia’s informal sector and proposals for reform—L’economie informelle Comment y remedier. Una oportunié pour la Tunisie—at a conference in Tunisia in December 2011. • Cercle d’Action et Reflexion de l’Enterprise (CARE). ILD has maintained a partnership in Algeria with CARE since approaching them in 2005. In March 2012, CARE organized a conference in Algiers for more than 500 people to address the importance of bringing the informal sector into the market economy to foster economic development and social peace in Algeria. This work, and efforts with other organizations in the region, resulted in a five-country regional declaration in the spring of 2013 suggesting a regional inclusive entrepreneurship action plan. • The LANDESA Rural Development Institute. LANDESA and ILD held private meetings and interactions with the purpose of talking about some possible collaboration. • The Omidyar Network Fund, Inc. In November 24, 2009, ILD signed an initial grant agreement with this organization to engage in a strategy project with McKinsey to establish ILD’s mission, vision, strategy, and gaps in executing the strategy. A second agreement extending the original funding was signed on April 15, 2010. After this engagement, on February 8, 2011, ILD signed a third grant agreement with the Omidyar USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 40 Network Fund, Inc., to support ILD’s educational and charitable research and activities regarding property rights throughout the world, especially for poor and disadvantaged groups. The contract term was 2 years and later extended by an amendment up to September 30, 2014, due to unavoidable delays as a consequence of political events in the countries in which ILD was working. ILD is still executing the grant agreement, which is focused on the dissemination of ideas and not on the implementation process. • World Bank—Peru. In 2012, ILD received an invitation from the Peruvian Vice Ministry of Housing and Urban Development and the World Bank to participate in the Land Governance Assessment Framework (LGAF) Program, contributing its expertise to panels that aimed to score Peru—in a regional context—on the quality of its registry/cadaster and land-tenure institutions. • World Bank—Washington, D.C. ILD’s methodology for identifying and quantifying obstacles to doing business in developing countries was an inspiration for the World Bank’s popular “Doing Business” program, which rates the business environment across 185 economies. In December 2012, ILD was invited to a conference in Washington, D.C., to talk about its “Doing Business” approach and how its methodology might expand and eventually enhance the World Bank’s “Doing Business” program. • United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). UNDP explored the possibility of working with ILD and declared an interest in finding joint projects in India, Tanzania, Uganda, Haiti, and/or Peru. However, no joint project has yet come to fruition. • Harvard University—Law and International Development Society (LIDS). ILD maintains a partnership with the LIDS program to carry out research through semester￾long projects on the intersection of law and development. Since 2011, LIDS has assisted ILD in researching and writing two reports: “Government Policies for Adjudicating Arable Land: A Comparative Analysis in Five Developing Countries (Sudan, Brazil, Cambodia, Mozambique, Ethiopia)” and “Strengthening Institutional and Legal Frameworks: Conflict Over Water Use Rights (Mongolia, Nigeria, and India).” LIDS will planned to work with ILD in the fall of 2013. • Colorado State University (CSU), College of Business. ILD partnered with CSU’s Masters of Business Administration (MBA) program in an exchange program where CSU hosted ILD senior staff at its campus for lectures and workshops and CSU executive MBA students visited ILD offices in Lima for lectures and on-site project observations. Additionally, a student team conducted research during the summer. If suitable outside funding can be found, this partnership will continue. • The Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) Geographic Information System (GIS) Mapping. ILD and this group had several meetings with the purpose of working together to incorporate ESRI’s expertise in mapping for use in the implementation of ILD’s methodology in calculating extralegality within country projects. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 41 - Other Awareness-Building Activities ILD conducted other activities that expanded on its work to build awareness for legal empowerment and social inclusion that did not fit directly within the three specified results for this strategic objective. Because these tasks contributed to the overall goal of promoting awareness of legal empowerment through training and awareness, the LEAP team has provided highlights of the activities conducted during this grant period. This information is organized by year and country to better represent the work that was implemented. Information gathered revealed that ILD initiated awareness-building and pre-diagnostic activities within 11 of the 29 countries of involvement during the grant period. Detailed information regarding activities within these 11 countries was not readily available, because there was no uniform timeline for awareness building and pre-diagnosis across the 11 countries. A significant amount of work on awareness building was done in Peru, but not as much in the other countries in which awareness building and pre-diagnosis were initiated during the grant period. Of the 11 countries, the LEAP team received documentation from ILD on only 2 countries—Nigeria and Tunisia—and general information on the MENA region, as shown in exhibit 4, below. Exhibit 4. Awareness and pre-diagnosis during grant period (2009–2013) Country Awareness Pre diagnosis (MM/YY) Canary Islands 04/2009 Mali 04/2009 Niger 04/2009 Senegal 04/2009 Libya 09/2009 Nigeria 12/2009 Cape Verde 04/2010 Timor-Leste 09/2010 Mongolia 04/2011 Azerbaijan 09/2011 Algeria 04/2012 Tunisia 11/2012 India 04/2013 USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 42 Strategic Objective 2: Institutionalizing Legal Empowerment Of The Poor (And Women) In Client Countries The LEAP team’s review of this strategic objective was categorized within the respective results as detailed below. Result 1: Raising partner countries’ awareness of issues related to extralegality in land ownership and business operations and motivating their interest in moving through Stages 1 and 2 (training/team building and diagnosis) d. Country cases where, during the grant period, ILD has championed improved policies and facilitated movement from Stage 1 to Stage 2 The LEAP team identified only one country within the grant period where ILD facilitated movement from Stage 1 to Stage 2: Nigeria (Lagos State). An 8-week pre-diagnosis project was conducted in Nigeria for the Lagos State, at its request. Upon completion of the pre￾diagnosis, training was provided to an established interim commission consisting of Nigerian nationals. This project is currently in the diagnosis phase. During the grant period, ILD initiated awareness-building and pre-diagnosis activities within 11 of the 29 countries of involvement. Within the grant period, pre-diagnosis was carried out in four countries during 2009, two countries each year from 2010 through 2012, and one country in 2013. However, during the grant period, Nigeria was the only country where ILD was able to successfully facilitate movement to Stage 2—Diagnosis. The Lagos State Government began a comprehensive reform process in March 2013, with the intention of formalizing approximately 90 percent of assets that were currently in the state’s extralegal sector. ILD was hired to facilitate this process. With the approval of the Lagos State government, ILD developed a Local Reform Design Team (LRDT) and together undertook data collection for the diagnosis stage to conduct the following activities: • Understanding the nature of the extralegal economy • Delineating typologies of extralegality • Defining causes of extralegality • Enumerating procedures that have to be undertaken by any business that wants to conduct its affairs within the legal sector • Enumerating procedures that have to be undertaken by any owner of property who wants that property to be fully legal • Measuring the amount of dead capital The Lagos State diagnosis stage is at the end of data collection with analysis in full progress to produce a diagnosis report due to the Lagos State government at the end of September 2013. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 43 - Exhibit 5, below, provides information on countries that moved from Stage 1 to Stage 2 during this grant period. Exhibit 5. ILD-facilitated country cases with movement from Stage 1 to Stage 2 during the grant period (2009–2013) Country Awareness Pre diagnosis (MM/YY) Diagnosis (MM/YY) Senegal 04/2009 Mali 04/2009 Niger 04/2009 Nigeria 12/2009 In progress 09/2013 Cape Verde 04/2010 Timor-Leste 09/2010 Mongolia 04/2011 Azerbaijan 09/2011 Algeria 04/2012 Tunisia 11/2012 India 04/2013 e. Effect awareness building has on increasing the appetite for legal-empowerment reform work, regardless of whether ILD works past this awareness-building stage ILD has been involved in multiple conferences, and mentions of the organization and its leader, Hernando de Soto, have often appeared in written media, film production, television, and seminars (as provided within Strategic Objective 1 findings). ILD also continues to position the legal-empowerment rhetoric in the development agenda of international organizations, in discussions about the development of country policies, and in the general deliberations of policymakers and government authorities. The evaluation team found that pre-diagnosis in specific countries led to awareness building in other countries: Pre-diagnosis in Tunisia (2012) effectively served as a tool for building awareness in other countries of the region, such as Algeria (2012). Pre-diagnosis in Senegal (2009), Mali (2009), and Niger (2009) prompted work to begin in Cape Verde (2010). Pre￾diagnosis and diagnosis work currently underway in Lagos State, Nigeria, has led to interest in the Delta State, and ILD is working with its local partner to advocate for working there as well. During the grant period, the most noticeable influence of awareness building on increasing the appetite for legal empowerment can be seen within ILD’s home country of Peru, through its research and publications on the Avatar Myths, and in the Middle East and North Africa USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 44 (MENA) region, through work conducted on the Arab Spring. Throughout these areas, the message regarding the importance of legal inclusion of the extralegal and poor reached not only political figures but also business communities and the media. Similarly, in 2009, ILD was involved in advanced pre-diagnosis in Cape Verde. This involved a deeper assessment of the country’s extralegal economy and legal obstacles, more so than what would have been captured in the typical pre-diagnosis stage. It was inspired by work done in Mali and Senegal. Finally, by conducting awareness building in Lagos, ILD not only has begun working with this state, but also has gained the attention of the Delta State and is working on formally securing work there. f. How ILD’s ideas have influenced governments in terms of policy change and the development agenda in international organizations During the grant period, evidence shows that ILD’s work influenced governments in some countries, including Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, India, Mongolia, and Nigeria. Evidence suggests that ILD was able to convince government officials in these countries to accept its methodology and promote change. However, the changes promoted by ILD were not always effected for a variety of reasons, including lack of major buy-in or political turnover. ILD’s work has also similarly influenced several international donor organizations and government agencies, including the United Nations, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the United Kingdom Department for International Development, and the U.S. Department of State. ILD’s work has influenced governments and international organizations. ILD’s work at the international level has facilitated change in national leaders’ perception of property and business practices across several countries, including Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, India, Mongolia, and Nigeria. For example, within Nigeria, the Lagos State government began a comprehensive reform process in March 2013, with the intention of formalizing approximately 90 percent of assets that were currently locked in the state’s informal sector as a result of its interactions with ILD. The Tanzanian government accepted the reform proposals instituted by ILD and Mpango wa Kurasimisha Rasilimali na Biashara za Wanyonge Tanzania (MKURABITA) and continues to conduct implementation following the training and awareness building ILD began in 2004. The implementation stage is now underway, with the following activities and reforms being incorporated into Tanzanian law: Between 2006 and 2008, ILD worked with MKURABITA to create a development communication strategy to assist with the implementation of the reform proposals. MKURABITA continues to implement this strategy and other methods to facilitate engagement and develop influence over the Tanzanian government. Since then, to boost the implementation of reform proposals, MKURABITA formed taskforce teams that worked with policymakers to promote the movement of reform proposals into law. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 45 Through the work of the taskforce, the following reforms have been incorporated into Tanzanian law: • The Business Laws (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act of 2011 has been enacted. (The act amends the Companies Act of 2002 to incorporate the Limited Liability Single Shareholding Company; formal implementation will begin once publicized in the Government Gazette.) • In Zanzibar, five business-reform proposals have been implemented, including the o establishment of commercial courts; o act for security of moveable properties; o decentralization of powers of the registrar general and the establishment of district registrars; o establishment of a one-stop center for business licensing; and o establishment of new forms of business, including a limited liability single shareholder company (LLSSC). • Property reforms in Tanzania have been submitted to the chief parliamentary draftsman. 41 • In Zanzibar, property reforms are moving very slowly due to difficulty in accepting changes and the need to maintain the status quo.42 ILD’s influence in the development agenda of international organizations included the following: • United Nations (UN) General Assembly. In 2010, the UN General Assembly endorsed the recommendations of the Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor (CLEP), co-chaired by former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Hernando de Soto, based on ILD’s vision reported in the “Making the Law Work for Everyone” report. • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). During its 50th anniversary celebration, OECD invited ILD to present findings on it Arab Spring and Avatar Research studies. The presentation of findings occurred on July 20–21, 2011, at the 2011 Tidewater OECD Conference for high-level representatives from the Development Assistance Committee (DAC). These proposals were also featured in the 50th-anniversary edition of the OECD Development Report 2011. • UK Prime Minister. ILD advised Prime Minister David Cameron on his review of the agenda of the millennium development goals, introducing property rights, during a meeting on May 1, 2012. • U.S. Department of State. ILD has been working on a collaboration strategy with the assistant secretary of the Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs in Tunisia and other MENA countries. 41 Data received from MKURABITA during the Tanzania site visit. 42 Ibid. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 46 • Organization of American States (OAS). In 2010, OAS and the Clinton Global Initiative worked with ILD (and other organizations) in implementing legal￾empowerment activities aimed at rebuilding Haiti after an earthquake. Result 2: Increasing partner countries’ institutional capacity to reach Stage 3 (institutional reform), whether through ILD itself, through another implementer, or through the country’s own efforts Within this grant period, ILD has not entered into the implementation stage for any of its country projects. However, Tanzania, one of the countries where ILD conducted pre￾implementation activities and developed and trained a local entity, has begun reform and formalization implementation processes on its own. Lack of finances and political turnover are the reasons cited for lack of implementation. The LEAP team noted an apparent weakness in ILD’s ability to transition from the initial stages of country involvement to implementation. As previously mentioned, ILD has faced challenges with moving countries from the pre￾implementation stages to reform and implementation. When ILD was questioned about the reasons for these challenges, the LEAP team was informed that this failure was not due to a lack of interest from host nations but primarily due to financial constraints (acquiring funding from other sources) and political turnover. ILD has not been successful in collaborating with its local partners in a way that enables them to secure funding for the type of work for which ILD has trained them. Additionally, ILD’s access to the political leadership in a country often depends upon a personal relationship between Hernando de Soto and a top political leader (where the relationship has often come about because a top political leader, aware of de Soto’s reputation and work, has asked to meet him). Because the pre-reform stages of ILD’s work require a significant amount of time and reform requires so much on-the-ground implementation effort, ILD often finds itself in a situation where its initial contact in the leadership has left office before reform can be accomplished, its contact is still interested in conducting the reforms but does not have enough political power to bring them about, or its contact has lost interest in implementing reforms. These scenarios can happen even when ILD’s contacts are within the very highest political circles. However, Tanzania provides a case study where the local property and business formalization entity created by ILD has moved from reform design to reform and implementation. When MKURABITA43 was asked how it managed to move from pre-implementation to reform and 43 MKURABITA was created in 2004 once ILD started conducting pre-diagnosis in Tanzania (funded by the Norwegian government). The LRDT trained by ILD to assist in pre-diagnosis and diagnosis began operations of MKURABITA on its own in 2007, when it re-designed the reform proposals and started internal deliberations with the Tanzanian government on reform and subsequent implementation (since 2008 to present). ILD maintains contact with MKURABITA but does not work with it officially due to lack of funding. MKURABITA is conducting Stages 2 and 3 of ILD’s methodology on its own with Tanzanian USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 47 implementation, it indicated that although ILD had approached a previous government, Tanzanian institutions are stable, and therefore the agreed-upon processes were continued after political turnover. Further, prior to officially concluding their partnership, MKURABITA and ILD discussed the need to implement “front-runners,” pilot programs in small areas to test the implementation process, and to use the findings within one area as evidence-based research to convince policymakers to move forward with and support reform and implementation. However, approval of reforms in parliament has taken 5 years, despite being initially expected to take 1 year. Similarly, MKURABITA mentioned lack of funding as a reason why its formalization process has not reached its targeted goals. The system of conducting pilot phases of formalization is potentially a good practice for other countries. MKURABITA has also implemented several other innovative processes during implementation, such as training and involving survey assistants to reduce cost; bringing all stakeholders (land owners, banks, and business-name registration and tax-registration officials, among others) to land-titling capacity￾building events; and involving land owners in the discussion on urban planning to effect sustainable changes to land-ownership and titling processes. b. Effects that team-building, training, and diagnostic studies have on increasing countries’ capabilities to undertake legal-empowerment reform work, noting any significant trends and observations (donor support, local support, etc.) The most significant finding to support this result stems from the work that ILD conducted in Tanzania, on which ILD’s project has had a very important presence, continuance, and expansion, thus demonstrating ILD’s capability to undertake legal-empowerment reform work. No evidence supported ILD’s influence to this extent in any other country. MKURABITA continues to make strides in property and business formalization in Tanzania. Several communities have received assistance to implement rural, urban, and business formalization, as verified by two newspaper reports: As of April 2012, several district councils had benefited from and made use of the Property and Business Formalization Programme, popularly known by its Kiswahili acronym MKURABITA, which ILD facilitated. These include Makete, Njombe, Nachingwea, Wete, Serengeti, Musoma Rural, Moshi Rural, Kasulu, Muleba, Sikonge, Kigoma Rural, Singida Rural, Manyoni, Mvomero, Masasi, Mbarali, Mbinga, Meru, Mwanga, Moshi Rural, Mpanda, Sumbawanga, Mkuranga, Kahama, Ludewa, Bagamoyo, and Handeni. Very recently, “[while] [s]peaking during the handing-over ceremony of customary title deeds to tea farmers of Mufindi, Njombe and Rungwe, the Mbeya Regional Commissioner, Mr. Abbas Kandoro, said that Tanzanians should use MKURABITA to winch out of poverty.”44 government funding. MKURABITA is included in this report although not funded by USAID during the grant period because it provides a success story for an area where ILD’s awareness-building and training activities have led to implementation by the local entity. 44 Tanzania Daily News (http://in2eastafrica.net/utilize-mkurabita-opportunities-tanzanians-urged). USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 48 Similarly, in August 2013, the Guardian newspaper in Tanzania reported that MKURABITA was set to support farmers in the Lindi Region to acquire arable land for sesame growing: “Sesame growers in Somanga, Kilwa Masoko and Lindi rural area would soon start to benefit from what they grow after the Business and Property Formalisation Programme (MKURABITA) started supporting them to get enough land for production and export of the crop. This was revealed on Tuesday by Chairperson of the Amsha Institute for Rural Entrepreneurs East Africa Biubwa Maingo at the launch of four agri-business centres at Miumbu and Ruchemi villages in Lindi and Kilwa Masoko districts to support small-scale farmers with loan facilities, training and agricultural inputs. She said MKURABITA has agreed to support farmers in those villages after identifying the potentially huge market for the crop.”45 Through this effort, MKURABITA has joined forces with the local government, through the district council, to identify arable lands that could be sold to the farmers. In addition, the International Business and Trade Tanzania Initiative (IBUTTI) has also agreed to identify potential markets for these farmers. The efforts made here demonstrate an innovative approach to improving the lives of farmers through formalizing their access to land. Further the collaboration between MKURABITA, the local government, and the private sector provides a good example for how formalization could be most effective to the extralegal sector and, in this case, local farmers. Multiple effects could be gained from this effort, including enhancing agricultural development, promoting food security, and ultimately increasing economic growth through access to international markets. Result 3: Developing strategies with partner countries to enhance their capacity to implement reforms The LEAP team found evidence that ILD has developed strategies with partner countries to enhance its capacity to implement reforms in three countries where work was conducted — namely, Tanzania, Nigeria, and Libya. ILD has worked to build local capacity within countries where it operates; for instance, local capacity building was instituted in Libya, Tanzania, and Nigeria. A brief description of ILD’s work in building local teams of home-grown technical experts is outlined below. ILD conducted capacity-development activities in Tanzania through the creation of an LRDT, which led to the creation of MKURABITA, after conducting pre-stage and Stage 1 activities under a previous grant in 2007. The LRDT continues to assume responsibility for preparing reform programs, which included receiving approval for the Business Law Amendments in 2012 as well as presenting a proposal to the National Assembly. Through the creation of MKURABITA, the government of Tanzania agreed to begin the reform and formalization 45 http://www.ippmedia.com/frontend/index.php?l=58389. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 49 implementation phase in 2008, which is currently underway and has had some achievements, as described previously in this report. In 2010, ILD conducted a 2-week training session for Libyan professionals regarding ILD’s approach to formalizing business and property rights. Thereafter, an ILD team spent a month in Tripoli, Libya, to train a local Libyan state agency, which continues to work with the Economic Development Board of the Libyan Government. ILD also established an LRDT in Lagos State, Nigeria, during the pre-diagnosis phase and conducted capacity development with this entity comprising government and private-sector practitioners. The LRDT is instrumental in conducting the research for developing the diagnosis report, and the hope is that it will be the team to spearhead reform and implementation processes. During the site visit in Peru, the LEAP team noted that ILD has limited interactions with the country’s universities and research communities. Through interviews with recognized research institutions in Peru, and confirmation by ILD, it became evident that ILD has not made an effort to join the Peruvian research community, which would be useful in building local capacity. Although the argument could be made that ILD is local, it is important that local capacity be built in other institutions and regions to promote continued implementation processes. During interviews with the Iquitos regional government, it was evident that land titling was not a major priority and that the region did not have the capacity to effectively continue this process. This situation might not have been the case had local partners been available to engage with the regional government and maintain the work that ILD had previously started. Lastly, ILD does not avail itself to interns at its office on a project basis. Providing internships to university-level students or recent graduates would be another way to bring ILD’s work to the larger community. Women’s Empowerment in Property and Business Rights ILD work on women’s empowerment programs for this grant period began with several activities in 2011. In 2012, a major outreach and training of indigenous Peruvian women in the Amazon area also took place. Within this strategic objective is the requirement that ILD conduct legal-empowerment activities with representative constituencies of women. The activities evidenced during the grant period are listed below: • ILD signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with India’s Self-Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) in February 2011, which included a research study on the situation of Indian indigenous women and an investigation of the legal empowerment of women in countries with Islamic traditions. SEWA and ILD engaged in two workshops in May and October 2011, where women leaders discussed the main challenges and most USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 50 pressing needs of Indian women. ILD developed a concept note based on the findings from these workshops.46 • Between November and December 2012, ILD performed a 3-week preliminary diagnosis of the extralegal economy in West Bengal, India. Pre-diagnosis of extralegality within the Indian state was conducted in partnership with SEWA. The preliminary assessment of extralegality was focused on o identifying the legal obstacles preventing women from gaining access to land and doing business; o identifying the extralegal practices that women resort to in order to protect their assets and conduct business within the discriminatory legal environment; o identifying the failures of the legal system that explain the existence and characteristics of the extralegal economy; o estimating the citizens’ costs when operating in both legal and extralegal systems; o identifying the institutional mechanisms by which citizens in the extralegal sector deal with land and business in the absence of a conducive formal framework; and o estimating the value and size of the extralegal real-estate and business assets. 47 • ILD conducted a preliminary diagnosis of the situation of indigenous women in eight regions of the Peruvian Andes.48 • ILD conducted a desk study on the legal framework of countries with Islamic tradition, which allowed it to gain a deeper understanding of sharia-based legal restrictions to women’s legal empowerment in Egypt, Iran, and Saudi Arabia.49 • ILD conducted training on women’s rights to property and businesses with indigenous women in the Amazon area in 2012.50 Concerning women’s empowerment activities listed above, most of the activities that ILD conducted are in preliminary stages and need extensive follow-up to make them effective. Strategic Objective 3: Strengthening Ild’s Operational Platform And Ensuring A Sustainable Expansion This section first provides a review of ILD’s economic methodology before directly addressing the strategic results. The LEAP team undertook a review of ILD’s economic methodology, a key tool that underpins its work in the pre-diagnosis and diagnosis stages. This was done because in analyzing the work of ILD, the LEAP team identified deficiencies in ILD’s economic methodology from the perspective of current economics, and this is indicated as a relative weakness of ILD. (Typically, ILD staff conducts the methodology and use in-country staff to collect data.) This review is detailed below. 46 2012 Work Plan, p. 47. 47 2012 Work Plan, pp. 40–41. 48 2012 Work Plan, p. 47. 49 2012 Work Plan, p. 47. 50 Information gathered during site-visit interviews with ILD and interviews of beneficiaries in May 2013. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 51 Economic Review of ILD’s Economic Methodology for the Estimation of Dead Capital Background The following is based on an assessment of the “Tanzania Diagnostic Report: Volume II: ‘The Extralegal Economy: Its Archetypes and Size’” and “ILD’s Economic Methodology: Lagos, Nigeria,” both of which ILD provided to the LEAP team, upon request, and neither of which are available on the web for public viewing. The major quantitative element of ILD’s economic methodology is the analysis that leads to estimates of the amount of “dead capital” in a country—that is, estimates of the assets of extralegal firms. Dead capital is defined as being “incapable of being used to secure the interests of potential contracting parties or being leveraged to guarantee credit, investment, and long-term deals.” ILD’s estimates of dead capital typically receive wide publicity in the media, reflecting ILD’s policy on emphasizing the importance of such estimates in the diagnostic process. For example, in Tanzania, the ILD diagnostic report reached the following conclusion: [We] have concluded that most of the economic activity in Tanzania takes place in the extralegal economy: 98% of businesses in Tanzania (1,482,000 units) are extralegal. The replacement value of urban and rural extralegal real estate and business assets is US$29.3 billion.51 The report then goes on to say: That’s an astonishing amount of economic activity and value—but it’s all “dead capital,” equivalent in Tanzania to: 34 times the investment in infrastructure projects in 1990–2000 (US$870 million) 9 times Foreign Direct Investment in 1964–2003 (US$3.1 billion) 6 times total net financial flows from World Bank in 1964–2003 (US$5.3 billion) 4 times the concessional and non-concessional net financial flows from multilateral institutions since 1964.52 It is not surprising that journalists use such powerful statistics to illustrate the economic problems in a country. These statistics highlight problems in stark contrast and are frequently used by journalists to give only a cursory illustration of the economic problems in a country. Characterization of Methodology Based on the evaluation team’s review, the exact steps in ILD’s economic methodology vary from country to country, sector to sector, and region to region. But its core elements can be summarized as follows: a. ILD classifies all relevant assets (businesses, land, dwellings, etc.) into categories (by region, by activity or sector, by type of structure/asset, by size, etc.). This classification often results in a rather large number of categories of assets. These categories are a product of ILD’s intensive fieldwork aimed at understanding the varieties of extralegal entities. b. Within each category, ILD estimates either the number of extralegal entities (e.g., number of businesses, number of dwellings, etc.) or the physical size of the assets (e.g., area of productive land), as appropriate for the entities that make up the category. The information on the overall number of entities or their physical size is taken from national censuses, business associations, government agencies, or fieldwork. The estimate of the proportion that is extralegal is taken from ILD’s fieldwork. c. Within each category, ILD estimates the value of capital of a typical entity in the category—the value of a typical business, hectare of land, or dwelling—by one of a variety of approaches, depending on data availability. In some cases, the estimate is of replacement value, where ILD estimates how much it would cost to replicate the assets being valued under present circumstances. In other cases—land, for example— where market valuations are used, ILD accepts the valuation of an average business that a local business association provides, ILD uses the market valuation of a business or property that the owner or user gives in answer to a survey question, or ILD uses the present discounted value of the net cash flow from a business or the rental flows from a structure, where the values of cash flows are obtained in answer to survey questions. d. The amount of dead capital is then the sum of the values across all the categories identified in part “A” of the valuation found in part “C” multiplied by the quantity found in part “B.” Findings and Discussion Based on the Review Despite the use of the term “dead capital,” ILD’s estimates are of a somewhat simpler phenomenon: the value of 51 Tanzania Diagnosis Report, Vol. 2, 2005, p. 1. 52 Tanzania Diagnosis Report, Vol. 2, 2005, p. 2. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 52 capital in the entities identified as extralegal. That is, ILD assumes the capital of extralegal entities is 100 percent dead capital and that current market prices are adequate to estimate total values. This approach would be best classified as an accounting approach to estimating assets rather than an economic approach to estimating dead capital. The reason for this judgment is that ILD’s approach does not embody several methodological features that are fundamental in the application of modern economics. All these features flow, essentially, from the fact that the status and value of assets (extralegal or legal, dead or in use) are reflections of decision making by economic agents who react to the rules of the system as they understand them. Ideally, one should take into account certain aspects of that decision making when estimating the amount of dead capital. The following are examples of the criticisms that could be made that follow from this observation: 1. Informal firms make informal arrangements. For example, sometimes these informal arrangements reflect the pledging of capital as collateral, where ad hoc arrangements made with local officials, family, associations, and other businesses provide some security. One cannot assume that 100 percent of the capital of extralegal entities is “dead.” 2. Similarly, in no country in the world are legal and business structures so frictionless that all capital in business can be used to secure contractual interests, pledge capital, etc. It is erroneous to assume that 100 percent of dead capital will become “live” on the establishment of good institutions. 3. In some of its work (e.g., in Nigeria), ILD uses regression analysis to extrapolate from one sample (owners, in Nigeria) to another (renters). The regression analysis is used to predict informality status for renters, using such predictors as building condition or education. There is a strong possibility of bias in such analyses—for example, the building condition does not only affect whether an owner decides to become formal; the formality status affects decisions regarding the amount of investment to put into the building. In a different vein, formality might encourage the accumulation of human capital (education) for owners, especially for children who inherit the business or dwelling from a previous generation. 4. More generally, informality status could reflect characteristics of the entrepreneur or property owner rather than be determined by exogenous forces. Thus, for example, a formal enterprise might be formal because its owner is skilled and knows that formality leads to the enterprise’s capital becoming “live.” In contrast, an informal enterprise might be informal because its owner might see no value in formalization. If formalization were made available to that enterprise at no cost, its capital would still remain “dead,” because the “deadness” of its capital ultimately reflects the characteristics of its owner rather than its formality status. 5. Estimates of asset values are all based on prices existing before widespread formalization occurs. With the types of massive formalizations that ILD advocates, prices on all properties would come into a new equilibrium. Hence, the prices of formal properties before the reforms would be a highly inadequate guide to valuations of all properties after formalization. Modern economics has standard techniques that would allow these problems to be addressed. Of course, no methodology is perfect in a very messy world. However, based on information gathered through this evaluation and on industry-wide practice that promotes publishing economic data, not addressing those problems—or even acknowledging their existence—suggests a gap in ILD’s portfolio of skills. In sum, ILD’s methodology amounts to a straightforward accounting exercise (although based on very sophisticated fieldwork). The derived measures of dead capital are certainly able to attract attention in the media. However, more work needs to be carried out on the methodology to make these measures a staple reference for those in the academic economics research community who work on development issues or policy-oriented researchers in international organizations and think tanks. According to the agreement between USAID and ILD, strengthening ILD’s operational platform is a key component in the efficacy and expansion of ILD’s influence in LEP and client countries. This activity aims at building in-country capacity and ensuring sustainable expansion of ILD’s program by developing new tools and networking with potential donors to diversify its services and support. To assess ILD’s success regarding this strategic objective, the LEAP team’s findings were categorized in accordance with the following USAID requirements: USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 53 1. Product improvements 2. Increased funding and cost sharing 3. Increased number of local technical experts Product Improvement—Result 1: Developing new technical manuals and tools for in￾country technical teams involved in diagnosis, strategy, and institutional reform ILD has developed several training manuals for various aspects of the implementation of its five-stage program as well as capacity development on some topics. However, specific to this requirement, ILD has fallen short, as it did not produce country-specific strategic-monitoring and technical manuals for all the countries it worked in during this grant period. Such manuals have been identified only for Peru, Nigeria, and Tanzania. The goal of the LEAP team’s evaluation of ILD product development and improvement was to identify all new technical manuals and tools developed by ILD during this grant period and assess their influence on in-country technical teams. Specific to this result, country-specific technical manuals were identified for Peru, Nigeria, and Tanzania, but not for other countries where ILD worked. Given the importance of training manuals for conducting ILD’s research work, the LEAP team went on to identify and review new manuals developed for conducting the five-stage program development. Upon review, the team found that the training manuals were well presented and user-friendly. ILD training documentation reviewed was comprehensive and presented with clear language and graphical presentations that made the information easy to digest. ILD manuals and tools related to the methodology and implementation of its work are listed below. ILD Manuals During the grant period, ILD • developed four manuals for training courses conducted in 2012 for promoting economic and property-rights issues among Peruvian indigenous women. Topics covered included property rights, enterprise access, and citizen participation, including: o ILD. “Manual on Property Rights: Training Course for Indigenous Women, Entrepreneurs of Peru, and Farming Communities.” 2012. o ILD. “Manual on Enterprise Access: Training Course for Indigenous Women and Entrepreneurs of Peru.” 2012. o ILD. “Manual on Citizen Participation: Training Course for Indigenous Women and Entrepreneurs of Peru.” 2012. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 54 o ILD. “Manual on Property Rights: Training Course for Indigenous Women, Entrepreneurs of Peru, and Native Communities.” 2012. • created three types of training manuals for the informal sector reform training program in Lagos, Nigeria, in February 2013, including: o ILD. “Informal Sector Reform Training Program, Economic Team: Classroom and On-the-Job Training in Lagos.” February 2013. o ILD. “Informal Sector Reform Training Program, Extralegal Team: Classroom and On-the-Job Training in Lagos.” February 2013. o ILD. “Informal Sector Reform Training Program, Legal Team: Classroom and On-the-Job Training in Lagos.” February 2013. • produced the first edition of its informational reform program guidelines titled “Institutional Reform Project: Conceptual Handbook, Research Methodology Handbook, and Operative Handbook”; • created an orientation manual in 2013 titled “From Dead Capital to Broad-Based Growth: Orientation Module for Politicians”; and • produced a technical training manual (for internal purposes only) titled “Management & Technical Module Training Manual for the Diagnosis Stage.” September 2011 (draft). ILD Methodology Tools • Created legal methodology templates and report format guidelines, including o Case File Template; o Interview Logbook Template; o List and Summary of Legislation Template; o Planned and Conducted Interview Template; o Procedure Scheme Template; o Sequence Template (version 2); o Legal Report Format; o Ongoing Programmes Format; and o Procedure Report Format. Other tools developed during the grant period are documented in the exhibits that follow: USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 55 Exhibit 6. Technical manuals and tools—Peru Grant year Activity 2010 • Assessed the impact of formalization in Peru using a database of formalized property and, to that end, hired a consultant to build a GIS based on open-source software that will be used to produce thematic maps and combine different layers of information. Thereafter, ILD produced and analyzed a consolidated report of the data corresponding to urban areas. Lastly, a sample of the formalized dwellings was extracted and channeled to different public entities (SUNARP, EQUIFAX) to create new layers of information and better assess the impact of formalization [2011 Work Plan, p. 23]. • Developed a study to assess the impact of formalization in Peru using a database of formalized property. ILD also hired consultancy to build a GIS used to produce thematic maps and combine different layers of information. Finally, it channeled samples of formalized dwellings to public entities [2010 First Quarterly Report, p. 6]. 2012 • Developed and approved a brand-new set of norms for its international organization and for compliance with Peruvian labor laws called “Health and Security Policy Handbook” [2012 Third Quarterly Report, p. 11]. Increased Funding and Cost Sharing—Result 1: Networking with donors and gaining media attention to increase buy-in to ILD program According to the USAID and ILD agreement, transforming demand for ILD services into actual projects is at the heart of USAID’s goals for ILD’s cost-sharing strategy. Cost sharing is a key strategic objective of ILD that helps secure project-based funds, which are necessary for the formulation and implementation of reform efforts. Contract Modification No. 1 (April 2009) changes and clarifies elements of the original grant agreement that refer to co-funding. It provides a target for “Cost Share,” a category of non–U.S. Government funding to be devoted to the program outlined in the grant for which a definition is incorporated by reference as a required applicable standard provision for non-U.S. NGOs.53 Failure to meet cost-share targets may have consequences, according to USAID policy, including a reduction in the amount of funds obligated to the agreement.54 The modification also provides for a second category of co-funding, labeled “Other Sources.” The LEAP team did not find any written definition of this term, and the grant agreement does not provide any guidance concerning USAID’s possibilities for redress should the grantee fail to meet its “Other Sources” targets. The grantee itself defines ”Other Sources” as other funds in excess of the cost-share requirement that can be applied to the program. Failure to meet the target for “Other Sources” does not appear to carry the same weight as not meeting the target for “Cost Share.” The “Cost Share” and “Other Sources” targets are provided in Modification No. 1 in the form of a table as follows: 53 USAID guidance on cost sharing is provided in the Automated Directive System (ADS) 303.3.10.4 “Meeting Cost Sharing Requirements.” The Standard Provision on Cost Sharing is located at RAA 14. Cost Share (June 2012). Both can be found at http://www.usaid.gov/ads/policy/300/303. 54 Provided in ADS 303.3.10.4 “Meeting Cost Sharing Requirements.” USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 56 Year Cost Share Other Sources Year 1 $707,848 $1,597,846 Year 2 $1,084,490 $2,448,049 Year3 $1,257,502 $2,838,595 Year 4 $1,514,784 $3,419,367 Year 5 $1,690,876 $3,816,864 The modification also further clarifies that the “Grantee’s yearly cost sharing will be cumulative and the $6,255,500 will be computed for the five-year Grant period.” The LEAP team assumes that this cumulative clause also applies to the “Other Sources” element of funding, and therefore a total of $14,120,721 is expected from “Other Sources” during the grant period. According to ILD financial records, up to August 2013, ILD had obtained commitments of $17,778,168 in funding from other sources. Of this amount, $7,272,269 had been already received by ILD and $4,917,787 had been spent. Therefore, if before the end of the grant period ILD expends $1,337,713 of the $2,354,482 that it has already been received but not spent, then it would have fulfilled its commitment on cost sharing (of course, the commitment could be fulfilled in other ways—for example, by receiving and expending other elements of the $17,778,168 that it has not yet received). The expectation on funding from “Other Sources” is in addition to the cost-share expectation. One very optimistic scenario is that before the end of the grant period, ILD would have received the total $17,778,168 that has been committed and would also have been able to expend all the funds on projects. Then subtracting the $6,255,500 that is applied to the cost-sharing commitment would leave $11,522,668 to be applied to the “Other Sources” expectation, which totaled $14,120,721. This means that in addition to fulfilling the optimistic scenario, ILD would have to obtain and expend an additional $2,598,053 on projects before the end of the grant period to meet the “Other Sources” expectations of the original agreement as amended by the modification. Increased Number of Local Technical Experts—Result 1: Building a cadre of in-country technical teams and recruits Given the primary focus of designing and implementing formalization programs to empower the poor across developing countries, ILD is tasked with building local teams of home-grown personnel in client countries to ensure the sustainability of ILD’s work upon its exit from these countries. The LEAP team measured these efforts via the following sources of input: • Available directories and/or rosters of local technical experts whom ILD trained USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 57 • Evidence of ILD outreach efforts to maintain contact and provide ongoing information and technical resources to local teams ILD was effective in increasing the number of local technical experts in two countries it worked with during this grant period. Evidence shows that ILD was able to build a solid cadre of in-country technical teams and recruits in Tanzania and Nigeria. ILD did share with the evaluation team that it has changed its approach to begin capacity development of local teams at an earlier stage of the project. However, the evaluation team has seen no record of a holistic approach to building a directory of local technical experts to target for training and/or partnership. ILD’s ability to build a cadre of in-country technical teams and recruits is evident in Tanzania. The work of the local entity established for property and business formalization, MKURABITA, has continued effectively, despite limited funding, and has been successful in incorporating innovative measures and best practices that have been recognized by the United Nations. In 2010, MKURABITA was awarded second place in the UN’s Public Service Awards in Category 2, “Improving the Delivery of Public Services: Management of Sustainable Delivery of Secured Property Rights Through Empowerment and Capacity Building of Local Government.” The following year, MKURABITA won the same award, this time for participatory planning and implementation of formalization of squatter settlements in Tanzania. In 2010, ILD conducted a 2-week training session (at ILD offices in Peru) with Libyan professionals regarding ILD’s approach to formalizing business and property rights. Thereafter, an ILD team spent a month in Tripoli, Libya, to train a local Libyan state agency that continues to work with the Economic Development Board of the Libyan Government. With approval from the Lagos State government, under the coordination of the Ministry of Trade and Commerce, ILD hired a local team of Nigerian professionals from the government and business sectors to conduct the diagnosis phase of the project. ILD staff members have been working closely with the local team that is leading the data-collection portion of this phase. Increased Number of Local Technical Experts—Result 2: Increasing the capacity of local technical experts to become indigenous change agents The LEAP team found that ILD had minimal success in this area of focus. Aside from the above-mentioned partnership with Tanzania, where ample evidence verifies the training of local experts who are spearheading change and initiating the formalization process, ILD has not reported any evidence that other local experts have become change agents in their countries as a result of ILD’s capacity building. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 58 The LEAP team found minimal success in this area. In discussions with ILD about this situation, ILD identified funding (gaining external matching funds to continue the work started with USAID and/or client-sponsored funding) as a challenge for its efforts in this area. ILD suggested that it aims to provide knowledge and capacity building more liberally and effectively; however, financial restrictions (such as the end of USAID grant funding and inability to acquire matching funds from other sources to continue implementation) prevent the continuation of cooperation between ILD and other in-country technical teams and recruits (as in the case of MKURABITA). Another limitation expressed by ILD is that not all persons who undergo ILD training sessions have the capacity to further use and apply the knowledge obtained during ILD training. Strategic Objective 4: Transforming Expressed Demand For Ild Services Into Actual Projects And Reform Efforts To assess ILD’s success with this strategic objective, the LEAP team divided its review into the two categories listed in the requirements of the USAID grant agreement: 1. Awareness, training, and pre-diagnostics leading to full diagnostic studies 2. Establishment of technical credibility in LEP with world leaders Result 1: Awareness, training, and pre-diagnostics leading to full diagnostic studies The LEAP team worked to identify cases where a full diagnostic study was undertaken during the grant period after ILD-led pre-diagnostic work was completed, with both ILD and a different organization performing the follow-up work. Although ILD has been successful in building awareness and pre-diagnosis in a total of 16 countries during the grant period, information that ILD provided indicated that the organization conducted full diagnostic studies in 2 of the 16 countries of involvement. ILD further identified three countries as being “full-term projects,” without a clear indication of dates of diagnostic studies. Of those two countries (Libya and Nigeria) where diagnosis was reached, extensive training was only conducted in one country (Nigeria). Exhibit 7, below, shows countries that moved from pre-diagnosis to full diagnosis and reform proposals as well as countries whose projects ended at the pre-diagnosis stage. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 59 - Exhibit 7. Diagnostic study and reform proposal after pre-diagnostic work—All countries Country Awareness Pre (MM/YY) Diagnosis (MM/YY) Reform (MM/YY) Implemen (MM/YY) Capital diagnosis proposals tation formation Algeria 04/2012 Azerbaijan 09/2011 Canary Islands 04/2009 Senegal 04/2009 Mali 04/2009 Niger 04/2009 Cape Verde 04/2010 Egypt* Long-term project Long-term project Long-term project Haiti* Long-term project Long-term project Long-term project India 04/2013 Libya* 11/2010 Mongolia 04/2011 Nigeria 12/2009 In progress 09/2013 Peru55 06/2006 Long-term project Long-term project Long-term project Timor-Leste 09/2010 Tunisia 11/2012 * The evaluation team was not provided with information to verify diagnosis in the following countries. The following chart provides a more detailed assessment of activities conducted where a full diagnostic study was undertaken after ILD-led pre-diagnostic work was completed. 55 ILD has been working in Peru since its foundation in 1981. During this period, ILD has produced many diagnosis and reform proposals about several issues, such as administrative simplification, property and business formalization, and the creation of the ombudsman, to name just a few. The majority of ILD’s proposals had been implemented by the Peruvian government in different periods. Thus, this question is not applicable in the case of Peru, because there is not a single diagnosis, reform proposal, or implementation but several that have been done between 1981 and 2013. Since 2009 ILD’s research in Peru has been focused in the Avatar Paradigm (Amazonians are not Avatar), which led the LEAP team to perform an in-depth assessment on indigenous communities in the Amazon and Andes and to prepare a training course for indigenous women in Cusco and Iquitos. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 60 Exhibit 8. Diagnostic study and reform proposal after pre-diagnostic work—Peru Grant year Activity 2009 • Submitted both technical and financial proposals for consulting projects in Peru, which were shortlisted by COFOPRI, the public agency in charge of the formalization of property rights over immovable assets in Peru [2010 Work Plan, p. 13]. Exhibit 9. Diagnostic study and reform proposal after pre-diagnostic work—Nigeria Grant year Activity 2010 • Submitted a proposal in November 2010 to do a diagnosis of the Delta State’s extralegal economy and the design of institutional and legal reforms [2011 Work Plan, p. 17]. 2012 • Began its team-building and project-coordination processes for prior proposal plans for a diagnosis in the Delta State [2012 Third Quarterly Report; p. 9]. Result 2: Establishment of technical credibility in legal empowerment of the poor with world leaders To evaluate success of this objective, the LEAP team attempted to identify various activities that would point to ILD’s establishment of technical credibility with world leaders in LEP. The following were reviewed: a. Research activities conducted during the grant period that focused the attention of policymakers, academics, development experts, and other leaders on issues related to legal empowerment of the poor ILD engaged in four main extensive research activities during this grant period—namely, the Avatar Myths Paradigm, the Arab Spring Paradigm, the Knowledge Crisis Paradigm, and the Backdoor Discrimination Against Women Paradigm. Avatar Myths Research The Avatar Myths Research was conducted between 2010 and 2012 with the intention of raising awareness of the socio-environmental issues affecting mining areas in Peru and their connection to the lack of or inadequate allocation of property and business rights as well as the lack of citizen participation in decision making. Upon completion of this research, ILD produced a series of articles in leading national newspapers and magazines on the conflict related to the exploitation of natural resources in Peru. De Soto also granted several media interviews to discuss the issues identified. These focused on communicating a clear message not only to those leading the protests but also to the government of Peru so that it could take concrete measures to benefit investors and peasants as well as those segments of the population that needed to be incorporated into formality to benefit from mining activities being carried out in their territories. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 61 This research has been widely cited in the media, but the LEAP team cannot firmly confirm its influence on world leaders. Arab Spring Research Work on the Arab Spring, however, has gained extensive attention from world leaders in MENA and in the United States as well as in other countries. On this topic, ILD researched the political changes and events that led to the Arab Spring, providing data and its opinion regarding how to effectively modify economic rights in the area, which will ultimately lead to domestic harmony. With this research, ILD has proactively spread its message through presentations, conferences, and different types of media, which has gained high-level attention. For instance, de Soto was invited to a U.S. congressional hearing to provide his perspective on the issue and the way forward on May 21, 2013.56 In addition to the two research studies that shaped their work concerning these topics, ILD carried out various applied-research activities during the grant period on issues related to legal empowerment of the poor, including knowledge crisis and women’s empowerment in property rights research studies. Although the effect on policymakers, academics, development experts, and other leaders in this field was difficult to measure, these activities undoubtedly expanded the capacity of ILD to better understand issues in chosen country cases. Specifically, ILD focused a considerable amount of attention on Peru and the MENA region, whose activities are outlined below. Exhibit 10. Activities for transforming demands for ILD services by year—Peru Grant year Activity 2009 • Began conducting research on the methodologies applied for impact studies of effects of property reform in Peru [2009 First and Second Quarterly Reports, p. 11]. • Conducted research on the effects of land titling in urban areas of Peru using GIS [2009 Third Quarterly Report, p. 11]. • Continued research on property rights, business activities and consultation, and participation mechanism within the native communities within the Peruvian Amazon Jungle [2009 Third Quarterly Report, pp. 11–14]. This study paid particular attention to the information before and after the violent riots in the Amazon in June 2009. Additionally, this included executing an analysis of procedures, comprehensive diagnosis report, feedback, dissemination, and consensus building [2009 Fourth Quarterly Report, pp. 9–12]. 2010 • Continued research on the design of the reforms regarding the Peruvian Amazon Jungle, outlining the recommendations and proposed reforms and undertaking consensus-building activities to gauge locals’ reception [2010 First Quarterly Report, pp. 7–9]. • Continued research on the estimations of costs faced by native communities on the Peruvian Amazon Jungle [2010 First Quarterly Report, p. 10]. • Concluded the first set of reform proposals for the inclusion of the Peruvian Amazon indigenous people in the mainstream economy, including control over land and resources, economic businesses and activities, and the decisionmaking process. This includes qualitative and quantitative cost-benefit analyses for each dimension [2010 Third 56 http://docs.house.gov/meetings/FA/FA00/20130521/100885/HHRG-113-FA00-20130521-SD001.pdf. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 62 Grant year Activity Quarterly Report, pp. 11–13]. 2011 • Expanded research on the obstacles that indigenous women in the Peruvian Amazon face when trying to gain access to property and business rights to include indigenous women in general, encompassing women from native communities and women from rural and peasant communities [2011 First Quarterly Report, p. 20; 2011 Second Quarterly Report, p. 16; 2011 Third Quarterly Report, pp. 18–19]. ILD finished the paper regarding Peruvian indigenous women’s access to property and business rights [2011 Fourth Quarterly Report, pp. 17–18]. • Began empirical assessment of access to credit with a focus on the case of Peru [2011 First Quarterly Report, p. 22]. • Conducted desk research and fieldwork in eight Peruvian regions regarding property rights and natural resources on indigenous lands in Peru [2011 Third Quarterly Report, p. 17; 2011 Fourth Quarterly Report, pp. 15–16]. • Conducted extensive desk research on public policies implemented in Peru to address adjudication/housing/urban-planning issues. In the process of carrying out the research, ILD documented all interviews conducted, analyzed detailed statistical information at the district level in Lima, and began writing preliminary reports on the empirical assessment of the impact of urban property formalization in Peru [2011 Third Quarterly Report, pp. 20–22; 2011 Fourth Quarterly Report, pp. 23–24]. 2012 • Researched how to measure the economic impact of the formalization program in Peru and designed associated fieldwork [2012 First Quarterly Report, pp. 9–10]. Worked toward concluding a draft report and other preliminary documentation regarding the institutional obstacles to formally housing the urban poor in Lima, Peru [2012 First Quarterly Report, pp. 12–13]. • Continued research and preparation on specific in-depth studies of conflicts in Peru, including a campaign to raise awareness of socio-environmental issues [2012 Second Quarterly Report, pp. 15–16]. • Regarding the Avatar myths research, ILD prepared preliminary reports on three in-depth case studies of social unrest, a methodology comprising desk research and fieldwork in the area where social unrest was taking place [2012 Third Quarterly Report, pp. 13–15]. • Conducted thorough desk research and identified two of the most relevant case studies of land grabbing in the Peruvian Amazon [2012 Third Quarterly Report, p. 16]. Exhibit 11. Activities for transforming demands for ILD services by year—MENA Grant year Activity 2011 • Researched the main institutional obstacles women face in gaining access to property and business rights in MENA [2011 First Quarterly Report, p. 21; 2011 Second Quarterly Report, p. 19]. Thereafter, ILD drafted and finalized the final report on research related to women’s rights in the Middle East project [2011 Third Quarterly Report, p. 23; 2011 Fourth Quarterly Report, p. 22]. 2012 • Reviewed and edited the final report for women’s rights in the Middle East program [2012 Second Quarterly Report, p. 13]. • Continued research activities related to the economic roots of the Arab Spring, including the study of self-immolations in the MENA region and the relationship between this phenomenon and economic exclusion [2012 First Quarterly Report, pp. 14–15; 2012 Second Quarterly Report, p. 15]. Completed the first draft of the study of self-immolations in the MENA region, which presented the Arab Spring paradigm [2012 Third Quarterly Report, 16]. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 63 b. How ILD engages its constituents and heads of state in its multistage process Evidence suggests that ILD had a greater amount of engagement with constituents and heads of states in the initial stages. However, following initial stages with high-level meetings, ILD does not appear to be able to sustain organized and deliberate engagement with heads of state and constituents. ILD engages in a multistage process that involves research to generate ideas in an attempt to facilitate communication and build awareness within its countries of involvement. Evidence suggests that ILD engages its constituents and heads of state during its awareness-building and political-engagement phase. However, the LEAP team was not able to identify a documented process of engagement to sustain the interest and enthusiasm of counterparts in later stages. Data provided suggest that ILD has held several high-level meetings throughout the grant period, but no data suggest these meetings were held in relation to a particular stage within countries of involvement. c. Frequency of citations of ILD research reports and studies produced under the USAID grant on topics related to LEP The LEAP team conducted extensive research to determine the frequency of citations of ILD research reports and studies produced during the grant period. To conduct the citation search and evaluate the success of this performance metric, the evaluation team utilized two search engines: (1) Google Scholar and (2) LexisNexis Academic (see Appendix 5 for the methodology of the citation search). Google Scholar The evaluation team conducted its search using Google Scholar to identify the frequency of citations of work produced by or associated with Hernando de Soto, ILD as an organization, and nine ILD staff members who were listed as authors on various ILD papers and documents reviewed for the current evaluation. Google Scholar is the citation tool now used most widely by academics and, in general, counts formal citations, usually occurring in academic publications, papers by policy-oriented researchers, and the products of think tanks, whether published formally or on the Web. It does not usually include the types of informal citations that appear in mainstream news media. Through the Google Scholar search, two conclusions have become apparent: (1) Recognition of ILD scholarship is focused almost entirely on the work of de Soto; and (2) although de Soto has been frequently cited for work produced before the grant period, the number of citations for work produced during the grant period is significantly reduced in comparison. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 64 The Google Scholar search identified a total of 40 works produced by ILD and the organization’s staff during the grant period. Associated with the 40 ILD works referenced were a total of 56 citations during the 5-year grant period. However, ILD President Hernando de Soto accounted for authorship of 32 of the 40 works referenced, which were cited 54 times during the grant period. No references were associated with the other nine ILD staff members who were listed as authors in ILD documents during the grant period. Additionally, ILD as an organization had only one work referenced, which was cited twice over the grant period, all within 2010. ILD and its staff members were recognized most in 2011, with 11 works referenced (9 related to de Soto) and 29 citations, all of which were related to de Soto’s works. These findings via Google Scholar are displayed in the chart below. Exhibit 12. ILD organization and staff references and citations in Google Scholar LexisNexis Academic The evaluation team conducted its search in LexisNexis Academic to identify the frequency of mentions in news media across the globe of work produced by or ideas associated with Hernando de Soto, ILD as an organization, and nine ILD staff members who were listed as authors on various ILD documentation reviewed for the current evaluation. Through the LexisNexis Academic search, two conclusions became apparent: (1) De Soto’s ideas have had a marked impact in the news media; and (2) references to ILD have typically come through references to de Soto. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 65 In the news media during the grant period reviewed, Hernando de Soto was mentioned a total of 565 times. These mentions were disaggregated into references to de Soto’s theories (344), de Soto’s participation in various events (137), simple mentions (73), interviews (5), and authorship (6). When examined by source, data revealed that the majority of de Soto’s mentions could be found in newspapers, newswires and press releases, and blogs, with all three sources accounting for a total of 389/565 (69 percent) of de Soto’s mentions. ILD was mentioned a total of 207 times, with 99 percent of the mentions related to the name of the organization in reference to de Soto’s presidency. No mention of any of the nine additional ILD staff members researched appeared in relation to anything related to ILD or work produced by ILD. There were 101 countries referenced in the documents reviewed, which shows the wide dissemination of ideas associated with de Soto. The findings via LexisNexis Academic are reflected in the chart below. Exhibit 13. ILD organization and staff reference searches via LexisNexis USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 66 Exhibit 14. Hernando de Soto source mentions in LexisNexis The evaluation team concluded that these results show that an accurate picture of ILD’s work as an organization is not gaining appropriate attention, because credit is usually given to de Soto. This oversight threatens the sustainability of ILD as an organization. Overall, the LEAP team concluded that although de Soto has been successful in disseminating his ideas, ILD as an organization has fallen short in its efforts to establish its technical credibility regarding LEP. d. Supporting evidence demonstrating that ILD’s media and other awareness activities under this grant have sparked public debate for reforming economic governance in developing countries The LEAP team was unable to evaluate this requirement, given that doing so would require an extensive and expensive social-media analysis research and trend analysis. USAID agreed that this analysis could not take place for the scope of this evaluation. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 67 - e. Awareness-building activities leading to reform efforts, even if ILD was not the agent of implementation Although ILD has been successful in building awareness in countries in which it has worked and elsewhere, and although the organization has generated extensive research on issues related to the Avatar Myth and the Arab Spring, ILD has not been as successful in translating its awareness-building activities to reform efforts and later implementation across all countries of involvement. Within the 11 countries in which awareness building was initiated during the grant period, only Nigeria moved on to the diagnosis stage. Among the 29 countries of involvement during the years of USAID funding to ILD, the organization has only been able to reach the fourth stage—implementation—within 2 countries, with this stage being completed by a local entity in Tanzania. Throughout ILD’s lifespan, Peru is the only country where all five stages of ILD’s methodology have been successfully accomplished. Exhibit 15. Awareness-building activities leading to reform and implementation during the grant period Country Awareness Diagnosis Reform Implementation + proposal pre diagnosis Senegal Canary Islands Mali Niger Nigeria Cape Verde Timor-Leste Mongolia Azerbaijan Algeria Tunisia India USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 68 IV. EVALUATION RECOMMENDATIONS Pursuant to the terms of the mid-term evaluation statement of work (SOW) and United States Agency for International Development (USAID) guidance on program evaluation, the Learning, Evaluation, and Analysis Project (LEAP) team has developed the following recommendations for improving Instituto Libertad y Democracia’s (ILD’s) activities under the grant agreement. These recommendations are categorized by the strategic objectives detailed in the grant agreement and evaluation SOW: Strategic Objective 1: Building Awareness for Legal Empowerment and Social Inclusion • Consider organizing an annual ILD global conference or symposium to raise awareness. Although ILD attends and participates in many global conferences and symposia on legal-empowerment, economic, and property rights, ILD as an institution does not organize a global conference to promote its work and bring global thinkers together to discuss pressing topics on legal empowerment. The LEAP team believes that ILD is well suited to organize such a conference annually or bi-annually, which will serve first and foremost as good public relations for its work but more importantly will provide an avenue for awareness and training as well as follow up with stakeholders interested in pursuing ILD’s work. Critics of ILD could be invited to such a conference so that ILD can engage with them and show opinion leaders that ILD’s ideas and work can withstand such criticism. • Increase the number of publications by ILD as an entity and by individuals on ILD staff. Most of the reports and publications that the LEAP team reviewed were authored by Hernando de Soto. The evaluation team believes that to sustainably promote the ILD brand, it is essential that ILD as an entity and other team members within the organization also author publications. This scholarship will lead to greater international awareness of the organization itself, its abilities, and its talented staff. • Include local civil society in ILD national efforts. One of the strategic objectives’ results that has not been fully addressed is the development of a directory of local technical experts who can become change agents for legal empowerment, enhancing and continuing with ILD’s work. The LEAP team believes that by including local civil￾society organizations (in addition to creating the local reform design team [LRDT]) at the early stages of ILD engagement, the organization stands a better chance of ensuring sustainability of its work, even after a particular government may no longer be in power and, as a result, unable to implement its propositions for reform. In many developing countries, civil-society organizations are becoming stronger, often have more continuity than particular political leaders, and are able to lobby for ideas and initiatives they believe in; therefore, ILD could leverage this stakeholder group. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 69 Strategic Objective 2: Institutionalizing Legal Empowerment of the Poor (and Women) in Client Countries • Increase focus on women’s empowerment activities. ILD has conducted a few effective programs to promote awareness and training on property and business rights as they relate to women. However, the LEAP team noted that ILD does not seem to prioritize or highlight these activities as part of its top implementation plans for future years. The LEAP team recommends that ILD focus on this area and ensure that a gender analysis is not conducted simply as a by-product of its work, but rather highlighted and communicated as important work in itself. The team also suggests that within its country projects, ILD provide additional (or separate) training for various women’s groups that would benefit from ILD’s knowledge and expertise. Strategic Objective 3: Strengthening ILD’s Operational Platform and Ensuring a Sustainable Expansion • Leverage local human capital. One of USAID’s expectations is for ILD to work with local entities and/or professionals to build their capacity and promote sustainability of ILD’s work. As such, the LEAP team recommends that ILD leverage the efforts of universities and research institutes in Peru, especially those in Lima, and employ interns to participate in its programs. • Conduct internal monitoring and evaluation of ILD programs in a consistent and continuous manner. ILD has produced most of the quarterly and annual reports, as required by the USAID grant agreement. When asked, the LEAP team was also furnished with several additional publications, reports, and information on ILD’s work. However, in developing this report, the LEAP team found some conflicting information in details provided in various quarterly reports and between the quarterly reports and information provided during and after the site visit to Peru. The LEAP team also identified numerous instances where plans of future work were listed in quarterly reports, but no follow-up information was given in subsequent reports. As a result, the evaluation team had to spend a significant amount of time conducting verification on conflicting data and frequently questioning ILD to fill in the gaps. Although ILD was very cooperative in this process, the team recommends that ILD conduct a more systematic and timely self￾evaluation and assessment of its work, which will be useful for USAID and other donor reporting as well as for its public-education activities and needed institutional reform. • Update the legal and economic models. The LEAP team recommends that ILD update its legal and economic models (particularly the latter) to reflect recent advances in knowledge of new institutional economics, law and economics, and empirical evaluation. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 70 • Make the models and analysis more accessible. ILD should endeavor to participate more frequently in national and international research conferences, particularly those that include policymakers. ILD should present its methodology more explicitly at such events so it becomes more accepted within the academic and policymaking communities while also benefitting from possible improvement. Participating in such events will also ensure that ILD’s name is better recognized within the academic realm and its methodology is tested by independent researchers. • It is in the best interest of ILD to come to an agreement with USAID concerning the cost-share targets and commitments, possibly developing a contract modification to reflect them. Also, ILD should regularly report its performance in meeting those requirements. The LEAP team endeavored to obtain a definitive interpretation of what was required under the cost-sharing and “Other Sources” requirements in the USAID and ILD grant agreement. The LEAP team discussed this issue intensively with USAID and ILD and still has questions, particularly regarding what is implied by the “Other Sources” contract clause and whether fulfillment of this requirement is mandatory. The LEAP team’s investigation into ILD’s performance in obtaining matching funds led to the observation that the relevant data seemed incomplete and subject to multiple interpretations. The evaluation team believes that it is in the best interest of ILD to clearly identify its requirements/targets and also clearly and consistently report its matching funds to avoid confusion and misinterpretation of its abilities to meet this grant agreement requirement. Strategic Objective 4: Transforming Expressed Demand for ILD Services into Actual Projects and Reform Efforts • Develop and maintain consistency when implementing project activities. The LEAP team found wide variation across countries in the conduct of ILD’s project activities. For instance, ILD has not developed training manuals for all the countries where trainings occurred, although it has in Nigeria and in Peru for the indigenous women’s empowerment training. Having a baseline model for conducting country projects and following a predictable path for deliverables will be useful for tracking ILD’s successes and challenges, developing a trend analysis of programming, and responding to the requirements in the USAID grant agreement. This process will also promote efficiency in implementation, given that previously developed manuals could serve as templates for creating new ones. • Consider revisiting some of ILD’s past work in Peru. The evaluation team found through discussions with direct and indirect beneficiaries of ILD in Peru that many do attribute great importance to ILD’s role in the changes that occurred in the country in the 1980s and 1990s. However, it was evident that more work is needed in many parts of the USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 71 country. For instance, representatives of the regional government in Iquitos stated that they had limited capacity to continue titling efforts that Organismo de Formalización de la Propiedad Informal (COFOPRI) started and then handed over to the regional government for implementation. It would be useful if ILD would revisit such entities and identify their current needs in the formalization process to establish potential collaborations for continuing the work it facilitated in the 1990s, given its expertise and ability to rally funding and conduct the titling process efficiently. Donor funding could be used to conduct public-education activities and gather the necessary stakeholders to raise awareness of the remaining gaps in implementation. Other recommendations for adhering to the grant agreement • Better organize and report specific countries’ activities within the respective USAID grant-agreement strategic objectives. Although ILD improved the organization of its work plans and quarterly reports throughout the grant period, many gaps were still avoidable: ILD’s reports did not always align with the results of the strategic objectives of the grant, and information reported did not always occur during the grant period. For instance, ILD did not carry out any activities in Tanzania within the five-stage program during the current grant period, yet it reported that in 2009 it presented the Institutional Reform Design Report for Tanzania in efforts to discuss the implementation. 57 The LEAP team therefore recommends that ILD standardize its reports according to the strategic objectives tasked in the USAID-ILD agreement and only report information that occurs within the grant period or provide specific details on why information reported prior to the grant period is included in reporting. Such practices will help improve the effectiveness of ILD programming by identifying high and low levels of activities within country cases and across strategic objectives for each year. • Make a concerted effort through internal or external means to collect data that truly analyze the impact of ILD’s effort. The LEAP team did not receive from ILD any report that self-critically evaluated ILD activities using credible data, nor did the LEAP team receive any data compilation that would have enabled independent analysts to subject ILD’s activities to critical analysis. It is imperative that ILD collect data on the results of its activities, conduct analyses using these data, and offer the data to independent analysts. Data to be collected can include causes of failures and successes within programs categorized by individual stages, systematic tracking of progress across countries, gaps in knowledge and expertise, ways to maintain relevance (identifying and promoting new trends), selection of beneficiaries, pre-implementation surveys of intended recipients of programs, post-implementation surveys that focus directly on specific economic behaviors that are thought to change as a result of ILD-type programs, 57 2009 First and Second Quarterly Report, pp. 4 and 5. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 72 and so forth. Such data would be most effective if collected and systematized while the work is being undertaken. Collecting quantitative data of this nature will also be very useful in making arguments for additional funding from USAID and other donors. In the longer term, convincing, methodologically up-to-date analysis of such data will be effective in persuading opinion-makers in academia and analytical think tanks of the importance of ILD’s approach and its potential effectiveness. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 73 V. APPENDICES Appendix 1: USAID Evaluation Statement of Work for the LEAP team STATEMENT OF WORK FOR THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF INSTITUTO LIBERTAD Y DEMOCRACIA ACTIVITIES I. SUMMARY The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Bureau of Economic Growth, Education and Environment (E3) Office of Trade and Regulatory Reform seeks a contractor to conduct a performance evaluation of the Institute for Liberty and Democracy Program (ILD)58 from 2009-2013. II. BACKGROUND: USAID provides core funding to ILD to support its efforts to legally empower the poor. To accomplish its goal, ILD focuses on providing technical assistance, sharing research and gaining support from partners to build awareness and advocate on behalf of the poor. Legal empowerment of the poor as espoused by the UN-hosted Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor focuses on four areas: formalization of real property rights; access to justice; labor rights; and business rights (meaning the right to participate as an entrepreneur in the marketplace). In 2009, ILD was awarded a $25 million grant from USAID to implement its program over the course of five years. As the grant enters its final year, USAID would like to conduct a performance evaluation of ILD program in meeting its objectives and deliverables as identified in the Agreement and yearly work plans. In addition to measuring performance, the evaluation will also assess ILD’s success under the grant in increasing the legal empowerment of the poor, including women’s empowerment and gender equality. USAID management has set aside $260,000 of program funds for the evaluation. The Evolution of ILD’s Partnership with USAID: ILD is a long-time USAID partner. From the time that USAID/Lima awarded the agency’s first grant of $150,000 to ILD in August 1982, USAID and ILD have built a 30-year sustained relationship that aims to reduce poverty through the simplification, legalization and formalization of rules and practices governing real property, business activities, and dispute settlement. ILD does this through efforts to eliminate bureaucratic "red-tape" and restrictive registration, licensing, and permit laws that make the registration of property and the opening of new businesses very time-consuming and costly. 58 Also known by its Spanish name Instituto Libertad y Democracia. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 74 The work of ILD is guided by noted Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto. Mr. de Soto’s views came to fruition at the time of the rise of the Shining Path guerrilla movement. That movement was launched in 1980 for the purpose of replacing Peru’s fledgling democracy with a so-called "New Democracy” that entailed establishing a Maoist Communist system. Mr. de Soto began exploring the difficulties inherent in the prevailing legal system, in part as a counter-balance to the Shining Path ideology. As an engineer and an entrepreneur, he adapted the familiar time and motion studies used to streamline manufacturing processes and applied them to business legal procedures. He and his group estimated that according to the law and regulations pertaining in Lima, it would take an urban squatter approximately six years, 11 months, and 207 steps to receive legal title.59 For merely one aspect of the entire procedure (the adjudication procedure), each would-be title-recipient would have to pay US $2,156 to receive a legal title (the entire income of four years and eight months for someone earning the minimum wage at the time of the research in 1984). In order to establish a small textiles factory, it would take 289 days, require 11 different permits, and cost US $1,231 (32 times the monthly minimum wage at the time of the research - around 1984).60 These innovative studies were the precursors for USAID’s Investor Roadmap methodology in 1995 and, eventually, the International Finance Corporation’s Doing Business Project indicators, launched in 2002. Using these studies as a springboard and gaining government and donor support, ILD generated initiatives, laws, and regulations that changed Peru’s system of economic governance. For example, ILD designed the reform of Peru’s property system which gave titles to more than 1.2 million families. It also helped some 380,000 firms, which previously operated in the gray market, to enter the formal economy. Mr. de Soto’s research policy prescriptions are credited with helping to eventually undermine the Shining Path guerrilla movement. Mr. de Soto’s developmental thesis was that the prevailing political economies of the developing world were based on mercantilist tendencies typically established during the time of colonial rule. These mercantilist tendencies, expressed through restrictive laws and institutions, served to retain control of the formal economy in the hands of privileged elites. This was done to the detriment of those without access—in the Peruvian case typically poor working migrants to the cities. His major insight, and discovery, was that those without access nearly universally around the world spontaneously create their own “memory systems” proving ownership and business dealings. ILD thus began more closely focusing on reducing this “extralegality” – a term of art that applies to commercial transactions that may be partially or fully informally conducted – through application of reforms that reduce or eliminate burdensome regulations, are market oriented, and respect the rule of law. 59 The Mystery of Capital, p. 20. 60 The Other Path, p.134. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 75 Mr. de Soto has published two books about economic and political development that have achieved worldwide acclaim: The first is The Other Path, published in the mid- 1980s, which details an approach to economic development that promotes market-based systems as opposed to the Shining Path’s Maoist principles. The second is The Mystery of Capital, published at the end of 2000, whose aim in the words of its author was to: “…demonstrate that the major stumbling block that keeps the rest of the world from benefiting from capitalism is its inability to produce capital. Capital is the force that raises the productivity of labor and creates the wealth of nations. It is the lifeblood of the capitalist system, the foundation of progress, and the one thing that the poor countries of the world cannot seem to produce for themselves, no matter how eagerly their people engage in all the other activities that characterize a capitalist economy. I will also show, with the help of facts and figures that my research team and I have collected, block by block and farm by farm in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America, that most of the poor already possess the assets they need to make a success of capitalism. Even in the poorest countries, the poor save.”61 Mr. de Soto remains a prominent personality both in Peru and in global circles. At the time of the negotiation of the US-Peru Free Trade Agreement, he was appointed lead negotiator for the Government of Peru. At the time, he championed for Peruvian audiences the benefits to the poor of the liberalization of trade. Mr. de Soto’s other recent activities involve co￾chairing (with Madeleine Albright) the UN Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor. UNCLEP’s final report Making the Law Work for Everyone can be found at http://www.unrol.org/doc.aspx?n=Making_the_Law_Work_for_Everyone.pdf Key Milestones in the USAID-ILD Relationship: USAID and ILD’s relationship spans three decades and is remarkable for the way it has spread from efforts to address poverty reduction and economic growth in a single, troubled South American country to a program that today has global reach and influences the decisions of world leaders. (Documents produced by these different activities may still be available, although many of them—it should be noted—are in Spanish.) • As mentioned, ILD’s relationship with USAID began in 1982, with a grant agreement named “The Emergence of a Market Economy in Peru”. This work continued more or less without interruption through September 1995 under several different agreements. The aims of the program were to provide support for a study of Peru’s urban informal sector and its implications for private enterprise development. As a result of the program, ILD promoted and implemented specific reforms affecting millions of Peruvians. Between 1984 and 1995, ILD notes that every President called on it to help change the country. With this high-level governmental support, ILD developed a series of projects, namely: o the Democratization of Decision-making project, o creation of Peru’s first Ombudsman, 61 The Mystery of Capital, p. 5. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 76 o the Administrative Simplification Program, o the Unified Business Registry, o a new form of Municipal Operating License, o a program for the Formalization of Urban and Rural Real Estate o a new ad-hoc System of Arbitration, and o the Justice for Untried Prisoners Project. It is also worth repeating that in the period 1984-1987, during a civil-war that pitted the Peruvian state against the Sendero Luminoso, Peru’s home-grown radical Maoist movement, ILD offered an intellectual alternative to communist ideology. ILD’s alternative provided the government with a set of tools and an approach that helped gain the trust of farmers thus helping beat terrorism on the ground. • USAID/Peru awarded a grant in December 1995 titled the “Enhancement of the Institutional Framework for the Formalization of the Urban Property and Establishment of the Basis for Extending the Program Nationwide”. This program aimed to achieve the formalization of urban property in a nationwide basis and lasted through June 1996. ILD’s work in Peru (what ILD calls its laboratory) constituted the foundation for a program packaged as a product to be offered to foreign countries. This was the beginning of ILD’s work in international circles. • In the early 1990s, ILD with USAID’s support gradually expanded its operations outside of Peru. Different studies were funded in the following countries: o Honduras (January 1992), an administrative simplification program was carried out, o El Salvador (January 1991), a program to establish a property registry system and to simplify administrative procedures was carried out, and o Honduras (May 2001), a full ILD Diagnosis was carried out. • 1996 marked a shift in USAID’s financial support for ILD. At this point, USAID/Washington awarded a grant to ILD in July 1996, ending April 1998, titled the “Globalize the Programs of ILD” project. This program aimed to provide the foundation for the final development of a globalized packaged program to be offered to foreign countries around the world by ILD. • USAID/Haiti, in August 1997, awarded a major grant titled the “Urban Real Estate Formalization Program”. This program, which continued through May 2002, conducted a full Diagnosis and Institutional Reform Design of the urban real property and business sectors plus a full Implementation Plan. Implementation of the Plan was put on permanent hold owing to Haiti’s political instability, insecurity, and natural disasters. • USAID/Egypt, in September 1999, awarded a cooperative agreement titled “Formalization of Egypt's Urban Informal Sector”, which continued through March 2002. It was immediately followed by a second cooperative agreement titled “Business Formalization Project in Egypt” (May 2002-September 2003). The second program USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 77 aimed to conduct a full Diagnosis and Institutional Design (terms defined below) for the business sector and develop the full Implementation Plan for the real property and business sectors. Implementation of ILD’s recommendations was considered carefully by the Egyptian government at the time and some implementation took place. • The Latin America/Caribbean Bureau, in May 1998, awarded a grant titled the “Program in Property Formalization in Latin America”. This program aimed to achieve property formalization in Latin American countries and involved Mexico and Honduras. It ended in March 2003. • The Poverty Reduction Office, EGAT Bureau, awarded a grant named “ILD Program to Promote and Create an Inclusive Rule of Law” in September 2003, ending January 2009. This program helped to establish an ILD training center in Lima, secure on-going and future projects, build awareness, conduct training activities for strategic/priority countries, improve and adapting products and services, and expand ILD’s delivery capacity. Several countries were assisted including: o Ethiopia, where a full Diagnosis was completed through a USAID mission buy-in to the grant; o Tanzania, where a pre-Diagnosis was conducted. (Work in Tanzania is continuing through the President’s MKURIBATA program.) o Nigeria, where a preliminary survey of informality was conducted; and o Pakistan, where a preliminary survey of informality was conducted. The Current USAID Central Grant to ILD: Program to Help Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor In 2009, the Economic Growth, Agriculture and Trade Bureau (renamed E3 Bureau in March 2012) awarded ILD a grant through an unsolicited proposal for the purpose of legally empowering the poor. The grant, titled “Program to Help Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor”, was awarded on January 26, 2009, and is slated to end January 25, 2014. This grant has a span of five years and has an expected value of $25 million. It is focused on designing and implementing capital formation programs to empower the poor in Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and former Soviet Nations. USAID’s current grant supports ILD’s methodology which involves awareness building and a five-stage program for legal empowerment of the poor. These stages, spelled out in more detail below, cluster a conceptual continuum of phases representing the range of ILD’s program activities. These begin with preliminary engagement and conclude with the end goal of capital formation. (USAID funds support only activities under the first two stages.) Awareness Building and Political Engagement: This is one of ILD's strategic objectives and comprises ILD’s efforts to inform and educate leaders and key decision makers about how ILD's reform ideas can help a developing country make the transition to an inclusive market economy. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 78 Stage 1 - Training and Team Building: This is the first stage of ILD´s Legal Empowerment Bridge. This aims to build local teams of home-grown personnel in client countries who are trained in the ILD framework and methodologies. Teams thus trained become capable of carrying out diagnostic studies to identify legal barriers. Training and Team Building efforts are also aimed at building strategic linkages with top political authorities and other respected leaders to support program efforts. Note, however, that training sessions may also be carried out during the Awareness Building stage with potential clients. Pre-diagnosis is an awareness building tool used when needed, under which a small team from ILD/Peru will undertake a brief two- to three-week in country analysis of the informal economy. Stage 2 - Diagnosis: This is to be the essential sine qua non stage in which a country’s extralegal economy is examined and explored. Teams of researchers (both ILD and local) are mobilized to detect and analyze the defects in the legal system. The teams also document the local extralegal practices people resort to in order to protect their assets and do business. The Diagnosis stage is typically preceded by a Pre-Diagnosis. Stage 3 - Institutional Reform Design: At this stage, ILD designs proposals for policy change and institutional reform that build from the bottom-up on well-established local legal and extralegal practices. Stage 4 - Implementation: The proposed reforms lay the groundwork for a massive formalization campaign and its implementation. During this stage the newly designed processes and systems together with record keeping organization are fully implemented and put into operation. Resistance to reform from vested interests is likely, which is why establishing local ownership is essential to ensure its sustainability. Stage 5 - Capital Formation: This is the ultimate objective at which time trained multidisciplinary professionals will help implement recommendations for relating newly legalized property to opportunities in larger national and international markets. This might include helping set up: • Credit and mortgage applications; • Collections systems for credit, rates, and taxes; and • Insurance and information services. Pattern of Funding In practice, grant funds provided by the E3 Bureau have only been applied to activities under the initial stages – Awareness, Team-building and Diagnosis -- for the following reasons: 1. The latter three stages, Institutional Reform, Implementation, and Capital Formation are extremely intensive, country-specific activities, and thus very costly. 2. E3 funding is meant to be applied for activities that have global importance, such as new research or setting new agendas for engagement on development issues. As such it was deemed appropriate to provide funding for ILD’s Awareness building activities and several Preliminary Diagnosis activities per year. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 79 3. By providing funding for Awareness activities and some Pre-Diagnosis work, USAID/E3’s expectation was that this would provide sufficient focus among other international donors, philanthropic organizations, and target countries to make available additional monies from non-E3 sources to enable ILD to continue work through the Diagnostic, Institutional Reform, and Implementation stages. This approach seemed to work with some success under USAID’s previous cooperative agreement with ILD, where USAID/Ethiopia provided additional monies to the core grant to fund a Stage 2 Diagnosis of Ethiopia’s legal arrangements. III.PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION The purpose of the performance evaluation is to provide USAID with an external assessment of its current grant agreement with ILD, to examine the evolution of the various activities initially proposed and now being executed by ILD, and whether these activities are leading to the expected results. The findings of this evaluation will be used both to enhance the effectiveness of existing implementation for the remaining performance period and to inform future USAID economic growth strategies and programming. IV. SCOPE OF WORK The evaluation must: B. Assess ILD’s performance in meeting the terms of the grant agreement, in particular in producing all deliverables identified in the grant agreement and yearly work plans. The evaluation team shall consider ILD’s track record in providing all deliverables listed in the original (2009) grant agreement, yearly work plans, and any appropriate performance management plans. Quantitative evidence should be gathered and reported where appropriate. This element of the evaluation should particularly highlight performance in delivering outputs. In all elements below, the evaluators should identify countries where the indicated work has been active. 1. Building awareness for legal empowerment and social inclusion Objective: Awareness building and political engagement Result 1: Delivering presentations to Heads of State, Ministers, public officials, corporate sponsors, and leadership of donor agencies and philanthropic organizations. The evaluators should identify in a list the major presentations delivered under the grant. Result 2: Providing training and workshops on legal empowerment of the poor (and women) for the purpose of building in-country talent and constituencies. The evaluators should identify major training and workshop events by date, duration, country and intended audience. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 80 Result 3: Development of new client and partner strategies responding to changing global and regional conditions. The evaluators should identify new clients and partners to ILD who have worked jointly with ILD toward the objectives of legal empowerment and social inclusion, and assess the content of any documentation on indicated strategies in terms of its effectiveness in advancing the larger objectives of the grant. Note: ILD prides itself on developing new and innovative paradigms. What new paradigms have emerged in ILD’s work during the grant period? What new products and services have been developed to adapt to clients’ specific needs? Has this translated into a greater ability by ILD to attract new clients, as measured by substantive ILD involvement in new countries, new settings or with newly emerged leadership groups? 2. Institutionalizing legal empowerment of the poor (and women) in client countries Objective: Improved policies reducing extralegality in land ownership and business operation as a result of a country’s ability to move toward implementation Result 1: Raising partner countries’ awareness of issues related to extralegality in land ownership and business operations, and motivating their interest in moving through Stages 1 and 2 (training/team building and diagnosis). The evaluators will identify country cases where during the grant period ILD has championed improved policies and facilitated movement from Stage 1 to Stage 2. Note: Evaluator is to examine what effect awareness building has on increasing the appetite for legal empowerment reform work regardless of whether ILD works past this stage, and should note any significant trends and observations, e.g., how have ILD’s ideas influenced: • Governments, in terms of policy change, and • The development agenda in international organizations? Result 2: Increasing partner countries’ institutional capacity to reach Stage 3 (Institutional Reform), whether through ILD itself, through another implementer or the country’s own efforts. The evaluators will identify country cases where ILD’s activities have contributed to their reaching Stage 3, including identifying how Stage 3 and subsequent stages were funded and implemented (e.g., donor support, local support, etc.). Note: Evaluator is to examine what effect teambuilding, training and diagnostic studies have on increasing country capabilities to undertake legal empowerment reform work regardless of whether ILD has performed/is performing the implementation. Moreover, evaluators should note any significant trends and observations. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 81 Result 3: Developing strategies with partner countries to enhance their capacity to implement reforms. The evaluators will identify country cases where ILD has worked collaboratively with partner countries’ policymakers to develop strategies for future reform during the period of the grant. 3. Strengthening ILD’s operational platform and ensuring a sustainable expansion Objective 1: Product Improvement Result 1: Developing new technical manuals and tools for in-country technical teams involved in diagnosis, strategy, and institutional reform. The evaluators should identify new manuals and tools developed under the grant (to be listed in an annex to the evaluation report) and assess the extent of their use by in-country technical teams to advance the objectives of the grant. Objective 2: Increased funding and cost-share Result 1: Networking with donors and gaining media attention to increase buy-in to the ILD Program. The evaluators should evaluate ILD’s success in diversifying its sources of financial support, including by other donors, philanthropic organizations and partner governments. Objective 3: Increased number of local technical experts Result 1: Building a cadre of in-country technical teams and recruits Result 2: Increasing the capacity of local technical experts to become indigenous change agents. For both Result 1 and Result 2, the evaluators will assess ILD’s efforts to build in country capacity, using as sources of input available directories or rosters of local technical experts trained by ILD and evidence of ILD outreach efforts to maintain contact and provide on-going information and technical resources to local technical experts. 4. Transforming expressed demand for ILD services into actual projects and reform efforts Objective: Increased number of new projects Result 1: Awareness, training and pre-diagnostics lead to full diagnostic studies. Note: Evaluator should identify the cases where a full diagnostic study was undertaken after ILD-led pre-diagnostic work was completed, including cases USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 82 both where ILD performed a full diagnostic study and where a different organization performed the follow on work. Result 2: Establish technical credibility in legal empowerment of the poor with world leaders. Note: Several points to be considered by the evaluator are the following: • What research has ILD completed during the grant period to focus attention by audiences such as policymakers, academics, development experts and other thought leaders on issues related to legal empowerment of the poor? (Bibliographic citations for ILD studies, analysis, country reports or other research products undertaken during the grant period should be listed in an annex to the evaluation report.) How is ILD research used to engage constituencies and heads of state in its multi-stage process? How often have the ILD research reports and studies produced under the USAID grant been cited in other published research on topics related to legal empowerment of the poor? • Can evidence be found to support the hypothesis that ILD’s media and other awareness activities under the grant have sparked public debate for reforming economic governance in developing countries? Can instances be found where ILD awareness activities have plausibly led to reform efforts, even if ILD itself was not the agent of implementation? C. Assess ILD’s success in reaching the objectives of the grant The evaluation team shall examine the quality and effectiveness of ILD’s activities to advance the development goals underlying the grant agreement. While the time period for analysis should correspond to the grant period, it may be necessary to also look at work begun up to three years earlier if such work was substantially continued under the current grant. (In such cases, work predating the actual grant should be identified). Quantitative evidence should be gathered and reported where appropriate. This element of the evaluation should particularly highlight performance in delivering outcomes. The proposed methodology for this performance evaluation does not intend to document or assess broader accomplishments and impacts that may have been achieved by ILD over longer time-periods. The intended focus is the outcomes and impact (both positive and negative) to date of the current grant. If the evaluation team determines a means to more rigorously quantify impact within the time and budget allotted for this performance evaluation, the evaluation team is encouraged to bring this to the attention of the USAID COR. The evaluation team is invited to consider measures of outcomes, and may wish to consider the following: • Building awareness for legal empowerment and social inclusion; USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 83 • Existing attitudinal surveys of the poor in countries where ILD has been active, to gauge awareness of legal channels available to them, preferably drawn from time series or panel data sets; • Statistics on the use of legal channels, disaggregated by poverty status and gender, and mapped over an appropriate period of time. • Institutionalizing land reform to empower the poor and women in client countries; • Statistics on possession of land tenure rights or land title, disaggregated by poverty status and gender, and mapped over an appropriate period of time, showing results of any reform programs associated with the current grant. • Strengthening ILD’s operational platform and ensuring a sustainable expansion; • Evolution of ILD’s diversity of financial support, by donor and amount of support. • Correlation between the provision of ILD services to supported countries and corresponding local public debate on reform, and reform implementation. • Evidence of demand by reforming countries for ILD involvement in reform implementation, and the nature of ILD involvement sought (including how such involvement was funded). V. METHODOLOGY The evaluation team, in collaboration with USAID/E3 TRR, will finalize the overall evaluation methodology once award has been made. However, E3/TRR expects that, at a minimum, the team will: • review and analyze the existing performance information from USAID and/or ILD; • examine ILD documentation (research reports, training manuals, article placements, website content, etc.) produced under the grant; • review public sources of information on ILD work in partner countries, and on ILD outreach and media activities; • interview by phone USAID staff aware of ILD activities in countries where ILD is active; • conduct site visits in at least three countries (including an initial visit to Lima, Peru, and then two or three other countries where ILD has performed significant work under the grant, possibly India, Nigeria and/or Mongolia); • meet and interview USAID project beneficiaries, partners, host government counterparts at appropriate levels, and examine any relevant project documentation; • interview a representative number of experts who have received ILD training; and • assess future sustainability of the mechanisms introduced or developed by the project. In undertaking the evaluation, the evaluator will document its methods of collecting information to verify that data and opinions are being systematically collected and are not subject to biases USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 84 (e.g., key informants are selected to represent a broad spectrum of affiliations so that the information they provide can be considered reliable evidence). VI. WORK PLAN AND EVALUATION DESIGN A Work Plan and Evaluation Design for the evaluation shall be completed by the lead evaluator within one week of the award of the contract and presented to the COR. The evaluation design will include a detailed evaluation design matrix (including the key questions, the methods and data sources used to address each question), draft questionnaires and other data collection instruments, and known limitations to the evaluation design. The final design requires COR approval. The work plan will include the anticipated schedule and logistical arrangements and delineate the roles and responsibilities of members of the evaluation team. VII. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE The period of performance for completion of the evaluation is not to exceed beyond June 2013. VIII. REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES In addition to the requirements for submission of reports and in accordance with AIDAR clause 752.242-70, Periodic Progress Reports, the Contractor shall submit reports, deliverables or outputs as further described below to the COR. All reports and other deliverables shall be in the English language, unless otherwise specified by the COR. • Oral Briefings - The evaluation team will meet with USAID and provide an oral briefing of its findings and recommendations to the USAID senior management and economic growth office • A draft final report (for USAID acceptance/review) • A final report incorporating edits (Not To Exceed (NTE) 50 pages excluding appendices) • The annexes to the report shall include: a. The Evaluation Statement of Work b. Any “statements of differences” regarding significant unresolved difference of opinion by stakeholders, implementers, and/or members of the evaluation team c. All tools used in conducting the evaluation, such as questionnaires, checklists, survey instruments, and discussion guides d. Sources of information, properly identified and listed e. Sufficient description of the methodology, data collection and analytical methods to demonstrate that bias has been minimized and results can be considered to be evidence f. Disclosure of conflicts of interest forms for all evaluation team members, either attesting to a lack of conflict of interest or describing existing conflict of interest • All data collected as part of the evaluation (logically organized in excel or other mutually agreed format) USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 85 • An executive summary of no more than 5 pages highlighting key findings of the evaluation along with specific recommendations to address these weaknesses in future programming. • A one page (front and back) fact sheet about the evaluation and findings/recommendations • A power point presentation (NTE 25 slides) covering the key findings/recommendations from the evaluation. The contractor will deliver this presentation to USAID following completion of the evaluation. • An acceptable report will meet the following requirements as per USAID policy (evaluators should refer to the USAID Evaluation Policy62). a. The evaluation report should address all evaluation questions included in the Statement of Work. b. The evaluation report should include this Statement of Work as an Annex. All modifications to the Statement of Work, whether in technical requirements, evaluation questions, evaluation team composition, methodology or timeline, shall be agreed upon in writing by USAID. c. Evaluation methodology shall be explained in detail and all tools used in conducting the evaluation such as questionnaires, checklists and discussion guides will be included in an Annex to the final report. d. Evaluation findings will assess outcomes and impacts using gender disaggregated data. e. Limitations to the evaluation shall be disclosed in the report, with particular attention to the limitations associated with the evaluation methodology f. Evaluation findings should be presented as analyzed facts, evidence and data and not based on anecdotes, hearsay or the compilation of people’s opinions. g. Findings should be specific, concise and supported by strong quantitative or qualitative evidence. h. Sources of information need to be properly identified and listed in an Annex, including a list of all individuals interviewed (interviewers must receive the permission of the individual). i. Recommendations need to be supported by a specific set of findings. j. Recommendations should be action-oriented, practical and specific, with defined responsibility for the action. IX. PLACE OF PERFORMANCE The place of performance under this contract is the United States, and two-three (2-3) countries in which ILD has provided technical assistance and/or implemented programs. The country locations will be specified by USAID at the time of the contract award. Field travel will be required to all specified countries, including travel to the appropriate capital cities and possibly within the countries. Countries are likely to include Peru, India, Nigeria and/or Mongolia. 62 http://www.usaid.gov/evaluation/USAIDEvaluationPolicy.pdf USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 86 X. KEY PERSONNEL The lead evaluator is key personnel under this project. He/she shall have at least 10 years of experience leading performance evaluation teams. He/she should also demonstrate capacity to perform and oversee evaluation work in developing country context. The team shall also include technical experts in land tenure and property rights. The technical expert(s) should have at least seven (7) years of experience in the field, preferably developing countries. At least one member of the team shall be a fluent or native Spanish speaker. The offeror may propose other key personnel. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 87 Appendix 2: Evaluation Report Reference List List of ILD Program Documentation Received from USAID Grant Agreement (1) • USAID-ILD Agreement, signed March 4, 2009, subject: “Award No. EEM-G-00-09­ 00001, Program to Help Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor.” Annual Work Plans (4) • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Work Plan for 2010.” December 2009. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Work Plan for 2011.” February 2011. • ILD. “USAID-ILD Partnership: Work Plan and Budget 2012, Update and Prospects for 2012.” February 2012. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor: Work Plan and Budget 2013, Tasks and Deliverables.” February 2013. Quarterly Reports (15) 2009 • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): [First and Second] Quarterly Report 2009.” July 2009. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): [Third] Quarterly Report 2009.” November 2009. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Fourth Quarterly Report 2009-2010.” January 2010. 2010 • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): First Quarterly Report 2010.” April 2010. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Second Quarterly Report 2010.” July 2010. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 88 • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Third Quarterly Report 2010.” November 2010. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Fourth Quarterly Report 2010.” February 2011. 2011 • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): First Quarterly Report 2011.” May 2011. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Second Quarterly Report 2011.” September 2011. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Third Quarterly Report 2011.” November 2011. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Fourth Quarterly Report 2011–2012.” March 2012. 2012 • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): First Quarterly Report 2012.” June 2012. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Second Quarterly Report 2012.” October 2012. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Third Quarterly Report 2012.” December 2012. • ILD. “Program for Helping Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor (Grant No. EEM-G-00-09-00001): Fourth Quarterly Report 2012 – 2013.” March 2013. Financial Reports (3) • ILD. “Accumulated Financial Disbursement Report for Activities and Countries (2009– 2012).” • ILD. “Disbursement Report for Activities and Countries: Fiscal Year 2012.” • ILD. “Projected Disbursement Report for Activities and Countries: Fiscal Year 2013.” Other Desk and Literature Review Documentation (8) USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 89 • De Soto, Hernando. “Knowledge Lies at the Heart of Western Capitalism.” Financial Times. January 29, 2012. • De Soto, Hernando. “The Free Market Secret of the Arab Revolutions.” Financial Times. November 8, 2011. • De Soto, Hernando. “Who Are the People Marching in Egypt’s Streets?” ILD. February 1, 2011. • De Soto, Hernando. “Who Owns This Mess?” The New York Times, IHT Magazine, Global Agenda 2012, Finance. Opinion. December 2, 2011. • ILD. “ILD Worldwide Recognition: From World Leaders and International Media.” • Judge, Clark S. “Notes on the Upheaval in Egypt and Throughout the Middle East.” Hugh Hewitt. Opinion. January 31, 2011. • Kitundu, Timothy. “Government Supports Formalization Programme to Fight Poverty.” The Tanzanian Express Online. November 3, 2010. • Viney, Steven. “Informal Economy Presents Challenges, but Also Opportunities.” Egypt Independent. September 2, 2012. List of ILD Documentation Reviewed for Evaluation63 Books (3) • Institute for Liberty and Democracy (ILD). Administrative Simplification. Lima, Peru: Institute for Liberty and Democracy, 1989. • Institute of Liberty and Democracy (ILD). The War of Notary Publics: Do You Know What Would Happen If Peru Lost the War Over State Reform? Lima, Peru: ILD, 2003. • De Soto, Hernando. The Facts Are In: The Arab Spring Is a Massive Economic Revolution. Tunis, Tunisia: Cérès Editions, 2013. Documentaries (1) • The Mystery of Capital among the Indigenous Peoples of the Amazon. DVD. Directed by James Becket. Lima, Peru: Institute for Liberty and Democracy, 2009. Manuals (12) • ILD. “Institutional Reform Project: Conceptual Handbook, Research Methodology Handbook, and Operative Handbook.” 1st Edition. September 2011. • ILD. “Description of the Diagnosis Program and its Training and Monitoring Strategy.” For Internal Purposes Only. September 2011. • ILD. “Strategic Module Training Manual for the Diagnosis Stage.” For Internal Purposes Only. September 2011. 63 Bolded references are documentation that are within the grant period USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 90 • ILD. “Program Management and Technical Module Training Manual for the Diagnosis Stage.” For Internal Purposes Only. September 2011. • ILD. “Manual on Property Rights: Training Course for Indigenous Women, Entrepreneurs of Peru, and Farming Communities.” 2012. • ILD. “Manual on Enterprise Access: Training Course for Indigenous Women and Entrepreneurs of Peru.” 2012. • ILD. “Manual on Citizen Participation: Training Course for Indigenous Women and Entrepreneurs of Peru.” 2012. • ILD. “Manual on Property Rights: Training Course for Indigenous Women, Entrepreneurs of Peru, and Native Communities.” 2012. • ILD. “Informal Sector Reform Training Program, Economic Team: Classroom and On￾the-Job Training in Lagos.” February 2013. • ILD. “Informal Sector Reform Training Program, Extralegal Team: Classroom and On￾the-Job Training in Lagos.” February 2013. • ILD. “Informal Sector Reform Training Program, Legal Team: Classroom and On-the￾Job Training in Lagos.” February 2013. • ILD. “From Dead Capital to Broad-Based Growth: Orientation Module for Politicians.” April 2013. Program and Country Reports (22) Avatar Paradigm • De Soto, Hernando. “The Peruvian Amazon Is Not Avatar (Supplement).” June 5, 2010. • De Soto, Hernando. “The Amazon Is Not Avatar.” Development Co-Operation Report. Chapter 5. OECD. 2011. • ILD. “Reporte Preliminar Sobre Conflictos Sociales en el Peru, Casos: Tambogrande, Conga y Quellaveco [Preliminary Report on Social Conflicts in Peru, Cases: Tambogrande, Conga and Quellaveco].” August 2012. Rural, Indigenous Women • Aliaga, Luis, María Barrón, Daniella Delgado, Ricardo Gutiérrez, Natalia Rey de Castro, and Ramiro Rubio. “Rural Community, Uncertain Future: Organization, Property, Business, Conflict Resolution, Natural Resources and Status of Rural Women.” Supervised by Ana Lucia Camaiora. December 15, 2011. • ILD. “Peruvian Indigenous Women: ILD’s Impact on Women.” January 2012. • Barrón, María, Iris Mackenzie, Jackeline Silva, and Natalia Rey de Castro. “A Cursory Compilation and Revision of Written Material on Women’s Rights in the Middle East and North Africa Region and an Initial Analysis: Toward the Legal Empowerment of Women in Islamic Countries.” Supervised by María del Carmen Delgado. July 2012. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 91 Land Grabbing • Harvard Law and International Development Society. “Government Policies for Adjudicating Arable Land: A Comparative Analysis in Five Developing Countries.” April 2011. • ILD. “The Rebellion of the Hungry: Food Security and Property Rights in the Global Context.” June 2011. Country Activities • Morales-Bayro, Luis. “ILD’s Capitalization Program: Estimating the Value of Extralegal Businesses (Dead Capital).” Working Paper. For Internal Purposes Only. Lima, Peru: September 2001. • Morales-Bayro, Luis. “ILD’s Capitalization Program: Estimating the Value of Extralegal Businesses (Dead Capital).” Working Paper. For Internal Purposes Only. Lima, Peru: October 2001. • Morales-Bayro, Luis. “ILD’s Capitalization Program: Estimating the Value of Extralegal Businesses (Dead Capital).” Working Paper. For Internal Purposes Only. Lima, Peru: May 2003. China • ILD. “An ILD Overview of the Property Rights Legal Framework in the People’s Republic of China: Exclusion and Extralegal Property Rights Amidst Economic Growth.” February 29, 2012. Ethiopia • ILD. “Program for the Creation of an Inclusive Rule of Law in Ethiopia: Diagnosis of Extralegality in Ethiopia.” Lima, Peru: December 2008. Multi-country Studies • Barrón, María, Jackeline Silva, and Robin Tivy. “ILD Final Report: A Cursory Examination of Personal Identification Systems and Civil Registries in Three Countries: Peru, Egypt, and India.” Supervised by María del Carmen Delgado. January 2012. Mongolia • ILD. “Building the Legal Habitat for Prosperity, Legal Empowerment for the Majority of Mongolians: Proposal for the Government of Mongolia.” November 2011. Nigeria USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 92 • ILD. “From Disconnected Extralegal Realities to One Prosperous Nation: Pre-Diagnosis Legal Empowerment Map—Lagos, Nigeria.” December 2009. Peru • ILD. “From Political Crisis to Economic Growth: ILD’s Contribution to Latin America’s #1 Success Story.” • ILD. “Housing for the Urban Poor, Case Study: Lima.” May 2012. • ILD. “Designing and Implementing Reforms, an Example: The Peruvian Experience.” Lima, Peru: April 30, 2013. • ILD. “Methodology Applied in the Empirical Analysis of the Impact of the Formalization Program in Peru.” Lima, Peru: July 2013. Tanzania • ILD. “Program to Formalize the Assets of the Poor of Tanzania and Strengthen the Rule of Law: The Diagnosis Executive Summary.” Volume 1. October 2005. Other Topics • ILD. “Rethinking Property Rights and Natural Resources: An Overall Conceptual Approach.” January 2012. Financial Reports (2) • ILD. “Disbursement Report USAID-EGAT by Line Item: January 2009–June 2013.” • USAID-ILD., dated April 2009, subject: “Modification No. 1: Award No. EEM-G-00-09­ 00001, Program to Help Developing Nations Create Inclusive Market Economies by Legally Empowering the Poor.” List of Other Documentation Reviewed by the LEAP team for the Evaluation Ahiakpor, J. (2008). “Mystifying the Concept of Capital: Hernando de Soto’s Misdiagnosis of the Hindrance to Economic Development in the Third World.” Independent Review 13:1. Albright, M., and H. de Soto. “Giving the Poor Their Rights.” Time Magazine. July 5, 2007. Alcázar, L., and M. Jarmillo. (2011). “Panel/Tracer Study on the Impact of Business Facilitation Processes on Microenterprises and Identification of Priorities for Future Business Enabling Environment Projects in Lima, Peru.” Business Regulation Evaluation Group. Alchian, A. (1977). Economic Forces at Work. Philadelphia: Liberty Press. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 93 Alzua, M. L., H. Djebbari, and M. Valdivia. (2012). “Impact Evaluation for Policy Making: A Close Look at Latin American Countries with Weaker Research Capabilities.” Centro de Estudios Distributivos, Laborales y Sociales. No. 132. Arrunada, B. (2007). “Pitfalls to Avoid When Measuring Institutions: Is Doing Business Damaging Businesses?” Journal of Comparative Economics 35:4. Banik, D. “The Potential of Legal Empowerment in Eradicating Poverty.” Rights and Development Bulletin. Volume 1, Issue 3, June–July 2009. ———. (2009). “Legal Empowerment as a Conceptual and Operational Tool in Poverty Eradication.” Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 1, no. 1: 117–131. Benjaminsen, T. A. (2002). “Formalizing Land Tenure in Rural Africa.” Forum of Development Studies 29:2. Benjaminsen, T. A., and E. Sjaastad. (2003). “Mathieu versus de Soto: A Comment.” NUPI Forum for Development Studies, no. 1. Besley, T., and M. Ghatak. (2009). “Reforming Property Rights.” Retrieved May 30, 2013, from http://www.voxeu.org/article/reforming-property-rights-and-economic-development. Bethell, T. (1998). The Noblest Triumph: Prosperity and Property Throughout the Ages. New York City: St. Martin’s Press. Blackden, M., J. Cutura, A. Ellis, F. MacCulloch, and H. Seebens. (2007). “Gender and Economic Growth in Tanzania.” The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, The World Bank Group. Blackman, A., G. Asner, and L. Corral. (2013). “Does Land Titling Stem Forest Cover Change? Native Communities in the Peruvian Amazon.” World Bank Group. Presented at the Annual World Bank Conference on Land and Poverty. Blackman, A., G. Asner, L. Corral, E. Lima, and J. J. Miranda. (2013). “Effects of Protected Areas of Deforestation and Poverty: Evidence from the Peruvian Amazon.” World Bank Group. Presented at the Annual World Bank Conference on Land and Poverty. Bruce, J. W. (2011). “Simple Solutions to Complex Problems: Land Formalization as a ‘Silver Bullet.’” (Note: the final version of this paper was published as Bruce, J. W. (2012). “Simple Solutions to Complex Problems: Land Formalization as a ‘Silver Bullet,’” in Otto, J. M., and A. J. Hoekema, Fair Land Governance [Leiden, Netherlands: Leiden University Press]). Bunting, M. (2000). “Economist Hernando de Soto: Fine Words, Flawed Ideas.” Retrieved May 30, 2013, from http://www.commondreams.org/views/091100-103.htm. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 94 Carothers, T. “Promoting the Rule of Law Abroad: The Problem of Knowledge.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: Rule of Law Series. Working Paper, Number 34. January 2003. Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor. “Making the Law Work for Everyone.” United Nations Development Programme. Working Group Reports, Volume I. 2008. Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor. “Making the Law Work for Everyone.” United Nations Development Programme. Working Group Reports, Volume II. 2009. Cousins, B., et al. (2005). “Will Formalizing Property Rights Reduce Poverty in South Africa’s ‘Second Economy’? Debating Land Reform.” Natural Resources and Poverty, Policy Brief no. 18: 1-6. De Soto, H. (1989). The Other Path: The Invisible Revolution in the Third World. New York: Harper and Row. ———. (2000). The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else. New York: Basic Books. ———. (2000). The Other Path: The Economic Answer to Terrorism. New York: Basic Books. ———. (2001). “Why Capitalism Works in the West but Not Elsewhere.” International Herald Tribune (January 5). ———. (2001). “The Mystery of Capital.” Finance and Development 38, no. 1 (March). ———. (2001). “The Secret of Non-Success.” Time Magazine (April 16). ———. (2001). “The Constituency of Terror.” New York Times (October 15). ———. (2002). “Rejoiner to Mathieu.” Forum for Development Studies 29:2. ———. (2002). “Push Property Rights.” Washington Post (January 6). ———. (2002). “Law and Property Outside the West: A Few New Ideas About Fighting Poverty.” Optima Special Issue on Sustainable Development 48, no. 1 (September): 2–9. ———. (2002). “Law and Property Outside the West: A Few New Ideas About Fighting Poverty.” NUPI (December): 349–361. ———. (2004). “Law and Property Outside the West: A Few New Ideas About Fighting Poverty." In Marc A. Miles (ed.), The Road to Prosperity: The 21st-Century Approach to Economic Development, 99–119. Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 95 ———. (2006). “What If You Can’t Prove You Had a House?” International Herald Tribune and New York Times (January 20). ———. (2007). Interview by Riz Khan. Al Jazeera English (May 5). ———. (2008). Interview with Gustavo Wensjoe. “The Rule of Law.” Literal Magazine. ———. (2009). Interview with Barrett Sheridan. “Slumdogs vs. Millionaires.” Newsweek Web Exclusive (February 20). ———. (2009). “Toxic Paper.” Newsweek, (March 2). ———. (2009). “De Soto: La Recesión Tiene Origen Legal, no Financiero.” El Comercio (March 3). ———. (2009). “Opinion: Toxic Assets Were Hidden Assets.” Wall Street Journal Online (March 25). ———. (2009). “Crise Financière: Une Crise . . . Du Papier.” Le Figaro (March 27). ———. (2009). “Opinion: Toxic Assets Were Hidden Assets.” Wall Street Journal Online (March 25). ———. (2009). Interview document by PBS for Commanding Heights documentary. PBS (March 30–31). ———. (2009). “Opinion: Global Meltdown Rule No. 1: Do the Math.” Los Angeles Times (April 12). ———. (2009). Interview with Emilio Camacho and Lucero del Castillo. Perú 21 (November). ———. (2009). Interview by Warren Kimmel. CNBC (November–December). ———. (2009). Interview with Rik Kirkland. “The Rise of Social Movements: The Economic Roots of the Arab Spring.” McKinsey and Company (December). ———. (2009). Interview by Riz Khan. “Clock Ticking on Development Goals.” Al Jazeera English (December 28). ———. (2009-2010). “Understanding the Shadow Economies of the Developing and Developed Worlds.” In The Annual Proceedings of the Wealth and Well-Being of Nation, Vol. 2, ed. Emily Chamlee-Wright and Jennifer Kodl. Beloit, WI: Beloit College Press, 15–23. ———. (2010). Interview with David McAlvany. Radio. McAlvany Weekly Commentary (February). ———. (2010). Interview for Oslo Freedom Forum (April). USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 96 ———. (2010). Interview with Linda Pressly. “Can an Economist Save Peru?” BBC Radio. Lima, Peru (April). ———. (2010). “Staying in the Dark About Derivatives Will Bring Economic Collapse.” QFinance (October 29). ———. (2010). “La Amazonía no es Avatar.” El Comercio (June 5). ———. (2011). “Law and Property Outside the West: A Few New Ideas About Fighting Poverty.” Forum for Development Studies 29:2. ———. (2011). “This is Your Land.” World Policy Journal 28, no. 2: 35–40. ———. (2011). “Opinion: Egypt’s Economic Apartheid.” Wall Street Journal (February 3). ———. (2011). “The Destruction of Economic Facts.” Bloomberg BusinessWeek (April 28). ———. (2011). “The Cost of Financial Ignorance.” Washington Post (October 7). ———. (2011). “The Real Mohamed Bouazizi.” Foreign Policy (December 16). ———. (2012). L'économie Informelle Comment y Remédier? Tunis, Tunisia: Cérès Editions. ———. (2012). Interview with Christian Caryl. “Just Call Me Poor.” Foreign Policy (January 12). ———. (2013). “Opinion: The Secret to Reviving the Arab Spring’s Promise: Property Rights.” Wall Street Journal (February 26). ———. (2013). “Fine Words, Flawed Ideas by Madeline Bunting.” Retrieved from http://www.commondreams.org/views/091100-103.htm (May 30). De Soto, H., and F. Cheneval. (2006). Realizing Property Rights: Swiss Human Rights Book. Vol. 1. Zurich: University of Zurich. De Soto, H., and J. Stiglitz (2009). Interview with Naomi Klein. “Economic Power.” The Great Issues Forum. De Soto, H., P. Collier, D. Moyo, and S. Lewis (2009). The Munk Debate on Foreign Aid. De Soto, H., and M. Albright (2009). Interview by Andrea Mitchell. Aspen Ideas Festival Afternoon of Conversation, Aspen, Colorado. Deininger, K., and G. Feder. (2009). “Land Registration, Governance, and Development: Evidence and Implications for Policy.” World Bank Research Observer 24, no. 2: 233–266. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 97 Development Today. (2007). “Norway Backs Out of de Soto Land Rights Project in Tanzania,” Development Today, no. 21–22. Available at http://www.development￾today.com/magazine/2007/DT_21-22/News/3061. Dorman, W. J. (2009). “Informal Cairo: Between Islamic Insurgency and the Neglectful State?” Security Dialogue. Vol. 40, no. 4/5: 419-441. Driscoll, G., and L. Hoskins. (2003). “Property Rights: The Key to Economic Development.” Policy Analysis, no. 482. Endo, V. (Year Unknown). “Applying the LGAF to Peru: Insights and Follow Up.” Presentation given to the Administracion del Territorio Consultores Member of the Advisory Committee of the Project for the Consolidation of the Immovable Property Rights in Peru. Evidence and Lessons from Latin America. (2013). “Expanding Microfinance in Latin America’s Rural Areas.” Policy Brief. Field, E. (2005). “Property Rights and Investment in Urban Slums.” Journal of the European Economics Association 3:2–3. ———. (2007). “Entitled to Work: Urban Property Rights and Labor Supply in Peru.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 122:4. Field, E., and M. Torero. (2006). “Do Property Titles Increase Credit Access Among the Urban Poor? Evidence From a Nationwide Titling Program.” Working Paper. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Fernandes, E. (2002). “The Influence of de Soto's The Mystery of Capital.” Land Lines 14:1. Galiani, S., and E. Schargrodsky. (2010). “Property Rights for the Poor: Effects of Land Titling.” Journal of Public Economics Vol. 94, no. 9–10: 700–729. ———. (2011). “Land Property Rights and Resource Allocation.” Journal of Law and Economics Vol. 54, no. 4: 329-345. Garcia-Bolivar, O. E. (2006). “Informal Economy: Is it a Problem, a Solution or Both? The Perspective of the Informal Business.” Bepress Legal Series, Paper 1065. Gilbert, A. (2002). “On the Mystery of Capital and the Myths of Hernando de Soto.” International Development Planning Review 24:1. ———. (2008). “Postscript: How Have Seven More Years of Research Affected My Message?” Document e-mailed on March 14, 2010, from Milford Bateman of the Overseas Development Institute to Stephen Golub. (Note: A refined online version of this paper was located as this literature review was being completed: Alan Gilbert, “The Tenth Anniversary of De Soto’s The USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 98 Mystery of Capital: Reflections on the Book’s Public Impact,” available at http://www.n￾naerus.net/web/sat/workshops/2010/pdf/PAPER_gilbert_a.pdf.) ———. (2009). “Extreme Thinking About Slums and Slum Dwellers: A Critique.” SAIS Review of International Affairs 29:1. ———. (2010). “The Tenth Anniversary of De Soto’s The Mystery of Capital: Reflections on the Book’s Public Impact.” University College London. Vol. 24. “The Globalist: Biography of Hernando de Soto.” Retrieved May 29, 2013, from http://www.theglobalist.com/AuthorBiography.aspx?AuthorId=32. Global Witness. (2007). “Cambodia’s Family Trees: Illegal Logging and the Stripping of Public Assets by Cambodia’s Elite.” Global Witness, Washington DC, June. Available at http://www.globalwitness.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/cambodias_family_trees_low_res.pdf. Golub, S. “Beyond Rule of Law Orthodoxy: The Legal Empowerment Alternative.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: Rule of Law Series. Working Paper, Number 41. October 2003. Granér, S. (2005). “Hernando de Soto and the Mystification of Capital.” Ord & Bild 2 (March) (in Swedish). Translated into English in Eurozine 19 (January 2007). Gravois, J. (2005). “The De Soto Delusion.” Retrieved May 30, 2013, from http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/hey_wait_a_minute/2005/01/the_de_soto_delus ion.html Gwartney, J., and R. Lawson. (2002). “Economic Freedom of the World: Annual Report.” The Fraser Institute. Hassen, E-K. (2007). “The Second Economy and ‘Dead Assets’: Why We Must Think Beyond de Soto,” P&DM Occasional Paper Series No. 1, October, Paper 7, 80–92, Graduate School of Public and Development Management, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. Hendrix, S. E. (1996). “Testing the de Soto Theory for Property Records Modernization: An Evaluation of the Model and Its Application in El Salvador With Lessons Learned.” Journal of the Urban and Regional Information System Association (URISA Journal) 8:63–75. Available at http://www.urisa.org/files/Hendrixvol8no2-5.pdf. Hewko, J. “Foreign Direct Investment: Does the Rule of Law Matter?” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: Rule of Law Series. Working Paper, Number 26. April 2002. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 99 Institute of Liberty and Democracy. “About Us.” Retrieved May 30, 2013, from http://www.ild.org.pe/about-us. ———. “Our History.” Retrieved May 30, 2013, from http://www.ild.org.pe/about-us/our￾history. ———. “Project Description.” Retrieved May 30, 2013, from http://imaginationforpeople.org/en/project/institute-for-liberty-and-democracy/. ———. (Year Unknown). “ILD’s Economic Methodology: Lagos, Nigeria.” Jaramillo, M. (2004). “Transaction Costs in Peru: How Much Does It Cost to Start a Garment Firm in Lima?” Ronald Coase Institute Research Report. ———. (2013). “Is There Demand for Formality Among Informal Firms? Evidence From Microfirms in Downtown Lima.” Bonn, Germany: German Development Institute. Langford, M. (2007). “Beyond Formalisation: The Role of Civil Society in Reclaiming the Legal Empowerment Agenda.” Legal Empowerment—A Way Out of Poverty, no. 4 (December): 41–66. LaPorta, R., F. Lopez-de Silanes, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny. (1999). “The Quality of Government.” Journal of Law, Economics and Organization. Vol. 15, no. 1: 222-279. Lastarria-Cornhiel, S. (1997). “Impact of Privatization on Gender and Property Rights in Africa.” World Development 25, no. 8: 1317–1333. Lyons, M. (2013). “Pro-Poor Business Law? On MKURABITA and the Legal Empowerment of Tanzania’s Street Vendors.” Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 5, no. 1 (March): 74–95. Madrick, J. (2001). “The Charm of Property.” New York Review of Books 48, p. 276. Mathieu, P. (2002). “Security of Land Tenure Papers and Unleashing Grass-Root Investments for Rural Development in Africa: Some Comments.” Forum for Development Studies 29:2, 367­ 372. McGann, J., and R. Weaver. (2000). Think Tanks and Civil Societies: Catalysts for Ideas and Action. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Mennen, T. (2010). “The Mystery of Legal Empowerment: Livelihoods and Community Justice in Bolivia.” In Legal Empowerment: Practitioners’ Perspectives. Edited by Stephen Golub, Legal and Governance Reform: Lessons Learned, No. 2, International Development Law Organization (IDLO), Rome, Italy. Mitchell, T. (2005). “The Work of Economics: How a Discipline Makes Its World.” European Journal of Sociology 46, no. 2: 297–320. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 100 “MKURABITA in the Context of Legal Empowerment of the Poor.” Retrieved June 3, 2013, from http://www.mkurabita.go.tz/userfiles/2011-1-19-2-36-43_mkurabita_context.pdf. MKURABITA. “Cost-Benefit Analysis: Calculations for Benefits.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. “Formalization Budget and Work Plan for Villages Growing Sugarcane in Mvomero District Council (Mtibwa).” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. “Formalization Work Plan for Cashew Nut Growers in Newala and Ruangwa District Councils.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. “Formalization Work Plan for Tea Growers in Kilolo and Ludewa District Councils.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. “Rural Property Formalization Budget – Tanzania Mainland.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2007). “Property and Business Formalization Program Progress Report.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2008). “Property and Business Formalization Program Progress Report.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2008). “Property and Business Formalization Program Progress Report (July￾November 2008).” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2008). “Property and Business Formalization Program Progress Report: Work Plan, Monitoring and Evaluation Framework and Cost-Benefit Analysis.” Vol. VII. Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2010). “Presentation on the Physical Progress Report to the First Program Steering Committee (July 2009 – March 2010).” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2010). “Property and Business Formalization Program Progress Report: Urban Regularization Project in Njombe, Morogoro and Arusha.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2011). “Property and Business Formalization Program Progress Report (July 2010 – June 2011).” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2011). “Property and Business Formalization Program Progress Report (July 2011 – June 2012).” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 101 ———. (2012). “Enhancing Impact of the Formalization of Properties and Businesses in Tanzania through Capacity Building: A Five Years Project (2013/2014-2017/2018).” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2013). “Business Formalization for 8 Districts: Five Years Budget and Budget for the Business Formalization – Zanzibar (Financial Year 2013-2018).” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2013). “Navigation of Legal and Institutional Reforms Activity Budget.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2013). “Property and Business Formalization Program: Budget and Work Plan for Monitoring and Evaluation (2012/13 to 2017/13).” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site￾visit. ———. (2013). “Property and Business Formalization Program: Budget for Sisal Estates Formalization in Korogwe Town and District Councils.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2013). “Property and Business Formalization Program: Detailed Work Plan and Budget for the Period from 1st July 2008 to 30th June 2013.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2013). “Property and Business Formalization Program: Detailed Work Plan and Budget for the Period from 1st July 2008 to 30th June 2013, Formalization of Extralegal.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2013). “Property and Business Formalization Program: Work Plan and Budget Business Formalization Tanzania Mainland (Year 2013-2018) and Activity Based Budget for the Year 2012/13.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2013). “Property and Business Formalization Program: Work Plan and Budget for Urban Formalization from 2013-2018.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. ———. (2013). “Total Cash Crops.” Retrieved during August 2013 Tanzania site-visit. Mooya, M. M., and C. E. Cloete. (2008). “Land Tenure and Urban Poverty Alleviation: Theory, Evidence and New Directions.” FIG Working Week 2008, Federation Internationale des Geometres, June, Stockholm, Sweden. Available at http://www.fig.net/pub/fig2008/papers/ts07a/ts07a_03_mooya_cloete_2757.pdf. Morriss, A. (2007). “The Economics of Property Rights.” Retrieved May 30, 2013, from http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/the-economics-of-property-rights/#axzz2Vt8gbDtu. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 102 Nyamu-Musembi, C. (2006). “Breathing Life Into Dead Theories About Property Rights: De Soto and Land Relations in Rural Africa.” Institute of Development Studies, Working Paper 272, Brighton, IDS. Olortegui, I. (2001). “Informal Settlers in Lima.” Presented at the ESF/N-AERUS International Workshop, Leuven and Brussels, Belgium. Onsrud, H. (2005). “The High Level Commission for the Legal Empowerment of the Poor.” Center for Property Rights and Development. Norwegian Mapping and Cadastre Authority. Operations Evaluation Department. (2002). “Peru County Assistance Evaluation.” Document of the World Bank. Otto, M. (2009). “Rule of Law Promotion, Land Tenure and Poverty Alleviation: Questioning the Assumptions of Hernando de Soto.” Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 1, no. 1: 175–197. Pallotti, A. (2008). “Tanzania: Decentralising Power or Spreading Poverty?” Review of African Political Economy. Vol. 35, no. 116: 221-235. “People in Economics: Hearing the Dogs Bark—A Jeremy Clift Interview.” Retrieved May 30, 2013, from http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2003/12/pdf/people.pdf. Pinckney, T., and P. Kimuyu. (1994). “Land Tenure Reform in East Africa: Good, Bad or Unimportant?” Journal of African Economies 3:1. PBS. (2009). “The Power of the Poor With Hernando de Soto.” PBS Documentary Special. Free to Choose Media. Schaefer, P. (2009). “A $9 Trillion Question: Did the World Get Muhammad Yunus Wrong?” Foreign Policy, August 18. Available at http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/08/18/a_9_trillion_question_did_the_world_get_mu hammad_yunus_wrong. Schirmer, S. (2007). “Deriving Development From de Soto: A Vision for South Africa.” P&DM Occasional Paper Series, no. 1, October, Paper 6, 66–79, Graduate School of Public and Development Management, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. Schuck, P., and R. Litan. (1986–1987). “Regulatory Reform in the Third World: The Case of Peru.” Yale Journal on Regulation, Vol. 4, no. 51: 51–78 ———. (1987). “Regulatory Reform in Peru.” AEI Journal of Government and Society, Vol. 11, no. 1: 36-43. Shipton, P. (1992). “Debts and Trespasses: Land, Mortgages, and the Ancestors in Western Kenya.” Africa: Journal of International Africa Institute 62:3. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 103 Sjaastad, E., and B. Cousins. (2008). “Formalization of Land Rights in the South: An Overview.” Land Use Policy Vol. 26, no. 1: 1–9. Smith, B., et al. (eds.). (2008). The Mystery of Capital and the Construction of Social Reality. Chicago: Open Court. Soliman, S. (2011). The Autumn of Dictatorship: Fiscal Crisis and Political Change in Egypt Under Mubarak. Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press. Stephens, M. (2009). “The Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor: An Opportunity Missed.” Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 1, no. 1: 132–157. Tomlinson, M. R. (2007). “Are Title Deeds a Silver Bullet for Accessing Credit?” P&DM Occasional Paper Series no. 1, October, Paper 2, 17–31, Graduate School of Public and Development Management, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. Unknown. (2013). “Rural Development in Peru: The Andean Connection, Diminishing Distance, Falling Poverty.” The Economist. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21576116-diminishing-distance-falling-poverty￾andean-connection. Van Der Molen, P. (2012). “After 10 Years of Criticism: What Is Left of de Soto’s Ideas?” International Federations of Surveyors, FIG Working Week. Von Benda-Beckmann, F. (2003). “Mysteries of Capital or Mystification of Legal Property?” Focaal-European Journal of Anthropology, no. 41: 187-199. Williamson, C. (2011). “The Two Sides of de Soto: Property Rights, Land Titling, and Development.” The Annual Proceedings of the Wealth and Well-Being of Nations. World Bank. (2002). “Peru: Country Assistance Evaluation.” Operations Evaluation Department. No. 24898-PE. ———. (2004) “Implementation Completion Report for an Urban Property Rights Project.” ———. (2008). “Doing Business: An Independent Evaluation.” Washington, DC. ———. (2007). “Gender and Economic Growth in Tanzania: Creating Opportunities for Women.” ———. (2011). “Restructuring Paper on a Proposed Project Restructuring of the Real Property Rights Consolidation Project.” ———. (2013). “Implementation Completion and Results Report for Real Property Rights Consolidation.” USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 104 ———. (1998). “Project Appraisal Document Report No. 18245PE, Peru-Urban Property Rights Project.” Washington, DC. Ybarra, M. (2008). “Violent Visions of an Ownership Society: The Land Administration Project in Petén, Guatemala.” No. 26: 44-54. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 105 Strategic Objective Business Process KPI and Main Deliverables Generate more knowledge and new products for global action. Innovation and Applied Research  White Papers according to Innovation & Applied Research Plan (see Annex 1)  Blueprint for new/redesigned products and services Build awareness for legal empowerment and social inclusion. Awareness Building and Political Engagement  Increased demand from clients (Head of State/Government)  Seminars, conferences and/or lectures  Appearances and/or mentions in media, researches, books, etc.  Letter of Intent or MOU signed to initiate an ILD Program  Strategic Training sessions for strategic countries Transform expressed demand for ILD’s services into actual projects. Operational Engagement  Desk Research Reports for strategic countries  Pre-Diagnosis Reports for strategic countries  Proposals submitted  Funding Agreement signed  Client Contracts signed Strengthen ILD's products, services, and operational platform to ensure sustainable expansion. Product Improvement  Diagnosis Manuals  Institutional Reform Manuals  Monitoring Manuals  Strategic Module Training Manuals (Trainee Edition)  Diagnosis Technical Module Training Manuals (Trainee Edition)  Institutional Reform Technical Module Training Manuals (Trainee Edition)  Strategic Module Training Manuals (Trainer Edition)  Diagnosis Technical Module Training Manuals (Trainer Edition)  Institutional Reform Technical Module Training Manuals (Trainer Edition)  Knowledge Management system  Operational system to support program deployment Appendix 3: Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Plan in USAID ILD Grant Agreement 2009 Performance monitoring will be based on quarterly progress report for each core business process described below and on the following scheme of key performance indicators (KPI) and main deliverables: Specific metrics for each KPI (i.e., number of Strategic Training countries, number of Pre-Diagnosis reports, etc.) will be defined on an annual basis and be used as a primary guideline to submit the work plan for each year of the program. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 106 ILD PRESENTATIONS (90) ILD Major Presentations to government officials or donor agencies Event Date Location 2009 (10) Mr. de Soto participated in the first USAID Summer Seminar Series by explaining the main challenges to creating market economies throughout the developing world. July 9 Washington, DC, USA X Mr. de Soto delivered the keynote speech for the 2009 ESRI International User Conference before an audience of 10,000 GIS professionals and experts. July 13 San Diego, CA, USA X ILD’s Legal Manager Maria del Carmen Delgado participated in the Second International Expert Session on Land Title Systems for Indigenous People Conference organized by the Forum of the Federations and the First Nations Tax Commission. September Montreal, Canada Mr. de Soto attended the International Forum on Food & Agriculture Conference organized by Colidretti. October Italy Mr. de Soto attended the ALTA Annual Convention organized by the American Land Title Association. October Palm Beach, Florida, USA Mr. de Soto attended the Miller Upton Forum organized by Beloit College. October Beloit, Wisconsin, USA Mr. de Soto was the keynote speaker at the XLIV Congresso Nazionale del Notariato, “Accompagnando la Societa che Cambia,” organized by Consiglio Nazionale del Notariato. October 21 Venice, Italy Appendix 4: List of ILD Participation in Conferences, Presentations, and High-Level Meetings After the LEAP team’s site visit to Peru in April and May 2013, ILD provided a list of major presentations delivered to government officials and donor agencies, acknowledged in the below chart. By utilizing ILD quarterly reports and annual work plans as well as conducting web-based research, the LEAP team then expanded upon this list to include other conferences, forums, seminars, presentations, and meetings delivered to government officials, corporations, donor agencies, and philanthropic organizations by ILD. Thereafter, all information was validated via web-based research by the LEAP team in June 2013 as well as by supporting documentation provided by ILD in July and August 2013. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 107 ILD PRESENTATIONS (90) ILD Major Presentations to government officials or donor agencies Event Date Location ILD staff participated in a seminar hosted by the Chamber of Industry of Bolivia, where ILD CEO Manuel Salazar and Vice President of International Operations Victor Endo presented ILD’s research October 17-18 La Paz, Bolivia ILD attended the Empowering Everybody for Entrepreneurship: What Has to be Done Video Conference organized by Bremen University. November Germany Mr. de Soto was the keynote speaker at the Globalization and Development: Political, Economic and Environmental Impact in Latin America working lunch organized by Grupo RPP, a radio program in Peru, to commemorate its 46th anniversary. November 11 Lima, Peru 2010 (31) Mr. de Soto participated in the Riding the Wave: The Summit Bounce and the Post-Crisis Conference for Western Hemisphere Economic Officers organized by the U.S. State Department January San Juan, Puerto Rico X Mr. de Soto participated in the “Slumdogs vs. Millionaires” Conference at Berkley University January Berkley, CA, USA Mr. de Soto was the keynote speaker at the “The Critical Importance of the Rule of Law and Property Rights” Speaker Series breakfast event organized by the Initiative for Global Development (IGL) January 29 Seattle, Washington, USA During Mr. de Soto’s abovementioned visit to Delhi, Mr. de Soto met with senior political leaders, including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Indian Congress Chairperson Sonia Ghandi, Congress General Secretary Rahul Ghandi, Minister of Housing Urban Poverty Alleviation and Minister of Tourism Kumari Selja, and other Indian Cabinet Members to discuss how ILD could be of assistance to the government. February Delhi, India Mr. de Soto participated in the Global Economy: Changing Growth Paradigm Panel and Geopolitics: Reshaping Geopolitical Language Panel at the Russian Forum. February 3–5 Moscow, Russia Mr. de Soto attended the Inclusive Paradigms for Inclusive Growth Conference organized by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI). February 15 Delhi, India X USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 108 ILD PRESENTATIONS (90) ILD Major Presentations to government officials or donor agencies Event Date Location Mr. de Soto met with Papua New Guinea Minister of National Planning Paul Tiensten. March Peru X Mr. de Soto spoke on “The Extralegal Economy: Significance of Property Rights to Leadership” at the 2nd Annual Bola Tinubu Colloquium. March Lagos, Nigeria Mr. de Soto attended the Town and Gown Cultural Series Conference hosted by ESRI. April 8 Los Angeles, CA, USA Mr. de Soto delivered the keynote speech on “How to Achieve Economic Growth With Social Inclusion” and the final comments at the QUO VADIS PERU 2010 Conference (“Peru, First World Country: How? When?”). April 20 Lima, Peru Mr. de Soto presented at The Global Economic Crisis Conference at the University of Minnesota. May Minneapolis, MN, USA Mr. de Soto was the keynote speaker at the 7th Winaypaq Seminar organized by Winqypaq NGO, chaired by Gonzalo Priale y Jamie de Althaus. May 7 Lima, Peru Mr. de Soto received the 2010 Hayek Medal Award and delivered a lecture entitled “The Crisis, Growth, and Private Property” organized by Friedrich August von Hayek Gesellschaft e. V. June 24-25 Freiburg, Germany Mr. de Soto attended the 2010 Fortune Global Forum, Hot Spots and Opportunities: A Global Economic Overview Conference. June 26–28 Cape Town, South Africa ILD Vice President for International Operations Victor Endo participated in the National and Global Macroecononimc Environment Forum on the Formalization of the Colombian Micro and Small Enterprise. July Medellin, Colombia Mr. de Soto presented the “La PYME, claves para su desarrollo exitoso” (The SMEs Are Key to Successful Development) exhibit at the ENAPYME Conference. July Santiago, Chile USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 109 ILD PRESENTATIONS (90) ILD Major Presentations to government officials or donor agencies Event Date Location ILD Legal Director Ana Lucía Camaiora participated in the Land Administration Policy and Cadastres Conference (COFOPRI and the World Bank). July 5 Lima, Peru X ILD Legal Director Ana Lucía Camaiora and Senior Researcher Luis Aliaga participated in the Peru: Government Public Policy and Challenges in the Field of LandManagement and Cadastre Conference (COFOPRI-World Bank). July 5 Lima, Peru ILD Senior Researcher Luis Aliaga participated in the Connecting Native and Rural Communities into Economy, Enterprise and Law Conference (Ministry of Mining, Government of Peru). July 15 Lima, Peru X Mr. de Soto was the keynote speaker at the Leading for Value III (Mobilizing Capital for Social Transformation) Seminar organized by the Delta State Government. His speech was entitled, “Laying the Agenda for Social Transformation, Financing Social Development and Transformation.” August 13 Asaba, Delta, Nigeria Mr. de Soto participated in the African Presidential Roundtable 2010: “Leadership Solutions to Land Reform in Africa” August 30–31 Dar es Salaam, Tanzania X ILD Legal Director Ana Lucía Camaiora participated in the Latin America and Caribbean Rule of Law Conference organized by the World Justice Project. September 8– 10 Lima, Peru ILD Legal Manager Maria del Carmen Delgado participated as a main speaker in the Ibero-American Association of Chambers of Commerce Conference on the main challenges for business formalization in Latin America, organized by the 27th General Assembly. September 26– 28 Cali, Colombia ILD attended the ESRI Conference: Global Land and Poverty Summit. September 28 Washington, DC, USA Mr. de Soto presented in the Property Rights and Poverty Conference plenary discussion. October 12 Copenhagen, Denmark Mr. de Soto was the keynote speaker at the First Nations Property Ownership Conference and Press Conference co-hosted by the FNTC and Indigenous Bar Association (IBA). October 20 Vancouver, Canada USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 110 ILD PRESENTATIONS (90) ILD Major Presentations to government officials or donor agencies Event Date Location Mr. de Soto was the keynote speaker at the CELFIN: Colombia and Peru: Challenges and Opportunities Seminar organized by CELFIN Capital. His speech was entitled “The Future of Latin American countries in the light of the new governments and economic behavior.” October 28 Santiago, Chile Mr. de Soto participated in a lead panel at the ICE Canyon Investor Conference 2010 on “Emerging Markets Middle Class: The Intersection of Growth, Incomes and New Markets.” November 4 New York, New York, USA ILD Senior Researcher Luis Aliaga and other ILD staff participated in the XVII International Congress of Register Law organized by CINDER–Spain and the Peruvian Institute of Register Law. November 11 & 14 Lima, Peru Mr. de Soto spoke on the legal framework and institutions necessary for opportunities for the youth in Latin America and the Caribbean at the International Youth Foundation Conference. November 17– 19 Lima, Peru Mr. de Soto was the keynote speaker at a “Peruvian Amazon within the Worldwide Economic Context” Conference organized by the Regional President of the Amazon Region of Loreto. There he was awarded the degree of “Doctor Honris Causa” by the Universidad Cientifica del Peru [Peruvian University of Science] and the “Caballero de la Amazonía” [Knight of the Amazon] medal. December 2 Iquitos, Peru X 2011 (23) Mr. de Soto spoke on the importance of business formalization and challenges for company takeoff at the Forum Gamarra: Coyuntura y Futuro organized by la Asociación Peruana de Industriales y Confeccionistas de Gamarra. January 12 Lima, Peru Mr. de Soto spoke on “The Peruvian Amazon Is Not Avatar” at the TEDxPuraVida event. February 10 San Jose, Costa Rica Mr. de Soto, elected as one of the top 12 innovators in Latin America, launched the “Innovadores de América” award at the I Foro Innovadores de América organized by Patricia Janiot. March 1 Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic Mr. de Soto was the keynote speaker at a conference organized by Fundación Global Democracia y Desarrollo (FUNGLODE). His speech was entitled, “Recession in the North: A Knowledge Crisis.” March 2 Santiago Domingo, Dominican Republic USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 111 ILD PRESENTATIONS (90) ILD Major Presentations to government officials or donor agencies Event Date Location ILD Legal Director Ana Lucia Camaiora spoke at the Formalization of Rural Property International Forum and participated in a workshop on International Experiences and Recommendations for Executing the Formalization of Rural Property Program in Colombia. March 7–9 Bogota, Colombia Mr. de Soto attended the Stanford Institute of Economic Policy Research: Economic Summit 2011 on “The Great Recession: The Missing Remedy for a Third World Perspective” as an honorary guest. March 10 Stanford, California, USA Mr. de Soto met with the Haiti Special Coordinator at the U.S. State Department, Tom Adams, and gave a presentation on “Haiti Property Law and Land Tenure Issues” (private event). April 5 Washington, DC, USA X Mr. de Soto gave special presentation at the 7th Perm Economic Forum on the “Keys to Economic Development: Experience of Developing Countries.” April 21–24 Perm, Russia Mr. de Soto participated in the 4th Annual Convergences 2015 Forum Le Monde’s Great Debate #3 by discussing “Where Does the End of Poverty Begin?” May 4 Paris, France Mr. de Soto presented at the Legal Empowerment and Indigenous Peoples Conference. May 9 Washington, DC, USA Mr. de Soto participated in a book presentation entitled Los Doce Economistas más Grandes de la Historia (The World’s Twelve Most Influential Economists) at the Centro de Convenciones Los Conquistadores. May 19 Trujillo, Peru Mr. de Soto spoke on “Fairness and Justice in the Economy” at the Zermatt Summit, themed “Justice and Solidarity for Sustainability.” June 17 Zurich, Germany ILD Senior Researcher Luis Aliaga spoke in the Colloquium of Technical Cadastral Specialization of the Integrated National Cadastral Information System. June 23–24 Lima, Peru ILD Legal Director Ana Lucia Camaiora spoke at the International Seminar of Registry Rights on “Formalization of Property in Peru and Developing Countries: Current Situation and Challenges.” July 7–9 Arequipa, Peru USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 112 ILD PRESENTATIONS (90) Event Date Location Mr. de Soto was invited to and participated in the 2011 Tidewater OECD Conference for high-level representatives from Development Assistance Committee (DAC) member countries to discuss how to provide international aid more effectively. July 20–21 Mr. de Soto participated in the European Forum for New Ideas 2011 Conference as follows: (1) plenary session entitled “Capitalism after the Crisis”; (2) one-on-one debate with EU Commissioner Janusz Lewandoski, entitled “Is a More Just World Possible;” and, (3) panel on “Consequences of General Consumption.” September 29– 30 Sopot, Poland Mr. de Soto participated in a panel entitled “Rule of Law and Global Performance” with Joseph Stiglitz at the 15th Forum 2000: Rule of Law and the 21st Century. October 10 Prague, Czech Republic ILD Major Presentations to government officials or donor agencies X X Mr. de Soto delivered the opening keynote address entitled “The Global Meltdown in Latin America” at the Festival of Media LatAm 2011 Session One. October 12 Miami, Florida, USA ILD Legal Manager Maria del Carmen Delgado presented a lecture at the 22nd Northern Business Encounter entitled “From Growth to Development: Enterprise and Society Confronting New Challenges.” Mr. de Soto presented and participated in a panel entitled “Property Rights: Moving Towards the Third World” at the Federalist Society Forum. October 20–22 November 12 Trujillo, Peru Washington, DC, USA ILD Legal Director Ana Lucía Camaiora, Senior Legal Manager Maria Carmen Delgado, and Senior Consultant Luis Aliaga, presented at an all￾day workshop for Colombian delegation entitled “Impact of Formalization in Rural Peru.” Mr. de Soto, ILD Vice President of International Business Development Manuel Mayorga, and Legal Director Ana Lucia Camaiora gave a presentation to the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the Parliament of Canada on their views on the role of the private sector in international development. Mr. de Soto gave a speech entitled “Mapping the Invisible” at the Eye on Earth Summit. November 18 November 22 December 12– 14 Lima, Peru Videoconference Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 113 ILD PRESENTATIONS (90) ILD Major Presentations Event Date Location to government officials or donor agencies 2012 (23) Mr. de Soto attended the Aspen Ministers Form on Economics Roots of the Arab Spring. January 13–15 Copenhagen, Denmark X Mr. de Soto attended the US Maghreb Entrepreneurship, Legal Underpinnings for Growth Conference. January 16–18 Marrakesh, Morocco X Mr. de Soto delivered various presentations on “Challenges and Opportunities of Azerbaijan” at the Second High Level Economic Policy Presidential Forum organized by the Central Bank of Azerbaijan jointly with the World Bank. March 5–6 Baku, Azerbaijan X ILD’s partner in Algeria CARE (Cercle, d’Action et Reflexion de l’Entreprise) organized a conference on the informal economy, which generated tremendous buzz in media and immediate high-level meetings with the cabinet, the minister of Trade, etc., eventually leading to a MOU to produce a “white paper” on Algeria’s informal sector to be presented to the president and the prime minister. March 12 Algiers, Algeria X Mr. de Soto was a guest speaker at a conference entitled Les Pistes d’une Transition yers la Formalization organized by ILD’s partner in Algeria CARE (Cercle, d’Action et Reflexion de l’Entreprise) in partnership with the Ministry of Commerce of Tunisia. The conference aimed to address the importance of bringing the informal sector into the market economy to foster economic development and social peace in Algeria. March 12 Algiers, Algeria At an American Philosophical Society program, Mr. de Soto spoke on “Thoughts on the Importance of Boundaries—How Entrepreneurship Can Help Address Poverty, Especially in Developing and Emerging Market Countries.” April 21 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA At the Council of Foreign Relations, Mr. de Soto spoke on the economic roots of the Arab Spring. April 23 New York City USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 114 ILD PRESENTATIONS (90) ILD Major Presentations to government officials or donor agencies Event Date Location Mr. de Soto met with British Prime Minister David Cameron at his request regarding property rights as a new addition to the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and then ran a seminar organized by the prime minister’s staff to address other ministers, government officers, and members of the press on the same subjects discussed with the prime minister (private meetings). May 1 London, UK X Mr. de Soto addressed the Department for International Development (DFID) staff, including Chief Economist Stefan Dercon and the Director of Policy Nick Dyer, at their request, on titling and property rights. Mr. de Soto also met with the State Secretary for International Development Andrew Mitchell at his request (private meetings). May 1 London, UK X Mr. de Soto was the keynote speaker at the World Bank’s Conference on Development Economics (ABCDE), an important annual WB meeting that presents and discusses innovations in development economics. May 7–8 Washington, DC, USA X Mr. de Soto was invited to the International Tax Dialogue Conference sponsored by the OECD and other institutions. May 27–30 Tunis, Tunisia X ILD Senior Researcher Luis Aliaga participated in a Conflict-Solving Program for Mining Investment Seminar. May 30-31 Lima, Peru ILD Legal Director Ana Lucía Camaiora and Senior Consultant Luis Aliaga as well as ILD Senior Researchers Jackeline Silva, María Barrón, and Ricardo Gutiérrez offered consultation in the Consulta Previa: de la Norma a la Realidad (Consultation: From Standard to Reality) event. June 7-8 Lima, Peru Mr. de Soto supported a USAID Economic Growth training course by holding a conference on ILD’s findings on the Arab Spring for USAID trainees. June 21 Washington, DC, USA X Mr. de Soto and ILD staff privately met with several regional presidents of Peru to analyze and discuss the mining problems in their regions and alternative ways to pursue mining activities profitably and inclusively, including: (1) Cerro de Pasco Regional President, Kleyer Meléndez; (2) Apurimac Regional President, Elias Segovia Ruiz; (3) Huancavelica Regional President, Maciste Díaz Abad; and September 15– 28 Lima, Peru X USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 115 ILD PRESENTATIONS (90) ILD Major Presentations to government officials or donor agencies Event Date Location (4) Purio Regional President, Mauricio Rodriguez Rodrguez. Mr. de Soto met with President Marzouki of Tunisia at the Los Delfines Hotel (private meeting). September 30 Lima, Peru X Mr. de Soto and ILD staff met with Mr. Guy Verhofstadt, former European Union (EU) President, Prime Minister for Belgium, and future candidate for Presidency of European Union, to teach him about ILD’s work on the Arab Spring, per his request. October 8 Brussels, Belgium Mr. de Soto met with Tunisian Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali and members of the National Price Control Commission chaired by Minister of Economic and Social Issues Ridha Saidi. November Tunis, Tunisia Mr. de Soto attended the VII International Trade Summit at the Peru Chamber of Commerce headquarters, where former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and the Peru Chamber of Commerce President, Mr. Samuel Gleiser, debated the topic “Challenges for Latin America.” November 21 Lima, Peru Mr. de Soto delivered the keynote speech at the World Bank Doing Business Conference. December 7 Washington, DC, USA Mr. de Soto delivered the opening speech at the World Bank Law, Justice and Development Conference, entitled “The Rule of Law.” December 10 Washington, DC, USA Mr. de Soto attended the UTICA “The Informal Economy: How to Fix It?” Conference, and de Soto delivered a speech entitled “Formaliser L’Informel” and participated in a series of roundtables with government ministers, economists, World Bank representatives, and local activists, which were moderated by the Prime Minister, UTICA President, and Chairman of Bloomberg BusinessWeek. December 16-17 Tunis, Tunisia X Mr. de Soto gave a speech at the Mediterranean School of Business Conference for business leaders and former Government ministers. December 17 Tunis, Tunisia USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 116 ILD PRESENTATIONS (90) ILD Major Presentations Event Date Location to government officials or donor agencies 2013 (3) Mr. de Soto participated in the U.S. Congress full hearing on ILD’s findings in MENA at the initiative of its new chairman, Edward Royce, and with the open support of Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader of the House of Representatives. May Washington, DC, USA X Mr. de Soto and ILD staff met with U.S. State Department Undersecretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and Environment Robert Hormats and Assistant Secretary for Economic and Business Affairs José Fernandez to present ILD’s findings in the MENA region and ILD solutions for similar problems in Peru that helped launch Peru on the path to economic growth. May Washington, DC, USA X Mr. de Soto and ILD staff met with White House officials Director of the President’s National Economic Council Gene Sperling and Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs Mike Froman regarding ILD’s Arab Spring findings and interpretation as well as the new project delivery proposal for the MENA region. May Washington, DC, USA X USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 117 Appendix 5: ILD Organization, Staff, and Publications References and Citations Findings via Google Scholar and LexisNexis Academic In efforts to assess the frequency of citations of ILD research reports and studies produced under the USAID grant on topics related to LEP, the LEAP team conducted a reference and citation search using Google Scholar and LexisNexis Academic to determine the frequency that ILD organization, its president, its published reports and studies, and its staff were referenced and cited each year across the grant period. Google Scholar Search The LEAP team’s methodological approach was as follows: • Input the “Search Item Description” into Google Scholar. • Customize the range for each year (i.e., 2009–2009, 2010–2010, etc.). • Review a sufficient number of Google Scholar pages to capture listed references and citations. • Exclude overlap in references and citations within and across years. • If necessary, translate titles from Spanish to English to determine whether ILD staff members’ published work was related. The structure of the tables and description of how each item was operationalized are explained as follows: • The “Total References” column denotes the number of works that were referenced in Google Scholar, even if they are not cited. • The “Total Citations” column represents the number of citations found to the referenced items in Google Scholar. • The “Years” column denotes the year of publication or posting of the item. • The “Published Reports and Studies” rows list all ILD publications and documentation produced during the grant period, which can also be found bolded in Appendix 5. • The “ILD Staff” rows list all ILD staff members whose names were attached to ILD publications and documentation. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 118 ILD Organization, Staff, and Publications References and Citations Found via Google Scholar 2009 2010 2013 Search item description Total references Total citations Total references Total citations Total references Total citations Total references Total citations Total references Total citations Hernando de Soto Hernando de Soto 1 5 3 8 6 28 1 3 0 0 Books (2) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Book chapters (1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Journal articles (1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Newspaper articles (15) 0 0 1 0 3 1 7 7 4 0 Interviews (13) 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 7 7 4 8 9 29 8 10 4 0 Institute of Liberty and Democracy Institute of Liberty and Democracy 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Documentaries (2) 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Manuals (11) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Program reports (16) 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 Financial reports (4) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 4 0 1 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 ILD Staff Luis Aliaga 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 María Barrón 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Daniella Delgado 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ricardo Gutiérrez 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Natalia Rey de Castro 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ramiro Rubio 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Iris Mackenzie 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jackeline Silva 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Robin Tivy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ana Lucia Camaiora 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 María del Carmen Delgado 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GRAND TOTAL 11 7 5 10 11 29 9 10 4 0 Total references over grant period (2009–2013): 40 Total citations over grant period (2009–2013): 56 USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 119 2011 2012 LexisNexis Academic Search The LEAP team’s methodological approach is described as follows: • Input the search items into an Advanced News Search in LexisNexis Academic. • Specify Date: Previous 5 years (to reflect grant period). • Select Source: All News (English). • Review all documents generated from Advanced Search specifications. • Exclude duplicates. The structure of the tables and description of how each item was operationalized are explained as follows: • The “Total Reviewed” column denotes the number of items that appeared in Advanced LexisNexis news search when items in column A were selected for the search. • The “Total Mentions” column denotes the total number of documents reviewed that mentioned selection from column A.64 • The “de Soto’s Thesis” column denotes mention in reference to de Soto’s thesis/ideas. • The “Participation” Column denotes mention in reference to actual participation at an event. This could refer to presence as a main speaker, invited guest, or presenter at an event. • The “Simple Mention” column denotes mention of selection from column A without indicating actual participation. This could refer to simple attendance at an event or mention in reference to a position in the organization. • The “Interview” column denotes mention of selection from column A being the person being interviewed. • The “Author” column denotes selection from column A being the author of the document reviewed. 64 Some names generated multiple references but few citations due to the fact that the name referenced was not ILD staff member based on content of the documents reviewed. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 120 Search item description Total reviewed Total mentions de Soto's thesis Participant Simple mention Interview Author Hernando de Soto 1177 565 344 137 73 5 6 ILD - - - - - - - Institute of Liberty and Democracy 196 196 0 0 0 0 0 Instituto Libertad y Democracia 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 ILD Staff (9)*** - - - - - - - Luis Aliaga 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 María Barrón 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 Daniella Delgado 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ricardo Gutiérrez 247 0 0 0 0 0 0 Natalia Rey de Castro 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ramiro Rubio 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Iris Mackenzie 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jackeline Silva 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Robin Tivy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ana Lucia Camaiora 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 María del Carmen Delgado 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GRAND TOTAL 1665 772 ILD Organization and Staff Referencing Search via LexisNexis Academic All News (English) Types of Mention Note: “Total reviewed” is much higher than “Total Mentions” in some cases because references appeared to irrelevant articles (see, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hernando_de_Soto). USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 121 List of Countries Referenced Within the Documents Reviewed via LexisNexis Academic Afghanistan Cuba Japan Norway Switzerland Albania Czech Republic Jordan Pakistan Syria Algeria Denmark Kazakhstan Palestine Taiwan Argentina Ecuador Kenya Papa New Guinea Tanzania Australia Egypt Kosovo Peru Tunisia Austria El Salvador Kuwait Philippines Turkey Azerbaijan France Lebanon Poland Turkmenistan Bahamas Germany Libya Portugal Uganda Bangladesh Ghana Malawi Puerto Rico United Arab Emirates Belgium Greece Malaysia Republic of Korea United Kingdom Bermuda Guatemala Mali Russia United States Bolivia Haiti Mexico Saudi Arabia Uruguay Bosnia & Herzegovina Honduras Mongolia Scotland Venezuela Botswana Iceland Montenegro Serbia Vietnam Brazil India Morocco Sierra Leone Yemen Burundi Indonesia Namibia Singapore Zambia Canada Iran Nepal South Africa Zimbabwe Chile Iraq Netherlands Spain China Ireland New Zealand Sri Lanka Colombia Israel Nicaragua Sudan Côte d'Ivoire Italy Nigeria Sweden USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 122 Appendix 6: Site Visit Interview Guides Interview Guides for ILD Staff United States Agency for International Development Learning, Evaluation, and Analysis Project (Bureau for Economic Growth, Education, and the Environment) AID-OAA-C-11-00169 Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities Evaluation Interview Guides – ILD Program Staff Introduction United States Agency for International Development (USAID) provides core funding to the Institute for Liberty and Democracy Program (ILD) to support its efforts to legally empower the poor. To accomplish its goal, ILD focuses on providing technical assistance, sharing research, and gaining support from partners to build awareness and advocate on behalf of the poor. Legal empowerment of the poor as espoused by the UN-hosted Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor focuses on four areas: formalization of real property rights, access to justice, labor rights, and business rights (meaning the right to participate as an entrepreneur in the marketplace). In 2009, ILD was awarded a $25-million grant from USAID to implement its program over the course of five years. As the grant enters its final year, USAID is conducting a performance evaluation of ILD program in meeting its objectives and deliverables as identified in the Agreement and yearly work plans. In addition to measuring performance, the evaluation will also assess ILD’s success under the grant in increasing the legal empowerment of the poor, including women’s empowerment and gender equality. Optimal Solutions Group, LLC (Optimal), has been assigned to implement this evaluation through the USAID Learning Evaluation and Analysis Project (LEAP) contract. These interview questions are structured for various ILD staff members and will be asked as appropriate during the 1-week period that the team will spend at ILD offices. The interviews will be semi-structured to allow for follow-up questions, giving respondents the opportunity to qualify their answers and to provide more nuanced responses. In a semi-structured interview approach, standardized questions are designed in advance, and follow-up or new questions can be dynamically added based on the previous responses provided. The protocol for the interviews will start with a brief introduction of the evaluation team and the purpose of the interview. The interviewer will then ask whether the interviewees have any questions before proceeding with the interview questions. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 123 ILD Interview Questions Financial Management and Reporting 1. One of the requirements for financial reporting within ILD agreement is to submit a quarterly performance report to USAID. Please explain how you track finances to identify progress on programming and which information is included in this reporting. (Provide us with an example of a performance quarterly report.) 2. How are financial decisions aligned with project progress? 3. Another requirement for this contract is “cost sharing” to complement funding from USAID. Please provide us with details on matching grants: a. Which organizations are the source of matching grants, and how much have they each funded? b. Which activities are funded by the matches? c. Which documentation is available on implementation of these activities? Legal Empowerment 1. How does ILD define legal empowerment? 2. Is ILD’s definition the same as that of the Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor? If not, in which ways does it differ, and why? 3. It seems that a number of development agencies and other institutions take different views of and approaches to legal empowerment than the Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor. Without passing judgment on whether any given approach is the better or correct, this raises certain questions pertinent to ILD’s overall work and that being carried out under the USAID grant: a. Is ILD aware of these other views and approaches? b. If so, to what extent does it see them as compatible with ILD’s work? c. If not, in the future will it take into account the approaches and research conducted by these other institutions? Project Initiation 4. Prior to initiating a project, what prompts ILD team to develop a new project? a. Which studies are conducted prior to program initiation, and how does the subject matter of these studies vary with characteristics of countries? b. Which steps are taken to begin working with new countries? c. How are beneficiaries identified? USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 124 d. Which criteria are in place for selecting new beneficiaries? e. Which materials are given to new programs? f. What are the expectations for introducing a new program? 5. Describe and diagnose, based on implementation strategy, the process from beginning to end in the country deemed most successful. 6. Which successes have you realized based on the implementation of the current methodology? 7. Which challenges have you experienced with implementing the current methodology? 8. How (and at which point) do you build your base of local technical experts to implement ILD project? Project Implementation 9. Define ILD’s research, project formulation, and project implementation paradigms. a. How have your ideas specifically changed over the implementation of the projects? b. Did any particular country experiences lead to changes in ideas? 10. Several programs are in progress in various phases. What is your process for transitioning between phases? (For example, available funding, political support, etc.) 11. Given a list of all phases of countries under implementation, for countries that are at the same phases, would available data be replicable across countries? 12. Who are your key stakeholders for program implementation, and how do you engage them at the program level? (For example, the government, private sector, etc.) 13. Which training materials (manuals)/workshops does ILD construct for political implementation? Building Sustainable Stakeholder Capacities 14. To what extent does ILD build up country capacities (in relevant ministries, in civil society, or among the poor themselves) so that various stakeholders can continue to implement ILD’s programs and recommendations in an ongoing manner without ILD support? Please provide relevant examples and documentation regarding relevant ILD experience in specific countries, both within and beyond those assisted under the USAID grant. 15. Are any of the methods and reform technologies that ILD uses proprietary? For example: USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 125 a. Does ILD ever charge governments and/or development agencies for services without completely training and equipping the beneficiary governments and institutions regarding how to implement its approaches independently of ILD assistance in the future? b. Are there any other ways in which it goes about its work without building country capacities to carry on independently or in which ILD charges governments and/or aid agencies without sharing relevant technologies? c. If ILD’s approaches are proprietary in any way, has this been the case in any countries assisted under the USAID grant? If so, which countries? d. If ILD’s approaches are proprietary in any way, has this been the case in any other countries (i.e., those not assisted under the USAID grant)? If so, which countries? Consideration of Selected Substantive Issues 16. Traditional, communal land rights are part of the legal culture in many societies. In view of this: a. What is ILD’s view of traditional, communal land use and its relation to alleviating poverty? b. Is it possible for the poor to secure land tenure as firmly if communal tenure approaches are employed as opposed to individual ownership? c. Does ILD ever promote communal land use or communal ownership in its programs? d. To the extent that ILD promotes communal use or communal ownership, how does this relate to the poor being able to secure credit or loans or otherwise increase their capital? How, if at all, does ILD promote such communal arrangements? e. Please provide examples and documentation regarding relevant ILD experience in specific countries, within and beyond those assisted under the USAID grant. 17. Gender equity is an issue and priority cutting across all development fields. In view of this: a. In what ways do ILD programs aim to ensure gender equity and women’s rights to land/property security? b. More specifically, for example, in which ways do ILD programs aim to ensure that, in the process of formalizing land rights while recognizing traditional patterns and practices, women are not denied control, use of, ownership of, or inheritance rights regarding land and other property? c. Please provide relevant examples and documentation regarding relevant ILD experience in specific countries, both within and beyond those assisted under the USAID grant. Performance Monitoring and Measuring Impact and Benefits of ILD’s work 18. ILD website’s “Our Impact” page states the following: USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 126 “According to independent evaluations of the results of ILD’s reforms, the poor of Peru obtained US$ 9.4 billion in net benefits between 1991 and 2003: 6.3 million Peruvians below the poverty line now legally own their real estate assets whose value increased by US$2.2 billion, while the income of the owners increased by US$3.2 billion; 380,000 business enterprises belonging mainly to the poor were formalized, generating 560,000 additional legal jobs and increasing tax revenue by US$300 million a year.” Could you please provide copies of the independent evaluations, highlighting the portions that report such impact? 19. The “Our Impact” section also states: “Impressed by what ILD had accomplished in Peru, the Government of El Salvador invited ILD to adapt its reforms to its country in the last gasps of a decade-long civil war and still suffering from the aftermath of a devastating earthquake in 1986. ILD trained a group of Salvadoran professionals to develop a property titling system. By the end of 2003, the real estate formalization system designed by ILD brought one million people under the rule of law, and also helped settle peacefully former wartime combatants and refugees on productive land, thus reducing incentives to violence. Today, the Salvadoran registry system handles more than US$ 800 million in mortgages yearly.” Could you please provide copies of independent evaluations and/or independent research studies that document this impact, highlighting the portions that report such impact? 20. Especially but not only because USAID support to ILD reaches back to 1982, in which of the 23 countries in which ILD has worked (according to the “Our Impact” page) since that time has ILD carried a project to fruition such that economic or other benefits have resulted? By “economic or other benefits,” we mean the kinds of impact described in ILD website attributes to the Institute’s work in Peru and El Salvador. Please provide independent evaluations and/or independent research studies that document this impact, highlighting the relevant portions. 21. Please provide any other relevant, independent journal articles, studies, or other documents prepared by organizations or individuals other than ILD that document its impact and/or the effectiveness of its approaches and programs. 22. How do you measure performance for each stage of your various programs? a. Do you have a consistent monitoring component on projects? i. If yes, which cycle of performance measurement do you have in place? ii. If no, explain the reasons for this approach. b. What are the indicators for measuring success for a program? USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 127 c. Is success measured at both the individual country and multi-country levels? 23. ILD has a philosophy for how development occurs—legally empowering the poor, formalizing economic and property rights—if this is done in a client country’s program. One should be able to do empirical analysis of whether this process has been successful. a. Do you have examples of such empirical analysis? b. If so, have you done empirical analyses of success at different stages of your programs? c. Do you have documentation for a systematic methodology of how you do your empirical analysis? d. Are there assessments of the effectiveness of ILD’s philosophy compared to other development philosophies? e. How does ILD determine which training seminars/workshops to conduct? f. What research has ILD considered during the grant period to focus attention by such audiences as policymakers, academics, development experts, and other thought leaders on issues related to legal empowerment of the poor? 24. How do you measure the impact (positive or negative) of the public presentations provided by Mr. de Soto? a. Provide a list of formal papers made available to the public. 25. Which specific measures implemented in different countries can be attributed to ILD’s influence? a. For example, laws, regulations, etc. b. Please provide a list and documentation of ILD’s influence. c. Please share with us country cases where ILD has championed improved policies that have resulted in a movement from Stage 1 (training and team building) to Stage 2 (diagnosis). d. Please share with us country cases where ILD have contributed to reaching Stage 3 (institutional reform). e. Provide comprehensive document that captures/lists ILD’s impact or influence on specific countries. 26. To what extent have any of the countries that ILD has prioritized under the 2009–2013 $25-million grant from USAID received assistance from ILD before that grant period? If so, what was the nature of that assistance, when did it begin, and to what extent was progress achieved before the grant period? 27. More specifically, what progress in those priority countries did ILD achieve before the grant period? And what progress was achieved under the grant? Please distinguish the two. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 128 28. Have any of these 2009–2013 grant priority countries experienced the kinds of benefits associated with Peru and El Salvador? 29. Has ILD received funding from any other development agencies or other sources for work in the countries assisted via the USAID grant during or before the grant period? If so, for each country assisted by drawing upon other sources: a. What were the sources of the funding? b. What was the level of the funding? c. What was the nature of ILD’s work in the country? 30. More specifically, does ILD anticipate the USAID grant’s funding the entire range of actual and potential ILD assistance in a given country? Or is the intent to get the country’s engagement to a point where full implementation is undertaken but will involve additional funding? ILD as a Learning Organization 31. What are the main lessons that ILD has learned from its more than 30 years of work? 32. More specifically, in a substantive vein, what are the main lessons that ILD has learned about how to combat poverty and legally empower the poor? For example, including but going beyond ILD’s insights on extralegality: a. Which are the best kinds of laws, regulations, and institutional changes for enhancing and protecting the property rights of the poor? b. Which are the best kinds of laws, regulations, and institutional changes for enabling the poor to use their property rights as a source of capital? c. What other kinds of laws, regulations, and institutional changes best help the poor in other ways, in ILD’s experience? d. Please add any additional key lessons that are worth highlighting. 33. In addition, in a programmatic/process-oriented vein, what are the main lessons that ILD has learned about how to best carry out its work? For example: a. Which are the best ways of engaging national leadership in the reform process to ensure its ongoing support? What are the mistakes to avoid? b. Which are the best ways of engaging the relevant ministries and their lower-level staff in the reform process to ensure its ongoing support? What are the mistakes to avoid? c. Which are the best ways of engaging civil society in the reform process to ensure its ongoing support? What are the mistakes to avoid? d. Which are the best ways of engaging the poor themselves in the reform process to ensure its ongoing support? What are the mistakes to avoid? e. Please add any additional key lessons that are worth highlighting. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 129 34. What have been the main types of criticism of ILD’s work over the years? What are ILD’s responses to such criticism? Please share any relevant documents, highlighting the responses. 35. In which ways have ILD’s successes and progress over the years contributed to its learning process? What are specific examples of successes and progress that ILD has learned from and built on? 36. In which ways have any mistakes that ILD has made over the years contributed to its learning process? What are specific examples of mistakes that ILD has learned from and built on? 37. In which ways has ILD’s view of and programmatic approaches to the poor’s property rights and ways of accumulating capital changed over the years? In which ways have they stayed the same? USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 130 Interview Guides for ILD Beneficiaries United States Agency for International Development Learning, Evaluation, and Analysis Project (Bureau for Economic Growth, Education, and the Environment) AID-OAA-C-11-00169 Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities Evaluation Interview Guide – Beneficiaries Introduction United States Agency for International Development (USAID) provides core funding to the Institute for Liberty and Democracy Program (ILD) to support its efforts to legally empower the poor. To accomplish its goal, ILD focuses on providing technical assistance, sharing research, and gaining support from partners to build awareness and advocate on behalf of the poor. Legal empowerment of the poor as espoused by the UN-hosted Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor focuses on four areas: formalization of real property rights, access to justice, labor rights, and business rights (meaning the right to participate as an entrepreneur in the marketplace). In 2009, ILD was awarded a $25-million grant from USAID to implement its program over the course of five years. As the grant enters its final year, USAID is conducting a performance evaluation of ILD program in meeting its objectives and deliverables as identified in the Agreement and yearly work plans. In addition to measuring performance, the evaluation will also assess ILD’s success under the grant in increasing the legal empowerment of the poor, including women’s empowerment and gender equality. Optimal Solutions Group, LLC (Optimal), has been assigned to implement this evaluation through the USAID Learning Evaluation and Analysis Project (LEAP) contract. As outlined in the Technical Proposal submitted to USAID, identifying the data available within and across programs is key to conducting a performance and impact evaluation for ILD program. As such, interviews are designed to gather information and better understand how ILD program measures its performance within and across country programs. The data collected during the interviews will be supplemented by document reviews and used to assess the effectiveness, relevance, and sustainability of the project as well as develop recommendations for improvement. Interview Structure Individual interviews are designed to last approximately 45 minutes, while interviews with multiple interviewees are designed to last 60 minutes. The interviews will be semi-structured USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 131 interviews to allow for follow-up questions, giving respondents the opportunity to qualify their answers and to provide more nuanced responses. In a semi-structured interview approach, standardized questions are designed in advance, and follow-up or new questions can be dynamically added based on the previous responses provided. This affords flexibility to explore certain subjects in more depth while still retaining a uniformity of themes across clusters. While the questions below serve as the standard anchor questions for the interview, follow-up questions will be selected from among the standard questions or developed during the interview based on the responses obtained. The protocol for the interviews will start with a brief introduction of the evaluation team and the purpose of the interview. The interviewer will then ask whether the interviewees have any questions before proceeding with the interview questions. Beneficiary Awareness 1) Were you aware of ILD and its programs before being contacted? 2) How did you hear about ILD programs? Beneficiary Contact and Selection 3) Why do you think ILD identified and selected you as a beneficiary? 4) Please tell us about the first interviews and focus groups that ILD held with you and what happened in them. 5) Were there specific selection criteria that you had to satisfy? 6) What exactly did you receive once you were selected as a beneficiary? Beneficiary Involvement in ILD 7) Tell us which ILD program you participated in and when. 8) What caused you to respond positively to ILD’s request for participation? 9) How were you supported as a beneficiary? 10) How often were you contacted by representatives from ILD during the time you were a beneficiary? 11) Did ILD get in touch with you once the programs were officially completed? If yes, which information was discussed during this follow-up? 12) Were evaluations done? 13) Was there other assistance you would have wanted but did not receive? Beneficiary Perception of ILD impact 14) Share with us which situation you lived in prior to being exposed to ILD programming. 15) Have there been any changes to your way of life (ownership of property or business) because of ILD intervention? a. What worked? b. What did not work? USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 132 16) Do you feel empowered to continue with the “intervention” provided in ILD now that its programming is completed in your area? 17) Discuss any challenges that you are currently facing. USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 133 Appendix 7: Site Visit Agendas Peru Site Visit Agenda USAID Evaluation Team - 2013 Lima Visit Proposed Itinerary Day 1 – Meeting at ILD Offices – MONDAY APRIL 29 Morning: - Overview of ILD: ILD President 1. ILD in a nutshell: Who we are? What we do? – What is unique about ILD 2. ILD Property Rights Paradigm and its applications: o Arab Spring: The economic roots of the Arab Spring – The Facts. o Avatar: Indigenous people want the right to Capital – Amazonas, Cajamarca, Alaska. o Knowledge Crisis, o Gender. 3. ILD timeline and Peru’s economic success Afternoon: - ILD Value Chain and ILD Business Model: Executive Director and ILD Team 1. ILD formalization/inclusion program (four components of the bridge) 2. Awareness building and education programs - Debriefing session with the Executive Committee Day 2 – Information Gathering, Document Review and Field visits – TUESDAY APRIL 30 Morning: - ILD Value Chain and ILD Business Model: Executive Director and ILD Team 1. Diagnosis and Reform Design Projects (Haiti, Tanzania and Lagos) - ILD programs in Peru: ILD Legal Team 1. Reforms designed and implemented by ILD 2. Administrative simplification program 3. Property formalization program USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 134 Afternoon: - Visit to Huaycán, informal settlement formalized by ILD Day 4 –Information Gathering, Document Review and Field visits – THURSDAY MAY 02 Morning: - Visits to the national agencies designed and implemented by ILD 1. Property registry – SUNARP 2. The formalization agency – COFOPRI Afternoon: - Visit to Las Malvinas: formalized commercial cluster Day 5 – Information Gathering, Document Review and Field Visits – FRIDAY MAY 03 Morning: - Economic Impact of ILD programs: ILD Economic Team 1. The case of Peru. 2. Other countries - Debriefing session with the Economic and Legal Team Afternoon: - The Avatar application of the Property Rights Paradigm: Property and business rights in indigenous communities and customary and informal environments. 1. ILD research in the Peruvian Amazon jungle and Andes: 2. Meeting with Jose Álvarez Alonso 3. Meeting with indigenous leaders from the Amazonian National Confederation – CONAP Day 6 – Information Gathering, Document Review and Field Visits – SATURDAY MAY 04 - Visit to Huando, one of the most important former rural cooperatives of Peru, a significant example of the social, political, economic and technical complexity of property formalization in agricultural areas. Day 7 – Visit to the Amazon region, Iquitos - SUNDAY MAY 05 USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 135 - Morning flight to Iquitos. - Preparation of meetings and logistics. Day 8 – Visit to the Amazon region, Iquitos – MONDAY MAY 06 Morning: - Field visit to area where ILD has conducted research a program: 1. Visit to the Bora indigenous community, location of ILD film project: “The Mystery of Capital among the Indigenous People of the Amazon” in 2009. Afternoon: - Lunch break - Field visit to area where ILD has conducted an education program: 1. Visit to the Independencia indigenous community: Meeting with indigenous women from different ethnic groups who participated in ILD Project for the legal empowerment of the Amazonian women in 2012. Day 9 – Visit to the Amazon region, Iquitos – TUESDAY MAY 07 Morning: - Meeting with Regional President of Loreto – Iván Vásquez: Impact of ILD work in the regional development agenda. - Meeting with regional officials of the Peruvian formalization agency – COFOPRI. Afternoon: - Flight back to Lima Day 10 – ILD Office, Lima – WEDNESDAY MAY 08 - Synthesizing of interview information - Schedule any remaining meetings - Debriefing session at ILD offices Day 11 – ILD Office, Lima – THURSDAY MAY 09 USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 136 - Synthesizing of interview information - Schedule any remaining meetings - Debriefing session at ILD offices Day 12 – ILD Office, Lima – FRIDAY MAY 10 - Debriefing session at ILD offices Nigeria Site Visit Agenda USAID Evaluation Team - 2013 Lagos Visit Tentative Itinerary Day 0: Sunday 14 – Arrival of Enrique Diaz (ILD) and Peter Murrell (Evaluation Team) Enrique Diaz KLM from Amsterdam to Lagos Peter Murrell Flight 54 Delta Airlines Arrival to Lagos at 4:30pm Day 1: Monday 15 – Meetings at Lagos State Informal Sector Reform Program – Lagos State Morning: - Meeting with Project Coordinator - Courtesy Call with Permanent Secretary Wali Rahji - Overview of the Project - Introduction of LAGS/ILD Informal Sector Reform Program team members: − Introduction of the Project Teams (Legal, Extralegal and Economic) Presentation of the Economic Team Afternoon: - Meeting with ILD Members (Project Office). USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 137 Day 2 – Tuesday 16 Morning: - Arrival of Christabel Dadzie (Flight 72, Arix Air from Accra, arriving to Laos at 10:05am). - Fieldwork visit and meeting with King (Oba) of Ipaja Land (Case of Traditional rulers managing land rights in Lagos). Peter Murrell with the Exrtralegal Team members. Afternoon: - Meeting with Honorable Commissioner of Commerce and Industry, Mrs. Olusola Owuru (2:00pm). - Other meetings (scheduled by the Evaluation Team). Day 3 – Wednesday 17 Morning: - 10:30 am: Focus Group with Traditional Rulers (Bales) and Community Leaders (Real Estate Matters in Lagos State). Afternoon: - Meeting with Mr.Alex Okoh and Mr. Iguwu (ILD consultants) – ILD perspectives for Delta State. - Other meetings (scheduled by the Evaluation Team). Day 4 – Thursday 18 Morning: - Fieldwork visit: Tour on Extralegal Areas in Lagos (Makoko, Festac Town and other) Afternoon: - Meeting with ILD Project Members. - Other meetings (scheduled by the Evaluation Team). USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 138 Day 5 – Friday 19 Morning: - Focus Group with Businessmen of Lagos State. Afternoon: - Meeting with ILD Project Members (Wrap Up) - Departure of Christabel Dadzie. Day 6 – Saturday 20 - Departure of the Peter Murrel. - Departure of Enrique Díaz. Tanzania Site Visit Agenda MKURABITA PROPERTY AND BUSINESS FORMALIZATION PROGRAM PROPOSED ITINERARY FOR USAID CONSULTANTS SN DATE ACTIVITIES EXPECTED OUTPUT RESPONSIBLE OFFICERS 1 20/08/2013 Brief Presentation on Progress To get an overview of MKURABITA/ILD activities in Tanzania 2004-2013 Program Coordinator 2 21/08/2013­ Morning session Field visit to Morogoro To understand how Business Formalization is carried out and owned by the Local Government Authorities Director Property and Business Formalization 3 21/08/2013­ Afternoon session Field visit to Mufindi District To appreciate the effectiveness of Capacity Building to the Local Government Authorities on Rural Property Formalization. Director Property and Business Formalization USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 139 4 21/08/2013 Travel to Njombe Town Director Property and Business Formalization 5 22/08/2013 Field visit to Njombe Town Council You will see how the citizens contributions for Urban Property Formalization can be revolved and used to facilitate formalization in other areas Director Property and Business Formalization 6 23/08/2013 Travel back to Dar es Salaam Director Property and Business Formalization 7 23/08/2013­ Evening session Debriefing Program Coordinator USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 140 Appendix 8: List of ILD Stakeholders and Partners Interviewed for the Evaluation List of Stakeholders Interviewed during Peru Site Visit Name of Interviewee Organization/ Location Type Hernando de Soto President and CEO ILD staff Manuel Mayorga Executive Director ILD staff Rafael Arribas Chief Financial Officer ILD staff Ana Lucia Camaiora Legal Director ILD staff Mariela Perez-Costa Senior Consultant ILD staff Carla Olivieri Director, International Affairs and Communication ILD staff Luis Aliaga Senior Consultant (economics) ILD staff Enrique Diaz Project Manager ILD staff Gustavo Marini Program Manager ILD staff Oswaldo Molina Economic Consultant ILD staff Daniella Delgado Rey Research Analyst ILD staff Ricardo Gutierrez Research Analyst ILD staff Silvia Olortegui Torres Directora Ejecutiva de Artesania ILD liaison, Women’s empowerment Jose Alvarez Alonso Director General de Diversidad Biologica, Minsterio del Ambiente, Lima Researcher Carlos Meza Organismo de Formalización de la Propiedad Informal (COFOPRI), Lima Government Ais Jesus Tarabay COFOPRI, Lima Government Elba Cornejo COFOPRI, Lima Government Four Officials Superintendencia Nacional de los Registros Públicos (SUNARP), Lima Government Rosa Barrantes Beneficiary in Huaycan Beneficiary Carmen Chozas Leader of Women’s Group Beneficiary Oseas Barbaran Sanchez President, Confederation of Amazonian Nationalities of Peru (CONAP) Beneficiary Aldo Mariategui Journalist Media Richard Webb Director, Instituto del Perú, Universidad de San Martín de Porr, Lima Economic Researcher Lorena Alcázar Valdivia Investigador Principal, GRADE, Lima Public Policy Researcher Miguel Jaramillo Banaante Investigador Principal, GRADE, Lima Public Policy Researcher Martín Valdivia Huaringa Investigador Principal, GRADE, Lima Public Policy Researcher Lic. Yvan E. Vasquez Valera President, Gorbierno Regional Loreto, Iquitos Government Eight staff members of the economic team for Gorbierno Regional Loreto Gorbierno Regional Loreto, Iquitos Government Sandro Cubas Former COFOPRI staff, Iquitos Government Lucio President, Maloca (Bora community), San Andres Non-beneficiary Leonardo Vice President, Maloca (Bora community), San Andres Non-beneficiary Twenty women from different Independencia, San Andres Beneficiaries USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 141 Name of Interviewee Organization/ Location Type indigenous groups in the Amazon Area near Iquitos List of Stakeholders Interviewed during Nigeria Site Visit Name of interviewee Organization/location Type Gustavo M. Marini Program Manager ILD staff Enrique Díaz Project Manager ILD staff Mariela Pérez-Costa Senior Researcher – Business Matters ILD staff Robin Tivy Senior Researcher – Real Estate Matters ILD staff Carlos Calienes Senior Economist ILD staff Ramiro Rubio Researcher – Extralegal Matters ILD staff Jackie Silva Senior Legal Researcher ILD staff Bola Agbabiaka Team Leader and Coordinator, Extralegal team ILD staff Wale Thompson-John Team Member, local extralegal team ILD staff Bisi Adeleke Team Member, local extralegal team ILD staff Adio – Oduola Omotunde Team Member, local extralegal team ILD staff Bimbo Sobowale Team Member, local extralegal team ILD staff Yemi Akinwale Team Member, local extralegal team ILD staff Ore Disu Team Member, local extralegal team ILD staff Olusola Senapon Oworu Commissioner, Ministry of Commerce & Industry Government Mr. Oladejo Special Advisor Government Alex Okoh Managing Partner, Ashford & McGuire Consulting Limited ILD partner Alhaji Chief (Bale Ikeji) Land owner Dr. Badamosiki Chief Land owner Prince Raymond Adekoye Assistant Secretary Progressive CDA Land owner Adekole Olaya Chief (Bale Makoko) Land owner Augustice Taylor Engineer Land owner USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 142 List of Stakeholders Interviewed during Tanzania Site Visit Name of interviewee Organization/location Type Stephen Rusibamayila Director of Property and Business Formalization, United Republic of Tanzania President’s Office – State House MKURABITA staff Japhet M. Werema Urban Property Formalization Manager, United Republic of Tanzania President’s Office – State House MKURABITA staff Seraphia Mgembe Program Coordinator, United Republic of Tanzania President’s Office – State House MKURABITA staff Leonard Jaka Coordinator (Mfungi) MKUBARITA staff Herman Coordinator – Business Formalization (Morogoro) MKURABITA staff Thadei Kabonge Authorized Land Officer (Njombe) MKURABITA staff Abdalla S. Chunga Registered business owner (welding and window/door grills) MKURABITA Beneficiary Ernest Makumbe Municipal Chair, Morogoro Municipal Council Government Ntinika William Paul District Executive Director, Mufindi District Council Government Mr. Mwamba Registered business owner (metal) MKURABITA Beneficiary Mr. Makumlo Maragoro Registered business owner (window manufacture) MKURABITA Beneficiary USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 143 List of ILD Partners Interviewed Organization/location Type Cercle, d’Action et Reflexion de l’Enterprise (CARE) ILD partner World Bank - Peru ILD partner Center for International Private Enterprise ILD partner Colorado State University ILD partner Harvard University – Law and International Development Society (LIDS) ILD partner LANDESA Rural Land Institute ILD partner ESRI GIS Mapping ILD partner Cadastre/Land Records ILD partner Omidyar Network Foundation ILD partner Bureau for Development Policy, United Nations Development Programme ILD partner USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 144 VI. ATTACHMENT: ILD RESPONSE TO USAID’s EXTERNAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION At the request of Institute Liberty and Democracy (ILD), included in this attachment to the final evaluation is 1) a letter from ILD responding to USAID’s external Performance Evaluation of its activities from 2009-2013; and 2) two volumes of documentation submitted by ILD in response to previous drafts of the evaluation. Please note that the two volumes from ILD were in response to conclusions found in an Appendix (more specifically, Appendix 9) of a prior draft of the evaluation. Appendix 9 provided a literature review of outside reports about ILD which was originally included as a means to provide background information only. Subsequently, Appendix 9 was removed from the final report because it was not considered a part of the actual evaluation. Nonetheless, ILD has requested that the two volumes it submitted previously in response to Appendix 9 still be included in the final evaluation. Optimal Solutions is including the two volumes but is not reinstating the previously deleted draft Appendix 9 because the conclusions taken from the literature review were not those of the evaluation itself, but rather a summary and analysis of perspectives from external independent sources, and hence deemed ultimately irrelevant to the final report. Furthermore, this evaluation is not an evaluation of the entire body of ILD's work. The scope of the evaluation only reviewed ILD’s performance under the most recent USAID Grant (2009-2013). The Performance Evaluation of ILD Activities from 2009-2013, was conducted by a third party external evaluator, Optimal Solutions. Information regarding the scope of work and methodology used by Optimal Solutions is publicly available. The Final Evaluation can be found on the USAID Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC). USAID Performance Evaluation of Instituto Libertad y Democracia (ILD) Activities 145 ATTACHMENT ILD RESPONSE TO USAID’s EXTERNAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION At the request of Institute Liberty and Democracy (ILD), included in this attachment to the final evaluation is 1) a letter from ILD responding to USAID’s external Performance Evaluation of its activities from 2009-2013; and 2) two volumes of documentation submitted by ILD in response to previous drafts of the evaluation. Please note that the two volumes from ILD were in response to conclusions found in an Appendix (more specifically, Appendix 9) of a prior draft of the evaluation. Appendix 9 provided a literature review of outside reports about ILD which was originally included as a means to provide background information only. Subsequently, Appendix 9 was removed from the final report because it was not considered a part of the actual evaluation. Nonetheless, ILD has requested that the two volumes it submitted previously in response to Appendix 9 still be included in the final evaluation. Optimal Solutions is including the two volumes but is not reinstating the previously deleted draft Appendix 9 because the conclusions taken from the literature review were not those of the evaluation itself, but rather a summary and analysis of perspectives from external independent sources, and hence deemed ultimately irrelevant to the final report. Furthermore, this evaluation is not an evaluation of the entire body of ILD's work. The scope of the evaluation only reviewed ILD’s performance under the most recent USAID Grant (2009-2013). The Performance Evaluation of ILD Activities from 2009-2013, was conducted by a third party external evaluator, Optimal Solutions. Information regarding the scope of work and methodology used by Optimal Solutions is publicly available. The Final Evaluation can be found on the USAID Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC). 2014-­‐08-­‐22_USAID.docx INSTITUTO LIBERTAD Y DEMOCRACIA Las  Begonias  441  Piso  9  -­‐  Lima  27  –  Perú Tel:  (511)  222-­‐5566    –  Fax:  (511)  421-­‐4552 mmayorga@ild.org.pe    -­‐    www.ild.org.pe 22  August  2014   Mr. Eric G. Postel Assistant  Administrator   Bureau of  Economic  Growth, Education  &  Environment   US AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, USAID 1300 Pennsylvania  Ave.  NW Washington, DC 20523 USA Ref.:     ILD  Performance  Evaluation  Final  Report     Grant    EEM-­‐G-­‐00-­‐09-­‐00001     Dear  Mr.  Postel:   In  September  2013,  USAID  sent  us  the  FINAL  REPORT  of  the  Performance  Evaluation  of   the  ILD,  prepared  by  Optimal  Solutions,  dated  August  30,  2013.     After   careful   review   of   the   report,   we   found   that   the   evaluation   was   based   on   an   erroneous   protocol   and   inadequate   methodology   and   had   failed   to   examine   all   the   existing  evidence  of  our  performance  that  ILD  and  other  contacts  made  available  to  the evaluators  upon  request.  Hence,  it  was  not  a  comprehensive  review  of  ILD’s  work.  What   was  initially  described  as  a  "get  acquainted"  visit  to  ILD  offices  in  Lima    became  the  only   official  evaluation  visit  (three  days  by  one  team  member  and  five  days  by  another  team   member).   The   evaluators   did   not   come   back   to   Lima   and   we   never   received   any   feedback  on  the  substantial  information  that  we had  provided  to     them,  nor  did  we have   the   opportunity   to   discuss  any of   the  findings  and observations   of   the  evaluators  who   were  oblivious  to  the  facts  already  in  the  records  not  just  from  the  ILD  but  also    USAID.     ILD  submitted  its  response  to  the  FINAL  REPORT  to  USAID,  in  two  volumes,  on  February   17,   and   March   4,   2014.   In   this   response,   we   provided   detailed   evidence   of   ILD’s   achievements  and  demonstrated  that  the  evaluation  was  poorly  executed,  resulting  in  a   flawed  report  that  depicts  the  ILD  program  inaccurately  and  unfairly,  to  the  detriment  of   ILD  and  the  successful  work  that  USAID  has  sponsored.     On   July   11th 2014,   we   received   from   you   a   new   document   also   labeled   ‘Final   Report’   which  does  not  address  any  of  the  substantive  observations  that  we  made  to  the  FINAL   REPORT.   All   it   does   is   withdraw   the   parts   from   the   final   report   which   showed   to   an   2014-­‐08-­‐22_USAID.docx extreme   level   just   how   biased   and   incomplete   they   were.   In   other   words   by   making   them  look  better  it  makes  us  look  worse.     We  have  had  a  fantastic  relationship  with  USAID  and  this  discussion  and  the  instrument   used  not  to  renew  the  grant  is  unworthy  of  that  relationship.  We  don’t  want  to  go  away   sounding  ungrateful.  So  thank  you  again   for  a   fruitful  working  relationship  with  USAID   over  the  course  of  the  years-­‐  we  greatly  appreciate  all  the  help  and  support  your  office   has  provided.   The  only  thing  we  request  is  that  our  reply  to  your  FINAL  REPORT  (August  30,  2013) be   attached  to  the  text  we  were  replying  to  so  that  our  response  makes  sense.  If  you  decide   to  also  attach  your  July  11th  2014  document  please  do  attach  this  letter  as  well.   Manuel  Mayorga Executive  Director c.c:  Mr.  David  David  Atteberry,  Deputy  Assistant  Administrator   2014-­‐03-­‐02_USAID-­‐Eric Postel.doc HERNANDO  DE  SOTO   CHAIRMAN  Las  Begonias  441  Piso  9  -­‐  Lima  27  –  Perú  Tel:  (511)  222-­‐5566    –  Fax:  (511)  421-­‐4552  hds@ild.org.pe    -­‐    www.ild.org.pe 2  March  2014 Mr.  Eric  G.  Postel Assistant  Administrator Bureau  of  Economic  Growth,  Education  &  Environment US  AGENCY  FOR  INTERNATIONAL  DEVELOPMENT,  USAID 1300  Pennsylvania  Ave.  NW Washington,  DC  20523 USA Ref:       As   promised   in   our   meeting   in   your   office   on   19   February,   here   is   a   more   reader-­‐friendly   edition   of   our   response  to  the  final  evaluation  report  on  ILD’s  performance1 so  that  you  or  your  staff  can  read  it  in  20  to  30  minutes.   Dear  Eric: The  evaluation  report  rests  on  three  criticisms: 1. “ILD’s  theories  are  too  general  to  be  applicable” 2. Their  doubts  that  “ILD’s  approach  can  prove  effective…” 3. “Lack  of  rigorous  evidence  of  the  impact  of  the  ILD  inspired  programs…” As  you  will  see  in  the  pages  below,  we  are  providing  you  with  extensive  documentation  signed   off   by   USAID   and   other   US   Government   authorities   proving   that   applications   of   our   theory   have   been   effective   in   thousands   of   cases.     The   issue   here   is   not   a   difference   of   opinion   between  the  ILD  and  the  evaluators  but  that  they  have  been  blind  to  the  facts  already  in  the   records  not  just  of  the  ILD  but  also  of  USAID. Volume   II   provides   some   of   the   most   obvious   evidence   for   activities   that   the   evaluators   claimed  that  there  was  no  evidence  for:  1,100  laws  enacting  ILD  initiatives,  along  with  dozens   of   related   strategies, six   treaties   and   covenants   designed   and   implemented   by   the   ILD;   plus detailed  evidence  of  the  impact  of  ILD  reforms  in  15  countries.   In  Volume  I,  we  have  organized  our  responses  to  the  evaluators’  three  criticisms  through  eight   cases   that   demonstrate   that   the   ILD     –   and   many   others   –   have   applied   our   theories   successfully   thousands   of   times;   that   Democratic   and   Republican   Presidents   and   their   NSA   chiefs  and  Secretaries  of  State,  Defense,  and  Housing  have  praised   the  effectiveness  of  ILD’s   approach;  so  have  Supreme  Court  Justices,  USAID  Administrators,  along  with  their  officers  and   evaluators,   Congressional   Committees,   and   the   US   media   in   hundreds   of   articles   and   programs.   1  Submitted  to  the  ILD  by  C.  Dadzie  and  P.  Murrell  in  September  2013. 2014-­‐03-­‐02_USAID-­‐Eric Postel.doc To  make  it  possible  for  you  or  your  staff  to  get  a  sense  –  in  less  than  20  minutes  –  of  how  much   evidence   is   actually   available   of   the   impact   of   ILD   reform   programs,   this   report   begins   by   summarizing  each  of  the  eight  cases  in  a  “nutshell”  of  only  one  or  two  pages.   If  you  can  spare  another  ten  minutes,  you  can  also  see  evidence  of  ILD’s  impact  in  the  form  of   a  “Picture  History”  of   the  documents   that  validate  and  certify  our  performance.    For  anyone   wanting  more  information  about  the  ILD’s  theories,  applications  and  challenges,  there  is  also  a   slightly  longer  account  of  those  same  cases  following  the  Picture  Histories. All  the  foregoing  demonstrates  that  the  Dadzie-­‐Murrell  team  has  never  even  glanced  at  ILD’s   regular   reports   to  USAID.  Eric,  by   the   time  you  or  anyone  else  has  spent  20  minutes   reading   this  report,  you  will  already  know  more  about  the  ILD’s  work  and  impact  than  Dadzie-­‐Murrell.   Their  report  is  that  bad,  which  is  why  we  have  made  such  an  effort  to  expose  its  failings  to  you   in  a  two-­‐  volume  response.    It  is  also  why  we  would  appreciate  that  this  letter  and  the  two  volumes  that  accompany  it  be   filed  with  the  Final  Report  so  that  everyone  can  make  up  their  minds  as  to  the  validity  of  the   Dadzie-­‐Murrell  team’s  evaluation  of  the  ILD. One  of  the  real  pluses  of  all  the  research  we  did  to  accumulate  evidence  in  the  past  month  is   that  we  had  to  talk  to  a  lot  of  people  to  pull  together  our  documentation.    Everybody  seemed   to  understand  the  relevance  of  what  we  do  in  the  USAID-­‐ILD  partnership.    I  hope  we  can  talk   about  that  when  we  meet. As   agreed,   we   have   asked   Nick   Klissas   to   visit   your   offices   and   personally   put   this   re-­‐edited   report  into  your  hands  on  Friday,  7  March.  We  will  be  getting  back  in  touch  with  Nick  to  see  if   that  date   still  works  or  if  we  have   to  make  an  adjustment.  We  certainly  look   forward   to  our   discussion.   Sincerely, Hernando  de  Soto Chairman Manuel  Mayorga Executive  Director 81 A RESPONSE TO THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE FINAL REPORT ON ILD PERFORMANCE SUBMITTED BY C. DADZIE AND P. MURRELL ON SEPTEMBER 2013 Conclusion #1: “ILD’s theories are too general to be applicable” ILD Response: 8 cases where ILD’s theories have been successfully applied – to win a war against terrorism, create broad-based economic growth, make government more accountable, explain the causes of the Arab Spring, influence the development agendas of international agencies and 15 countries – and change the debate worldwide. Conclusion #2: ...doubts that “ILD’s approach can prove effective…” ILD Response: Documented recognition of the effectiveness of ILD’s approach – by the White House, USAID officers, US press, war victims, even the terrorists. Conclusion #3: “…lack of rigorous evidence of the impact of the ILD inspired programs…” ILD Response: A list of 1,100 laws enacting ILD initiatives, along with dozens of related strategies, six treaties and covenants designed and implemented by the ILD; plus detailed evidence of the impact of ILD reforms in 15 countries. VOLUME I INSTITUTE FOR LIBERTY AND DEMOCRACY / Ave. Las Begonias 441, Suite 901, San Isidro. Lima 27 - Peru / (+511) 616-6100 / hds@ild.org.pe / www.ild.org.pe 313 TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume I INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................p. 3 CASE #1: THE STRATEGY, LAWS AND TREATIES DESIGNED BY THE ILD IN COOPERATION WITH THE WHITE HOUSE AND STATE DEPARTMENT, FUNDED AND PROMOTED BY USAID, WHICH LED TO THE ONLY SUCCESSFUL U.S. WAR AGAINST TERRORISM SINCE THE FALL OF THE BERLIN WALL -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.7 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.9 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.14 CASE #2: HOW ILD’S RE-CATEGORIZATION REFORMS OPENED THE CITIES TO PERU’S UNDERCLASS AND HELPED WIN THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.21 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.22 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.25 CASE #3: HOW ILD IDENTIFIED THE OVERRIDING CONSTRAINTS TO BROAD-BASED GROWTH AND MADE THEIR REMOVAL A POPULAR CAUSE -- IN A NUTSHELL .................................................................................................................................................................p.31 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.32 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.35 CASE #4: HOW THE ILD CHANGED THE PERUVIAN CONSTITUTION TO MAKE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE AND CLOSER TO THE PEOPLE -- IN A NUTSHELL .................................................................................................................................................................p.41 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.43 CASE #5: HOW THE ILD HAS BEGUN THE RE-CATEGORIZATION OF THE ARAB SPRING -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.49 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.50 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.57 CASE #6: ILD’S CONTRIBUTION TO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.63 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.65 CASE #7: HOW THE ILD IS HELPING OTHER COUNTRIES RE-CATEGORIZE -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.69 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.70 CASE #8: ILD’S INTELLECTUAL IMPACT -- IN A NUTSHELL ................................................................................................................................................................p.77 Volume II ANNEX 1: 182 VALID INTERLOCUTORS FOR ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT. COCA GROWERS COMMITTEES. UPPER HUALLAGA VALLEY AND APURIMAC RIVER VALLEY ......................................................p.85 ANNEX 2: ONE THOUSAND PIECES OF LEGISLATION TO REMOVE CONSTRAINTS TO GROWTH .......p.181 ANNEX 3: A SAMPLE OF LEGAL REGULATIONS PUBLISHED FROM APRIL 1984 TO JUNE 2012, DERIVED FROM DRAFT LAWS DESIGNED BY ILD RELATED TO CITIZEN PARTICIPATION, DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE AND THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN ...................................................................................................................p.295 ANNEX 4: DETAILED EVIDENCE OF THE IMPACT OF ILD REFORMS IN 15 COUNTRIES ..........................p.303 1 A RESPONSE TO THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE FINAL REPORT ON ILD PERFORMANCE VOLUME I 83 TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume I INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................p. 3 CASE #1: THE STRATEGY, LAWS AND TREATIES DESIGNED BY THE ILD IN COOPERATION WITH THE WHITE HOUSE AND STATE DEPARTMENT, FUNDED AND PROMOTED BY USAID, WHICH LED TO THE ONLY SUCCESSFUL U.S. WAR AGAINST TERRORISM SINCE THE FALL OF THE BERLIN WALL -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.7 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.9 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.14 CASE #2: HOW ILD’S RE-CATEGORIZATION REFORMS OPENED THE CITIES TO PERU’S UNDERCLASS AND HELPED WIN THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.21 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.22 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.25 CASE #3: HOW ILD IDENTIFIED THE OVERRIDING CONSTRAINTS TO BROAD-BASED GROWTH AND MADE THEIR REMOVAL A POPULAR CAUSE -- IN A NUTSHELL .................................................................................................................................................................p.31 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.32 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.35 CASE #4: HOW THE ILD CHANGED THE PERUVIAN CONSTITUTION TO MAKE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE AND CLOSER TO THE PEOPLE -- IN A NUTSHELL .................................................................................................................................................................p.41 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.43 CASE #5: HOW THE ILD HAS BEGUN THE RE-CATEGORIZATION OF THE ARAB SPRING -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.49 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.50 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.57 CASE #6: ILD’S CONTRIBUTION TO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.63 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.65 CASE #7: HOW THE ILD IS HELPING OTHER COUNTRIES RE-CATEGORIZE -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.69 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.70 CASE #8: ILD’S INTELLECTUAL IMPACT -- IN A NUTSHELL ................................................................................................................................................................p.77 Volume II ANNEX 1: 182 VALID INTERLOCUTORS FOR ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT. COCA GROWERS COMMITTEES. UPPER HUALLAGA VALLEY AND APURIMAC RIVER VALLEY ......................................................p.85 ANNEX 2: ONE THOUSAND PIECES OF LEGISLATION TO REMOVE CONSTRAINTS TO GROWTH .......p.181 ANNEX 3: A SAMPLE OF LEGAL REGULATIONS PUBLISHED FROM APRIL 1984 TO JUNE 2012, DERIVED FROM DRAFT LAWS DESIGNED BY ILD RELATED TO CITIZEN PARTICIPATION, DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE AND THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN ...................................................................................................................p.295 ANNEX 4: DETAILED EVIDENCE OF THE IMPACT OF ILD REFORMS IN 15 COUNTRIES ..........................p.303 3 INTRODUCTION The ILD believes that the methods economists and security professionals use to search, gather and categorize information and extract useful facts from it are not equipped to deal with the new reality that ILD had discovered taking place as communism started imploding: the poor of the Third World were not naturally opposed to open societies; ILD’s research showed that they were in fact marching toward Western style globalization. Why do we continue to miss that point? Because most official systems do not have a category that relates the poor to their aspiration to be part of the global market. Thus, they are unable to explain why Peruvian farmers armed only with spears went to war on behalf of their right to markets and entrepreneurship, or why poor young Arabs would light themselves on fire when a petty functionary took away their property. Since the 1980s, the ILD had realized that Peru’s poor farmers, the emerging entrepreneurs of the Middle East and North Africa as well as the people operating in Tanzania´s informal sector were part of a global phenomenon that continues to this day. Over the last three to five decades, the majority of people in developing countries have been fleeing in massive, slow moving droves from small-scale traditional economies towards more globalized ones. We estimate that about four billion people have already abandoned their economically exhausted societies (tribal, customary communal, feudal = one billion) to get closer to their country’s legal, modernized large scale market economies (westernized elites in emerging nations = one billion) or the modern economies abroad (in North America and Europe = one billion). But when these four billion refugees reached their destination, they were unable to enter the legal market, due to constraints that current official categories cannot spot. Unwilling to return to their traditional societies and abide by narrow local rules, but unable to move forward towards global rules, they are trapped in what ILD calls the “extralegal economy,” which is made up of hundreds of anarchic, discrete arrangements “outside the rule of law”. The ILD believes that the world’s extralegal sectors is the big challenge not just of economic development but for peace: It is something new, it’s moving, it’s the biggest part of the world’s population, and it remains out of control. The existing classifications for the extralegal economy where people are categorized on the basis of size, trade, gender, age, and life expectation give no clues as to the constraints holding the billions who want to move to modernity. We are facing tsunamis around the world, and all that current categorizations can give us is a clear view of each drop of water, when what we need is to see how those drops of water come together to form a powerful wave. The extralegal economy, for better or for worse, does not lie in the specific characteristics of its parts but rather in the common constraints that unify them into an aggregate force for change that cuts across gender, trades, or ages. World Population 7 billion 4 billion 1 billion 1 billion 1 billion Informal (unglobalized) Formal (globalized) Traditional. Extralegal. Westernized elites developing countries. Developed countries. Illegal. Traditional Extralegal Legal Legal 4 Authorities have plenty of information worldwide on the extralegal economy but none of it is broken up and grouped into categories that allow us to get facts, i.e. short-cut actionable knowledge that can be tested for truth from which we can infer the constraints generating the crises that governments must solve. Why is it that millions of farmers cannot be protected by law? Why can’t they get the business or property tools to develop or the security to protect themselves? What makes hundreds of young people to commit suicide in the Arab Spring? That such knowledge is hard to find is not surprising: “facts” do not exist on their own. In a world brimming with information, facts are the result of appropriately selecting and categorizing that information. Categorization proceeds in the following way: discarding the information that has proven to be useless so far, especially that arising from interpretations of cultures; concentrating on information in the streets that comes directly from those affected by the crises; keeping in mind that today’s crises are quite similar to those that occurred when the West was making its transition from a traditional to an industrial society; fitting these pieces of information together into a new blueprint for translating them into facts. ILD has developed categorization principles, protocols and procedures to identify the real constraints blocking extralegals from prosperity and increasing the probability of terrorism, contagious conflicts, frustrating poverty. Such re-categorization is what is required to reveal the causes of the world’s most pressing crises, find out who the West’s allies really are, and pave the way for working together to remove those constraints. In the following pages, we offer eight different cases that illustrate how the ILD´s efforts at re-categorization have helped not only win a war against terrorism in Peru but also produce broad-based growth, create the fastest growing middle class in Latin America, and make the government accountable. ILD’s recategorization also inspired international organizations to modify their development agendas, led to reforms that made the legal market economy accessible for everyone in many developing countries; and, changed the understanding about the root causes of the Arab Spring. 5 Case #1: THE STRATEGY, LAWS AND TREATIES DESIGNED BY THE ILD AND SUPPORTED BY USAID WHICH LED TO THE ONLY SUCCESSFUL WAR AGAINST TERRORISM SINCE THE BERLIN WALL FELL 7 Case #1: IN A NUTSHELL Bush, Scowcroft, Fujimori and de Soto, 17.09.91. A strategy to “fight terrorism with the support of farmer defense organizations”. Mothers of the Sanamarca community (Ayacucho). Anti-Subversive Civil Defense Committee, 1984. In 1980, radical Maoist terrorists called Sendero Luminoso appeared in the Peruvian Andes and tried to impose on poor farmers the collectivization of their farmland, the substitution of currency with barter and markets with central control. The farmers resisted and Sendero massacred them by the thousands. In 1984, the farmers organized into a couple of hundred illegal “Comités de Defensa Civil Antisubversiva (DECAS)” and fought back with spears, knives and homemade pellet shotguns, which were the only weapons they could access. The farmers made surprising progress but the better-armed Sendero kept coming back. By March 1990, RAND reported to the U.S. Secretary of Defense that “Sendero is firmly entrenched in the highlands… Peru is on the brink of internal collapse… Sendero could win.” The U.S. State Dept. considered Sendero as the most dangerous threat to peace in the Americas and as devastating as Pol Pot’s war in Cambodia. Neither Peruvian laws nor international treaties had provisions that recognized the property and business rights of poor farmers nor their right to protect themselves. The farmers were thus in the same situation as four billion other people in the world who also live in the “extralegal economy.” ILD designed and implemented a strategy that re-categorized the DECAS and converted them from an illegal to a legal force, recognized by the Peruvian law, covenants with the U.S. and the U.N. Thus, economically and militarily empowered, and accountable to government, the DECAS’ volunteer army of 20,000 fighters increased overnight to 120,000 —and proceeded to win the war against Sendero. Re-categorizing is what the ILD does. It is about two things: One, changing regulations, laws and treaties in stages and installments to emancipate those who live in legal apartheid; and two, crafting messages that move governments to action and raise public awareness so that concrete reforms quickly reach their tipping point. This Historic Success is only getting attention now because: 1. By 1990, U.S. intelligence, State Dept. and RAND saw Sendero winning a long war. Two years later, we turned the war around with legal reforms –a surprise story that no one knew how to report. 2. President Bush failed to win a second term; his Peru observers left their positions, and the bridge was broken. 3. With the collapse of communism, international affairs experts turned their attention to Central and Eastern Europe. 4. Those fighting Sendero in Lima –only 2 to 3% of the action– took credit for winning a war that was really in the countryside –waged by people not accustomed to writing books. 5. Discriminated for 400 years by Peru’s elites, the farmers were used to keeping their suffering to themselves. 6. Mostly, this war has been forgotten because it was fought with unusual weapons: legally empowering citizens with the rights to defend their property and their lives. 7. The war weakened the resolve of traditionalists for defending an outdated legal system which allowed such radical change that Peru quickly obtained the highest growth rate in Latin America – and the urge to bury the bad times. 8. With the West confronting small armies like Al Qaeda’s in MENA and elsewhere, it is time to re-visit Peru’s non-traditional solutions. The time chart below reveals essentially a war between a mass of uneducated farmers fighting for rights to property and to buy and sell and to use currency against an army of ideologues led by professors bent on imposing collectivism. It reads like a right wing pamphlet, but it is the truth. 8 Sendero Luminoso welcomed in provinces. Sendero proposes collectivizing property, and abolishing currency and local markets. Farmers resist; Sendero responds with massive executions. Pres. Belaunde sends in troops. Gen. Huaman hands 20 shotguns to the resistance, promises 1,000 more –and is fired. Farmers create illegal “Comités de Defensa Civil Antisubversiva (DECAS)” to fight Sendero with knives, spears or homemade pellet guns. ILD publishes The Other Path (TOP), an alternative to Sendero’s program – a historic bestseller and front-page news throughout Latin America. Farmer organizations seek ILD’s help in becoming legal. Three main presidential candidates adopt TOP’s program. Three communist-led organizations –street vendors, transport owners, housing associations– switch to TOP. Pres. Reagan at U.N. calls ILD his “hero” and praises its reform vision. ILD media blitz to empower extralegal organizations to do business and protect themselves. U.S. Sec. of State George Shultz invites ILD’s de Soto to his “Open Forum” to make the case that most Third Worlders are in the private sector and Pres. Reagan has not addressed them. ILD’s first proposal treating the resistance as “informal” not criminal –which Pres. Garcia submits to Cartagena Summit of North and South American Presidents. Pres. Garcia celebrates enacting numerous legal reforms for facilitating the transition of extralegals to legality. Pres. Fujimori freezes U.S. collaboration agreement, leaving progress in the hands of ILD, which immediately engages members of Congress, Cabinet, including Depts. of Defense, State and National Security, and human rights organizations. VP Dan Quayle and CoS Bill Kristol run interference to ensure that U.S. policy makers understand Peru’s strategy to incorporate informals into a winning coalition against the real criminals, Sendero Luminoso. De Soto, accompanied by U.S. Ambassador and/or U.N. authorities, meets with farmers and DECAS, in Andes as well as Lima, to work out details for incorporating them into the legal system. “U.S. Peru Treaty” recognizes farmers as ready to participate in civil society. Secretary General of U.N. and its Drug Control Programme agree to supervise the legalization process. White House Summit of Presidents Bush and Fujimori, NSA’s Scowcroft and ILD’s de Soto commit to fight criminality with support of Peru’s farmers. DL 741 legalizes DECAS to defend their right to property and enterprise, and to be armed to fight Sendero – under army supervision. DECAS reduce violence by 80% in two years, thus defeating Sendero as a political force. A Graphic History of the War against sendero luminoso 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 6. 7. 8. 9. 11. 10. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Laws and Treaties 0 6000 12000 14000 10000 8000 4000 2000 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 D E A T H S Farmers create a 20,000 strong illegal army that beats back Sendero with spears and pellet guns. Sendero returns fully armed. In March 1990, RAND reports to U.S. Secretary of Defense “Peru on the brink of internal col￾lapse. Sendero could win…is firmly entrenched in the highlands.” Conversations with farmers and cam￾paigns to assist them begin in earnest. Farmers are gradually recognized by law and supported by public opinion in a succession of moves. By 1991, they have become a 120,000 strong army. Abimael Guzman, head of Sendero, is arrested in Lima. Land war in the countryside Terrorism in Lima 9 1. 1980: Sendero Luminoso welcomed in provinces. 1981-1983: Sendero proposes collectivizing property, and abolishing currency and local markets. Farmers resist; Sendero responds with massive executions. 2. 1982: Pres. Belaunde sends in troops. 3. 1984: Gen. Huaman hands 20 shotguns to the resistance, promises 1,000 more – and is fired. 4. 1984: Farmers create illegal “Comités de Defensa Civil Antisubversiva (DECAS)” to fight Sendero with knives, spears or homemade pellet guns. 5. The 120,000 strong farmer defense organization - DECAS. Case #1: Picture history 10 1986: ILD publishes The Other Path (TOP), an alternative to Sendero’s program – a historic bestseller and front-page news throughout Latin America. 6. 8. 1987-1989: Three main presidential candidates adopt TOP’s program. 7. 1987: Farmer organizations seek ILD’s help in becoming legal. 1986 - 1987: Three communist-led organizations – street vendors, transport owners, housing associations - switch to TOP. 9. 11 1990: ILD’s first proposal treating the resistance as “informal” not criminal – which Pres. Garcia submits to Cartagena Summit of North and South American Presidents. 13. 57 ...cont. 14. 1990: Pres. Garcia celebrates enacting 180 legal reforms for facilitating the transition of extralegals to legality. 1987: Pres. Reagan at U.N. calls ILD his “hero” and praises its reform vision. 10. 1988: ILD media blitz to empower extralegal organizations to do business and protect themselves. 11. 1989: U.S. Sec. of State George Shultz invites ILD’s de Soto to his “Open Forum” to make the case that most Third Worlders are in the private sector and Pres. Reagan has not addressed them. 12. 57 14. 1990: Pres. Garcia celebrates enacting numerous legal reforms for facilitating the transition of extralegals to legality. 12 1991: Secretary General of U.N. and its Drug Control Programme agree to supervise the legalization process. ...cont. 1991: Secretary General of U.N. and its Drug Control Programme agree to supervise the legalization process. 19. 19. Chief of Staff to the Vice President of the United States 44th Vice President of the United States 1990: VP Dan Quayle and CoS Bill Kristol run interference to ensure that U.S. policy makers understand Peru’s strategy to incorporate informals into a winning coalition against the real criminals, Sendero Luminoso. 16. 1991: De Soto, accompanied by U.S. Ambassador and/or U.N. authorities, meets with farmers and DECAS, in Andes as well as Lima, to work out details for incorporating them into the legal system. 17. 1991: “U.S. Peru Treaty” recognizes farmers as ready to participate in civil society. 18. 1991: Pres. Fujimori freezes U.S. collaboration agreement, leaving progress in the hands of ILD. 15. 1991: White House Summit of Presidents Bush and Fujimori, NSA’s Scowcroft and ILD’s de Soto commit to fight criminality with support of Peru’s farmers. 20. 13 1991: DL 741 legalizes DECAS to defend their right to property and enterprise, and to be armed to fight Sendero – under army supervision. 21. 1996: COFOPRI Law No. 803 creating a formalization agency. Procedures to carry out categorizations. 22. 1993: DECAS reduce 23. 24. violence by 80% in two years, thus defeating Sendero as a political force. 14 THE WAR IN PERU The land war began in Peru when Sendero, a radical Maoist insurgency, appeared in the Andean highlands (mainly Ayacucho, Huancavelica, Apurimac, Junin, and Pasco) early in the 1980s, preaching justice for poor farmers, thus gathering local sympathy and support. That honeymoon, however, rapidly ended in 1982, as Sendero began trying to abolish private ownership along with the use of currency and transactions in small local markets to settle prices. That’s when the farmers began to rebel. Their willingness to fight for property and markets reads like an extract from a radical right wing pamphlet. But that’s exactly what happened: At some point in the past, the locals had parceled their land, learned to trade in small scale markets and became accustomed to using the national currency; they were not going to accept collectivism. Sendero’s leaders, largely school and university teachers, like most Peruvians, hadn’t perceived that even the indigenous communities of Peru had been moving away from legally established collectivism but found it too hard or expensive to officially record this change of economic regime. Believing that this was a mere deviance from traditional values and therefore easily correctable, Sendero —between 1983 and 1984— began killing massive numbers of locals to assert their authority. The armed forces and the police were called in, but neither could distinguish Sendero’s people from the farmers since they were all illegal (unrecorded) in their own way and difficult to identify. As a result, government forces may have shot many innocent people, or refrained from shooting for fear of killing innocent farmers. The farmers, on the other hand, knew who the terrorist fighters were, but as illegals, they had access only to homemade spears, knives and pellet shotguns with a 50-yard range. In short, authorities had weapons but were blind, while farmers could see perfectly well but were outgunned. The result was that Sendero was winning the war. At least into 1984. Before the end of that year, however, farmers had organized themselves into illegal “Comités de Defensa Civil Antisubversiva (DECAS)” —20,000 strong— to fight Sendero; and by 1986 the DECAS had managed to drive Sendero out of the valleys and into the hills. (See “Nutshell” graphic, which makes this clear). Sendero, however, re-organized, re-armed and re-trained, and at the end of 1985 responded with an all-out effort, regaining territorial control in the following year, while terrorizing and killing more local farmers, hoping to eventually wear them out. The farmers, still outgunned, kept on fighting, losing thousands of men. DECAS leaders appealed to the military and the politicians to officially recognize them or give them weapons or integrate them into the armed forces, but to little avail. In fact, the armed forces sympathized with the plight of the DECAS and tried various times to help. In 1984, for example, General Adrian Huaman, head of the armed forces based in Ayacucho, gave the farmers of Ocros 20 shotguns, and planned to arm other communities that had requested help —until he was fired. And it wasn’t because political authorities were any less sympathetic to DECAS’ losing battle against the very group that vowed to overthrow the government. The politicians believed their hands were tied, legally: how could government, the defender of the rule of law, partner with an armed illegal counter-insurgency movement? That left the government, the army and the farmers all mired in a category trap that seemed inescapable. Case #1: a brief account 15 CALLING ON THE ILD In 1987, the DECAS —and Peru’s president— began seeking the ILD’s help in earnest. Both knew from the ILD’s publications that the ILD gave enormous importance to the law and institutions for solving Peru’s problems and had already begun designing reforms. The farmers had a simple and practical equation in mind: if the ILD could help them re-categorize and get their land and businesses legally recognized, they were hoping that would make them eligible for the kind of firepower that might give them an edge over their enemy. The President had a more complex equation in mind: On the basis of ILD’s vision that most of the world’s information and categorization systems were outdated and incapable of providing facts that could help governments solve the on-going challenges of poverty and security, he needed a strategy to bust the inertia of the status quo and a reform program to bring in the missing institutions. Between 1988 and 1990, the ILD devised the strategy the President had requested; dozens of related projects were being implemented. (See Cases 2 to 7 below for a fuller account of the strategy and results, including the hundreds of laws and regulations that turned Peru around. For a sample of books, newspaper and activist campaigns that started converting communist “extralegal” organizations into legal ones, see the “Picture History”.) ILD’s Simple Equation In response to the farmers’ request, the ILD was initially reticent to go beyond its practice of empowering extralegal groups in order to help them grow economically. But the news about the war against Sendero was so ominous that we began studying the farmers’ legal dilemma more closely. According to a major 1990 study by the RAND Corp. for the U.S. Secretary of Defense, “Sendero is firmly entrenched in the highlands...Peru is on the brink of internal collapse...Sendero could win.” Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs Bernard Aronson later warned the U.S. Congress that a Sendero victory in Peru would be as disastrous as Pol Pot’s takeover of Cambodia or as murderous as Hitler’s advances in Europe: Sendero-style communism would spread throughout Latin America. ILD research quickly determined that the overwhelming majority of Peruvians were against Sendero. Our own book on the phenomenon, “The Other Path,” was outselling its competitors 20 to 1 and had become the best-selling book in the history of Peru. Our message that the extralegals were the antidote to Sendero was carried in the newspapers, TV and radio programs, even in songs. The real problem was that Sendero’s Maoist guerrilla tactics were so efficient that Peru’s armed forces had no way of fighting without very high collateral damage. ILD like most Peruvians recognized that some kind of alliance with farmers was necessary. The big stumbling blocks were: Peru’s agreements with the international community, which indiscriminately treated everyone as a potential narco-terrorist; the tarnished reputation at the time of the country’s political leadership; and the suspicion that Peru’s government might be using this alliance with the DECAS to favor some obscure political or large oligarchic interests. With full USAID support, it took the ILD three years –up until 1991– to gather the facts, draw up a plan to legalize the DECAS and make them accountable to law, on the basis of their long-standing commitment to property and legitimate business. Our categorization study to give the farmers and governments the power to protect lives was part of a larger ILD objective: to merge the extralegal economy with the legal economy. 16 This required giving authorities facts that would allow them to: 1. understand how they are organizing themselves in the present, 2. categorize the different components of the extralegal economy, not only according to cultural criteria but especially according to how close they are to being completely legal, 3. facilitate the ascent of these constituencies by spotting the constraints that stand in their way and designing consensual reforms that remove them. The ILD has a few hundred re-categorization recipes, but the easiest way to understand what the process involves is to see how it applies to the defeat of Sendero, as outlined in this brief account. Re-categorization means changing perceptions at home and abroad, changing regulations and laws and modifying treaties. We call all three of these kinds of changes “moments of crystallization”. I. Re-categorizing the Extralegal Economy • Andean farmers illegally create the “Comités de Defensa Civil Antisubversiva (DECAS)” to defend property, currency and markets. (Picture History #5) • DECAS and Andean farmers agree to fill in forms that tell us their names, their location and how they relate to organizations and norms that we can trace, thus distinguishing themselves from criminals or terrorists, whose objective is to steal from or destroy legal society instead of joining it. • Bring in the U.N. to verify the ILD protocol. (Picture History #19) • Documentation is drafted in such a way that the highly meticulous and intellectually sophisticated U.S. Ambassador to Peru can certify the truth of ILD’s analysis; travel with ILD to meet farmers and DECAS in the Andes and see for himself that there was no comparison possible with paramilitary groups in Colombia or other war-torn countries. (Picture History #15 and 17) • Nearly all extralegal organizations have a vision and mission statement around which they have formed their consensus – an important indication for authorities as to where citizens are headed. (Picture History #9) • Nearly all extralegal organizations have statutes which provide a strong indication on how they are organized. • DECA members are also members of parallel producer associations. We identified 182 DECAS and their leaders, representing some 300,000 citizens in the region; and then asked the U.N. to check them out. (Picture History #19 and Volume II, Annex 1) • Extralegal citizens are asked to volunteer proposals and opinions so authorities can see if they are on the right track. (Picture History #14) • Extralegals are offered the opportunity to protect their assets by recording them. In addition to bringing peace, the objective of re-categorization is to provide citizens in transition to a legal society with the means to make a peaceful living once violence has ceased. (Picture History #14) II. Re-categorizing What Extralegals Need to Become Legal ILD uses a standard checklist to determine the shortcomings of the extralegal system so as to ensure that legal reforms do in fact provide extralegals more benefits than those they have outside the law. For example: Are they standardized? Are they compatible with their neighbors? How fungible are their assets? How accountable are they as owners? Do their assets have other functions aside from their physical presence (e.g. credit, capital, contracts, etc.)? (Picture History #14) 17 III.Breaking the Status Quo and Gaining Political Support A. Breaking the Status Quo • Pres. Reagan at U.N. calls ILD his “hero” and praises bringing extralegals into the legal economy. (Picture History #10) • U.S. Sec. of State Shultz invites ILD’s de Soto to his “Open Forum” to make the case that U.S. desire to address the private sector in Latin America must also address extralegal economy. (Picture History #12) • Pres. Garcia submits ILD proposal for making a distinction between criminals and farmers to Cartagena Summit of North and South American Presidents. (Picture History #13) • Pres. Garcia celebrates enacting 180 legal reforms for facilitating the transition of extralegals to legality. (Picture History #14) • Pres. Fujimori freezes Peru-U.S. narcotics collaboration, leaving progress in the hands of ILD, which immediately engages members of Congress, Cabinet Departments including Defense, State and HUD, plus human rights organizations. (Picture History #15) B. Gaining Political Support on behalf of the New Category from: • White House (Picture History #20), Office of the Vice President (Picture History #16), NSC (Picture History #20), State Dept. (Picture History #12), Secretary General and UNDCP (Picture History #19), Dept. of Defense, “Drug Zars”, Foreign Affairs Committee U.S. House, Foreign Relations Committee U.S. Senate, et al. IV. Creating New Law and a New Social Contract By stages and in installments, the ILD gradually created an unassailable category that distinguished criminals from the farmers and the rules required for government to assume full responsibility for its action of legalizing them. The distinction and the rules were finally accepted in Peruvian law and in covenants between Peru and the U.S. and the U.N. • “U.S. Peru Treaty,” which recognizes farmers as ready to participate in civil society. (Picture History #18) • DL 741 legalizes DECAS to defend their right to property and enterprise and to be armed to fight Sendero – under army supervision. (Picture History #21) • Agreement between Peru and U.N. to supervise empowerment of DECAS and farmers. (Picture History #19) • Registro Predial Law No. 495 and 496 setting up a national property registry. (Picture History #14) • COFOPRI Law No. 803 creating a formalization agency. (Picture History #23) • “Valid interlocutors”: all farmer and DECA leaders are recognized as valid government interlocutors and made responsible to different authorities for their behavior. (Picture History #19) By 1993, Peru’s formalized popular army had defeated Sendero in a land war that the State Department had called a global threat historically outranked in murderousness only by Pol Pot and Hitler. We have gathered the documents and the actors. This Western success is about to get its rightful place in history. 19 Case #2: HOW the ILD’S RE-CATEGORIZATION REFORMS HELPED WIN THE IDEOLOGICAL BATTLE IN THE CITIES, INCREASED PERU’S MIDDLE CLASS AND GAVE THE COUNTRY A LEG UP IN ITS INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL ADJUSTMENT PROGRAM 21 From 1990 to 2012 Peru has grown on average twice as fast as all the other Latin countries and the growth rate of its middle class has quadrupled that of Latin America in the same period This is due to a great extent to ILD’s work in re-categorizing the extralegal economy funded by USAID. For the sake of illustration, we have recently done a brief survey of Northern Metropolitan Lima (Cono Norte), which confirms this thesis: • From 1990, the number of titled and registered properties in that area increased eight times (from 33,000 properties worth US$0.5 billion to 273,500 properties worth US$ 8.2 billion) and now can be used for various functions, including leveraging. • Reforms for reducing red tape and facilitating business have increased the number of legal businesses in Cono Norte 32 times (from 2,600 to 84,600). • As a result of the above and during that time period, middle class families have increased from 33,000 to 241,000, with their income increasing from US$800 to US$1,800. Case #2: In a nutshell Procedure to legalize ownership of “de facto” possessions of state-owned land in Peru Before ILD reform: 728 administrative steps and 15 years Procedure to legalize ownership of "de facto" possessions of state-owned land in Peru Before ILD reform: 728 administrative steps and 15 years After ILD reform: 31 administrative steps and 67 days ALCALDÍA ALCALDÍA ALCALDE ALCALDE DIRECCIÓN MUNICIPAL DIRECCIÓN MUNICIPAL DIRECTOR DIRECTOR PROMOTOR SOCIAL PROMOTOR SOCIAL TÉCN.ADMIN. TÉCN.ADMIN. TRANSPORTE TRANSPORTE DIRECCIÓN ADJUDICACIÓN DIRECCIÓN ADJUDICACIÓN JEFE DIVISIÓN JEFE DIVISIÓN COMITÉ ESPECIAL COMITÉ ESPECIAL TÉC. INGENIERÍA TÉC. INGENIERÍA TÉC. LEGAL TÉC. LEGAL TÉC. ADMIN. TÉC. ADMIN. PROMOTOR PROMOTOR DIRECCIÓN URBANIZACIÓN DIRECCIÓN URBANIZACIÓN SEC. MUNICIPAL SEC. MUNICIPAL ASESOR ASESOR TÉC. MUNICIPAL TÉC. MUNICIPAL MESA PARTES MESA PARTES SEGUIMIENTO Y DESPACHO SEGUIMIENTO Y DESPACHO REGISTRO Y DESPACHO REGISTRO Y DESPACHO COBRO COBRO ACOTACIÓN ACOTACIÓN INTERESADO INTERESADO STEP 1 STEP 728 US$ 2,000 US$ 50 The time and cost of formalizing property in were reduced by some Peru 98% Procedure to legalize ownership of "de facto" possessions of state-owned land in Peru Before ILD reform: 728 administrative steps and 15 years After ILD reform: 31 administrative steps and 67 days ALCALDÍA ALCALDÍA ALCALDE ALCALDE DIRECCIÓN MUNICIPAL DIRECCIÓN MUNICIPAL DIRECTOR DIRECTOR PROMOTOR SOCIAL PROMOTOR SOCIAL TÉCN.ADMIN. TÉCN.ADMIN. TRANSPORTE TRANSPORTE DIRECCIÓN ADJUDICACIÓN DIRECCIÓN ADJUDICACIÓN JEFE DIVISIÓN JEFE DIVISIÓN COMITÉ ESPECIAL COMITÉ ESPECIAL TÉC. INGENIERÍA TÉC. INGENIERÍA TÉC. LEGAL TÉC. LEGAL TÉC. ADMIN. TÉC. ADMIN. PROMOTOR PROMOTOR DIRECCIÓN URBANIZACIÓN DIRECCIÓN URBANIZACIÓN SEC. MUNICIPAL SEC. MUNICIPAL ASESOR ASESOR TÉC. MUNICIPAL TÉC. MUNICIPAL MESA PARTES MESA PARTES SEGUIMIENTO Y DESPACHO SEGUIMIENTO Y DESPACHO REGISTRO Y DESPACHO REGISTRO Y DESPACHO COBRO COBRO ACOTACIÓN ACOTACIÓN INTERESADO INTERESADO STEP 1 STEP 728 US$ 2,000 US$ 50 The time and cost of formalizing property in were reduced by some Peru 98% After ILD reform: 31 administrative steps and 67 days Procedure to legalize ownership of "de facto" possessions of state-owned land in Peru Before ILD reform: 728 administrative steps and 15 years After ILD reform: 31 administrative steps and 67 days ALCALDÍA ALCALDÍA ALCALDE ALCALDE DIRECCIÓN MUNICIPAL DIRECCIÓN MUNICIPAL DIRECTOR DIRECTOR PROMOTOR SOCIAL PROMOTOR SOCIAL TÉCN.ADMIN. TÉCN.ADMIN. TRANSPORTE TRANSPORTE DIRECCIÓN ADJUDICACIÓN DIRECCIÓN ADJUDICACIÓN JEFE DIVISIÓN JEFE DIVISIÓN COMITÉ ESPECIAL COMITÉ ESPECIAL TÉC. INGENIERÍA TÉC. INGENIERÍA TÉC. LEGAL TÉC. LEGAL TÉC. ADMIN. TÉC. ADMIN. PROMOTOR PROMOTOR DIRECCIÓN URBANIZACIÓN DIRECCIÓN URBANIZACIÓN SEC. MUNICIPAL SEC. MUNICIPAL ASESOR ASESOR TÉC. MUNICIPAL TÉC. MUNICIPAL MESA PARTES MESA PARTES SEGUIMIENTO Y DESPACHO SEGUIMIENTO Y DESPACHO REGISTRO Y DESPACHO REGISTRO Y DESPACHO COBRO COBRO ACOTACIÓN ACOTACIÓN INTERESADO INTERESADO STEP 1 STEP 728 US$ 2,000 US$ 50 The time and cost of formalizing property in were reduced by some Peru 98% US$ 50 US$ 2,000 The time and cost of formalizing property in Peru were reduced by some 98% 22 International Conventional View - PREALC-OIT: “Informals are the unproductive unemployed with no future that failed peripheral capitalism has been unable to absorb”. 1. National Conventional View - Jose Matos - Mar: “Informality is the non-conformist Andean sector that rebels against the official circuit”. 2. ILD Re - categorization: Property rights are crucial to fight poverty and allow informals to enter inclusive market economies. 3. 4. ILD Re-categorized to understand informality and found that Informals were not “ unemployed “: 52% of industry, 90% of small businesses, 93% of public transportation, and 60% of fishery were operated by informals and 90% of agricultural land was farmed by informals. They supplied 61% of total man-hours, generated 39% of GDP, and were 48% of the work force. Informals were not “people without a future”: Informal areas held 43% of Lima’s dwellings and gave shelter to 47% of its population. Informals were not 7. “unproductive”: Informal houses were worth US$ 57 billion. 5. Informals were not “unproductive”: The fleet of 16,250 informal public transportation vehicles was worth US$ 1 billion. 6. Case #2: Picture history 23 Informals were not “people without a future”: The informal fishing fleet had 6,840 boats that operated in 23 ports and 67 small bays. Informals were not “people without a future”: Street vendors saved to build their own markets; in 1985, they had built 240 informal markets and the State only 2. 8. 9. Informals were not rebelling against the “official circuit”; in fact, they wanted to be part of it: Some 300,000 bus owners belonging to the leftist Public Drivers Association, ceased general strikes as soon as they were recognized as private sector entrepreneurs by the law that liberated transportation fees control. 10. Informals were not rebelling against the “official circuit”; in fact, they wanted to be part of it: Land invasions and building shantytowns were only one of 17 ways aimed at entering into formality although using extralegal practices. 11. The so called “ non-conformist Andean sector” did not exist ; however, most poor economic agents were victmized by excessive regulations: They needed 300 days to obtain the authorization to operate a small business and had to wait 20 years to get their houses titled. 12. 24 On 1 July 1990, in New York, Peru’s President elect announced a new plan to reintegrate Peru in the international financial system but emphasizing “socio-economic development in the informal sector and the marginalized populations”. 13. 25 The Opposition Until 1986, three categorizations regarding Peru’s poverty and informal economy prevailed: 1. PREALC-International Labor Organization (ILO) categorization that we can sum up as follows: “Informals are the unproductive, unemployed, with no future proletariat and lower technicians that Latin America’s peripheral capitalism is incapable of absorbing.” 2. The Peruvian cultural school, best symbolized by the prestigious Jose Matos Mar, which we can sum up as follows: “Informal sector is the Andean radical opposition, rebelling against the ‘official circuit’ with ‘explosions.’”. 3. Sendero Luminoso (Sendero) class-targeting approach that supports every informal movement: Sendero’s Movimiento Clasista Barrial to support land squatting; Movimiento de Campesinos Obre￾ros to assist taking over farmland; Movimiento Obrero de Trabajadores Clasistas to assist street ven￾dors and transport strikes; etc. Sendero’s strategy was to empathize with the precise economic frus￾tration of each informal group, betting that over time each group would see the broader picture and commit to total revolution. ILD’s Response to PREALC-ILO and the Cultural School (1 and 2 above): Winning the Ideological Battle with Numbers The ILD countered PREALC-ILO and the Cultural School with a blitz of publications: Our principal book, The Other Path, became Peru’s number 1 best-seller of all times and outsold the opposition’s publications at least 10 to 1 in the first three months. The Other Path’s message was spread even wider through documentary films, radio shows, cartoon stories, brief pocket books, essays, and weeklies. The ILD’s argument was devastating because: 1) by correctly categorizing the extralegal economy as “those using illegal means to achieve legitimate objectives due to prohibitive procedures and laws,” it became mainstream thinking: Peruvians internalized the ILD’s definition of “extralegality” in less than a year; and 2) because our categorical definition made it easier to gather significant statistics, which we published extensively, debunking the arguments of the ILO and cultural school —and which remain unchallenged today (with the exception of isolated blowback from a few Oxford professors who were promptly defeated in debate and never showed up again). • The informals were not “unemployed”: they represented 61.2% of total amount of man-hours worked in Peru and 48% of the employed population. • They were not “unproductive”: they built US$36.5 billion worth of housing and ran transport fleets in excess of 16,000 vehicles worth over US$1 billion. • They were not “without a future”: street vendors were moving out of the streets to build markets; by 1985 they had built 240 extralegal markets in Lima, while the Municipality only had 2. • They were not “rebelling against the official circuit;” they wanted to be part of it —and said so openly. For example, the 300,000 transport operators of the FECHOP supported by the Communist Party openly declared in newspaper advertisements in 1986 that they were dropping their Communist affiliation and adopting the principles of The Other Path. There was a revolution all right, but it was not ethnically motivated; it was made up of people aspiring to be middle class. Case #2: a brief account 26 ILD’s Response to Sendero (3 above): Winning the Battle against Terrorism with Reforms The ILD also countered Sendero with a class-targeting approach. We designed, managed and enacted hundreds of projects and laws based on consultations with of the concerned extralegal organizations. (See especially Cases 3 and 4.) These reforms primarily focused on (i) facilitating the business activities of the poorest by reducing red tape by 75%; (ii) facilitating the leveraging of their assets by recognizing their property. Together with macroeconomic reforms, these business and property reforms have had the following effects: • Annual inflation was reduced from 7,600% in 1990 to 40% in 1993, and 3.6% in 2012. • Real GDP, which had fallen 13.4% in 1989, grew 3.4% per year, on average, between 1990 and 2012 (vs. 1.8% in the case of Latin America) • The growth rate of Real GDP per capita (113%) doubled that of Latin America (51%) between 1990 and 2012. The growth rate of middle class (234%) quadrupled that of Latin America in the same period (58%). The reason the income of Peruvians has increased twice as much as that of other Latin Americans and our middle class has grown four times more in average is in great part due to the institutional reforms ILD promulgate to lower the costs of doing business and using assets. For the sake of illustration, we have recently done a brief survey of Northern Metropolitan Lima (Cono Norte), which confirms this thesis: • From 1990, the number of titled and registered properties in that area increased eight times (from 33,000 properties worth US$0.5 billion to 273,500 properties worth US$ 8.2 billion) and now can be used for various functions, including leveraging. • Reforms for reducing red tape and facilitating business have increased the number of legal businesses in Cono Norte 32 times (from 2,600 to 84,600). • As a result of the above, and during that time period, middle class families have increased from 33,000 to 241,000, with their income increasing from US$800 to US$1,800. Detailed estimates have yet to be completed, but the trend is quite clear: the ILD reforms are working. Using Political Victories in Peru to Make Macroeconomic Adjustment Possible On 1 July 1990, Peru’s President elect Alberto Fujumori announced in New York a new plan to reinte￾grate Peru into the international financial system. (See New York Times headline in Picture History #13.) According to Peru’s leading magazine Caretas (2 of July 1990), the President didn’t make a case for mac￾roeconomics but for integrating the extralegal economy, emphasizing “socio-economic development in the informal sector and the marginalized populations,” Caretas added: “Fujimori speaks not only of a market economy, but of the need to create markets in an economy like that of Peru. The market economy does not work for the poor…what Peru needs is a reconstruction program.” In the initial agreement at the end of June with IMF Managing Director Michel Camdessus, both par￾ties would coordinate with the Peruvian government so that all painful IMF adjustment steps would be matched with reforms to compensate the extralegal economy for the pain they suffered and to make them aware that these corrections were made to benefit them. 27 Macro-economists are inclined to think that politicians don’t understand why removing constraints to growth are necessary. The ILD’s experience is that most political leaders do understand this. But like President Fujimori in New York, they need to find a formula that makes adjustment politically sustain￾able, one that puts a large constituency on their side, because change is essentially a struggle with the resistant forces of the status quo. Peruvian presidents have never disagreed that a structural adjustment was necessary —from Bustaman￾te, Velasco, Morales-Bermudez, Belaunde, and Garcia. The reason they gave for not implementing one is that it was politically impossible. How can you propose painful measures that help a private sector grow if the majority of the country is not part of the private sector and does not work in a market econ￾omy? By 1990, however, it was clearly established that the majority of Peruvians were private sector and were working in a market economy, albeit an extralegal one. And that’s one of the main reasons why the Peruvian structural adjustment worked so well: recognizing that the corrections were to their benefit, ordinary Peruvians had an incentive to support adjustment. Any transition towards a free economy is essentially a political task. Peruvians got that message from the highest level, not just from the Secretary of the Treasury but from the President himself. The tran￾sition to a market economy is about change, and change is a political issue, —as the Founding Fathers who created the USA proved, or Abraham Lincoln’s economic reforms during the Civil War, or General MacArthur’s land reform in post-war Japan, or Den Xiaoping’s market reforms in China. 29 Case #3: HOW THE ILD IDENTIFIED THE OVERRIDING CONSTRAINTS TO BROAD-BASED GROWTH AND MADE THEIR REMOVAL A POPULAR CAUSE 31 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 1896 1902 1908 1914 1920 1926 1932 1939 1944 1948 1952 1955 1958 1962 1965 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2012 TO • GDP PER CAPITA GROWTH RATE DOUBLE THAT OF LATIN AMERICA. • MIDDLE CLASS GROWTH RATE QUADRUPLES. • IDEOLOGICAL SUPREMACY: ALL POLITICAL PARTIES RUN IN 1990 ELECTIONS ON ILD PLANS TO RE-CATEGORIZE THE INFORMAL ECONOMY. • ILD DESIGNED REFORMS GENERATED ONE THOUSAND LAWS THAT EMPOWERED INFORMAL POPULATION, MADE STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENTS POLITICALLY VIABLE, AND RE-CATEGORIZED REBELLIOUS SOCIAL GROUPS AS ENTREPRENEURS. • ILD RE-CATEGORIZED FARMER ORGANIZATIONS THEREBY MULTIPLYING PERUVIAN ANTI-TERRORIST FORCES WITH BACKING FROM THE U.S. AND THE U.N. FROM • 7.600% INFLATION IN 1990. • GDP DROPS 13.4%. • 60% OF PERU UNDER EMERGENCY RULE. KEY FACTORS (1987 - 1992) FROM POLITICAL CRISIS TO ECONOMIC GROWTH CREATING AN INCLUSIVE MARKET ECONOMY WHILE APPLYING A MONETARY STABILIZATION PROGRAM USAID - ILD PERUVIAN EXPERIENCE In 1986, ILD began its re-categorization mission by conceiving, designing, promoting and drafting the breakthrough legislation that first allowed the inclusion of extralegals into the rule of law through reforms targeted to make property, business transactions, and participation accessible to them. These reforms are today governed by 1,000 laws, regulations and administrative decisions that are attached to this document. At that time, in Peru, 52% of industry, 90% of business, 93% of transportation, 42% of housing, and 90% of rural areas were outside the legal system as a result of bad laws and regulations. ILD projects were directed to remove the bad laws and replace them with good laws that would provide extralegals with access to secure and fungible property rights that help produce credit and capital, and provide them with the mechanisms to convey their problems and aspirations to government and participate in decision-making. One of these laws was the Administrative Simplification Law (1989) that paved the way to 200 reforms, one of which was the Unified Business Registry which incorporated 388,000 extralegal enterprises into the legal market during the administration of the following government, between 1991 and 1994. These newly formalized enterprises created approximately 558,000 jobs and helped the tax agency collect US$ 7.8 billion in taxes in those years. The time needed to incorporate and register a business in the city was decreased from 278 days to one day, and the cost reduced by 85%. Below please find a “Picture History” of the Administrative Simplification and the Unified Business Registry projects. An Annex with more than1000 laws, regulations and administrative decisions mentioned above can be found in Volume II, Annex 2. Case #3: In a nutshell 32 May 1989: ILD’s draft law is unanimously approved in Congress by all political parties and becomes Law No. 25035 for Administrative Simplification. 1986: ILD initiates communications campaigns in Peru to show how bad regulations impose unnecessary costs and waiting time on the majority of Peruvians, forcing them into the extralegal sector. ILD carries out press campaigns and holds public hearings and debates to build consensus on the reforms. July 1989: During the year the Tribunal was in operation, more than 180 bureaucratic knots are untied. July 1986: ILD’s Administrative Simplification Draft Law aims to transform public administration from one that imposes excessive queues, paperwork, and bureaucratic procedures —that cause most Peruvians much lost time and unnecessary expense, and impose constraints on their economic activity— to one based on administrative efficiency and trust. Government and ILD create “The Administrative Simplification Tribunal”, to gather and evaluate deregulation proposals from citizens and to monitor how bureaucracies are responding to the law. Communications campaign to convey the benefits of the Administrative Simplification Law. 1. 2. 3. 5. 6. 7. 4. The Administrative Simplification Case #3: picture history 33 Prime Minister Juan Jimenez Mayor approves the National Plan for Administrative Simplification (Ministerial Resolution 048-2013- PCM 2013). President García approves the Positive Administrative Silence Law. Administrative Silence as a strategy for good governance (Law 29060, 2007). The Administrative Simplification Law is incorporated into the General Law for Administrative Proceedings (27444) in 2001. Government approves the Framework Law for the Modernization and Management of the State (Law 27658, 2002) enhancing simplification mechanisms. The Unified Business Registry (UBR) Beginning in 1986, the ILD shows how difficult it is to do business formally. For instance, government requirements take some 278 days to complete. Aprueban Reglamento sobre "Unificación y Simplificación de Registros para acceder a la Empresa Formal" DECRETO SUPREMO Nº 118-90-PCM (*) De conformidad con el Artículo 22 del Decreto Supremo Nº 024-98-ITINCI, publicado el 31-12-98, se establece que una vez culminada la desactivación progresiva del Registro Unificado quedaría derogado este Decreto Supremo. EL PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBLICA CONSIDERANDO: Que, la Ley de Simplificación Administrativa Nº 25035, reglamentada por el Decreto Supremo Nº 070-89-PCM, del 01 de setiembre de 1989, fija los criterios conducentes a lograr la reducción de los costos y trámites indispensables para la realización de la actividad económica; Que, por el Artículo 11 del indicado Reglamento, se dispone que las entidades del Estado modificarán sus procedimientos específicos para el otorgamiento de licencias, concesiones, autorizaciones, permisos y similares, con la finalidad de que éstos sean automáticamente otorgados; Que, en el Artículo 62 del mismo Reglamento, se señala que las entidades públicas coordinarán las medidas para la elaboración de proyectos de simplificación de trámites específicos, cuyo criterio fundamental será la centralización de los mismos, en una sola entidad de la administración Pública; Que en la actualidad, los trámites para el ejercicio de las actividades antes indicadas, devienen dilatorias, contraviniendo en todo sentido el espíritu de la descentralización administrativa, por lo que es imperativo simplificar y unificar el trámite de los permisos y registros, a fin de que las empresas puedan iniciar de manera formal y ágil sus actividades económicas; Con el voto aprobatorio del Consejo de Ministros; DECRETA: Artículo 1.- Apruébase el Reglamento sobre "Unificación y Simplificación de Registros para acceder a la Empresa Formal" -Registro Unificado- cuyo texto y anexos constituyen parte integrante del presente Decreto supremo. Artículo 2.- El presente Decreto Supremo entrará en vigencia a los 30 días calendarios, contados a partir del día siguiente de su publicación. Artículo 3.- El presente Decreto Supremo será refrendado por el Presidente del Consejo de Ministros. Dado en la Casa de Gobierno, en Lima, a los catorce días del mes de setiembre de mil novecientos noventa ALBERTO FUJIMORI FUJIMORI Presidente Constitucional de la República JUAN CARLOS HURTADO MILLER Presidente del Consejo de Ministros y Ministro de Economía y Finanzas 1990: Government puts in place the ILD designed Unified Business Registry (UBR). ILD’s communication campaign to announce the benefits of the UBR. May 1990: Almost 80% of all Peruvian citizens rate the Administrative Simplification Law as the best law of the 1985-1990 legislative period. 9. 10. 12. 14. 17. 18. 13. 16. The time needed to obtain a marriage license, which used to take 720 hours of bureaucratic hassles, was reduced to 120 hours, thus helping women secure their rights as marriage partners. 8. 34 In September 2003, the World Bank publishes its Doing Business 2004 assessing the regulations that constrain and enhance business activity. The UBR dramatically reduces red tape and costs: the nearly 300 days it takes to obtain a business license is cut to one day, and the cost is slashed from US$ 1,200 to US$ 174. In three years, some 340,000 new businesses are registered. 1990: Some municipalities adopt the ILD’s model ordinance for simplifying the granting of municipal operating licenses, thereby cutting the costs from US$ 690 to US$ 70 and reducing the bureaucratic gauntlet from two months to one day. ILD signs agreements with various municipalities for the application of the Administrative Simplification Law and complementary laws 2006: The National Bureau for the Simplification of Municipal Procedures for Business – INTERMESA (its Spanish acronym) is created to promote business by simplifying the paperwork involved in the different municipal procedures. Since December 2010, Special Platforms are being created in strategic places of main cities to deliver high quality public services to citizens (MAC) and micro and small enterprises - M&SEs - (Macmype) (PCM, 2010). The first platform is located in a Mega Mall in North Lima, where 75 administrative procedures involving 19 public entities can be followed in a single location and in less time. 2007: Congress approves the Framework Law for Operating Licenses (Law 28976), which picks up the principles of ILD’s proposed model ordinance. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 35 All ILD projects aim to facilitate the inclusion of the extralegal sector in the legal system. For this, the ILD uses its field-tested categorization protocols, which include property and business law. To facilitate the inclusion of the extralegal sector under the rule of law, the ILD applied the following three principles, which were also enacted in a number of laws: 1. Removing obstacles in order to help people in the extralegal sector gain access to public services and allow them to carry out economic activities legally. (Law 25035 and some 500 measures enacted by different government entities to simplify procedures.) 2. Providing holders of extralegal property with access to secure and transferable property rights without affecting legal security. (Legislative Decree 495, 496, 667, and 803 as well as some 500 government decisions to formalize and register urban and rural property throughout the country.) 3. Providing all Peruvians with the mechanisms to participate in government decision-making, thus helping government listen to the extralegal sector and avoid the creation of unforeseen obstacles to participate in the legal economy. (Legislative Decree 283, 1993 Constitution, and more than 40 laws and regulations establishing people’s right to information and to participate in government decision￾making.) These principles, described in more detail below, continue in force today in different policies, laws and regulations, and government initiatives in Peru. 1. Removing obstacles in order to help people in the extralegal sector gain access to public services and allow them to carry out economic activities legally by: a. Replacing most ex-ante requirements that create legal bottlenecks with ex-post controls: i. Taking information presented by extralegals at face value — i.e. dispensing with previously costly and time consuming certifications— establishes an environment of trust between government and the extralegal sector, and promotes legal property and business. ii. Establishing strict administrative, civil, and penal sanctions to dissuade people from lying, thus —for the first time in Peru’s history— categorizing lying to the state as a criminal offence. iii. Reducing the time for extralegal citizens to obtain permits and licenses by automatically authorizing such paperwork if authorities have not replied within a specified period of time (“positive administrative silence”). b. Keeping the costs of operating legally below those of operating illegally: i. Eliminating redundant and unnecessary paperwork (e.g. the need to submit certain certificates —such as documents certifying the loss of documents, the need to submit other types of ID in addition to the national ID; and the need to submit several copies of one document to the same entity, especially when the entity already has this information). ii. Establishing fees based on the cost of the service rather than on the value of the transaction. iii. Enabling the use of simplified and standardized forms and documents in public administration so that these can be easily understood and used by extralegals. iv. Deregulating public functions by transferring the responsibility of verifying legal and technical information to private practitioners. c. De-concentrating/decentralizing decision-making procedures by reducing the unnecessary practice of channeling everything through upper-level functionaries and allowing instead lower￾hierarchy officers to process simple procedures. Case #3: A brief account 36 d. Putting in place rules that allow extralegals to be served efficiently by public administration. For example: i. Providing citizens with clear information on the costs, requirements, and duration of administrative procedures, and provide them with the possibility of demanding compliance with these rules. ii. Eliminating the routine practice of obtaining prior opinions from legal departments in public administration. iii. Establishing one-stop-shops through which users can carry out all required paperwork and obtain the information requested on one or several procedures being followed in the different entities; and iv. Introducing automated information systems. v. Providing alternatives that allow extralegals to obtain legal services. For instance, creating attestors to certify documents free of charge in the different public entities as an alternative to costly public notaries. (The designation of 1,015 attestors in Peru translated into an estimated savings of US$84 million for users.) 2. Providing holders of extralegal property with access to secure and transferable property rights without affecting legal security by: a. Incorporating extralegal property in the legal system i. Recognizing and classifying the various types of extralegal ownership. ii. Determining the main legal obstacles to providing legal security and facilitating the economic use of property. iii. Identifying, categorizing, and recognizing existing local practices as valid proofs of ownership, following required legal standards, so as to make the extralegal social contract compatible with professional systematized law. iv. Launching communications campaigns to disseminate the benefits of property formalization among the main groups of stakeholders. v. Developing a strategy to reach the head of state and keep him/her involved in the approval and implementation of the property formalization program. vi. Incorporating feedback mechanisms to fine-tune reforms continually. b. Creating a proactive, modern, safe, and easily accessible registration system to guarantee full legal security to extralegal owners with the following characteristics: i. Simplified and low-cost procedures ii. A cutting-edge technology to allow the automation of registration procedures, which guaranteed easy and inexpensive access to registration entries and recorded information, and prevent the deterioration, loss, and destruction of public records. iii. Principles that offer legal security and protection against third parties (erga omnes). iv. Feedback mechanisms to permanently improve registration services and keep a close relationship between the registry and citizens. v. A geographic base to accurately determine the location and boundaries of each piece of property, linking legal information with spatial data and avoiding multiple owners registered for the same property. vi. A system able to establish links with other public entities. c. Removal of legal restrictions on property rights and mechanisms to unleash the economic use of property by i. Providing extralegal owners with the opportunity to choose the kind of property system that most 37 suits their needs and interests. ii. Eradicating legal limitations on the use, rental, sale, and mortgage of property. iii. Establishing a simplified system for creating and foreclosing mortgages using out of court procedures. 3. Providing all Peruvians with the mechanisms to participate in government decision-making and through this, help government listen to the extralegal sector and avoid the creation of unseen obstacles by: a. Allowing citizens to have access to draft laws along with a cost benefit analysis and an explanatory memorandum b. Allowing citizens to participate in public hearings to discuss the proposed reforms and to obtain the support necessary for their approval and their successful implementation. c. Allowing citizens to gain access to government information so that they can: i. have free access to information on administrative procedures in which they are involved, including access to reports and rulings; ii. gain access to information in government entities. d. Allowing extralegal citizens to question, criticize, and monitor public administration decisions and actions, as well as file grievances; e. Allowing citizens to inform public entities and public opinion about the existence of problems and obstacles; f. Allowing citizens to propose the creation, abolition, or modification of administrative regulations or rules, ensuring that these do not generate new and unnecessary barriers; g. Allowing citizens to have recourse to the defender of the people (a public ombudsman) in cases where public officers or servants commit abusive or arbitrary actions. h. Allowing citizens to participate, in a responsible and progressive manner, in the control of the provision of public services. 39 Case #4: HOW THE ILD CHANGED THE PERUVIAN CONSTITUTION TO MAKE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE AND bring it CLOSER TO THE PEOPLE 41 Conventional categorization: Peru is a democracy because we have regular elections every five years. ILD re-categorization: Peru is a voters’ democracy but not an accountable one: 1.In Peru, the executive branch produced some 134,000 laws and decisions every five years. That is more than 100 laws a day. 2. Together, these laws and decisions defined the way we worked, produced, and distributed our wealth. 3.In developed countries, whatever the government ideology may be, civil society (that is, the great majority of us who are not authorities) controls and participates in the creation of these laws. 4.In those countries, electing government does not mean allowing them to do whatever they want to do, much less handing them a checkbook with 134,000 blank checks. In Peru it did. 5. We elected our authorities on the basis of a few ideas transmitted in campaign propaganda, and we had no way to control or give our opinions on the thousands of laws directed at us. 6. Our governments had no way to pick up the sentiment of the people or the alternative proposals produced by civil society. They governed uninformed, or using the information obtained from the few with vested interests who had access to pubic officials, and therefore government approved laws and regulations that benefited the privileged few at the expense of the majority. 7.Citizens had no way of making authorities correct their mistakes. They didn’t even have a way to learn what government officials were planning to do. There were no mechanisms to encourage accountability before civil society. There was no access to government information, and we didn’t have an ad-hoc entity to protect us from government arbitrary actions. This is why our governments find themselves isolated from civil society, why they don’t produce the conditions required to create wealth, why they can’t avoid corruption, and why they end badly. When the ILD was entrusted by the Peruvian government, the U.S. State Department, and the Organization of Americas States (OAS) to find a way out from Fujimori’s coup d’état of 5 April 1992, it proposed to all three parties that the solution was to resolve the fundamental problems in Peru: the lack of legal mechanisms to listen to and protect its citizens; be accountable to them; and allow them to participate and have inputs in the decision-making process. All parties agreed. The ILD had already drawn up and publicly presented legal proposals to provide these mechanisms, and the President had committed to applying them. Consequently, the ILD proposed that elections be held to elect a Democratic Constituent Congress (CCD) to draw up a new Constitution, including these mechanisms, and that the text and alternative texts be submitted to referendum for approval by the people. The Constitution included many articles dealing with economics that the ILD had also advocated but it’s emphasis was on having government PROTECT, LISTEN, and become ACCOUNTABLE to citizens and have them Case #4: In a nutshell 42 PARTICIPATE in decision making as ILD had proposed. In Peru, ILD reforms have given rise to more than 18 legal mechanisms for citizen participation so far (i.e. for legislative initiatives; for referendum; for revoking or removing authorities; for making authorities accountable; to participate in the creation of general laws and regulations; to participate in and be consulted regarding environmental matters, mining activities, hydro-carbon activities, forestry activities, infrastructure projects; to be heard and answered by Public Administration; to access public information; to make administrative petitions; to participate politically in municipal and regional government; to participate in the management of municipal and regional government; to participate in the drawing up of municipal and regional government budgets; to be protected from arbitrary State actions by the Ombudsman; and, the right to special consultation in the case of indigenous peoples). See Volume II, Annex 3. In developing countries worldwide, ILD has found that their democracies lack these mechanisms, which impedes their ability to listen to and understand their informal sector. This is why the ILD has introduced these participatory mechanisms in all of its projects and accordingly is introducing them in the MENA region. 43 1985: ILD publishes its findings on Peruvian citizens’ inability to defend themselves before public administration’s arbitrariness and abuse, as well as on the need for an independent Defender of the People (Caretas: “The call of the law”). 1. 1985: ILD signs agreement with Attorney General to implement a pilot plan for the defender of the people and to design a draft law and its regulation for improving the institution. 2. 1985: After operating for six months, the pilot plan inspires numerous newspaper articles. 3. 1986: The pilot plan receives and resolves citizen grievances and the ILD￾Attorney General’s Office publish the results and reform proposals in three ads. 4. 1986: When the agreement ends, the ILD continues working on the problems detected. It publishes reform proposals in two additional ads and manages to have a law that imposes restrictions on property rights modified. 5. 1986: The ILD publishes its findings, experience, and proposals for legal and constitutional reform to create an independent Defender of the People (Workbook 1: The Defender of the People). 6. 1993: The new Constitution incorporates an independent Defender of the People (Ombudsman), just as the ILD had proposed. Subsequent laws and regulations have developed this entity further. CONGRESO DE LA REPUBLICA CONSTITUCION POLITICA DEL PERU Promulgada el 29 de diciembre de 1993. CAPITULO XI DE LA DEFENSORIA DEL PUEBLO Artículo 161.- Defensoría del Pueblo La Defensoría del Pueblo es autónoma. Los órganos públicos están obligados a colaborar con la Defensoría del Pueblo cuando ésta lo requiere. Su estructura, en el ámbito nacional, se establece por ley orgánica. El Defensor del Pueblo es elegido y removido por el Congreso con el voto de los dos tercios de su número legal. Goza de la misma inmunidad y de las mismas prerrogativas de los congresistas. Para ser elegido Defensor del Pueblo se requiere haber cumplido treinta y cinco años de edad y ser abogado. El cargo dura cinco años y no está sujeto a mandato imperativo. Tiene las mismas incompatibilidades que los vocales supremos. Artículo 162.- Atribuciones de la Defensoría del Pueblo Corresponde a la Defensoría del Pueblo defender los derechos constitucionales y fundamentales de la persona y de la comunidad; y supervisar el cumplimiento de los deberes de la administración estatal y la prestación de los servicios públicos a la ciudadanía. El Defensor del Pueblo presenta informe al Congreso una vez al año, y cada vez que éste lo solicita. Tiene iniciativa en la formación de las leyes. Puede proponer las medidas que faciliten el mejor cumplimiento de sus funciones. El proyecto de presupuesto de la Defensoría del Pueblo es presentado ante el Poder Ejecutivo y sustentado por su titular en esa instancia y en el Congreso. 7. PROTECT - The Defender of the People (The Ombudsman) Case #4: picture history 44 PARTICIPATE - Democratic Decision-Making by Government (DDG) 1984: As proposed by ILD, President Belaúnde enacts Law 283 and S.D. 071-84-PCM, and creates the Committee on Economic Rights to encourage citizens’ participation in the decision-making process. These were never adequately implemented. 8. 1986: ILD publishes its findings on the deficiencies in the creation of laws and regulations in Peru, which does not allow citizens to learn about the foundations of the laws or give suggestions (Caretas: “The Origin”) 9. 1990: The ILD draws up the Draft Law for Democratic Decision-Making by Government and receives wide coverage by the media. 10. 1990: The ILD publishes two ads explaining “What makes our governments end up badly” and “How to ensure that one of them [presidential candidates] does not end up as our next dictator” to emphasize the need to pass the law. 11. 1990: Regional governments support the proposal. 12. 1992: Before the OAS XXII General Assembly, Peruvian president commits to introducing DDG and access to public information mechanisms to our legal system. 13. 1993: The new Constitution incorporates ILD’s principles, which subsequent laws and regulations develop further (i.e. S.D. 001-2009- JUS demands that main regulations to be issued by the Executive Branch be published prior to their enactment). 14. LISTEN - ACCESS TO PUBLIC INFORMATION e 1986: The ILD subm its a proposal, which is well received by the media, and publishes an ad about the need to have a law for access to public information. " AW: fi-~ IJt iidCl'&M:IMI, ottu• txpru~c!C'O U~t-.-J~P .. l'"fl~{-- ~ *lik l~da .Ka.411eiurp11111Je t dll..,lo ¢ • ~u.i~t11 .. ~-..4 11illll.1ui. Q •I ~- l•..,i. •~ •I ;oft• 41# ,,,_"""" ~ 11cd1Jo s.. =-:~1u~to-1eaq11t.ih: ... 1t111u.i=Hll.l ,.no11.:ri.: r••~qp,tffillll!llel~ Nt ~~lltJ'OPff~Ut~Ul\l•1'"'""' ,.,..., ~··~ • ---1~ 11s1~ !• Mq1110-•.11.,oat. bKion~o ''~cw~• an~lOJUrtdlot • p • tt!lm4.u~2, ,_.., S r~~l•C....ruo•. e1993: The new Constitution incorporates the right to access public information (articles 2.4, 2.5 and 200.3). It has been further developed in the Law for Fiscal Transparency and the Law for Citizen Participation and Control. BECOME ACCOUNTABLE - BETTER CITIZEN REPRESENTATION AND CONTROL ~~ii'Z!S! _!!m1n1t1tut ~~ .. He tenido..11 rViaJ.illl una pesaat a ... e 1992: The ILD proposes a number of mechanisms to improve citizen representation, participation and control of government, to be incorporated into the new Constitution. It publishes two ads titled "CCD: Will we be represented?" and "I had a nightmare ... terrorism was taking over in Peru". ILD YA TIENE 100 MIL FIRMAS PARA REFORMAR CONsnt1JCION e 1993: The ILD collect more than 500,000 signatures and submits t he first Peruvian popular initiative to incorporate and develop more and better mechanisms for participation in t he new Constitution. The media applauds the initiative, but Congress rejects it. • :RE Conga or Bagua ALL OR NOTHING is not a solution ~ 2012: To deal w ith social unrest, the ILD publishes a new proposal to improve the consultation mechanisms involv ing mining, hydro-carbon, forestry, and infrastructure p rojects, including the people's right to popular initiative. lnstituto Llbertad y mo racfa~ CO 1993: The ILD proposed that the new Constitution be submitted to a referendum. but government was opting for a plebiscite, which the ILD publicly opposed . [lt·lii4·1 Se entregaron las firmas para la revocatoria a Susana Vill ar~n ftl'MU-t-'!•••~ .. '"'1 .. -..l'lo!-*~*'"""'-*'''•-,,.1 •""•"""""'• '~-i,....,..,_,.. ,...,_,,_ .. 119....,,11,,...,., .. lll •-•-"'''ll•tont11PN1ff-.,o-(<',.•• _..,, •• ,... .. .,..,"°'_b..,Ml• r.Oric .. -fl .. td >l!<;>H"" ..... 1cio _k>oo,,,., t(~ n\1'4~ 1:11111...-11 . .. ~ .. -•t-1t.•l;.-1111-Ctlll lA Sl*RE llHWllil AS IN!£00l!Wbl E CJa:UTLEW {CO~OlllE IXFOMllE (ommenl ~~rextraleplau lepl 1 ·· .DESOTOl~SiESURlANECE)) TE DEMENERUNEOPERATION Cf STANDARDISATION DElA Lor 52 3. Major Media in Egypt have featured ILD’s approach and findings. 53 Immediately after Mohamed Bouazizi’s death, the ILD sent a team of senior researchers led by Hernando de Soto to conduct research in a number of Arab Spring countries, such as Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria and Morocco. The research revealed that during the first quarter of 2011, not just one but 64 men and women throughout the MENA region set themselves on fire in protest of arbitrary expropriation. 4. 5. ILD’s view that the Arab Spring is an economic revolution was published in 62 major media articles worldwide. Mr. de Soto consolidated ILD’s findings and recommendations in L’Economie Informelle, Comment y remédier? published in Tunisia in December 2012. 6. Intrigued by ILD’s research, political authorities and business organizations in the Maghreb contacted us. In Tunisia, President Moncef Marzouki met with Mr. de Soto in the Presidential Palace in Carthage in July 2012. 7. 54 The book was presented to political, business, and civil society leaders in Tunisia on 15 December 2012, generating great expectations throughout the region. 8. 55 In August 2013, Magheb’s largest organizations published a double￾page newspaper announcement embracing ILD’s evidence that the on-going revolutions were not triggered by extremist ideologies but by unbearable constraints on emerging entrepreneurs struggling in the informal economy. 10. In January 2014, PBS broadcasted throughout the U.S. a one-hour documentary film on the ILD´s work in MENA Region supporting ILD’s case that the Arab Spring was mainly a symptom of an Arab Industrial Revolution -driven by the desires of 90% of the population now outside the rule of law demanding to share its benefits. 12. On 2 July 2013, L´Union Tunisienne de L´Industrie, le Commerce et de l´Artisanat (UTICA) hosted a meeting of the leading employer organizations in the Maghreb countries which culminated in the signing of the « Tunis Declaration » and the creation of a « Maghreb Council for Inclusive Entrepreneurship ». 9. In May 2013, U.S. Representative Ed Royce, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, held hearings about the ILD’s MENA findings and strategies for reform, featuring testimony from former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and ILD President Hernando de Soto. 11. 56 reports and proposals THE PLAN I. ARAB LEADERS CONCUR: THE ARAB SPRING IS AN ECONOMIC, PRO-MARKET REVOLUTION (p.1) II. ARAB LEADERS CONCUR: SEIZE THE MOMENT - OR RISK THE REVOLUTION BEING HIJACKED (Cf. EGYPT) (p.2) III. THE RATIONALE: VIEWING THE ARAB SPRING AS A SOLUTION, NOT A PROBLEM (p.2) IV. THE STRATEGY: VIEWING THE ARAB SPRING AS AN INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION (p.4) EIGHT PRE-CONSTRAINTS: 1. OFFICIAL ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL CATEGORIES ARE BLIND TO MENA CONSTRAINTS 2. WESTERN ECONOMIC PROPOSALS RISK BEING PREJUDGED AS INTRUSIVE 3. MISTRUST OF PUBLIC AUTHORITY 4. LACK OF INCENTIVES TO SHARE INFORMATION WITH GOVERNMENTS 5. AGENCIES THAT DEFEND THE STATUS QUO 6. BELIEVING THE IMF HELP MUST PRECEDE REFORM 7. INABILITY TO MAKE GROWTH AND SOCIETAL CHANGE COMPATIBLE 8. MISUNDERSTANDING PROPERTY RIGHTS AS BEING ONLY ABOUT PROPERTY LAW V. THE PROCESS: FIVE STAGES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN (p.11) VI. PROJECT TIMEFRAME (p.27) ATTACHMENTS • MAGHREB DECLARATION (AUGUST 2013) (p.31) • EGYPTIAN REPORT OF THE MAGHREB DECLARATION (AUGUST 2013) (p.35) • SELECTED HEADLINES REGARDING PLAN IN MENA (2011-2013) (p.37) • U.S. BIPARTISAN SUPPORT OF ILD STRATEGY (p.38) A FIVE-STAGE PLAN TO END THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICAN CRISES BY REMOVING THE CONSTRAINTS ON DEVELOPMENT IDENTIFIED BY THE PROTESTERS THEMSELVES ARAB LEADERS EMBRACE THE PLAN (AUGUST 2013) e DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE PLAN • FOR THE MUBARAK GOVERNMENT • FOR THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD GOVERNMENT • FOR THE QHADAFFI FOUNDATION AND MAHMOUD GEBRIL • AS EXPLAINED TO THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS • THE USAID-ILD PARTNERSHIP TUNISIA MAURITANIA ALGERIA MOROCCO LIBYE PERU STRATEGY REFORM CONSULTANT LIBYA INSTITUTE FOR LIBERTY AND DEMOCRACY / Ave. Las Begonias 441, Suite 901, San Isidro. Lima 27 - Peru / (+511) 61-6100 / hds@ild.org.pe / www.ild.org.pe Under the auspices of the Minister of Finance, Medhat Hassanein, an ILD team of 70 technicians with the help of 300 key local informants did an extensive survey of how the majority of Egyptians lived and worked in the extralegal economy. 13. 15. In July 2004, before the Egyptian Cabinet, the ILD proposed a major reform strategy that included a set of 20 proposals to streamline the current legal system and integrate the extralegal economy into the mainstream economy. 14. During 2013, the leading business organizations of the Maghreb region together with the ILD designed a strategy and reform proposals to incorporate the majorities living and operating extralegally in their countries into the mainstream economy. 57 With the acquiescence of their governments and the support of the ILD, the largest business organizations on the Maghreb spent 20 months gathering evidence on the causes of the region’s ongoing revolutions. The key Data emerging from this analysis is as follows: • During the first quarter of 2011, it was not one but 64 men and women throughout the MENA region set themselves on fire in protest – 22 Tunisians, 29 Algerians, four Moroccans, and five Egyptians. • Thirty-seven survived and ILD interviewed 12. All were emerging entrepreneurs operating mostly outside the rule of law. • All stated as their principal motivation “expropriation” – the absence of legal property rights. Property rights are not only about protecting ownership but also, through legally enforceable records and procedures, allow owners to maximize the potential of their assets, combine them to create more wealth, use them as security to obtain credit and divide them into shares to generate capital. • ILD estimated that more than 380 million Arabs are excluded from the benefits of property rights – and are thus forced to depend on extralegal income. Hernando de Soto consolidated these findings – and reform recommendations – in the book L’Economie Informelle, Comment y remédier? launched in Tunisia in December 2012 at a conference of political, business, and civil society leaders , generating great expectations throughout the region. On 2 July 2013, L´Union Tunisienne de L´Industrie, le Commerce et de l´Artisanat (UTICA) hosted a meeting of the leading Maghreb employer organizations, culminating with the signing of the « Tunis Declaration » and the creation of a « Maghreb Council for Inclusive Entrepreneurship » embracing ILD’s reform strategy. In May 2013, U.S. Representative Ed Royce, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, held hearings about the ILD’s MENA findings and strategies for reform, featuring testimony from former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and ILD President Hernando de Soto. THE PROCESS: FIVE STAGES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN STAGE 1: Gather Information and Prepare for Change. Create a first map of the extralegal economy and prepare society for change; establish alliances with the individuals and organizations best positioned to access, provide, and verify information describing the country’s informal economy. This information will provide the consensus upon which the rest of the reform plan depends. STAGE 2: Create a Specialized Agency and Launch a Quick Wins Program Create a specialized agency for ascertaining the necessary facts for removing constraints to integrating the majority into the formal economy; this agency must be empowered and staffed to oversee the whole reform agenda and must run under the direction of the nation’s highest political authority in order to ensure commitment, local ownership and sustainability of the reforms. Its mission will be to provide the necessary tools in a space independent of those interested in maintaining the status quo, but without interfering with already functioning laws and institutions in the country. Initially, this agency will implement rapid changes to legal administrative procedures that will deliver immediate results (“quick wins”) and prepare nationwide data gathering, reform design and reform implementation. Case #5: a brief account 58 STAGE 3: Convert Extralegal Information Into Facts Leverage the network of alliances and the initial assessment results from Stage 1 to scale up data gathering at a national level. Prioritize and assemble information into congruent statements that become facts because they can be measured, compared, certified and tested for truth. This process transforms information into facts which will ensure the reform design takes into account existing consensuses and practices in the extralegal sector and lays the groundwork for re-engineering or enhancing the current legal system to achieve the objectives of the reform strategy. STAGE 4: Remove Underlying Causes to Constraints and Build Institutional Reforms Remove underlying causes to constraints, build legal and institutional reforms and establish a legal infrastructure of interconnected devices that will allow holders of extralegal assets to build reliable, productive links with the existing private sector. STAGE 5: Manage the Specialized Agency and Implement the Reform Strategy Execute the reforms designed in Stage 4 and ensure the system sustaining the plan is not just a warehouse for data but rather one that retrieves and facilitates access to the knowledge entrepreneurs need to combine assets, skills and technology for producing additional value. Ensure that changes to procedures, statutes, record keeping and registration affecting emerging entrepreneurs are not regressive. Continuously quantify and monitor ongoing costs and benefits of greater economic inclusion. See below a typical proposed timetable showing the schedule of stages and activities in each of the Maghreb countries. 59 PROJECT STAGES Budgeted activities for Stage 1 & 2 and preparation for Stage 3 STAGE 2 STAGE 3 STAGE 4 STAGE 5 Set up project logistics; build a network of local contacts; create a multidisciplinary research team Initial assessment of extralegal sector Engage interest groups, develop orientation and training courses Deliver orientation and training courses to interest groups of society separately Set up specialized body (agency or commission); build local capacity; initiate citizen feedback process; implement administrative or regulatory changes that produce immediate results Consolidate and extend the network of contacts and alliances built in STAGE 1; create local research teams using ad hoc profiles and job specifications; gather data and information and convert them into facts that can be measured, compared, certified and tested for truth Design a strategy to integrate the multiple social contracts that constitute the Arab Spring into a single, standard system for property and business rights and for the creation of capital, especially by the poor Communications Campaigns Recruit and train technical staff to manage the process to recognize, formalize and protect business and property; monitoring & supervision Reengineer the existing registry system to adapt it to institutional reforms ensuring that all rights are fungible and can be leveraged for multiple purposes; and that changes to procedures and statutes are not regressive Month Activity 9 18 21 24 33 51 120 STAGE 1 Complete preliminary economic map of the Arab Spring; build alliances with its leaders; establish basis for consensus with the most influential interest groups Create a specialized agency at highest political level, independent of the status quo and empowered to deliver immediate results Leverage the network of alliances and the initial assessment results from STAGE I to expand and test the Arab Spring map for truth; lay the groundwork for reengineering legal system to include the agenda/motivations of the Arab Spring Remove underlying causes to constraints; build legal and institutional reforms and create public memory systems; establish a legal infrastructure of interconnected devices that will allow holders of extralegal assets to build reliable, productive links with the existing private sector Execute the reforms designed in STAGE 4 and ensure the system sustaining the plan is not just a warehouse for data but rather one that retrieves and facilitates access to the knowledge entrepre￾neurs need to combine assets, skills and technology for producing additional value Recruit & train local professionals Draft statutes and procedures to bring the costs of holding assets legally below the costs of holding them extralegally; create mechanisms to reduce risks associated with private investment; integrate standards and enforcement into the extralegal world; provide the poor with the legal instruments to mobilize, combine and divide their assets; estimate the benefits and costs of each proposed reform Reengineer the existing registry system to adapt it to institutional reforms ensuring that all rights are fungible and can be leveraged for multiple purposes; and that changes to procedures and statutes are not regressive Continue citizen feedback process; scale up field research and data gathering at a national level Gather Information and Prepare for Change Create a Specialized Agency and Launch a Quick Wins Program Convert Extralegal Information Into Facts Remove Underlying Causes to Constraints and Build Institutional Reforms Manage the Specialized Agency and Implement the Reform Strategy PLAN TIMETABLE 59 61 Case #6: THE ILD’S CONTRIBUTION TO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS 63 In the early 80s, ILD was able to document how the Peruvian mercantilist and burdensome legal system excluded the vast majority from the formal economy, laying out, step by step, the procedures that ordi￾nary entrepreneurs faced to legalize their businesses and property, and graphically mapping the entire bureaucratic maze. This work culminated in the publication in 1986 of The Other Path –which revealed how informality was not a description of marginal behavior but a powerful social force with the poten￾tial to lift the excluded poor out of poverty. After field-testing these ideas around the world, The Mystery of Capital was published in 2000, using ILD’s findings this time to make the case that widespread clear, secure and fungible property rights were necessary for capitalism to work as successfully in developing countries as it did in the West. ILD’s re-categorization of the concepts of “informality” and “property rights,” as well as its methodology to identify the legal and administrative barriers blocking the entre￾preneurial poor from entering the formal economy made a major impact on the development agenda of international organizations – and continues to do so. USAID Inspired by ILD’s discovery that red tape had become an impenetrable barrier to doing business, USAID, in association with the World Bank’s Foreign Advisory Service (FIAS), developed The Investor Roadmap, a popular tool launched in 1995 to monitor the busi￾ness environments of developing countries. Inspired by the methodologies described in The Other Path, the Roadmap focuses on the administrative barriers to creating a business –the very elements that the ILD had first researched in Peru from the point of view of poor entrepreneurs trying to formalize their busines￾ses and property. Carried out in more than 50 coun￾tries, The Investor Roadmap has become a very cost-effective means for changing a country’s business environment. World Bank Doing Business: ILD’s seminal research of informality in Peru, inclu￾ding analysis and estimates of the cost of administrative procedures ne￾cessary for doing business (number of steps, time, and costs related to official fees, extralegal payments, and opportunity costs), which revea￾led the legal barriers informal entrepreneurs were up against, inspired the creation of the World Bank’s flagship program, “Doing Business,” launched in 2003. The Doing Business annual report provides data on regulations that impact on the ease of doing business, registering pro￾perty, and getting credit, among other indicators, across 189 countries, and has served as a powerful tool for institutional reform around the world. Case #6: In a nutshell 64 Land policies: the Bank’s historical focus on property had been mainly in “assisting” the poor through grant and loan programs to provide better housing and shelter, usually in urban areas. According to Bank officials, ILD’s groundbreaking approach to property as a fundamen￾tal tool for economic development paved the way for a shift in the Bank’s policies from simply land formaliza￾tion towards the role that property rights could play in the fight against poverty and exclusion: land must not be viewed as merely a source of subsistence or shelter but principally as a source of capital. United Nations The Commission on the Legal Empowerment of the Poor (CLEP) – hosted by the United Nation’s Development Programme (UNDP) was the first global initiative to fo￾cus on the link between exclusion, poverty, and the law. At the outset, CLEP declared it had found inspiration in the “contributions made by Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto,” the Commission’s co-chair with former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. The objective was to contribu￾te significantly to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) with respect to reducing world poverty by half by 2015 – on the assumption that this could only be achieved “if governments succeed in rendering legal recognition of the assets and institutions of poor people and democratizing the rule of law.” UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan hailed the notion of “legal empowerment” as an important asset towards attaining the UN’s MDGs. 65 1986: The publication of The Other Path. 1. 1994: USAID Administrator, Brian Atwood: “I am pleased that USAID has been able to support the work of an organization that is on the cutting edge of change in the Americas.” 2. 1994: USAID Assistant Administrator, Mark L. Schneider: “Hernando de Soto has shattered stereotypes surrounding the poor in Latin America (…) which help keep people poor. (…) His work (…) offers the Americas a path to development and a bridge to consolidate democracy.” 3. 2000: The publication of The Mystery of Capital. 6. 2003: The World Bank published “Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction” by K. Deininger, embracing ILD’s take on the significance of property rights to development. 8. 1995: The first Investor Roadmap was carried out in Ghana by USAID and the World Bank’s Foreign Investment Advisory Service (FIAS). 4. 2002: World Bank researcher Simeon Djankov adopted ILD’s methodology to measure administrative barriers: “Our work owes a great deal to De Soto’s research which opened the way on the regulatory issue of starting a business in Peru.” 7. 2003: The first “Doing Business” report was published in 2003 referring explicitly to The Other Path and ILD’s work in Peru. All subsequent reports have acknowledged ILD’s influence in the design of their methodology. 9. 1996: USAID Congressional Presentation: “One of the most important developments which could have global applicability was the lessons learned from the work of ILD [which] has been on the cutting edge in promoting legalization of the informal sector as an essential component of broad-based and equitable economic growth.” 5. Case #6: picture history 66 2009-2010: The UN General Assembly approved two resolutions recognizing legal empowerment for the poor as essential for generating prosperity and fighting against poverty, thus echoing ILD’s reform vision with respect to property rights and the rule of law, by placing them at the center of UN’s anti-poverty efforts. 15. 2010: UNDP embraced the legal empowerment agenda as central to its own development efforts. The ILD signed a Long Term Agreement with UNDP to help it implement its LEP agenda in its work around the world. 16. 2014: Based on the CLEP report, investor and founder of the Open Society Foundations, George Soros, has launched “The Global Legal Empowerment Initiative,” establishing a network of 900 individuals from over 300 legal empowerment groups around the world. All subsequent reports have acknowledged ILD’s influence in the design of their methodology. 17. 2005: The World Bank published its “Agriculture and Investment Sourcebook,” acknowledging: “Land titling programs can create secure, clearly defined, and easily transferable land ownership rights, which ensure benefits to recipients/ owners and improve incentives for long￾term investment.” 10. 2005: The World Bank published its “30 Years of World Bank Shelter Lending: What We Have Learned”, acknowledging: “Observers such as Hernando de Soto are almost certainly correct: Improving land use and the clarity of property rights, formally or informally, can confer enormous benefits on many poor families.” 11. 2006: Ana Palacio, former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain: “De Soto’s work has had a substantial impact on development theory and has also influenced aid agencies, including the [World] Bank, as reflected in land and real estate projects in formal land titling and land transferability.” 12. 2006: The World Bank Foreign Investment Advisory Service (FIAS) published a methodology manual: “The FIAS methodology for administrative barriers to investment was originally inspired by the work of Hernando de Soto. It was further developed within FIAS by Robb Smith and Jim Emery.” 13. 2008: The Commission on the Legal Empowerment of the Poor, co-chaired by former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Hernando de Soto, published its final report “Making the Law Work for Everyone,” providing a poverty reduction agenda based on legal reform on property rights, business rights, and access to justice. 14. 67 Case #7: HOW THE ILD IS HELPING OTHER COUNTRIES RE-CATEGORIZE 69 In 1990, ILD answered an invitation from El Salvador’s President Alfredo Cristiani who was trying to rebuild his country after a decade-long civil war and a devastating earthquake. We signed an agreement to help, and thus, in 1991 the ILD found itself an international organization. Over the past two decades, 44 heads of state have requested the ILD’s services, and we have met personally with 37 of them. Typi￾cally, these leaders have read our ideas, know our work, think that their main problems are caused by informality —and ask the ILD to deconstruct the apparent problem and re-categorize so as to find a workable solution. We have responded variously: inviting them to see the results of Peru’s reforms; visiting them to discuss how we can help; doing a preliminary assessment of their informal sectors or a full-scale Diagnosis whose findings force heads of state to look at their informal economies as a solution rather than a prob￾lem; and recommending and designing reforms. Governments often take the reform process from there. In recent years, we have discovered that our ideas can travel even faster than our staffers and be equally influential about raising awareness about the extralegal economy’s potential in countries where the ILD has yet to mount a reform project. 1. Mexico 2. Haiti 3. El Salvador 4. Guatemala 5. Honduras 6. Dominican Republic 7. Panama 8. Venezuela 9. Colombia 10. Peru 11. Bolivia 12. Argentina 13. Ecuador 14. Russia 15. Azerbaijan 16. Egypt 17. Libya 18. Morocco 19. Tunisia 20. Algeria 21. Niger 22. Ghana 23. Tanzania 24. Nigeria 25. Mali 26. Cape Verde 27. South Africa 28. Iraq 29. Afghanistan 30. Pakistan 31. India 32. China 33. Philippines 34. Mongolia 35. Thailand 36. Senegal 37. Ethiopia 38. Mauritania 39. Timor-Leste 40. Albania Countries that called on the ILD Case #7: In a nutshell 70 Some examples of our work abroad El Salvador: In 1991, the ILD and the Cristiani government developed the Real-Estate Formalization and Registry based on the ILD’s recently implemented Property Registry in Peru: • 550,000 Salvadorians had become legal property owners; 1.2 million real-estate units were incorporated into the new registration system; 27,000 former wartime combatants and poor people received real-estate property rights, consolidating the Peace Agreements signed in 1992. Egypt and the Maghreb: Between 1998 and 1999, the ILD executed a preliminary Diagnosis of Egypt’s Real Estate Sector. The Final Report submitted in 2004, including 20 reform proposals to integrate the extralegal economy, was a re-categorization of how Egypt should view the informal sector that was unanimously approved by the Cabinet. In 2004-05, the Government launched several major initiatives to formalize extralegal assets– implementing, at least partially, 13 of ILD’s 20 reforms, which earned Egypt the title of “top reformer for 2006/07” by the World Bank’s Doing Business Report: • In 2012 the ILD carried out an in depth study of the root causes of the Arab Spring in Tunisia, the results of which were broadly publicized. Consequently, the Government of Egypt called on us once again. In 2013, the largest business groups of the five Maghreb countries formed the Maghreb Council for Inclusive Entrepreneurship, a historic joint effort to move forward in 2014 to implementing a five-stage reform strategy in each country. The Philippines: Since President Joseph Estrada invited the ILD in 1998 to diagnose the extralegal economy and President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo requested a research update in 2006, no fewer than four executive orders on agrarian and urban reform and restructuring mortgage financing have been issued; at least seven ILD-inspired reform programs for land titling and tenure, and mortgages have been initiated; and 53 bills of legislation have been proposed on land use and reform, housing, collateral, red tape, and small business guarantee: • Pres. Macapagal Arroyo created the Urban Asset Reform Program to “develop the proven ideas of the economist Hernando de Soto regarding the integration of formal and informal settlements into one legal system...” Colombia: A 2006 Pre-Diagnosis study by the ILD – commissioned by the IDB– revealed that 68.5% of Colombia’s real estate assets and 89% of business assets were held extralegally. Several Colombian ministers have visited the ILD to discuss formalization, and Colombia has two programs following ILD’s methodologies: • President Uribe declared publicly, “We have listened to Hernando de Soto many times. We believe in a Country of Property Owners…” Case #7: picture history 71 Honduras: In 2001, the Government launched its “Poverty Reduction Strategy,” and asked ILD to diagnose the magnitude of the extralegal sector and propose reforms. Four years later, the Government decided to implement the ILD’s reform recommendations on its own, passing a series of ordinances and creating the Institute for Property and the Land Administration Program - PATH: • According to the Institute for Property the aim is that at the end of the PATH program “approximate 75% of the total 2.2 million farms in the country, will be mapped and registered in the Unified Registry System; that more than half of the 298 municipalities in the country will improve their capabilities for cadastral services...” Haiti: Between 1998 and 2004, the Haitian Government commissioned ILD to research the informal economy and design a reform program. The ILD presented a reform and legislative package of 179 articles, along with an explanatory memorandum, an economic impact analysis, and an action plan to implement a National Program for the Capitalization of Assets that were approved by the executive branch: • ILD recommendations were supported by Presidents Aristide and Preval, civic organizations, including leaders of the informal economy and the press. Tanzania: In 2004-05, ILD helped the Government create the Property and Business Formalisation Program – with the Swahili acronym, MKURABITA. In 2007, the ILD implemented a training strategy to instruct the MKURABITA staff in the ILD’s reform implementation methodology, which the MKURABITA team began executing in different regions. ILD designed a package of 44 proposals for institutional reform in the business and property sectors, based on 17 social patterns of extralegality.In 2012, Parliament amended its Companies Act of 2010 by establishing a “limited liability single shareholder company” and the use of Kiswahili in business transactions – as ILD had recommended: • MKURABITA won UN Public Services Awards in the categories of “improving the delivery of public services” – delivering property rights through local government and regularizing informal settlements. Albania: The Government of Albania adopted the “Action Plan for the Reduction of the Informal Economy for 2006-2009”. Prime Minister Sali Berisha and the UNDP asked the ILD to train a team of Albanian professionals and conduct a Diagnosis of the extralegal economy and propose reforms: • In line with ILD recommendations, the Albanian Government created in 2008 the National Registration Center, lowering the time and cost of incorporating businesses, limited liability companies, partnerships, etc.). 72 Mexico: In 2000, ILD did its first investigation of the Mexican informal sector, proposing solutions and reforms. In 2005, at the request of President Vicente Fox, ILD began a comprehensive study of Mexico’s extralegal economy supported by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and the Government; and in 2007 presented a comprehensive reform plan for dismantling constraints to growth to the Government of President Felipe Calderón. In 2011, Mexico launched a program for the Modernization of Property, Commerce, and Cadaster Public Records with the support of 31 states, along with the district and federal agencies such as the National Institute of Statistics and Geography. • “I will reform the legal system, which has been hostile to the poor, and which does not allow them to accumulate capital and participate in the economy, markets and business in general.” - Vicente Fox launching the “Mexico’s Capitalization Program”. Guatemala: From January to November 2006, the ILD assisted the Government with its Program for the Formalization of the Assets of the Poor and Middle Class in Guatemala. ILD worked directly with the Presidential Commission for the Modernization of the State (COPRE), diagnosing the size and scope of the extralegal economy, and identifying the institutional and legal failures causing it. • Armed with the category of extralegality, the Presidential Commission for the Modernization of the State (COPRE) put formalization at the center of its mission to modernize Guatemala. Thailand: Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra created a massive effort “to generate grassroots and SME growth” – and invited Hernando de Soto to address state agencies and financial institutions, along with policy and public opinion makers, on asset capitalization. His recommendation to re￾categorize the informal economy as a potential source of economic energy was taken to heart by the PM and his Cabinet. • In January 2004, the Thaksin government launched its “Asset Capitalization Policy” aimed at legitimizing informal property and business assets and registering them so that they could capture as much value as possible in capital markets. South Africa: In 2003, President Thabo Mbeki, Nelson Mandela’s handpicked successor, invited Hernando de Soto to Johannesburg to discuss the nation’s growing problem of extralegality. ILD’s influence is evident in the ruling African National Congress policy paper 2004 initiative, “Development and Underdevelopment – Learning from Experience to Overcome the Two-Economy Divide”– i.e., the formal and informal economies; and the Government’s 2006 initiative, “Accelerated and Shared Growth-South Africa” designed as an engine to halve poverty and unemployment by 2014 – through programs reflecting ILD suggestions for tacking extralegality. • “In due course we will have the eminent Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto to also assist us in understanding better and making use of the value that lies within our informal settlements.” Minister of Housing Lindiwe Sisulu,2005. 73 Ghana: President John Kufuor hosted former President Bill Clinton and Mr. de Soto in Accra in 2002 to launch the “Foundation for Building Capital for the Poor,” a non-governmental organization aimed at mobilizing resources for the poor in the developing world. Echoing the ILD reform vision, the Foreign Minister, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, noted that “informal sector reform” was the essential link to the nation’s on-going efforts at public sector, land, education, health delivery, and private sector support reform. • “The lack of an integrated system of property rights, according to the renowned Peruvian economist, Hernando de Soto, makes it impossible for the poor to leverage their informal ownerships into capital…” Foreign Minister, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo. Russia: In 2001, Hernando de Soto met for 3 hours with President Vladimir Putin to discuss Russia’s problems with extralegality and growing poverty. In 2007, Mr. de Soto was invited again to the Kremlin this time to meet with Putin’s Deputy Chief of Staff, Igor Ivanovich Shuvalov, and other high level Putin advisors. • Putin’s Deputy Chief of Staff informed ILD president that in Putin’s 2005 State of the Union address he had launched his own version of the ILD reform program, along with laws to title some 350,000 state-owned dachas. Mongolia: ILD conducted a Pre-Diagnosis of the extralegal economy in February 2010. Armed with this new data, ILD President de Soto, met with President Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj and Prime Minister Sukhbaataryn Batbold to discuss how the ILD might assist the government with a reform program to incorporate into the growing economy the large majority of Mongolians living and doing business outside the law. • Reelected for a second term in 2013, President Elbegdorj remains a champion of the ILD program and has publicly called for ILD-style reforms to be implemented in Mongolia. See Volume II, Annex 4, for more information. 75 Case #8: ILD’s INTELLECTUAL IMPACT 77 Case #8: In a nutshell 1. London’s Institute of Economic Affairs’ Fisher Prize in recognition of the outstanding contribution to the public’s understanding of the political economy of a free society. (28 July 1990) 2. The Economist magazine selected the ILD as one of the two most important think tanks in the world. (December 21, 1991) 3. The Swiss Freedom Prize (University of St. Gallen) bestowed by the President of Switzerland. (22 May 1995) 4. Time magazine selected Hernando de Soto as one of the five most important “innovators of the 20th Century in Latin America”. (24 May 1999) 5. The Entwicklung und Zusammenarbeit, the German development magazine, recognized Mr. de Soto as one of the 10 top development thinkers of the millennium. (January, 2000) 6. The Goldwater Award, for “an outstanding contribution to the advancement of human liberty”. (16 March 2002) 7. The Adam Smith Award, from the Association of Private Enterprise Education in the US, for legal reforms carried out throughout the world. (7 April 2002) 8. The CARE Canada Award for Outstanding Development Thinking for “helping the poor on the ground”. (12 April 2002) 9. Forbes magazine, ranked Mr. de Soto among one of the world’s top 15 innovators “who will reinvent your future”. (23 December 2002) 10. Yale University’s 2003 Downey Fellow. (16 April 2003) 11. Democracy Hall of Fame International originally nominated by Supreme Court Judge Anthony Kennedy, and prize received with Andrew Natsios, USAID administrator. (14 October 2003) 12. The Templeton Freedom Awards, first prize for ILD’s “Egyptian Property Law Program, which is reforming Egyptian property law through a focus on state acknowledgement of lawful property ownership”. (8 March 2004) 13. Time magazine Time 100 list of the most powerful and influential people in the world. (26 April 2004) 14. Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty, CATO. (6 May 2004) 15. Member (Fifth Class) of the Most Admirable Order of the Direkgunabhorn conferred by His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand in recognition of his valuable contribution to the economic and social development of Thailand. (23 October 2004) 78 16. Honorary Degree of Doctor of Letters from University of Buckingham for his economic writing on the institutional pre-requisites of a market economy; and his intellectual and physical courage”. (29 January 2005) 17. The Americas Award 2004 -2005 granted by the Americas Foundation. (10 February 2005) 18. The Most Outstanding Personality of Peru of 2004 awarded by the Peruvian National Assembly of Rectors. (17 March 2005) 19. The Prize of Deutsche Stiftung Eigentum (German Property Foundation) for his exceptional contributions to the theory of property rights. (13 April 2005) 20. The 2004 IPAE Award by the Peruvian Institute of Business Administration, for the design of strategies and programs whose validity is recognized worlwide. (28 April 2005) The Golden Plate Award 2005 bestowed by Michael Bloomberg in tribute of outstanding accomplishments. (June 2005) 21. The Seventh Compass Award for Strategic Direction, awarded by BearingPoint, Forbes magazine for his strategic vision. (20 September 2005) 22. “Fellow of the Class of 1930” by Dartmouth College. (29 September 2005) 23. Prospect/Foreign Policy, 20,000 readers selected de Soto as the 13th top intellectual of the world (Noam Chomsky was first). (19 October 2005) 24. The 2006 Bradley Prize for outstanding achievement. (25 May 2006) 25. The 2006 The Economist Innovation Awards top Social and Economic Innovator of the year. (9 November 2006) 26. The Poder Magazine BCG Business Awards 2007, granted by Poder Magazine and the Boston Consulting Group, for the “Best Anti-Poverty Initiative”. (April 20, 2007) 27. The anthology Die zwölf wichtigsten Ökonomen der Welt (The World’s Twelve Most Influential Economists, 2007), BILANZ regards de Soto as one of the twelve most influential economists since Adam Smith. 28. The 2007 Humanitarian Award from Project Concern International, in recognition of his work to help poor people participate in the market economy. (November 3, 2007) 29. Honorary Patron of the University Philosophical Society of Trinity College (Oldest philosophi￾cal society of the world) for a worthy contribution to society. (October 19, 2009) 30. Hernando de Soto Award for Democracy awarded by the Center of International Private Enterprise (CIPE). (26 October, 2009) 31. Economist of the Year granted by the Peruvian Chamber of Commerce. (20 April 2010) 32. The Hayek Medal awarded by The Friedrich A. von Hayek-Gesellschaft for his theories and the implementation of his concepts by two Peruvian presidents. (June 24, 2010) 33. Medal of the Italian Cabinet awarded by Mijail Gorbachov. (17 October 2010) 34. Technological University of Peru, UTP: Institutional Medal. (September 2012) 35. Prospect/Foreign Policy, 2013 – 36th among the 100 top world thinkers. (April 2013) 79 The five major business organizations of the Maghreb committed to implementing the ILD program in their countries SELECTED PUBLIC DEBATES Joseph Stiglitz and Naomi Klein v. H. de Soto on Economic Power at the Great Issues Forum Conversation Stephen Lewis and Paul Collier v. H. de Soto on Foreign Aid at the Munk Debates Joseph Stiglitz v. H. de Soto on Democracy & the Rule of Law. Forum hosted by Pres. Václav Havel Pres. Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, Pres. Fernan￾do Cardoso v. H. de Soto at the Clinton Glob￾al Initiatives Pres. Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj v. H. de Soto at the Mongolia Economic Forum Jagdish Bhagwati v. H. de Soto on Globali￾zation & Exclusion International organizations whose development agendas have been influenced by ILD’s and methodologies. 1 A RESPONSE TO THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE FINAL REPORT ON ILD PERFORMANCE SUBMITTED BY C. DADZIE AND P. MURRELL ON SEPTEMBER 2013 Conclusion #1: “ILD’s theories are too general to be applicable” ILD Response: 8 cases where ILD’s theories have been successfully applied – to win a war against terrorism, create broad-based economic growth, make government more accountable, explain the causes of the Arab Spring, influence the development agendas of international agencies and 15 countries – and change the debate worldwide. Conclusion #2: ...doubts that “ILD’s approach can prove effective…” ILD Response: Documented recognition of the effectiveness of ILD’s approach – by the White House, USAID officers, US press, war victims, even the terrorists. Conclusion #3: “…lack of rigorous evidence of the impact of the ILD inspired programs…” ILD Response: A list of 1,100 laws enacting ILD initiatives, along with dozens of related strategies, six treaties and covenants designed and implemented by the ILD; plus detailed evidence of the impact of ILD reforms in 15 countries. VOLUME II INSTITUTE FOR LIBERTY AND DEMOCRACY / Ave. Las Begonias 441, Suite 901, San Isidro. Lima 27 - Peru / (+511) 616-6100 / hds@ild.org.pe / www.ild.org.pe 81 A RESPONSE TO THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE FINAL REPORT ON ILD PERFORMANCE VOLUME II 313 TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume I INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................p. 3 CASE #1: THE STRATEGY, LAWS AND TREATIES DESIGNED BY THE ILD IN COOPERATION WITH THE WHITE HOUSE AND STATE DEPARTMENT, FUNDED AND PROMOTED BY USAID, WHICH LED TO THE ONLY SUCCESSFUL U.S. WAR AGAINST TERRORISM SINCE THE FALL OF THE BERLIN WALL -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.7 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.9 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.14 CASE #2: HOW ILD’S RE-CATEGORIZATION REFORMS OPENED THE CITIES TO PERU’S UNDERCLASS AND HELPED WIN THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.21 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.22 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.25 CASE #3: HOW ILD IDENTIFIED THE OVERRIDING CONSTRAINTS TO BROAD-BASED GROWTH AND MADE THEIR REMOVAL A POPULAR CAUSE -- IN A NUTSHELL .................................................................................................................................................................p.31 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.32 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.35 CASE #4: HOW THE ILD CHANGED THE PERUVIAN CONSTITUTION TO MAKE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE AND CLOSER TO THE PEOPLE -- IN A NUTSHELL .................................................................................................................................................................p.41 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.43 CASE #5: HOW THE ILD HAS BEGUN THE RE-CATEGORIZATION OF THE ARAB SPRING -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.49 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.50 -- A BRIEF ACCOUNT .........................................................................................................................................................p.57 CASE #6: ILD’S CONTRIBUTION TO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.63 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.65 CASE #7: HOW THE ILD IS HELPING OTHER COUNTRIES RE-CATEGORIZE -- IN A NUTSHELL ...............................................................................................................................................................p.69 -- PICTURE HISTORY .........................................................................................................................................................p.70 CASE #8: ILD’S INTELLECTUAL IMPACT -- IN A NUTSHELL ................................................................................................................................................................p.77 Volume II ANNEX 1: 182 VALID INTERLOCUTORS FOR ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT. COCA GROWERS COMMITTEES. UPPER HUALLAGA VALLEY AND APURIMAC RIVER VALLEY ......................................................p.85 ANNEX 2: ONE THOUSAND PIECES OF LEGISLATION TO REMOVE CONSTRAINTS TO GROWTH .......p.181 ANNEX 3: A SAMPLE OF LEGAL REGULATIONS PUBLISHED FROM APRIL 1984 TO JUNE 2012, DERIVED FROM DRAFT LAWS DESIGNED BY ILD RELATED TO CITIZEN PARTICIPATION, DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE AND THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN ...................................................................................................................p.295 ANNEX 4: DETAILED EVIDENCE OF THE IMPACT OF ILD REFORMS IN 15 COUNTRIES ..........................p.303 83 ANNEX 1 182 VALID INTERLOCUTORS FOR ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT COCA GROWERS COMMITTEES UPPER HUALLAGA VALLEY AND APURIMAC RIVER VALLEY 85 l'llf.NTE DE DEFENSA Y ERRADICACION DE LA COCA DEL AL TO H UALL.AGA • UCHIZA· Senor • tngen1ero Alberto Fu;1mon FUJ1morí PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyecto:POR EL DIALOGO YLA l'A2: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS de • Pln.:o\ de. Jln Lima COMíl'E DE PROOUCl'ORES DE : DISTRITO PROVL'10,\ REGION INl VALIDOS r•ara 1o! efectos de-e-u11lquic1 acur:rdo sob;e Desarrollo Alternativo a ser supervist!do por Na\."IOncs Un¡d:l$, .JQ.&LXS i======:='=================ot DISTRITO : 1 OC!!IZA ';=======================\ PROVll'ICIA : l 3JC4Cll8 REGION :1 ... --"'-º-3l _ 110 _ llA _ -s _ AJ11W. __ n_ll_. ___ INTERLOCUTOR.ES VALIDOS Para 105 efectos de acuerdo .sobre Desarrollo AJlcrne1ivo a .ser supcf'\11\o.1Jo por !as N;¡cíon.es Unidas. son lntcrlncutores Válidos: CAHGO NOMBRE L E. FIRMA COORDINADOR IU.l'OLJ!O IJ GENERAL nGA SI!'UJ:l ms 1 655Z755 COORDLl'IADOR De ACTAS Y ARCHIVO /vH't P <¡=t e COORDINADOR DE ORGANIZAC'JON GAJ!Cll UIGm> OOOH540 COORDINADOR DE .U. IUIO ECONOMJA fAL'r!!ll)JI P!UaDO 19404•77 COORDINADOR DE J(IOOEL DEFENSA Sil llliLU DOllI.lllUBZ COORDINADOR DE l!S lBUJI PRENSA Y PROPAC. TIGO SALI.5.1.S 22961461 COORDlNADOR DE !lilCBLUO DISOPUNA llXLXllll.BZ AJIGOLO 22961461 86 FIUJ'l rL ni:: Ut.t t'~M V t.KKAU \l'ION 111?.U\ COCA DLLALl"O HUALl.AGA • l lC1111.A • COM!TI' DL PRODUCTORES DE :1 . PAcwno1o Ah~mac1YO. KJC us&trlucutort.1 vJlidos. CARCO • • -· ..... COOROISAOOR DE ~CfAS Y ARCltJ\f) °'1l d • r • tl.C • tf!.i.Tl. COORmNAOOR !Je ECOl'OMIA COORDINADOR DIJ DEFE..'SA COOROL'IADOR DE rR.ENSA Y PROPAC COORDINADOR DE ~ ¡----- UISClPUNA ~rll.uc ioc• ll• ,.., . 1950~ ,=: , \z.rruJe.tcré Jg.r foct.ÜJ•dc.s ~l (:QSO 0 lm p~rWPU 'UllC'S wtnaunaJ:ti:, p:i.ru Ct bUCi1 dise.mpebo Uc: -;us íunci\ Y f IUlAlllCACION U f, l..A CúC\ ni,;1., \1 TO11l .\Ll;\ C1\ . 1 Clll7A • COMrrE 01 PROOUCTORB DE J OISTRfTO PRO\'DICIA IU:GI0:-0 · l°CH!ZA----=--= -' !OCAC!!ll SAR llAR Tl N 1' 1TKl .0CUTORr.s \Al IUOS l'oi• I•• t!tc:t0> del Cun•calo cttre l'cn. vi~ E;i..00,. U.WO.de Amone> sollie PoL:.ca Cn•UU)I Jt~:a.\ y ~n~ o Ah .. ra.i'""° ~n mit"f!Q("Jtore:~ '-'ilidos￾C.AKCO ' D\lr.Rf 1-1:. f1R.\IA COORDl!'>AnQR l'JDRO CO!IDORI 4~ 06219180 GE~ER.\1. COORUIJ'li\J.)()R PL CUSOGOKO l!AUnS!A P . 06226,00 ~CIAS \. -\ROU\'O ( lXJlOK J.li; f.C d~1 i:aso a lll per1uuus antes. mc.nCJona •, pJfll el llaca d:s.cmpc.tlu de \Uf. íuoc-iun-:s, 87 FRENTE DE Dl!FE.NSA Y EltRAIHCAClON oe (;\COCA llEL. Al.TC> llUALLACi\ - UCHIZA - DE PRODUCroRES DE DISTRJTQ PROVfNCL<\ REG ION l .5 qn _____ _, INTERLOCUTORES VALTOOS Pa."O lus:cfec1os del Con,coio en1re Peni v lu1 UuiJosdeAwéucutobrc Pi;}Uttou. de Control dcDr<)gas y Oesarrolo Ahen1a#ri-vQ, sdJl iutctloc::u1orcs válh.los: C.\RCO 1'101\IBitE t..F.- FlRMJ\ COORDINADOR Dé . ¡ DEFENSA //¡, 0 ., / 1 (!J,,, d .iv,,_ COORDll'ADOR DE ,) PRENSA Y PROPAG. 1' COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA /(C r FR.ENTI:! DE. DEFEN A Y ElU!ADl CACION l)f:: LA COCA DEL i\L.1 V H Ui\L-l.ACr\ • UCUIZA - COMiffi DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 l!Ul!'IO POllTUG/.lr ';=:=================: DISTRITO : 1 UCHIZA PROVlNCIA : 1 1'0CACHR l<.EGIOJ'I l -' U1'0MO!IO l\>Jt T!11 1N11!RLOCUTOR.eS YAl.11.lOS Para lós efectos dd Comaoio entre Pcn"1 v lm, U.Siadc.s Uuídos de.Améric:i. sobre Polllic.i do Conuol de-OroBM y Deso:irrolo Ahem:ltivo. son interloc\11oJ(!;$ vá.l.idos: CAR GO COORDL'1ADOR GENERAL COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDIN!\.DOR DE ORGAN17-ACION COORDINADOR DE ECONOMlA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COOllOIN/\DOR DE PRENSA Y l'ROPAO. DE DISCIPLINA '-:OMRRE LE. CAJILOS CtIB!lCA BASILIO 'KIRillIO l'R.lNCll'B 157201}2 - JULIO YLORJ!S V&RA )2775124 HUI.!MP!O COROll!L SIJ'UE11TES 23092509 SAlN AOOR CURO MADOR DE ORGANIZACION 10:ol. !lZ!IOS C. COORDf!'.AJJOR DE ECONOMlA z•ll.(11..J:.Nu 3M.IJJ,J(J 1J. COORDlNADOR OE! DEFENSA COORDINt\DOR DE PRE:-ISA Y PROPAG. COORDl:NAOOR DE LE. )2121628 0100%20 OISOPU°l'A •!ArilO J'afütúv GAJJ?..\ J20902JO FtRMA Jar del ca.so -a las pen.cu.1a..\ antes mencionadas. ¡>ara c1 butu de!itmpeñu Je: S'J.S; CúordhH1dur del F'"renlc DE! tlEfKNSA Vl >:HUAl)1CA.CIO'N oeu COCA DEL ALTO llUAU.ACA · llCHlZA • COMITE OE PRODUCTOREs DE : 1 PUS'R TO HUIO?K DlSTRITO : íbC!itZI PROVl1'ClA REGION · Jl11'!UlfA!IASA!rlWl'II INT1'RLOCUTOR.E.<; V,\ LI DOS 1 1 J 1 Pllt.o los de:I Couven.iocnuc Pera y los Estados Polluca de Control deDrogas y J>esarrolo Altcrnauvo, son wtetlorutorc.s: Válidos: f',\RCO '!U:S LLE!Utlli ACTAS Y ARCHl\10 11.lllS COOl\DlOADOR DE !\ICA.RDO vtl\JJ'J!!DI OROANIZ.ACION COORDL'lADOR DE R.BHG!l'O ECONOMt.. OARDSllAS COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA De ! 111& l a.r4 e•&• Rlli• l:lli!I QIJ:K IUIUlUlZ COORDINADOR DE RU!Z PRENSA Y PROPAG COORDINADOR DE l'AIIU. OJSC!PUNA L.&. 01015500 0099i,9ee - 229720} 6 0 1099750 A9';H•i:,ere- dnr facilidades deJ aoo las pe.nonas aDte.s. mencion3das. pr.rn el buen d.cscmpcho de nu iunciones.. l ,. jlllh to i " ! f'ech•--__:-----,_,1-fl-f·--- 89 FRENTE DE DF.FENSA V ERlW:>IC/\CION oe (¿\ COCADEL,\LTO HVALLACA - UClllZA • l/ffERLOCUTOR.f.S VALLOOS P:ua ICJJ. cícctos del Convenio e:nue. Peni) los: E.1il3dos Unidos de América sohre dt:: Control &Otoz_.as y Dcsflfftllo Altt'r.DA1ivo.sou intcrlncu1ort's válidos: C\RCO PIRMA COORDfNADORDE ORGA,'.'íZAClON >=tl.ll·'.:: COORDINADOR DE ':::::illo :>e1 COORDINADOR DE ?rum•r.010 DISCrPLLNA w-->. Agr:idecerC dar fadlidndes del i..-aso a lns personas antes meoc1onad:is. para el buen desen1pcño de sm (unciones.. F'lilt'ha U: Í\.l:::;. lº .:I! t.TulJ.') DE PRODUCTORES • t.J11 111.1,..u . ... t:--.-uc.u,.,,, e .. .,1o: .•. ,,, 1, °"'"'l•Q / FRENTE DP. DEFENSA Y ER.RAD ICACION UE CA COCA DEL ALTO HUALLACA • OCHl'.M • PRODUCTORES DE :IA /_TO fl o 81l 1'I GO DISTRfl'O 'I)::: ::::V!!::!:C:::!:/1:!:6:' PROVJ)'1CIA : 1 T ó e -4 e H F REGlON : 1 e; /l N HA R-r I N ll'Tl!:RL.OCU'l'O.IU!S \IAUDOS I':lra los efectos del Coovcmo entre Perú y los E.stadoi Unid<>< dé sobre Polltica de Conuol deD.r0&-as y Ues.arrolo Alternativo, son \'fú1dos: CARGO LE.. l'lRMA ¿;p--.. COORDINADOR GENERAL RF+ r: fl ¡¡ .s q[l!11 Ñ "'.c..Hp T"l-t . F.. ºº '!94 90 r COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDINADOR DE. ORGANIZACION , p ¡.J , ,, .,, L 'PF .2 O COOR.DTNADOR OE 'ECONOMIA 'A V COORDJNADOR UE DEFENSA ' 1c T !!> P. COORDINADOR Dé PRENSA Y 1 O CóORDrNAOOR DE OISCIPUNA • n oc & o{llf3o _ dar (ncjüdades del caso a las personas wttcs. pnro. el bu.cm desempeñó de sus funciones. 2 /J.uiv\), son ln•erloru.tores \iálidos: CARGO l...E:. CUUJWINllDOK VE ECONOMIA Al.B!:J\XO HIDALGO P.OJ •S. OS58l3l4 COORDINADOR DE DE'.FENSA CAALOS 0092943 6 COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PRO!' AG. llllAJllJO ltIOii l S95 6602 COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLL'IA J)!OllY COllD01.t.: l'JRAI 0}884400 Agradecerc dar i.lt.:I t.':iSv a l:ü pt:rWUilS antes _parti el bu,n deserupefi(I de sus funciones. l'f!EffTE DE DEFENSA ICll.zl¿l)l(>.CJU:t DJi U. .. DU. ¡t.LlU UUA.1.1.4!1A ' WAt.-Ttll fbC•a "º'n.\ de! F'rcnlt / FRl:NTE OE DEFENSA Y / ERRADICACION DE LA COC'.A DEL ALTO HU.U.LACA .uc1m:A￾Senor · l.ngen1ero Albeno Fujirnori Fujlmori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUDUCA Proyect0:POR F:L fllALOGO y IA P,U,A,GIUCULTORES COCAUmos Ptl.&6o de • Pbu de Atft)as - Lima DISTRITO PROVINCIA RECION INTERLOCUTORES VAUOOS Pare tos c:ícctos de cualquier u.,cue.rdo sobre Oe.sarroUo Altematfvo a ser por las N•cloncs Unid ... ;on ln1erlow1orcs Válidos: C \RCO COORDINADOR GENERAL COORDL'IADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO NOMBRE . -- ·--- ... ... - - -- COORDIJllAOOR DE ORGANIZ.ACION --: ;-- COORDINADOR DE ' - ECONOMIA _,__;_, -· - .;.>_______.... .. - - -·-.. _ ... (" ... COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA H-• -'- ¡_. .... -' • - COORDINADOR DE LE. PRENSA Y PROPAO. ,_;:-:. _ :'="3:. Clelll79 COORDINt\OOR DE FIRMA / 91 f'IU:li'"TEDE DEFENSA Y ERRADICACION DE LA COCA DEL AL TO 11 UAI UCA • UCHIZA • Señor · lntcnlem Nhcrto Fujimorl Fujimori PRESIDEl'trE DE LA REPUBUC\ Proye<1o:POR EL DIALOGO V LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCAU:ROS Pila.ria de Gobkmc> • Pbu Je: Armu ' i 1:1 • Lima COMffE DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 " -daAaGU'ta:rIIuUnsde Pones! OISTRrro : 1 Ucb.i za 1 PROVINCIA : 1 Toc:acne 1 REOION : l Aut6noaa 1 INTERLOClfl'ORES VALIDOS Para los efcctns de cuaJquier acuerdo sobre bes.arrollo Al1c1nativo a ser SVpérvisado por las Nadan .. Unidas, ron fmerlocutor .. Válidos: CARGO NOMllR.E L.E. COORDINADOR Alborto 1!o.ci.l1o IldeíoceoN• GENERAL COORDINADOR DE Re;narl Cárdena Valles U 01017'27 ACTAS Y ARCHIVO YIRMA COORDINADOR DE ?&l u Cbávez Alcántra 04047797 ORGANIZACION '-' J oal Jloaquiora C.N• tJ/ 17/0< f5 COORDINADOR DE Carloo 3al1Uoval K. DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE Carelllia.o J!sp!noza PRENSA Y PflOPAG. COORDINADOR DE JUlill 3aro.n&o Llaceahw.nca B • 009995}6 DISCIPLINA FRE.,TE DE DEFENSA Y ERRADICACION oe L.\ COCA DEI,. ,u;ro HU.U.LACA • UCl llZA • COl\oITTE DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 PDCA RUMI DISTRITO PROVINCIA REGION : L UCllIZA h'>T&RLOCUTORES \'ALLDOS Paril c:fec1os del Convenio enue Perú y)os Estados UnidQS de ... \lperica sobre PoUria dt Control de.OrOgas) Oe:\afrulo Allcrttéuvo1 .iUíl lntcrlocutore:. v:lliüos: CARCO L.E. flltMA dar rru:ilidac!cs det c:t.w a lM p<.rwrw antes mencionadM, parn e: buen dcsem.pefio de sus funciones. Oll.tfTE QF ?ROO UCTQRES O G;MdOI o,; 111 Coordinador eut1ntl deJ Frt-ntC' r DEllTE DE UEFENS• l P M lUC.U:AO!( DE 00"'- DIJ. ALTO tUIJ.U." ,,. •• dt' Fl"tnlt 92 FRENTE Df: DEF&."l'SA Y ERRAOIC\CION OE LA CUCA OELAL'l'O HUALLACA - UCIUZA - COMJTEOE PRODUCTORES DE :[ C-;>aA l¿¡(i'('f .i3f1J!'"1(J 84'Mko ! DJSTIUTO :i"u cfli;>d 1 PROVL"ICIA 'I 1éeAcfli!' l REGION 1 INTERLOCUTORES VAJ..lllOS los. e Cede>$ del Coovenio enue Peni v lmi Estados Unítlos ele: Alnéri('.i! sobre Polltica de: CQntrol Ocsarrnla Aheriu\uvo, :;ott interlonHores CARGO COORDINADOR GENERAL "l'OMUIU: 1...E. FIR\ l \ COOROfNAOOR DIZ .{) DEJ'E:"SA ./'(Of(U / f> f}¡,,Jci ,-¡.¡,_,t1/1'11tf,Vy /. '1. ; COOltDlNADOR DE PRENSA y PROPAG. JJuJNrt'.i o !1U1/fO/IÍ tMNrl;>/J J:u t.u;ll.idade$ dc1 01$0 '& nnic:!i ntCt)c:iernodas. ron e1 buen desempeño de ¡u; funciones.. FRl'!Nl'E DE OE:l•ENSA Y ERIWJICACION DE LA COCA DELAL'l'O 11 UALLAGA • UClllZA · COMITE 013 PROD\JCíORESDE. ·I C.\S:D!O ¡¡;; ·\t : o u•;:,!.J.\Q\ OlSTR.ITO : 1 UCilIZ.\ PROVrNOA • 1 = c:tt: REG10N • 1 At..°TeíiOYJ\ '' SA.:I 'L',ITT'!r. " trmm.LOCUTORES VALIDOS Pora lt» efc<10$ del Convcniu entre Penl y los l'.rtados Unidos de Américo sobre PoUúc;a de Conuol dcDcQgas y Des.zrrolo Altc:rnalh'o, int(tr}C>c\llOl'C! ''1\liéos: CARGO NOMBRE FIRMA COORDINADOR GEl'IERAL :, n c:>rrl.i;r. L . r. COORDINAOOR DE ACl"AS Y ARCHJVO s:-. VAxi•t> S&Tim>7A COORDINADOR DES::-. u;.,;-:;;, 11:>¡:1::-i'l>U 17.>!!!> OlCl'J':·n. 0RC r.!tli oo G•r ci<. o.¡530n7 r ,4 dílr íacihdades ,tel roso a antes mene[ontuias, pari el bueu de sus fun1.;oncs. FREITTE DE LJ1 roe.a. DC. ü.tO .QU,u,.LAt• - ..G.,eñlnuü"l« .Otara.I <-·•'lJl!l"Fr'l'!m"' 93 !'RENTE DE OEFENSA Y F:ltllAOlr \CION DEI.A COCA OF.1, ALl'O ll UAl.L\Oh · UCl ll7..A - ~p l'C. '-r Y 41/.k-'•Duc1c.-.:.: D!STRITO PRO\'INCLo\ REGIO'- Tf. RLOCUTORJ:S\~OO Para lo; ofC<:t0$ del Coovcr o cmrc Plm: Po!Wc;i de Coo:uol JeOr >p.s 7 On.utoJ.1 AlltnJ4.IJ\'O. M)U mtcrlocutntc.s "~do.s: C \RCO COORDl1'AlX>k GL''"ER.Al. COORD!l>ADOR DE <\CíAS Y •\ROllVO COORDINADOR DE ORGANJZ.AC"ION COORDlt>ADOR DE ECOi' ,,1.,-av" '?°/Ci 1 J.,t 8.J f.t • ,.,, c.//6:?/~~ ru11 M 111u="':t.L-+J FRE.NTF. DI! Ull:FF..NSh Y KkltMJICACLON DE Lh COCA OF.L AL 1 o llU/\!JJ\ Ch • UClllU • COMITE DI:! l'RODtJCTORf..S De 1 PUCA'L\CU DISTllITO ' \'----~== [ UCB1 ZA =========== PROVIJ>CIA • ocacmi: :-==== ====~ RI:GION ~TO~Oll SU HA= l' 'TERWCUTOR.f.S \'AIJDOS 1':1ra los efc: CARGO LE. COORDINADOR f:'r,.r Antoalo ... r 1 D1a: . GE~ERAL V COCRD11'ADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCIOVU r1 l ade tro Oi-t.cg • 04111o¿u.e.-z . 22· 652" COO Dl/'o/\00 OE , ORGANlZAt'lON Alb• r to Roqu e H c.n tt. ~<-0n COORDINADOR DE F.CONOMIA Roy"oldo Sin '!'•ou lllma . 00900703. COORDL.,ADOR DE OtfEt-ISA C•r lo1t h . 1/lllanue v• 0 611 e: , OCl'2 162S3. ro<>RDfNAOOR lll' Á PRENSA Y PROPAG. 3u lplNT6 DE DEFENSA Y ERRADICACION DE LA COCA DEL Al.TO ll LIALLACA - UCHJ7,A - COMITT DE JORG;; CRA'Tl!Z PRODUCTORES bE : 1 DISTRfíO : \:¡ :1 .TOCAUllL REGION · . AU1'0NGl'.A Siúl H; VALI DOS Pata il,)S efcc..ios del Con\'dniQ entre Pc.rü y los. Estados Unidos de Am!ricn soore :Polllle'l de ConLrot dc_Drvgus. "í De"arrolo ..-"\11ertLJth•o, soo i.ntfltlocutute& v21lld0ii.": COORDINADOR DENlS R.EAt!:Gtll Dl;.Z GENERAi. COORDINADOR OE ORGAN!ZACTON 01IYMO SOTO l!UIZ L.E. FIRMA 0001H21 COOROIN.'\DOR DE ECONOMJA ?RJJICISO\. StdC!iLZ !!EJ.:?.Al· COORDINADOR DE DEFENSf\ VALDXiL'e. :&2ff'V/'l2 COORDINADOR DE 1 O ORCANlZ.-'\ClON fi,u.'- I -? - 1-;>- 95 FRENTE DEl>llFENSA V ERRADICACION DE LA COCA DEL ALTO HUAU-'GA - UCHIV.· Señor: lngcnlero Albeno Fujimorl Fuflmori PRESIOEtm.! DE LA REPUBUCA Proyeeto:POR EL DIALOGO Y U l'AZ' AGRlCU1.1·01tES COC\LEROS Palacio ck Oobicrao - Plu:a de Arm-at slo - Um.I COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : J=I =====·=·=··=··= ·=-====! DISTRITO : I \===============9 PROVINCIA REGION : 1 ··---··· - - ·-· INTERLOCUTORES l'ALJDOS Para tos cíeccos de cualquier acuerdo sobre: Desarrollo Ahcrnotivo a.ser supervisado por Naciones Unidas, son lntcrlocu1ores Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE COORDINADOR GENERAL ·--- ··- COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDINADOR DE ORCANfZ.ACION COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA COORDL'IADOR DE DEFENSA -· ... ¡--- ,_,_ ... - .... --··· - ··--- -· L.E. oeoa57e6 "';• --- .. --- COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. ·- · - ... - -·· --· -- · - -- -- . . . d3r del caso a las personas an1es mencionados. para el buen descn1peilo "e sus funcione\. ., COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA Coordinador G•ntral Coordinador de Acta.s / FllENTR oe DEF&NSA y ERR,\DICACJON DELA COCA DEL. ALTO LI U . .\l:LAGA 01smno VROV!NC'.IA REGJON • UCT117, \ • !IC!f ¡z..; L"ffERLOCUTOllES VAUOOS P.ar-:a cfectOl dtl COU\'l!r.io em¡e Perú y h>s Es1:tdos UnidO'S de .AJJtlrica wbre Folluca tle Cunaol y Des.uro le;. Altero.o.dvo, son vállJos.: CARGO COORDINADOR DE ;,CT,\S Y ARCHJVO L.E. DUAJ1To Vt.3..U::s 1'rJ9'174i)O-:::;ti:L ,,'!- IO.!UNO HElmE.'U SA!!T:::STE3,\JI 0907703 COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA . .. Cr/ mn1c10 XItt.Al!YA 19SU650 , .... :- ,·\_gn1deceré d:u del t":t$0 '.l personas antes ro.cndOOádb.5o, p;:1t11 el de 11u$ funciones.. fBEKTI DE DEFEJl!A .D..fU.DltA.CIOI' DC L& z ' l'NTERL WAl-ff" .. s l O• tt C•our•••••" 0.,. • .,.1 Coordfnt'dGr Gl'-ntr-..il del Fr.r_nle l-F.. FlP.,\IA f'RENTE DE DEF&.'ISA Y &RRAD!CACION DE LA COCA DEL ALTOHUALLAGA - UCHIZA· Sellor : Ingeniero Albcno FuFmorl Fujimori PRESIDEITTE DE l.A REPUBUCA Proyccto;POR EL DIAJ..OGO Y LA PAZ;AGRJCULTORES COCAU:ROS 1'11.adti de · Pla:ra de Amw lln · Um.a PROVINCIA REGION INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Pünl 105 eítctm de: cualquier acuerdo sobre _Desarrollo Altern;,iivo a ser s-upcrvisnúu ptlr las t--:acioncs. linfdu,. son lntc:rlocu1orcs CARGO NOMBRF. ¡_¡;:_ F1R\1A COORD!NJ\OOR GENERAL COORDINADOR DE ,\CTAS y ARCHrvo COORDfNADOR DE COORDlNADOR DE Ec o ..;OMIA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. OOORDl,';: - - -1.,.¡ :,¿., ., t_J, o '?o/,nn "' Á /,. ., > co "' :---. <:: V::. 1 .e-=>---"T - .,._ ? :r '"t'V'l a:. 97 FRENTE llE DEFENSA Y ERRADICACION DE lA COCA DEL ALTO HUAl.l.AC •. ·UCHIZA· Seftoc : ~.,¡eniero Albcno Fu11mor1 FuJímo:1 PRESIDE~ DE LA REPUBUCA PrO)'octo:POR EL OlA!.OCO V U P \2.: ACRJCULTORF'.S COCALRROS Pa1Klo ck- Gob«""° · Pl..D de AJ m.u. ,_o l.NaJ4 COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : :: ?O '/:-,:l - ;;: ==--=~~~~~~== DISTRITO PROVf!' n:RLOCUTORES \' >.UUOS P3n los efectm de C"U1lqu1er acucrJo ~re 0e"5r·nno Ahem:i11\'0 a str supc-r. 1.s.:ido "'' .. lu !\30C'\M-\ l n1d.llJ.. '°" ln1c rl0Ntorc V6hdot;:· CARCO COORDINADOR GENERAL ~u· !:i.ltl !;..~i::r.1c : ;. .. • !! I .... 1Clt!li~s COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO ¡~~.llO J . ,.J:;:ih .S. OC9:1<•lc COORDINADOR DE ORQANIZACION OLZA;.;ft ,;"/AJ,J~tl::T e~~ Co"l COORDINADOR DE ECONOMlA JOA-:t :JJ.l. .... ..:Art OCflOO'IA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA ti I .. ]'L ,, ,¡q'J] 1 Lt1,.:9 nv:.;¿ COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAGti¡¡p.:¡,.:¡ ~0 UJO tlOC~O~O ~-.,{c.-.... - • FRENTtl DE DEF'f./'ISA Y ERRADICACION DE LA COCA DEL AL TO ti UALLACA -UCHIZA · Scnor: IJigcni<:ro Alber10 Fu¡ímori Fu¡1mori PRESIOEITTE DE LA REPUBUCA Pro,ec1o:POR EL DIALOGO \' U PAZ: AGRICU LTORES COCALEROS Pallao de Gobcrl'O • f'lln Oc A,_. tJa • ÜIM COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : ;==~,,.;!'llJi ;;~ ÚKt,;:·=o=il=====: DISTRITO uásiZi PROVIXCIA REGIO:'< ! 1 !ÓCÁÓÜ :~¡======= 1110 ====IU=== S=.1.1'" === =;,,.= ==~ l!"TERl.OCUTORES VALIDOS Para ~Ol cftC10l de C'l..alq\l.Jer atUerdo M>brt Oel1JTolao Altcrm1fvo a ser superi.-l>adu rot 1al .Naciones Unidas., son 1n1erSocnorcs V'lldol: CARCO COORDINADOR GENERAL COORDINADOR OC ACTAS Y ARCll lVO COORDINADOR DE ORCANll.ACION COORDINADOR DE ECO>;QMIA COORDl'IAOOR oe DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAO. COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA 1'0M8RE n uo s=• rP41fAQUB ll.U.t'l'!R IU.Jlill 4 Al!ST .U.O U TU QUE BIOS O!ll'" OBAY RBQ()J!l() I.O'I s so 'IO 1-E. FTRMA 010095 4H3~ 1 · 00995641 00999222 041!IJ,O ?2964607 0099729l Coordinador dt A.e~ h._. 98 PRESIDENffi DE! LA REl'UBUCA , .. Proyecto:POR EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COC>J..EROS PaJac.o de GobtettMJ - Pta12 Je Armu .s/o - LlCNi COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 sa .roa r:... 4 - 0 i==========================' DlSTRITO : 1 rn ';========================. PROVINCIA : 1 ::======================== REGION IJllTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Para los tfeccns de- cualquier Acuerdo sobre Desarrollo ,\.hcmt11lvn a ser por Naciones Unidas . .son fn1crlocu1ores Válidos: CARGO COORDINADOR GENERAL COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDINADOR DE ORGA."qZACION COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDíNADOR DE PRENSA Y l>ROPAO. COORDINADOR DE DISCIPUNA NOMBRE L.E.. FIRM A 911()4545 • ,_;g- 1. L ,. ' 25557000 ... i:;.- FRENTE OE DEFENSA V ERRADICAOON DE LA OOCADEL ALTO }IUALL\CA -UCHIZA· Scfior : lngen.ieto Nbeno Fujimnñ FuJímori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Co121i·t: de Productores Agropecu;i.rios de snl>.& IABT.l t.OaL\ Proym<>:POR EL DIALOGO Y LA AGRICULTORES CQC\LEROS P-alaoo de Ciobicroo • P11?.a de A.Nnti S/tJ • Llm.a COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : DISTRITO : . 1m:lZ.l ';=======================I PROVINCIA : 1 'l'OO.l.Cll!l i====================i REGION lNTElU.OCUTORES VALIDOS Po.ralos cfee1<>s de cua.Jquier ac:ucrdo sobre Des.anollo A1tcmativo a str superviOAdo ¡l"r ltt') NaciOQe$ Unidas, Válido': CARGO COORDINAOOR GENERAL COORDh'IADOR DE NOMBRE 0000301 1 1\ CT1\S Y NlCHfVO =:ir CJJ!DDlll 2297403$ COORO!NAOOR DE ORGANIZAClON !mIJE?1"l PillOO LU'I COORDINADOR DE ECOKOMIA J.LBBmO Abtemo . Plua. dt: ..\.tm.lS fJG • Llm.i DISTRITO PROVINCIA : 1 ... ;-=::: 1 REOION ; 1 ... INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Par-a los efectos de rualquier acuerdo sobre Desarrollo Alt.cmativo a ser supcrvi:.ado por hu 1':u;ion-cs Unidm., son lntcrlocutores Válidos: CARO O COORDINADOR GENERAL NOMBRE COORDLNADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO ·-:;¡ ;-:::: O O :-::;-:e; COOR INADOR E •• .·."!.(\ ;; 2:L. O ROANIZACION COORDINADOR Dé ECONOMIA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. .., ..... :··:::·4· j,..,. ... .# ?nJ::L:..-\ LE. FIRM.\ FRENTE DE DEFENSA Y ERRADICACIOI/ DE U. COC\ DEL ALTO HUALUCA . ucmZA . COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE :( .;U<)//. Lt3Z."l!'AD DISTRITO PROVl)'ICL'< REGl01' íNTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Para los efectos del Convcnío entre Perú v los E$1ados Un1dos de Am!ric:i sobri:. Polit1a de Control de Drogas)' Oesarrolo Altci:na.dvo, .son CARGO COQRDl:-!ADOR DE Y ARCHJVO COORDINADOR DE ORGA>,'IZ.AC ION NOMBRE FIRMA COORDINADOR DE A.lr'and.."<> .:> . ..,, ,- / 1/ l>RE.NSA V "' ·' • ¡1 Ji._.· COORDflMDOR DE No!Ho S . ¡a.,. //"'u¡ DISCIPLfi'IA /• A.gradecer!: dar facilidades- del caso rt la! pcrsonu :'in!cs mencionadas. para el buen desempeOo d.t sus 100 FRENTE OEOEF'ENSA Y ERIWllCA.CJON DE U COCA DEL ,U, TO H UAU..AGA - UCHIZA· Seftor: Ingeniero Alheno Fujimori Fujimori PRESfDESTE DE L'\ REPVBUCA Proy•eto:POR EL DIALOGO y LA rJ..Z, AGRICULTORES COCALEROS Pal..do de Cobtcmo • de. Arm.u sin · tllhl INTERU>CllTORES VAUDOS Para los efectos de c:u31quicr acuerdos.obre Desarrollo r\ltcma1ivo a ser pur Naciones Unidas. son tntcrloc."tJcore.s Válidos; CARGO l'OMBRE LE. FIRMA COORDINADOR ¡ GEt\ERAL r'°M'/; / J., /i!,;.,.¡?¡;.,., 5 (/,' COORDINADOR DE ' ACTAS Y ARCHIVO 3 : ; ¡ ,'r;, COORDINADOR DE • ORGANIZ.ACION •• ,,·c&.cJ.l•bP COORDINADOR DE ECONOMJA l'", ' COORDL'IAOOR r DEFENSA ·I J COOR DINADOR DE -" f( 1 PRENSA y PROPAG. ¿¡/1,,-\.. • - .. .VCutorcs V111dos: CAACO NOMBRE LE. FIRMA COORDINADOR l&lll!ODO ECONOMIA COORDINADOR DE mllnO llIJ,lLllA8 .V.Cil!!O DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE BlLlJOD $4!fI,+D AS.SIP0D" PRENSA Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR DE l'llmlISCO !l.llllXnU. lllJlUj)O DISCIPLINA ...... ,y.,, 101 l'RE1''T8 DE DF:FENSA V ERllAOICACION DE lA COCA Dí1L ALTO HUJú.L\ CA • UCHIZA • al de 1'rodo<"'"" Com111.é Ct.ntr .0 , de trc-bix-o. A_C1Topec-uan . · . • -ttOD SA5T.t. LUCIA CQ¡,trn;¡ DE PRODUCTORES DE : DISTRITO ; ::,1 =========] PROVINCIA 11.EGION INTERLOCUTORES VALmos Par-3 \t>t;. Jet Conyewo cntte Peru y.Jos titados Unidos de Ar.ncrica sobre PoUtica de <..:onuol deUrógli y Desar.roío . .\..heroaovo. sao m1erlocutóres v:\hdoS: CARGO NOMBRE L.E. COORDINADOR (;Ei"JERAL RlOI. MAR1 @1S At.mpaRI?. COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHfVO '·'·""''"' COC>RDiN ... DOR LE ORGAl'/IZAt.:ION' CARLOS OLORT:WI G11!'IXRBEZ ;z:. 11. 0099 7070 COORDDiADOR ue ECO>lOMlA JOAJI IGLiSIAS AaIAS L • .i.000 OC DEFENSA J OS!! GRADOS DRCI A COORDL'{ADOR DE PRE..\15'\ YPkOl',\G, Q!All >!ACAHOACHI PAS!!A!IASI L.i. COORD!Nt\DOR DE DISCIPLL"lr\ AL3JIJl1lRO AL!!1"1>ARTZ L. E. oc.<¡qS'i' t Agradece:t: dar facilidades det a IM pct!i-Ot'las rr.e.nc1on.ada..,, ¡w._ra e.1 burn de.ot.c.mpelln de funcicnes. Fech:l 1 1 n1.....rn1,10 DR 1 __ ' I • • FRENTE DE Ot:n:NSA Y ERRADICACION UK U (,'()CA Ui;J.. Seilor : AL TORUALLJ.CA • UCRIZA· Ingeniero Albcno F\ljimori Fujlmori PRESIDE!>TE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyecto:POR Et.. DIALOGO Y L\ PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS hboo de.Gobierno· Pla:.a de Armu Vil • Llm.a COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 .. DISTRITO : 1 t,l(',..i C4 PROVINCIA : 1 REGION : 1 S..-¡¡ " ' rNTERLOCU'l'ORF,S VALIDOS ! 1 1 ! Para los de cualquier l"lcucrdb sobre Desarrollo Ahcrn3rivo a ser !ii.upervt$:!do pnr las Naciones Uoidas. soo Interlocutores Válidos; CARGO NOMBRE L.E. f'IRMA COORDLNADOR -" (t;,71;., ./ O EN ERAL iCJ <•: Ct .. 1t( 3:-,'l!t·I 1$ --,.,¿:,· ,! COORDIN.t\DOR DE '-l! 4 ACTAS Y ARCHIVO I '· ., • _, .... - COORDINADOR DE .,¡-CJ •O ORGANlZACION VtSi, Ar. Ht-J u.:. '% 1'í(-qt¡!., . COORDINADOR DE (J;;¡ .. <· COORDI NADOR DE DISCIPl..INA 11 !. ", Jzrrc;,, Agradeceú dar dcl ca.t;o a las peí'$Onas antes mencionadas, para c1 hucn .. c. re ... - ..i)ó I et q 1 Fecha N ..Jh c' "" " > e 102 FRENTI:DEOEFENSA y El\ltADICACION OElACOC\ DEI. Señor: ALTOHUALUGA • UCHIZA· lngdnlero Alherlo Fujimori F\Jjimorl PRESIDEl\'TE DE LA REPUBJ.ICA ProyeO S4llCll!ll llllDl!Iou¡¡s ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDINADOR DE OROANlZAOON L1JI3 .IJJUil!RI V.l.lllS COORDINADOR DE ECONONC!A 'lSlUlS.l vncB!Z COORDINADOR DE .rou lllllllll!l.I. SIRP. DEFENSA L.E. COORDINADOR DE 11D11S8SLAO lllUOO OllllWO PRENSA Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR DE """"" ..... TI!>il DISCIPLINA - 07930559 FIRMA 103 FRF.NTEOEOEPENSA Y ERRADICACION DE LA COCA DEL AL TO HUALLACA • UCHl7.A· Sc~or: Ingeniero Albcno Fu¡1mon Fu¡1mon PRESIOEl'i"TE DE LA REPUBUCA r.omi•é C-nrr:d de: Produc.cor11 Agrop«uari,o,. de Ucb.rra SCDC auu LOlll.4 Proyecto:POR EL OIALOCO Y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCAU'.ROS PAbcio de ~roo Pkn de Nm.u lii• • l.im.t COMrrt DE PRODUCTORES DE : ~ c.wm - SU'li lDCI.I. DISTRrTO 1lCllU. -==========; PROV~CIA REGIOS INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Para k>s eJectC» de cualquier acuerdo \Obre OcJ.arrollo Alternauvo a w:r wpcrv1>0MSo p-.r 1a.s ""-:ac:.onu Urtldas., iOft h11t.r1~"Uloru \'Slidos.: CARGO l'OMRRE L.E.. FIRMA COORDINADOR GEl'IERAL COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDINADOR DE ORGANIZACION COORDINADOR DE ECO:cno:POR EL DIA.LOCO Y LA PAZ. ACRIC\JL TO RES COCALEROS P&:l.lao de Gobierno • P1All di: At9as. ila • U.. COMnt DE PRODUCTORES DE · U:: MIGO!!.. D!I ?Oli lB DISTRJTO ~~--rn-.rª.:r================"" PROVIN~ REGION : 1 .~,=====--~~-===========~ .;;.,\N Y..A..i\ :tJ l i''TERLOCllTORES VALIDOS Para los cÍCClO:S de cga1qu¡cr aC\Jerdo ~brc Dturrollo Allctr.3i1rvo a $.er ~tpeM~o ~ bs ~aciones Urudu. son lntt:rlnannrcs V'lidol: CARGO L.E. FIRMA COORDINADOR GENERAL :)SCA JCSl ~u;x..s.: .• JUl';l '.(;:-t 1962~óo COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO Glllt.Ltl\MO llZPlllI?U SALAS 00054905 COORDlllAOOR DE ORGANl7.ACION J,IOIO >i0DKS1l v.1c.1 Nl.l.!IC .. 07677G25 c_oo~R-D ECONOMIA _D_o_R~D-E~~~~~~~~~~~~ . .. ~A.IDO nac:: ~.11.Ul. 1904865 ~~~- 1 ·/..- COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRE.>;SA Y PROPAG. !.U!S 'll~~~S KClZ 01010295 COORDINAOOR DE DISCIPLINA Ci YO ED1~!IO . UIS?K l\g.rBd.e~erl- dM facili~¡ dC"J ~ a 1as pc1'0nalo utcs mencionadas. para d ooc'l de:5oempc6o de. sus funciones. !) te Jullo 4• 1 . 3;11 Fecb•---- c-d~ • FRElol'rE DE D&FENSA Y ERRADICACION DE LA COCA DEL AL TO 11 UALLACA • UClllZA· Sellor lngcmcro Alheno F\ljimon Fu¡1mori PRESIDEJ\TE DE LA REPUBU~ Coaii1é mi do P,...t• t\g«irecuariot de Ocblza ltDt S4~TA tom• PrO)ccto:POR EL DIALOCO Y LA PAZ: ACRIOJLTORES COCALEROS r .:..a,., de C'iolM:mo • ~ de A.r-.u .,. • t... COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : ,.:2 !l"" , z;:¡ ?LEc. 4 orSTRrro : 1 tJ c: ot , z ,,. '==='==================:; PR0\1NCIA REGION INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Para los cícctc>t de a.iat1.1ulcr '\IC'Ucrdo M>b:c Oew.rrollo Ahcm.1.lr.'O a ~r ~trpc:f'\lr..ado por las l"IKlona Unidas.. M>o 1nte.rloc:utores VtHdm: CARCO COORDl~ADOR GE~ERAL COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDINADOR DE O ROAN 17..ACION ,,.• A "-• s ... ;. ' NO'IBRE L.E. FIRMA COORDINADOR DE r EC0~0~11A r .. f;/ ,¡• .... ,.,... .._IJ ~t-, e~ - i:-'?-?t ~v---_ ... COORDINADOR DE .,, N_S_A~~--~....d.·~ ~--''~~·~·"-~·~-~=~·~~L·~~,~s~~·~~"~L'·"-...,.; !Z!: f'"-- / COOR011'AOOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR DE DISClPUNA f:../-:- ~;.;;.;.;..;;;;.;,;.;.;_~~~--'C.::.:'-.:.-~~~~~r~~~:__!...(~,~:.....l~:..:.-_cc..:.~~~,~ '...:.'.·~':.i~ 105 FRENTE DE DEFENSA Y ERRADlCACION DE LA DCL ALTO HUALLACA -UOllZA· lngeo_tcro A1heno Fujimori Fujtmori PRESIDEl'ITE DE U\ REl'UBUCA Pl°O)'c\ COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. COOROIJSA Y ERJtAOICACI0:-1 OE LA COCA DEL ALTO RUALLACA • UCl llZA • COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : s;.:r ,\ill)l!SS - :;va. !'!ü:\A. DJSTRITO ?ROVll"ClA REGlON INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Para cfecios del Convenio los E.Mados de sobre Pol1lica Contr(ll deDr.oya' y Oesl\rrolo Al1er-nanvo. s.oii inte.rloculores válidos: CARCO L.E. l"IRMA /} .. \DOR PASTO!t ;RAV"3Z ?Oa':'AL ')Ol)Cé.773 GE, ERAL. COORDNADOR DE ACTAS y ARCHIVO "'.,\;;·:;;L ;;;.:ws .?:;.o COOR.DNADOR DE ORGAl'IZACIO:-: A..3Z1!?0 i'\ó32.7957 COORDU'ADOR DE 'D , M y ;=, 'J.AR AL1A:vo.DO i;..\3EZiAS -201aca55 COORDINADOR DE "1A1GJITLIJJl0 J.;c:ano cuac- <'16ó221. . • OISCIPLJNA & • V \l>r faciUdoc!c> del cruo a :lS pt:;;9111 u u cu. tlL W1 ttil.Wü Coordinad _.... or _ At-1"!.IS 106 FREl'ITE DE DEFENSA Y ERRADICACION DE U COCA DEL ALTOHUAU.ACA -UCHIV.· Staar : lugeniero Alberto Fu¡trnon Fu¡1mon PRESIOEl'-TE DE lA REPUBUCA Proyecto:POR EL OIALOCO V U PA7 : A\.RICUl.TORF.S COCAU.ROS P.bao de GoOo«.o • Pl&i> de Al-~·•'-- COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : l1c-~ .. "='=u.,·,.• ... ...,~========' DISTRITO t : • ·¡::::;================~ PROVU'TERJ.OCUTORES VALIDOS Para los eftC'IM de C'UiJquicr acuerdo $Obre DcurroUo Ahem1u1\'0 • ff't c;\..pervts.ado por la\ !'acionc.s Un~dto., son lntctlocutOl'H Válidos; CARCO SOMBRE 1.E. FIRMA COORDINADOR ,~ GENERAL .i.1.,ca• I;er COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO ~, _ •~ •4 , ••• COORDINADOR DE PRENSA YPROPAG.L, COORDINADOR DE -- ,. -,-tf_1.1 .. •ta•c-••~ 01SCfPUNA \,ce. c.c·,..,c..,. •'fO.f.C .l- 'Z·~;:• ~r~7í,,.-; Agnadea:rt dar facilidadcl del cuo a lu pcl'\Onu anie1 mi:ncion:sda,,. par1 c:I bu.:o dc~mpet\o de .kU funoonu.. Coonlln1dor Ct.ntral Coordinado,- dr: ActaJ mEJ'n: º"" DEt'ENS \y t:RlTt:IU.OCUTOR!:S \'AlJDOS P.tta .o.; efectos de' Comt:n10 enue Perü y IO\ EsDdos C:ück>$ de ~-\mé."lc:a- soo•e Paln1c¡ Je C-antrol deOmtb v Deurrd.o l\hem:.U\O, JOa uncdo:utor:s vL.idos: CAlOROINAOOR DE cor,;io C••U"<·rw col,,• PRE.'>SA V PROPAO. é .!. COORDINADOR DF nro Oolai• • Caldao DISCll'UNA LE. Ag.radi:Ccré dar iac1Udade~ del c~~o 3 lu pcrsocu at11es mencionadas., ~ ::1 buen d.t$t.mpcl'io d< UH func1<"ne'" rreh:a l!' 107 f'IU!NTEDEDEFENSA Y ERRADICAClON DE U COCA DEL Al.TO HUALIAGA • UCHIZA· Sct\c1r : Ingeniero Alberto Fujimoñ Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Pro.ccto:POR EL DIJ\1.0CO Y l.A PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS de Gobierno .. P'U:.uii de Arm.iu tia · Uma COMITEDEPRODVCTORESDE :j p¡;tLN- Mt:Jf!Er=t￾DISTRITO : 1 ti Cf/ I Z l"I PROVINCIA : 1 í cc,:;c ... REGION : l nu . <;,,(V'. /f!4K77;Y INTERLOCUTOR.ES VALIDOS 1 1 1 Para los eftctos de cualquier acuerdo s0-brc .Desa.rm11o Ahcrnativo a supervis.ado por la!i Naciinncs Unidas, q)n V:\hdo1: CARGO L.E. FlR.\IA COORDll"AOOR J . . . GENERAL /141• HAli!l/;.//J H /it:U f/lrA : ,t.é /t. COORDINADOR DE • ,, ACTASYARCHIVO/,J,Po4-«a (Í,QN.IM!f/(' H.Utv'f2 l/fi COORDINADOR DE ORGANIZAClON ,., .... COORDINADOR DE ECONOMlA ?·011 yo c.w ,. Het17éq c- N+: ?31> 8-ollh " , ' l'RE.NTE DE DEFENSA Y ERRADICACION DE U COCA DEL.- ALTO HUALUCA • UCHIZA· Señor : Alberto Fujimori F"ujimori PRESIDEl'ITE OE LA REPUBUCA P«Weno:POR EL DIAL.OCO V l.A PAZ: ACRICULTORES COCALEROS Palado de Crobkroo . Pl.W de Arm..u Lima COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : j :>OitO:;GO - B..IJO DISTRITO ; 1 UQlIZA PROVINCIA : 1 'LCACll:5 REGION ; 1 3"' ¡f ,.:;.. a '!:1 ... t\ INTERl.OCU1'0R&S VALIDOS 1 1 1 Par:» Jos eftctos de oualquler .acuerdo .Desarrollo Al!ern3tivQ a: ser por NitlOnts Unidas. son 1 n1crlorutorcs Vihdos:. CA RCO 1..E. f"IRMA COóRDlNAOOR GENERAL JITLARIO CUSI';. V COORDINADOR DE .o\CTAS Y ARCH.IVO Pl:fflOO S. COORDlNADOR DE ORGANLZ.·\CION '.l50Di."6I OV VEQA COORDNADOR DE ------- ECOl'IOMLA l1All!'\iA '!Ilreo."- 00995996 «r.,r t(,,r-(/.// COOROl'-1.o\OOR DE / DEFE.NS . .\ tri" '('¡ x. ?7 e.t ... . r-, ñ ., ,¿p 108 FRENTE DE DEFENSA Y 6 RRADICACION DE U.COCA DEL AL TO H UALl.AGA 0 UCHIZA￾SC"llor : lJ\gcnicro Alhcno FuJimorl Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA J>rQyecto:l'OR EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: AGRICULTOltES COCAU:ROS PWc:io de • Plan de sJn · Lima COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 '15CEL:w.r.'.: DISTRITO : 1 :;d.."L:.l PROVLNCIA : 1 l:l:C.:..Z:: !==;=;====;==============-==: REGION : ._I _ zi_· _ - __ ' _· VALIDOS Para los cfec:1os de cualquier acuerdo M:>brc Des.arrollo . ..\llernarivo a ser supcrv.lsado poi ta.. Naciones UntC1as.son lnterlo.cutQtt"S V1htios: CAACO COORDINADOR GEi-ERAL COORDL'IADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHtvO jü;ill !:,..J;,:;:,¡ COORDINADOR DE ECONOMLA COORDL'IADOR DE DEFENSA COORDIN,\DOR DE PRENSJI Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA Agradecer< ú:ir faCJlidado; del CllSO • los pe™>nas anies LE. FIRMA. dc¡empeño de sus funciones. . iflEIU f_ OE OEFfN:SA J T""'I .¡ - _., I O>C.a ) fi"ll llfilIA I (/f¿ .¡¡ ) 11'""- ?ll I I .• ,t !"RENTE DE DEFENSA V ERAADICAOON DE LA COCA DEL ALTOHUAU.ACA -UCIU1.A· Sci'\or: lngerucro AJbeno Fujimori FuJímori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyecio:POR EL OIAL.OGO Y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS Pa.Ltclo de. Gobicmo • .PW.. de Ari:;;.a.s: alq .. Lima COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 ¡.t< EY<' ,;,tc.,._ l!C j DISTRITO : 1 :.'t-,-l'VJ 1 PROVINCIA '.=,-¡=',=,,=y=;_,==,=========='--:\1 R EG'lON fNTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Para tos efec-ros de aCtJcrdo sobre Desarrollo Alternativo a ser supervfs3do por las Nacronc:s Untdai. ¡¡on CARCO l'OMBRE COORDINADOR GENERAL 7,_,,; ,.;.:¡.-< .... e-,.,,; ¡::p""-:--crr.r. COORDIN,\DOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO ,9wll[l· e ,¡ COORDTNADOR DE ORGANIZAClON c# COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA é'Jlrr. - -11 COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA l-E. FIRMA tl'l L ... 1c.•·.!_ __ ¡{¡¡/._,, - (.'OORDINADOR DE Á ¡ PRENSA Y PROPAG. f..t 1'.i'« jr! -.j!IYf!!-_. 109 FRENTE Dt Dtf'ENSA y ERRADlCACIO,'I DE LA COCA DEL AL TO llUALl.ACA -UClllZA • Sd1or· lnecn ero Alt>eno Fu¡unon Fu~mon PRESIOEl'-TE DE V. REPUBUC. .. Proycao:POR EL DIALOCO , . LA PAZ: ACRJCtlLTORES COCALEROS h1aoo ck ~ Pl&.u1 de A"""' un • Uaa. COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : ¡,, I ====3l'='il!ii='='w= .-=-=~===~ DlSTIUT'O : 1 llQ!l::I. \:===== ~-=-========~ PROVINCli\ ; l TOCA O.U: ~ =::=;;¿:¡:¡;:: .., :;;..,,.,.=.;.;;.. REGIO:. 062671ll ECO: ?:D'n:... !'i!<.&;;Jll;Z 2""'2192 DISCIPU'A .,.,., . ~ FllE.'1TE DE OEFT..'ISA Y ERRADICACIOl'i DE lA COCA DEL ALTO HUALl.ACA • UCHIZA· Sdor lngcn)(:rO Albcno Fujimon Fujirnori PRESIDE.''TE DE L .. REPUBUCA Pr.,..ce1o·P'OR El.. DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: ACRJCUL 101U'.S COCA!..EROS P&boo de: (';oh..:nio- PWa de Ana.u s.ei ·.Lima COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : )=~ All"""Jll"'i.11 18=-·-===~=~==º=' ====!' DISTRITO :~\='Jl~~A~~-~~~--"'~=\j PROVINCIA : 1 10CAIJIB 1 ¡.._..,,..--~============== REOION : ,_j _s_w_. _;wi-::?1 ---------~ ISTERLOCUTOIU:S VALIDOS P:ara os eícctM de a.alqu1er acuerdo sobre De1arrol.o Altcm:ltrvo a ser su~do por ·» Nactonc:s L'r11d35.. son ln,e-rlocuwrcs V'1i~ CARGO LE. COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO : - .. ¡IY'l ~ ..... ··o 3ojl!dt""" i', or-:. ~~jl COORDll'IADOR DE ORGANIZAClON otnoi.po Sl"!O :;¡m¡;¡¡n¡;g COORDll'/ADOR DE ECONOMIA COORDll'IADOR DE DEFENSA COORDl'-ADOR DE PRE..,SA Y PROPAG flRMA / - 110 lngtnicro Albeno Fujímorl Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyetto:POR E:L. DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS PA.l.at10 d,e, Oobit-rno · Ptua de ArmU llo ·Urna COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 :S-.:><& e-'9.li?.tt)s 1 DISTRITO : 1 d<""///ZA' 1 PROVlNClA REGION : 1 TCc.-"'c,,.,c 1 ; 1 S.A'H .#.";H.QT/A/ ; INTERLOCUTORES VAWDOS Para los efectos de cualqui"r acuerdo sobre Desarrollo Ahernotivo a ser supcrvi$odQ por la. Naciones Unidas. son ln1erlocu1ores Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE L.E. FIR.\1A COORDINADOR •. . .Í !ur:-io 111;:.otf'SD " ==E1" COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHfVO ;Fi:/:\141:'..t 1:1tTrJ1t,t; COORDINADOR DE ORCANJ2..ACION rl!'l!.!J•ll-:Jnc lé.iJ-:rr.,.t{. COORDINADOR DE ECONOMJi'\ ,J11uzr1!'1" COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDIN,\DOR DE - _. - PRENSA Y PROPAG. c;111y•*" ::>..r,,>o mrl'i;"''" COORDINADOR DE ¡ , • •• • • • - . DISCfPUNA .. .- ;;...-..- d'f:. ""! f iJ lV>' _ A¡¡rndcccré dar facilidades del C:ISO a las personM antes menciúnadas. para el buen descmpeM .. . - • c;tOS r11.1u l :. - _,,.. - flecha / • = ' '-/ 1/ IU IU ... r /,. / J l_ e''" i - ; · S: ":;::;./ ._ ' a \..._.... ....... • .,.. e Coordl11ador dt Ac·Ca,_--- f'RENTEDEDEFENSAY ERRADICACION DE U. COCA O.EL ALTOHUALL\CA .uc1uz;.. S.ñor : lngen1ero .<\.lhy CHG· 1 ; l Au·f/:#1· M o) l IN1t:RLOCOTORESVALIOOS P3r3 1os eicctrn. de eua,quicr acuerdo sot;>re Dc!:l!rollo t\ ltemarivo a ser !-UpeN¡s.ado por loJ¡ Unida.s. son interlocu1orcs Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE L.E. •'IR.\IA COORDINADOR ¡.) / /' t •j.) GENERA!. f• Muvi•c C''kl:,. :f. r 1 COORDINADORDE ¡¡ j • . ¡-· '•..-- . .\CTAS Y ARCHIVO e .t.-< COORDINADOR DB ./ · -e ( \ ORCAl'llZACION {'{;.cr 1(,, -"#'1 6·· t .: 21"J"t'1-) • COORDINADOR DE / ECONOMIA /; ¡:. , .. :-....... ,...; l < ;f'..._ b; COORf?INADORDE r · / ', DEFENSA (1-.t /1.-.. g. L ... º" s-1-..0>- / COORDll'ADOR DE >-vJ /¡ti /2 1 (!;' ;.J PRENSAYPROPAG. /¡ Clll'?Cl "_j COORDINADOR DR--- / ../;' , - / " 1 q.., Q::.r·· DISCI PLINA ,/, .1;,4., te . • e Ice '1?9 " - Agradecc-rt d:ar del oso _a las personas "antes mencionadas.. pan el but'n dcse.mptAo de funcioot.s, ............. ¡¡.. r:.n.u .. ,, / ;:- ''V:· / · /// "1\t. ÁtT U t ¡ . 1 .1 Coordinador dr;;;;t.:I"' 111 FRENTE DE DEFENSA Y ERRADICACION DE LA COCA 01!1. Scllor : AL TO RUA!.UCA -UCRIZA· ln¡crucro N~no Fujimoñ F\Jjimori PRESIDENTE DE U. REPUBUCA PrO)ccto:PO R EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALl!ROS PWOD de Gobcma · PW:a de Ñll'1b s.·a • Ll:D COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : DISTRITO PROVINCL>\ REGIO:>. Air.OJi,jl'.A l.l ~ UlllOJl - ?l:XAS ... --------~~~...i DC!llZA roCACi!.!: !:A.~ Y.A..:r.t,~K"-~~~~~~~~~ 11-'TEIU..OCtrTOIU:S VALIDOS Pi111t los efectos. de cualquier JQ.lcrdo '°brt- 0C.$:1troHo A.he.rnllÜ\.O :a jt:f u1pe~do P"'r 1~" -.:acfones l:nida.;. sor fn1trlocutores \':11id0$: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~f.:..:IR A ~ COORDINADOR --;:::::::::7 GENERAL ~o A: ~r ;c!o.a ~~.3~l? ~ CARGO NOMBRE L.f~ COORDú~ADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHfVO -a<>!...ahdo C-'Gd.! l.\I s.untl COORDINADOR DE OROANIZACION ,; Jl ~1.J J..:: i!!'.l~ ::' . " COORDINADOR DE ECONO\.llA a 0rtooL COORDINADOR DE DEl'ENSA ,\,J.!ouao cust1Ho ;;~uu.L..ln úJtrn,7 ,- - COORDINADOR DE PRE."'SA Y PROPAG. ~"-"" !l•r":e)i 3 f¡r'"- ·'fi>.1.' Agncte«rC dar faci1idadC> del caso 1. Jas persona\ :antes mcnc1onadu,. para el bue" de-.icmpeno ó.c ¡us funci ~ c.nes. . F h '-• ' .. "-""""' ' .- 1ro. ~ >< a ¡.\,( ¡¡ 1111 • ?. •. ~;;.,{~ u•~ -) Xi~M;& ,/ 22 niídor- "cni__ Co3Ni t.a.s ... . I F'RL'IIT DE DEn:NSA Y ERRADICACION DE LA COCA DEL Al.TOHUAU.\CA -UCli!ZA· Seilor: Ingeniero Alheno Fujimori Fujimori PRESIDE.''T"E DE LA REPUBUCA ~·ecto:POR EL DIALOCO Y U PAZ: ACIUCULTORES COCALEROS h1aao de Gobtcno · PW:.a de Anau •• · U.. COMITEDEPRODUCT'ORESDE : 1',\ur.:c: ~.e~~ ne. TOHllS DISTRITO PROVINCIA IJ(jll 211 7·':'t.. .. ll
Ct.. e.;.,.·11c...:.ATH v'''"'"""°" .3:l>-.i3.ZS4 ~Ít~ COORDINADOR DE ECONOMlA H"'"-·f-'>J ,...u4 '- rf •:,.NO;,; 01~1c•~~ ~v~~,p COORDINADOR DE o-Ef'ENSA c, ... ,. ... ,,._,i1..:'° .S:v l!'I; \. .:,,f.Ao /' n •l o"-S•tq_.// COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPA..G. J~•L111,.. ,..,11,..!"t: rlrj1J(' .., J.__.> CIC'C'.9~ ¡ ¿ "': f -~ COORDlN1\00R DE DlSCtPUNA Ctco..;.r. .q, •"'A \,;4,1,f:.t:,,_ Agrade«<~ W.r íao1íd3d'- biflOR IJ1'. ' ]' _, 1 URG.'-\..'Zi.Z.o\C!ON !:1,,1 .. Z;1 COORDl:-.'ADOR DE /1 1 - _ )' ECONOMlA t.4. 1 • .._ ;tf60?/ff2 . C.P4JJ#.,..._ 1 COORDINADOR DE COORDl.'iAI>OR DE Y PROPAG. COORDl'NADOR DE DJSCTI'LIXA ; ; ... • . ' . Ó/0/ AQ/!?- p ' .. dar útcilid.nde.s del t!.iO a las n1en('1onaoas - - ----- 1 p3r'.i el buo:i de>cno Fujimori Fujimorl PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Pro1ccto:POR EL DI ALOCO Y LA PAZ: ACRJCUL TO RES COCALEROS PaJ.año de Goo.emo • PW.. de Annu J/n • tima COMne DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 l'.ANAJ ANCA j DISTRITO : 1 l!! OGl!l!SO 1 PROVINCIA REO ION ! 1 1 : j SAN !re Desarrollo ,.\ llern3rivo a 6Cr supeNisado por \as Naciones Unidas. son tntcrlocu1ores Va:1id05-! CARGO NOMBRE LE. flRMA COORDINADOR DE Mi!ULIO iU;YNQSü OROANIZACION .... c: . ..J:o!:. v ... 1vi. COORDIK>\DOR DE ECONOMIA U!:..·.:. El! AbJ l.a. COORDINADOR DE ROJ DEFENSA ,¡ .r.1 1 t; ,'1LiJ !OI COORDrNADOR DE PRE,\iSA Y PROPAG. ¡¡,,Q.•:1 •• \l'-1 i>cJ01 t ........ COORDINADOR DE coo;uc¡¡;¡ DISCIPLINA '"""'"" z: lonel'1ll 113 FRENTE DE Y ERRADICAClON DE U COCA DEL ALTO H UALLAGA <:OMITE u c r "-"'"" - - - __ p.gtopecuano.s dtl 011ttitO o• NUl\10 P!'or;1li$0 ...... Tli - • UCHIZA· Sei\or: ingeniero AJbeno Fujimori Fuji.m-0ri PRESlDE1'TI DE LA R E PUBLICA Proyecto:POR EL.DIALOGO V LA PAZ:AGRIC Ul..TORES COCALEROS. Palacio de Góbk:rno · P1aa de Armu Sin- Um.a COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : [i81111'll CBK'l'RAL DE PRÓDUC'?O'R"..s--1 !!lraVº l'ROGRESO. l DISTRITO : 1 mravo PROGRESO. ---1 PROVL'1ClA REGION : 1 TOC AC!Jl! 1 : MA!ITIN . INTERl..OCUTORES VAUDOS Pafa \os ck eualquicr cu:uerdo i;obr-e Desarrollo Alternativo o. ser supc.rvis.:idc> por las e-.i!lciones Unidas, son ln1er:oci.11ores Válidos! CARCO COORDíNADOR GENERAL COORDL'IAOOR DE ACTASYARCHTVO COORDINADOR DE O RGANIZACION COORDNADOR DE ECOl'IOMIA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPA G. COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA NOMBRE L E. FIRMA GZRA..R.00 p A.DTI.! ... l?'/. JARA 0099608. ' OSCA..'l !UMI!!SZ ROSALES Agr:.decer! Uur facilidades del ca\O a pe.r."tenas :unes menc:ionadas. para el buen desempc.J\o de sus funciones. ºJ FRENTE DE DEFEllSA /! .J;,j, /! 11, I 0 .1 Ft<-h.a "- / 1 """" .,, .. .., ...... .,. Coordinador dt: •• FRENTE DE DEFtNSA Y ERRADICACION DE U COCA DEL ALTO H UALLACA -UCHLZA· Senor : Ingeniero Albeno Fuji mori Fujimori PRESIOE:-<"TE DE LA R E PUB U CA Proyec1o: P OR EL DIALOGO Y U PA'.Z:ACR.ICU LTORES COCAl...EROS rai.oo de Cobtc.m0- Plu.a de Antuil fJQ . UmA CO MITE DE PR O DUCTORES DE : l(ÍIYC/1 DISTRITO ; PROVINCIA : 1 -r"'. L j, .- 1 REGION : 1 S.> - ;. . INlt:RLOCUTORES VALID OS P:i.ra los efectos de cu&1qu1e..r .:ie'ucrdo sobre DeJarrollo Ahern:nivo a wpcrvuncio por la.\ Naciones Unidas., son lnterlocuiores Válidos: CARGO NO MBRE L E. COORDINADOR GENERAL ..::'- - _.:¡.. '"J.w .!f.·.-.•.,.,,.._-.., - .. ... • .• COORD!N;\ DOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHl VO :;' _;. . ..; •• t<_ . l: ;; ·· • COORDINADOR DE O RGANIZ ACION ·-.... ?_ . . ,. -::- ! -- .-- 6') ,·r- /•_ :-- COORDINADOR DE ECONO MIA , ,- l. ' /, ,_ ... ,.; - h-tl' • -,'/ . 'f''...,,. <.,<.{-.;...,..._ .,; _ _;..,. ....- _ . COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA ¡:: .... __ -; - . r-. .-.._ -" COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PRO PAG. . 1'1i· ..;; : - ·- -·": - - !:. . .. •• ·.r \: COORDINADOR DE ¡ DISCIPLINA _ ·,., ,.,..,. ,l,? v Agradeceré dar fac:i.lídadts del C:L\O a las personas antes mencionadas. para et b*:.J en de 1;us funciones; ENTE DtDUENIA ·•,. 1,.. 1·.· / ,q.·1 fecha ·tJ ... - .,.., ' 7, .. f \ 1 / ú'óJfo, _ f,·n . . \ J/J r- (:.• ... L Ctnl'.ntl 114 fRE...,IE DE DEFE!'CUTORES VALIDOS Para los e.íectn.s de cualquter oscucrdo sobre Oc.s;i.rrollo Alternativo a ser supervisado por las Nseiones l lnid:is. son lntcr1oeutores V::\lid0$! CARGO NOMBRE L.E:. FIRMA COORDIN,\DOR /'1/\IJL'El v\\\EtJI\ · GENERAL D'f0<,5'.fltf COORDINADOR DE 5AJJCH'éZ p OGZ '/31/¡ ACTAS Y ARCHJVO - COORDINADOR DE LVCI" L O \"'i;.<. F.,,¡. 040601;,1 ORGA.'11ZACION '"' - T . • COORDlNADORDE J°Po\Me 2.. ECONOML"' COORDINADOR DE f.::.ef2...ÍHP CAei>!iJflL Q(P.998.Zµ . DEFENSA 1-' COORDINADOR DE PRENSAYPROPAC. E,'óíEl A :::ÍF-'\2.f\ CJ ..1E>001.r:i 1.z, COORDINADOR DEAGF\P'rro .DE V\ C.Cl.út DISCIPLINA · 066'f'f1.l 7- ¡.f Ag.radcceré cJa1 faciHdade.s del caso 3 las penonss an1e.s mencionadas. pora el buen d.e su.s funciQnes. .. EllTE OE DEi'El•S. F h 2k ocf- ole .[r:¡q1 \.\DIC..001.'t r>e lA CIXoto M · •A ALTO Ut'A.t.J..r.C:.i. " . •. ,eo.c. .. dinador- e 1 COordlnador de A.clas SOn tn1crlOC\llOfCS Vá1i.:Jos: CARCO NOMBRE L.E. FIRMA COORDINADCR GENERAL #.e,,., ,o-u.uo y4,w: !llvij¿¿ / ')t)v E'lu_Í__Lr;/;1 <:'. ¡ '> COORDINADOR DE 7 ,\ CTAS y ARCH IVO 'V't>Uc Alwv<-6 (2t>¡t2!;/0 COORDINADOR DE ORCANIZACION .p ,.¡'J;re¿¿. 8&'vo 6PPVl'.U COORDIN "OOR DE . /l ECO:--:OMIA '-•¡.;v""''<.J.•,.,.•.n /99 J'J/7/ COORDll'l.ADOR DE DEFENSA ,(/,..,., _ _ ¿,, -- / r.c.....!< 1- COORDINADOR DE ' PRENS,!\ Y PR.OPAG. é'WU"" /,;,.; tft,, ..i.-ü.i ... COORDINAOOR DE DISCIPLINA ...f¿.,¿ ->/#,u.u '1/u:4z. /<; ?.r·.F9/tJ 115 FEDERAOON DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DF. COCA VAUL Dli:L RIOAPURIMAC AYACUCHO Señor : Ingeniero Alberto Fuíimori Fujimori PRESIDENTE 06 LA REPUBU CA PrQyccto:POR EL Dl.U.OCO V t A PAZ: .. C RICUt.TORF.S COC\LEROS P aboo do Gobkrao · Platl tk Annu Sin • L.i.m1 COMITEDEPRODUCTORESD6 : 11'd,,,.(),het16 .,,q - Ar<,, ! DISTRffO : l 11,_,,.,_,.7,,, 1 PROVTNCIA : 1 )lv ,,,v...-A 1 REG ION : 1 J.1t;.&w <'S .v l'.f'' 1, ll"TERLOCUTORLS VALIDOS Pata los eiectos de rualquier acuerdo sobre Dc$3rrollo AJtcmadvo 3-ser supcl"\·i.sad<) pur Jas ."13c1onc& Unidas. son lntcrla.U COORDINADOR DE _ - ACTASYARCHIVO •,::,.v pa -:.es (.'llfl I ' COORDINADOR DE R ª"'""'ºº V""'.\io. ORGANIZ.ACION COORD!NA,DORDE •J ·J ·• ·. A.,_.,_.,s H •A'fr,,. .5J8Sy312.(, ECONOM!A ' • " " _,_ ¡.,, COORDINADOR DE ,. H.:> O\J'-"' bo C L,, .rrC: . Z8S.5 - DEFEl'ISA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAO. ?é o-::..., ó \J "' "-' :> e ¡/ u"..-c.'° '2 8.SC.58,/,f A ,., /l L J -. "" ',)¡ COORDINAOOROE • ., Í - / .ÍJ orsc 1PLLNA v . ' 1 Co-..J 1-....._,-oo r Ab,'iudcccré d3;r racilídadcs- del c:i..w a lns persona.$ an1e.s para el buen dcsempc6o de rus ñ.lnciones. ftcha 20"- l.:. 4- - a / ... - f'EDERAClON DEPRODUCfORF.S DE HOJADE:COCA VAU.EDELRIOAPUIUMAC AYACUCHO ' SeñQr: • Ingeniero Albeno lfujimori Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBLICA Proyccto:POR EL OIA.LOCO V lA PAZ: ACRJ CULTORES COc,\LEROS Palacio de: Cobicc:oo - Pl.a:z.a de ArtNs fJn • Uma PROVINCIA REGION : 1 Hv."'.;vr.,Q 1 : 1 1 INTE:RLOCUTORF..S VAl.I DOS Para los c.fcaos de cualquier acuerdo sobre Desarrollo Ahern:n!vo :i ser supctvisado pc'lr la$ 'iadoncs Unidas. son lotcrloanorcs Vélidos; <:ARCO COORDINADOR GE.'IERAL COORDINADOR DE ACíAS Y ARCHIVO NO.,fBRE L.E. FIRMA IC / : "' < Ca he ;¡<:f J3flrbogo +Sl.cfY};y/? V :_=::;;:: - Pa,d,'tia fY)9-.-,. r-s Ce,,¡,,..,.,, J • .t COORDINADOR DE t; OROANIZAClON O l'loA;ceo - =- COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA Ari:uio J... f", 2:t.:!) J-5tA ¡¡ COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA R. J,a @. c.J,/,;¡ @,. • ..,. ! e ?;1>10 1 ¡¡ COORDll"ADOR DE - P. PRENSAYPROPAO. j 0 ¡P"''° C4...,,,.. Jidro i.E. Z1.1.l1 3V2 COORDINADOR DE /.f.?NuGl ' ' t'J,;t>u,,- $J>Nú•c.<'"L '>2 ,.J v..i' DISCIPLINA Llar iacílJdades dc.I C'a;s.o a las personas antes mencionadas. p:-s:n el buen dcsempet\o de :5US funciones. ., rKha :!¿- o :J - ' 1 \ ·- ' · 116 FIIDERACI0:-1 DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJ A DE COCA VAU..E OEL RIOAPURIMAC A'iACUCHO Sd\or: Ülgeniero ,'\lberto Fujimori FujUnori PRESIUEl'ffE DE U\ REPUBLICA Prayecto:POR EL OIAL.OCO Y LA PAZ.: AGRICULTORES COCAU:ROS J>•bcio de: Oabkn1.o - Ptau de Armas sin · Lima REOION INTERLOCUTORES VAUOOS Para lo$ eíectos de eualquitr acuerdo sobre Desarrollo Ahcm:u.ivo a ser supervis3do por las Naciones ton lntcrlocu1orc¡ Válick.>$.; CARCO NOMBRE 1...E. FlRM.A COORDINADO'R l?/VJNr i J,?.H,fl. v f;t*..-;Jt COORDINADOR DE - ORGANIZACION Pc.5.To íl JHQflltlúllJ bDHllOó COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA ,;;. Lc.c.a.10 RoJu sc.e.w c. 1!r;it'l10'I COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA lll.JT!.IJ 6n HcNDo'Lll 60..,St.t.LJ. . '2HH Q5, /. J • .,.......->. ' '1 Hti.ill-10 L1'c¡¡s. 2n.kZ.8Z.3 .B&1•1t. Sfin.Ba-u. Agradcc:er6 dar facilidaCí'\'is1do por tas Naciones Unidas.,-s.on Válidos: CARCO NOMBRE LE. FIRM.\ COORDlNADOR />1JvL1«/0 óv77ERLé'¿.,,,.,F,r GENERAL COORDINADOR DE (/'tc.7/J e f".tt'4--e1·sto ACTAS Y ARCHIVO - t. l COORDINADOR DE Zn> DlSCIPU.';'A '"""'i 2?2.;' 2¡>2Z ./ Agtaóe<:cre da.r f:iciHdades del caso a Ju. antes rnc-ncionJdas, p3.r3 el tlue.n doseOl!>tho de sus fun,;nes. .J, /' /7 • ../, 'f. Fttb• ;J-o P"<. ttt-t"r.t.!411(t Fttti!c1ttu it t1j1 t • d · I fZ / •h'q 1 d/ . · ----- Cl)Ordlnador de. Acla$ • FEDE.R.A CION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLEDELRIOAP URJMAC AY ACUCHO Señor : Ingeniero Alberto F\Jjimori Fujimorl PRESfOE!'fl"E DE LA REPUllLICA Proyecto: POR EL DIALOGO Y LA 1'A1.: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS Pahdo de Gobierno P'lat.I c.!e Armu sln Um,¡ COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : [ ¡.,_..,.,,,,, '"' - ::J DISTRITO : l llv/9,vT.1< l PROVINCIA REG IO:>! : 1 /IVli'"''-' 1 : J ;.1QFar.;ovcA <'• ,_v,.,,,.,. 1 :t INT ERl.OCU'l' ORES VALIDOS Para los de cualquier acuerdo sobre DesarroUo Ahcmativo a ser _¡upervisado por tas Naciones t1nidas,. '50n tn1crlOC\liores CARCO NOMBRE LE. PIRMA COORDINADOR /Jl8 ,_-../ti N..;.C.PyC-6 6:J"ln.<,,, GENER.<\L COORDINADOR DE /ec.oo.e11 ,.¡.,.,,,,,,,_, ACTAS Y ARCHIVO a"' .. ,:<' 7 $ 'l "? 6 s ,,. COORDINADOR DE ytJ<>I R<>1'P"HL ORGANTZACION ¡2u•t COORDll':ADOR DE ¡:¡¿¿ T oK l!oDAt(L'é>l- v¡q,.· ZfSS>3 !tS c • ., . .._. <'....,..j·' ECONOMIA <' ._,,,, DE (?.,,.,._ ¡..{o!:tr.1'.4 F-arrollo Alte"'3ÚllO • ~r SUl><"'\Udo I''" tas Nt.""ionet Ut11dal., son lntc.rloc:utor~.s \'ilídos: CARGO NOMBRE L E. FIRMA COORDINADOR i GENERAL 7(.1¿10 J..l -t;;u8f ,..,,,,. 'P~lomon~ J.. r. Al ~e H 91!1' COO PRENSA RDINADOR Y PROPAG DE . 4,,Tonio c~Jféñ•vr>•' ,)/JNÍ~Q t.1.lf' A~"7'TTI:f ?~ ·• r.,....n r..r" . COORDIN,..uur\. uc. DISCIPU"A • - .. r,~: ... ~n"TtJr,,o -4"~1l ~se_1no20 1~;- # .ar2;:Í'sgi A.¡tadeccré d:u íacilidadts. dt:l aM> a ¡_as pc-_r~nu an1es mcnoonadu. para tl buen de)Cmpe!Jo Oc sus funciona.. · 9', ,; F'EDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VAU..E DEL RIO AJ'URIMAC AYACUCHO Señor: Ingeniero ..-\Jbeno Fujímori Fujimori PRESrDESTE DE LA REPUBUCA Pr~"Ccto.PO EL DIALOCO Y V. PAZ: AGRI CULTORES COCAJ..EROS PWcio ck Gobicno - Plan de Amw \<'11 • '--t. CO!>llTE DE PRODUCJ'ORES DE • 1 !°#""..-~ "_""" - -""<&.,, 1 DISTRITO , µ¡.•¿t1NTA 1 PROVll'CIA ~_.N:'"A t REGIO~ ¿1~&11r~"1,IJ JA/'1AI INTERLOCU'TOR.ES YAUOOS P3la 1~ c!tttDS ck auilqJicr ;cuerdo sobre .Desarrollo Ahcmauw a !tres Vs.idos.: CIRCO NOMBRE LE. FIRMA g~~ADOR iforge A-8á7~":za ftzo>Y!:r?o'/" t'/ 4t1(: COORDP.-IADOR DE .o L ACTAS Y ARCHIVO 'J(),( tr ¡; O tt.rO<>Z'&I COORDINADOR DE t;.,vs.:5.5a71é"1Íei!: ~ :t>TSf; 'Y?&--&. _..,.,, ORGAN!ZAOON <)"" i'i~ COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG J? o. <ó's fi1'h- I 7 .J l i= '°"( $? ----== l ''ªª fu,,JI,, •• " ll< ... /,fue- ""ºS , .,,.,,P "'"' G ... ,e:, ..,.,, t-9 7? )??,( ,, COORDINAPOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG, ,. __ -·- " - .J.L:-- - -r - -;p.,. -1. ,. COORDINADOR DE OlSCIJ>UNA / - - . .. ... - • F ... ,,_ • - -- -· ... _;>,97 -.. Agradeceré dar fact1irlades del ct1.SO a hu personas :.i.nte¡ mcnc1o·nadas, para d buen descmpello de SU1 F•cha.Z.,0, &4. d¡/ftJ/ Coordinador de Aetas FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJADECOCA VALLE DEL RJOAPURJMAC AYi\CUCHO Señor: Ingeniero Alberto Fujlmori Fujímori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyu1o:POR EL DIALOGO y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS PabOo de. OOOterno • PI.u.a de Amw !hl Uma COMITEDEPRODUCTORESDE :1 C"'Strifflt,V/1 /.-C-oN j DISTRITO ; 1 /l&h tUJ7".it 1 PR,OVINCIA : 1 ¡'./(,tA N7"A 1 REOION : 1 - WÁ'1'J j INTERLOCL'l'ORES VALIDOS Para los efectos de cu;ilquk.f arucrdo sobtc. Desarrollo Altci:n::uivo a ser supervisado por las Unidas., son l.ntcrtoaaorcs Válidos: CARCO COORDINADOR GENERAL .N01\1 BR.e COORDINADOR DE , A<;T AS Y ARCHIVO t,fj7.¡1 L.E. FIRMA COORDINADOR DE • • ORGANlZACION /<.4.u.k,& ,¿ Ro1JH1".vin COORDINADOR DE , ECONOMlA ?",, ,j:>IE /(0[4.f 1/:Z>Y'l-2 'lS COORDINADOR DE • DEFENSA Ra ?,, /2o-vt:;e.o i5J.-r.l"l"PF COORDINADOR DE PRE.'ISA Y PROPAG. /.(l!JP.c.G.lo f;G .l.6 2 {t.NY O tNl>?i'i1SO COORDINADOR DE DISOPUNA Lt.rú o µtJ1l-C:f fltJ /C.DA ':2.S'i-OJ.// S> ,¡ g_- dar íadlidadcs del ca$O á las personas antes me.ncion:idas., para tl nuen dc:sempeflo de su.s funciones. ., et írtt1tttrtJ ' " " a[ >t,,() tÍe ¿ 9/ # ,. tu-S:: .!:.. •• 120 FEDE.RACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLE DELRlOAPURlMAC AYACUCHO Señor: lngenicro Albeno F\Jjimori F'ujimori PRESIDEITTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyecto:POR EL DL,U.OGOY LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS Ptiaciu de: • f'l.a.11. "= !la · LliM COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : - ¡Ir,;;, 1 DISTRf!O ; 1 //,,,.,,-¡,, 1 PROVINCIA : 1 /-l.v1tlf-/e 1 REGJON : 1 •. ,/ee• /,fa11" 1 íNTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS efectos Je eua1qu1er ;ii;t1erdo .sobre a $et' -supcrvC.Oldo poi Naci.Qnes Un'idas.. son Válidos.: C\RCO NOMBRE COORDINADOR Q.,,,,,. .. Q- GENERAL COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHlVO COOROIN . .\DOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR DE ¡11(,.,,., fl-4.... p,( • .,.., DISCIPUNA WL. FIRMA ·' '( "t. z..;_ t:f61t l D • du facilidades del caso a ·1as persona$ antel mendt>n3das, des::mpetio de sus funciones. •• ' . /9jJ <- FEOERACION OEPRODUCTOf:ES DE HOJADECOCA VAU..E DELRIOAPURIMAC AYACUCHO Senor : lngenicro Al ben o fujimori Fujimori l'RESIDa.rt"E DE LA R.EPUllUCA Proyecio:POR EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: AGRJCULTORES COCALEROS Pa.bcio de Gabictao · Plata de ArtllU Vri Lima REGION L'ITERLOCUTORES VAUDOS Para los de cualquier aclJerdo sobre Desarrollo Ahernaiivo a se.r supervisado por las N:1cloncs Unjdas1 son lntcrlocu1orcs Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE L.€. FIRMA COORDINADOR GE!iERAL .i<•I·· º COORDIN . .'\OOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHJVO 1' -· J2 t'&ft"ÍI' j:, .. !.t>J N COORDINADOR DE .. ªº ••·""'º ;¿3307'! ORGAN!ZACION COORDINADOR DE ECONOMlA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA ""'º"'º f'IJ>•f R i'>I'•¿ :¿.¡¡ /'( -1S COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG, COORDINADOR DE Jl&it.O DISCIPLINA 121 - R!O ... ;.-1..: .... ·.•:• - -:-.. • -<;;:t:... ': :·E.,_, .... : ... . ., • .:._, .!. -·-A -_::....-.:..S CGC.\L:--:i.:.$ .k - -¡'l.".J :A.n:-.:::-: n • •.,¡,..._ cr ... A.• í!: t:"- -i:.-v1 . -< ""'° A" J (} /:f. -- - JI/ta · -- ... /1t.11111tt> • J.f.111,,ta ¡,¿ ... ,"-1;if.:1l'J =- ;,:..L:D-'JS ;>¡¡._,: :.,,.,. "! : ........ ....; ... ·,.."!.,¡:er- _.""\!"<::.:'- ;c.: ·;: C-e..-• .. -u ... -, \(r ="\;;..:f·•r. .- -:tr ' : :! ::¡' :\. .. .; f'l!l\-h ....... r' .. C - r - - .... ...,, "'E '-<::;:7. --J1 - , •. :-;; @'.1 ·-- . ·· --- -- 1 .... • _ 1:C11Jt':.O!:'\l\iY:>R :.E J!Á'' .;c..- 1:,. u.U;J.s.111 , iitt,,,. :;¡-¿ - ... --- . ... - •J .. r .. :) -- R :.·, • ·' • ·' ••'·p ...,. \Óuofü o 1 _ OISClPLlJ"lA l"\01 ?.f.S t o p ;:2 (\fa.9.act\t -" S5-; JQ n1 b' Agradeceré d3r f3ctlidades del caso :i las personas anles mencionadas. pan el buen descmpebo de ius funclonet;:. : EDEil.AClON DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE.COCA V.U.U DEL RJOAPURIMAC ,..V/.ct.ICHO 5ct\or : ingeniero Alhi:no Fujimoñ Fujirnori PRESJDEi''TE DE LA REPUBU CA Proyec:.o:POi! EL DIALOGO Y l.A PAZ: ACR!Cut.TORZS COCALEllOS hbcodc Oobu:rno · d:: L.m.a COMITT DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 a-:r.¡,-,;¡fi:, q/f,,. #(.,,;;. 1 DISTRITO PROVINCIA REOlON . " _, ' 4oft.1tHta 1 : 1 /¡"" ,¡/,; 1 : 1 •&,.,f,,,n,,., w,,,. 1 l NTE.lU.OCUTOR!:S VAUDOS efeetcs dr a.cuerdo ¡ é/t11sp&" P,i.,a_ 29Z7-Sl>IZ'f- .-,,CTA.S • ./O C o COCRDl"SADOR DE ,AJ..lon "" e (Co fia..pum&\.. ?g ORG."1'/IZACION -i• CCCRDINADOR o:;: Ana ni&l :J Rwo.. ... Jo..} zo • CQ9!-i;>INADOR DE lonsÍan li>1o lftJ Í'2-'.):>,,,{o. c--ISA y PRO? AG. VI Ct or q lJ/5 )-"e 1.rzmci '? il9S. :i.HS -'j!!.'"r.:- COORDf'."ADOR Rwo... r o OISCrPLINA O .. ..,... A¡r:idcceré dar Ca:cihd-:tdes óe.1 c:.uo il hu pc::wna.s mencion1Jd3$, p3ra el buen de. sus funciones_ . ,,./,() ¿g 71 122 • Fr.DE;RACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJADECOCA VAU.E DEl.RlOAPURIMAC AYACUCHO Sci\or: l ngcnitro AJberto Fujisnc,ri Fujimori PRESIDEl'ifE DI! LA REPUBLICA Proyecto:POR El. DIAl..OGO \' LA AGRICULTORES COCAl..EROS hbcio de, (;c:ibfera.o- Pla.u de Atmn .- COMrrE DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 /1(l/J/b{4 /V PA T,LJ -A Ca/V - 1 DISTRITO , 'I /-(vAN-rA 1 PROVlNClA : 1 é(VA/'l'TA 1 REGION : 1 /,/¡5J:/17APr,/ft;5 I 1 INTERLOCUTORES VAi.iDOS Para IC\S e.ft:ct.OS de cualqu!et :tmserdo $0bte Oesat:rol1o Alternativo 1 .ser por lM ·Naciones Unjdas, son Vttidos; CARGO 1"0MBRE L.E. r1 RMA COORDINADOR ,$Y¡IWt1iPO flVAfl(,AN ¡fvJRS 2ss 123 •/:;" GENERAL ¡Y/ANvycc G. 2.-t'.5f.;li30 COORDINA!)(JR QEíeo.PofiO f/llAl'l/./1 Qv¡;,p¿: Qes-;o"'/ . • ORGANlZACION .- _,,/, / - "' COORDL'l,\DOR DE :r'Aut.1 IV O !?:t. E. ¿8::.-f/3 '('"/? 1 I;CONOMIA COORDINADOR DE /H3t; LA!f.})O tf l/l?AC.til f/. !(.,o 9C. f.;,-::,- DEFENSA COOROlNADOR DE ;A11v o , • - PRENSA YPRO PAG. f'l"r.11110 11 tJJr<> .,<. · COORDINADOR DE"ll¡:S¡JJé/(/0 A 2.8S(..J'(/0 DlSCIPUNA ..Y Agradece:r6 d3r facil\d50:S COORDINADOR DE , / J 1 DEFENS,\ r: r.;..smc VtfdJ!/"'I!. /fOr,; ru :urt99 ' COORDINADOR DE • , / , PRENSA Y PROPAG. p, ""' <'di!S tl°J"";J'"' 2 'ii'S6 COOR.DINAOOR DE , DISCIPLINA .J.,;;.-o tJ..-e _>.,,,,e/..e3 /95'/SgS''Y Ag.radeccr6 dar fac.Hidadc5 del C21$0 'l 13.5 personas mues mencionarlas, para e1 buen de.scmpeflo de sus fundones. .. J :;; '.i 'd,·o /9 91 G:I 123 FF.OERA CION OE PROOUCTO RESOI; HOJADECOCA VALU'. D EL RIO AP U RIMAC AYA C U C HO Sc-ñor: Ingeniero Alt>erto Fujimori FuJimori PRESIDEITTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyeno:POR EL OIALO CO V l-\ PAZ: AGRICULTO RES COCALE ROS P:t.Ucio de O obitN"lO de A.rmu $/n • Umt COMffE DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 /'l•f.;cono - /l con ==i DISTRITO ; 1 fl u•n T. - J PROVINCIA : l >/, • ., f:a 1 .REGIO?"to' · J - I I - vi:-11T; J L"TERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Para los efectos de c:ualquitr acuerdo sobre Desarrollo Ahcrnativo a s.cr supc1Visatlo por J35 U n•das.. son lntcrlOC\.ltores VáUdos: CA RGO NOMBRE L..E. FIRMA ,._ COORDíNADOR GEl'IERAL H •• t .. f.oeh.o tJHJ,,. z'32'1-9903 COORDINADOR DE _ ACTAS Y ARCHIVO / flo Sd/u.1J-r • I IÍc.c.do i8-J,3J.C8t:J COORDINADOR DE ,.- • . "" Co..r.tJ.J"'C COORD!l'IADOR DE ECONOMIA <:;«•••DO 23'TO '113/ :iJw# COORDTNADOR DE - ,... DEFENSA co-<>UO 1'11/iJ,;,.._,¡ '-;j t-r '11/ COORDINADOR DE PRENS1-\ Y PROPAG. M¡1cr,.,.,: t;;t..wUt'ln r,·e.a;JA .ilJ 31 f: :i .i.o COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA =-"'' º' '2 KSIJ Ag:radeoert üa.r raclUdades de.1 caso a la.s personas antes parll el buen des.empefta de .,/.o J, J99 .J ,- )> {'" •• ' ' .?' :.:. . ! • DEPllOIJ UC- 1 Vil.ES lJE l·IOJi' DE COCA VALLE DEL RIO Al'URIMAC .\YACl!CllO Se:lsot: lnge.niero ,\lbeno f ujiw.ori Fujimorl l'Re5rDEl'N - - -1 DISTRITO :j ;!vAtrf'A l PROVl:VCL\ : 1 ¡./t//l!'ITll 1 RFGIO'< :j -UIAl"(J 1 U\"TERLOCUTORES VALIDOS P¡¡ra los-eJc,aos de cualquier ac;ucrdo sobre. Dcsa.rroUoAltcrnati\'o a )CC suoetvisadd por lJntdu, son lntcr1oc.J.tores CARGO NOMBRE LE. FJR,\IA COORDr."ADOR c )l'l/JtvJJa l./l!V/;A G . .23:2..'.f.2.//l:J ¿,,- 4 GENERAL COORDL"ADOR DE .]) ,-,:;,v ICI o '" () IVí es li. <'-8 ¿ 8 13 ACTAS Y A.RCHrVO ' ' f'/ ( ' ( l'\"i ... DORQE c. 2 li' O RGt\NlZACION COORDINADO RDE J vl/o GAV/LA N Sll<'..Cfl 2.112.Ffofl?O ECONOMIA · - ... COORDINADOR DE .S/Nl=O Ji'IANo Pt:/?'ES (é;, 2..ll 2.} ':7-8 DEFENSA ' \f'. COORDINADOR DE ÍIJ I c. A o !'? J>lF /..A e lt IJ i:: 2. 8 2.8' /') 'l 00 9:l1Jt.,,, J'RENSA Y PROP .. G. COORDINADOR DE Ll N.j) t¡ ¡. t'? A U J O l , DISCIPLrNA ,- 2.l..' o 3 º· d:\r d-e:l cxo a l3S penon&S antes p:ir¡¡ el buen des-em;x.fio de St!S fundones. l :!..,;;) - CJ ' _,... p Ftcba ,- -':? · _ _=:;;.o Coordin ador de Aclas c./ 124 FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJADECOCA VALLE D&l.RJO Al'URlMAC AYACUCHO Seaor: logeniero Albeno Fujimori Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Ptoyec1o:POR EL. DIALOGO V L.A PAZ: AGRlCUL. TO RES COCAl..EROS PaJscio de Oobicrno • PW;a de Arm.u J,/n • Uma REGION 11'TERL.OCUTORES VAUDOS P3r3 los cíec1os de cualquier ocuerdo sobre l'\ltcm:1ti\'O a ser .supervilldo por t:.u N:icione.s Unidas, son lntc:rloo.11orcs V1Hdos; CARGO NOMBRE L.E. FIRMA /9Ps-;f!$S d GENERAL. COORDINADOR DE v 1 · ,,.-. · r. . . yaa:..- ACTAS y ARCHNO ., ot..v;i V"'-'"'uc.ü f4'L'I <"e 6 2 ,,...,,._ -· COORDINADOR DE,/ .. -,,."' / ,, I ORGAN!ZACION /.Y.a.e-'...,. r-f• ' COORDINADOR DE / • -O 1. .1. ECON'OMIA ,.-......_,.. '"' º' H #./!!!' . COORDINADOR DE ),,,,.,,,,.to i,,,,"'° DEFENSA r COORDINADOR OE ot!... PRENSA Y PROPAG. r 7 .it, .J-L.... COORDINADOR DE C2k 'fJ,./.,,....,,,, Q..,M,,J DISCll'UNA -' tJ <> • '--.l-..c t1 TS-T fT/.-.<é'/.uvJ '. :> Agn1dcccr6 (lar faciltdades del caso a las penonns antes mencionadas, pa'I-a el buen dcsempeJ\o de sus funciones. Ftch2 •. ?O - .. rEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VAl..l.E DELRIOAPURIMAC AYACUCHO s.:nor : lngcnicro r\Jheno Fujímori Fujimori PRESIUENTE DE LA REPlJBUCA Proyecto: POR EL DIALOGO Yl..A PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS Ps.boo ck Cobierts0 - P\5n de Armu • Lima REGION ll'ffF.RL.OCUTORES VALIDOS P3ra los efectos de cualquier acuerdo sobre OesarroUo Alt.crn3.tivo a ser iupervlsado por tas Nad.ones Unidas, son tnter1ocutores Válidos: CARGO COORDINADOR GENERAL COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDINADOR DE ORGAl'lll.ACION l'(OMBRE L.E. --6' trm ;, (1!. !U ri.l t/ó6 -1 ' ,t:'fe;tt?• ·(;,,,.,o <' J-w1¡c »'fi!-:/,z:&- i'"!CJtltc:t J ft •72_ COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA /?, COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA ql/."?-1tYri .Q COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. -;;f;,,_,/,x_ ?Qof_r_i__r;/, C"- .q !? .f!_,J;¡ v ·¡ COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA 12 ,M • Agr&di:.cer-é oar facilidad($ del c;tSO a tas personas antes mcocionad;u,. para el bu.en desempeño de sus funciones. •• • _ Fcch11: 2 6 - 9 i j?,$í • • r-1 "' \ =- .... '§: l! ' · ·.t• OS Para las eíenos de cuaJq,u1e.t acuerdo M>bre. Oewrollo A.ltcrnaU\l'O 1 s.tr l.Upervtsada por lu t'~cione< Unidas. son 1ntcr1ocutore1 V41idns: CARGO COORDINADOR GENERAL 1'0MBRE COORDINADOR DE&; I . '· / ACf AS Y ARCHIVO "l'l... • ''"·"'o IS>¡, . COOROIN."DOR DE ORGAfllZACION ¡?, t..E. FIRMA t. E.z.e"ut> COORDINADOR DE ECO? , .... ~ ~ COORDINADOR DEl'ENSA DE • ,,¿_,. '7;,t' f I rz•5nQJ ~"J / ._¿ ~ f',.~ COORDINADOR DE -r; ,,.,,~ ,.,,;J· fúM6c' 21&9tj!r~ ti PRENSA Y PROPAC.-• .!'Or • . -" ;. COORDINADOR DE ;;t.., ?~ -f. DISCIPLINA L" .! Pnr;11 ;b?~~ ~ Agnukc<:rt dar íaalida' '" ••211 GnxtJcl' t 8 S'r V'I r.l COORDINADOR DE . •,p § S PRENSA Y PROPAG. G«a,u10 i/6•«"""' ,RvR 2.8 2f 7 !j' COORDINADOR DE D ISCIPLINA i..\l"it .Dr·'1t ,,.._,.,,,¡¡ "' buen FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJADECOCA VALLEDELRIOAPURIMAC AYACUCHO Scnor : lasemcro Albeno Fujimori Fujirnori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA l'rO)lecoJj'tfS ¡,(/,1)19 ¡ j ll"TERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Pttr-a c ícao .-. de cualquier ;s.ah:rdo r\licnuUJ\IO ll po1 135 Nacloncs Unidas.. son lnterloc:utores Validos: CARGO COORDINADOR O EN ERAL vi NOMBRE L.E. FIRMA 'MIP'.:!. 1'.r:_ "!• C'OORDINADOR DE '/, ' _ • , ORGANlL,CION 10 ¡fa 11 /e.,,,,¡ l/11 Y.f!' "'" ,,?"fl:F V p C'OORDlNADOR DE , _ - #, ECONOMIA ffeR/,1.z'1 N t) COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA f 52 $ ;/ r o 1 ""'' Llar facilidadct del ca«J il las personas !lntcs mencionad&S, _p11ra el buen dc.scrnpeño de sus funciones.. . ;.o ¡991 " , 127 fEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLE DEL RJOAPURfMAC ,-YA.CUCHO S<ñó.r: Lngeniero AlbeMn Fujimnri Fuj'imnri PRESlDE/'.TE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyccto:POR EL DIALOCO V LA PAZ:.-CRJCOLTORES COCALEROS hbd.> de- GohlN COORDINADOR DE ORGA.NlZACION Mo IU)$5,.S z.r.r-6 p f'C:c> COORDINADOR DE N-tJ!IO <>A-/'7,,,_,0 ECONOMIA 11v1rp5 Z.J'S'r.Sc/'7 y COORD WC-;TJ¡L INADOR DE DEFENSA Ot>/.// A./t;v¿z Zj 'f'S /6// COORDINADOR DE - G/Q PRENSA y PROPAG. ""-t:.fl"'<> ¡; vr1eu:in COORDINADOR DE flop,116//r: Z DISCfPUNA PIZ./:' :S.ff ¿¿ .rr: .:";.ft .... Agtil4eccré I ..... .. - - < ,/) ciner-;;¡] FEDERACION DE PRODUCTOR.ES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLE ,\YACUCHO Señor : lngcoicro A!Ocno Fujimori Fujlmori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyecto:POR EL DI.ALOCO YLA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS Palado de: Cobkma - Pl.121. de Amw .s..in - Lima REClON fNTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Para los electos de cualquier acuerdo sobre Desarrollo Ahcrn:uívo a Sér supervisado por la\ Na(.ionct Unido.s. $0n Interlocutores Válidos: CARCO NOMBRE l-E. COORDINADOR GENERAL fl.i? ¿ .,,"".*3& 7J OtJ COOROINAOORDE . ACTAS Y ARCHJVO ;70 M ...... ¿-.>7.'< • COORDINADOR DE CJ,,> , ORGANlZAOON J../cJ COORDfNADOR DE :._ ECOl'\OMlA t . 1• ?t#ll't - COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE ,-r,,µ;¡-... •o;; • · _,,..,...,.e\?,:--¡![., ••. :., v'--,....,. "'.P-'- li H 9,J'-'J: .......,.,. PRE-NSr\ Y PROPAO • .- , • _,. .,,. ,.10 .. •.,. ¡;.., ..... CQOPJ)lNAOOR DE :::::::::__ 7 /,- DJSCIPUNA fl! t< fr--;'rn ltll Ahrm:utvo a ~f (U~rvit.ado p.11" lm Naciones Unidas. son lrucrloanorc.s lid CARCO COORDINADOR GEl"ERAL COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHlVO COORDINADOR DE ORGANIZACION COORDrNADOR DE ECONOMIA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. COOR0 11'1AOOR OE OISCIPU1' .. NOMBRt L.E. FlRMA S:,,. t.. i-1~~'}.Z_sf_ : .2 """=--"" e ~~__.,.,, '!.._!? ~ b oDU ~nies mcnc¡onadu, para et buen dcs ~fw> de Qll funóones.. .• Ec - , ..!.-- -;¡ '-· 7Enenl FEDF.RACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJADECOCA .U.U: DEL RIO Al'UIUMAC AYACUCHO Señor : Ingeniero . .\lbcno Fujimori Fujimon PRESIOE.\.TE DE LA REPVBUCA PrO)eru>:POR F.J.. DIALOGO Y IA PAZ.: AC RIC""IJl .TORF..S COCAl.EROS P'.tacio de CobicraO - P1aa de Anaa$ 1111 - Luu COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : fios A iT I o - A c." (V 1 DlrrRITO • 1 /iV,elNT.4 1 PROVL'ICIA : 1 # 1/"' 'V 7" -4 1 REGION • ,?¡4,:¡0 r~ ;?.,._,·r, __ i,:l~ ~' ,_~ ::-J:~V ~~ •.J t;. ~-~ COORDINADOR DE DJSCIPUNA. Jc"r.._~,~:;, l/e,.!S LIÍ :.!J,q .a.~e.) .,, A¡radeccrl dar faaljdadc.s del cuo 1 tu pe:rsonas an1CJ mcncaoo~ p1ra et bdcn de.scmpePo de sus fum:1on:i.. • ..., _ 1 _ / 11 Fodta .;:_o ~ 19 :JI .,_,¿ ual loador d~ A.du 129 FED&JV.CION DE PRODUCTOR.ES DE HOJA DE COCA VAU...EDEl. RlOAPURIMAC AYACUCHO S.aor : ln¡orucro Albeno F\Jjimori Ftijimori PRESTOENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyc<1o:POK El.. DlALOCO Y U PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCA u.RO~ p..._ d< Goboe""' • PlaD d< ....... JI• • u... COMrTEDEPRODt;CTORESDE: /1~'1l~E'11f/&& - ,IJC&N DlSTRITO PROVL'IC!A RECIO)' )-/f,IA ,,, .,..A L.tr;_é'1.,,..A~'1~$_ ~;fl lSTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS ] 1 Par• los efeaos de cualqwcr =•rdo sobre De>111TOU0 AhcmJ1uvo • ser ;ADO l7..AC'-1 0N R DE ~{·A, >h.....tr,,,. t.:'o;¿, c r• /&' Jp.,,.;r.l'p:);"' ~ ~ COORDINADOR DE ¡;.),, • ECONOMlA ";° cuct/11'"'2 ... J,,1 L'+r1[..,. t f 131Soaq'9~ COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA di. I~ T:" A. .. ,<;. ,i._ L I t 'flfl,o\OOR DE PRE:-ISA V PROPAC. R.U;Or; !LUUIU:Z COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA ONO?ll!: CllES!'O SAllCHS: ~82805 F1K.\t\ 'ré' AgnU> funoon<>. _ ¡ . Jv...f. Foc b~ b ~ ::><' "-<> of.t l 1 ¡ I 130 FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJ A. DECC>C,\ VA.LLF: DEL RIO APURJMAC AYi\CUCHO Scnor￾logVBUCA Proyeno:l'OR EL DIALOGO Y LA PA7, AGR1CULTORES COCALEROS PaUcio de Oohicmo · Plm de: Armu llft . l..i.m.1 REO ION INTERLOCl-"fORES VALI DOS Para los cic<:ros de cualquier ac::uerdo sobre Desarrollo A!tcrnaUv·o 1 .ser supervisudo por las '...' 1aciones son lnledoauore.s V!lidos: C\RGO NOMBRE LE. t1RMA <;QORDINAOOK GEKE.RAL - ,_ ·· COORDINADOR DE f' ACTAS Y A.RCHIVO -;¡ COORDINA[)OR ne ' ' . ---- ORGANlZACION (,.,.,, ,,,, -r,·/¡• ;.4i _,_ ;2.,, 1 ¡-/;¡; > Jlf"1"f>.c. , COORDINADOR DE n tª > /ze￾ECONOMIA &rtlnd.fj., Gctllle( C:F ¿¡'/ c.:11e ,·;q;; .-; .. r '« l'lt COORJ?INADOR DE r" ¡ ;:¿ (}; t>E.Ft.."'iS..... l 1Lt.hr l?1 11./ V"1-tJ 23:?-J COORDIJ'ADORDE ,.....-¡¡. 7 ' n1 PRENSA Y PROPAG. /J,, e_.,.¡,_, ¡ )...._ L_L,u_¿illP' COORDIN.'\OOR DE • • •1 /// • {/ Í · DISCIPLINA . t.hu facf1id:idt$ del as.o a 1:ts personas antes m,enciQn<'ldU. pilr.l el buen desempeño de sus-íuncionM. r .... Q / ITDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VAU.EOELRIOAPURIMAC .\ YACUCllO seaor • r0geniero Albeno Fujünori Fujimori PRESIDE?>'TE DE t;,\ RE.PUBLICA Proyeeto:POR EL 01¡\LOCO Y U PAZ: AGRICUl.. TO RES COCM-EROS P.U.cia Je Gobil.:mo • M;u.s de Anp:..s $/D • Limo. PROVINCIA REGIOt-1 IN'rERLOCUTORES VAL.IDOS rartt los cfectO! Je cualquier acuerdo sobre OcW1tro1Jo a lC-r superv.wtdo l3$ Nat:ionts Unid:u. son hucrloanores ViU.ido$: CAACO NOMBRE cooRD11-1ADOR etí'.'9vJ,. ,,,,,,.,.,,,,,,º,,, ,., . GENERAL L..E. FIRMA 776f21 ?&, COORDINADOR DE F.J.'A""'s ACTAS Y AA CHIVO =e:::;='=· COORDfN.';DQR DE • ORGANlZACJON ,/,_l, z tlar-f3cifidades de1 caso o las personas anees mcncion:idas. para 111 buen dckmpeflo de sus fuucioncs.. ">'! 131 FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLEDELRIOAJ'URIMAC AYACUCHO Schor: Ingeniero Alberto Fujimori Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE IJ\ REPUBIJCA Proyccto:POR EL DIALOCO y L\ PAZ:ACRICULTORES COCALEROS de Gobi.t-l'TIO · Pltzl de Annu i/n ·Lima COMITE DE PRODUCíORES DE ; 1 ¡;•"'"º' ¡;,"-E> - ""'º" 1 DISTRITO : J H•1>,rr11 1 PROVINCIA REGION : 1 Hm;"" 11 J : 1 -• .. • ....,.r,'fl'tJ' 1 INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Pan tos c.(e1;1os de aialquicr acuerdo sobre Desarrollo A.hcrnaúvo -a ser supervisado por las Naciol\Cs UnidaS,$On tnterlocutorcs Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE LE. FIR.l\1A COORDINADOR GENERAL COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COOROIJ.IADOR Of. ORGANIZACION COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA ,., .. flC'j rJ ,., t:.1; J'.J-$ •• ,..,.,,µª rliDtr!60 .J'u¿,A,.1 i/.M1Jf'H ¡,z ""' /llJc'IJ •o ... h "0$3 F'EDERACIOl'I DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA V AlJ..E DEL RJO AJ>URJMAC A\'ACOCHO Señor : Ingeniero Fujimori Fujlmori PRESIDENTE DE LA REl'UBUCA Prormo:POR EL DI ALOCO Y U PAZ: ACRJCUL TO RES COCALEROS ck Gob"kmo • rb.t-a ik Anna l/11 • Uwa COMITE DE PRODUCT'ORES DE : 1 c,xoa .• r .. 07,c 6'{) .. - 1 Ol!>ffiITO PROVINCIA REGION ; 1 ,,,,,,,..,,.,;;, 1 : ¡ ,,,,,,,,_,.,r,., l : 1 ,¿,,¡f!GH;°AAbJll¡:S J.VAR' 1 INTERLOCUTORES VALJOOS P::r.ra los cie.ctos de cualqo1er acuerdo sobre Ocsan·olfo Alttrnath·'O a ser supen•isado por las t\'3cioncs IJnidas, .son lntc;rloeu1ores V4Udos; C\RCO L E. FIRMA COORDINADOR f PV"'"" FI W/J(A y,p#vu r!Ff• 1ns r-:::::::t5 GENERAL COOJlOíNAOOR DE 7 .>31 V ;);!. / .<\CTAS Y ARCHJVO ' ·"· 1,, COORDINADOR DE I I / OROAN12AOON /l 111:..s$/;!tiw"-"'w 1E 2 .. COORDINADOR DE " . --- ECONOMIA 0 · .11 .. <"?"'71 d -lfrl .. ,.. COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA ........ e . - 1.f ."(j ' }!Á,r-,u .. I COORDTNADOR DE 4PMll,, e o, c;¡;,¡;11 1?•3"'> PRENSA Y PROPAO. COORDINADOR DE ,..1 M . J DTSCIPUNA P-o-,.-.r<.,·-> .. ,o,r->· l !' Agra:dc.cere dar fr.cilidadc.s del C'UO a person3s antes mencionada$. - pan el bueo de sus runáone$. .. -l') - 3 / COORDfNAOOR.DE ,/'.¡/J.f-r,,v.JN() ACTAS Y ARCHIVO G-,.1_ !J._'T) COORDINADOR DE """''"'' "".J""S .,_,,,,,,r?:- :i&J' •JI'{ ORGANIZAOON - COORDlK.\DOR DE ,léONC/'O l JtJl'l6A H· .Z&S63003-l:4· 1--:-- k__¡¡' ECONOMIA DE 0.5\lf•!..'.Po plislie s LV/\I ASC.o 2.Jj )_ 8 - ' 1' 'I; -;: COORD .... Mno ..... INADOR DE Uift..IP.kl PA,-.,._..,, .. u .., r· ..c...-o'-' , "" - ' _, PR.E.'1SA Y PROPAG. u.'-" ESPl,.AL P•"1••"4 DISCJPUNA ¡..- ' Agradecere tJ3r facilidades dc:l caso -a las personas a11ECS mencionadas. p:lta el burn dcstmpci\o de. sus: funcione&-. "2LJ-D7- ;1/ ..__ fEDERACIONDEPROOUCTORESDK HOJA DE COCA VALLEDELRIOAPURJMAC AYACUCHO Señor : lnjcniero AJbeno Fujin\Ori Fujin1uri PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUC'\ Proyeao:POI! EL DIALOGO y L\ PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCAU:ROS P.U:.cio de Gobk:nto • PbQ ck Amult -Nn • Uuu REO TON INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Pa."'tt los efectos de cualquier M>bte Dtsanollo Alternativo a ser supcrvbudo por tas Nacio.ne:,. lÍnl/P/P 6J¡IAN$>p 8 . .2-828/<19S PIRMA COORDINAOORDE .j.,.J/10 0 .SEJO (} 2,$.2.g ORGANIZACION ' COORDINADOR DE f>"¡f'.NO'"l L . i..9.'l.$ 1JS;t{, , ECONOMIA , . COORDll'IADOR DE 1'1 A"º e.u f\o loltRE DEFENSA e,., '- ,.. , . COORDINADOR DE GD PRENSAYPROPAG. Í· COORDl"l'/ADORDE;l.é'JAN.>l?o <;&11 1spe L. 2.8 2-/ftJ3 DISOPl.lNA r Agr3deccré úar facilidades del coso a las personas :!ntes n1encionadas. para et buen d6e:mpcño de 5US funciones. 1 /] . _ d.t, rttha t:U- 1 9/ ,;;; .. --Gííllll: FEl)ERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLE DEL RIOAPURIMAC AYACUCHO Seftor: Ingeniero Alhc110 Fujimorl Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE L .. REPUBUCA Proyecto:POR EL DIALOGO Y L\ PAZ: AGRJCULTORES COCALEROS PalJicio de Gobierno ._ Pbn d: ArmU sin · Llrnl R EGIO!< INTERLOCUTOR.ES YAl-1005 Para los efectos de C\lnlq:uicr acuerdo sobre Oes.arroHo Alternati"'o a $er S"U¡>ef'\li.so.do por las Unidas. son lntc:rlO<'Utor"Cs VáUdos; CARGO LE. FIRMA COORDINADOR - 1. ./ GENERAL Ftc..vs 'JZ&l 9Ui ---::::-:- (:. -:?t:..• r /-1 :3:'=<í-- COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO f/u/\11n ... r . .,_ COORDINADOR DE . ¡ 1 1 ORGANIZACJON V/1¡¿ ,.,1,.., !lvAN Alo 1 7'7Cól9 , ,g_?cCJ COORDINADOR DE J ECONOMlA J'.ltt:rl'\,.-01\v t:'v »rk o "l.11 ?Z o 1 l ·I COORDINADOR DE + ? OE.fENSA 'P.iul<> A•rl' .;;- .:0:·=4 ::;:, COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG, H;1 y//ur. COORDINADOR DE /. ¡ J DISCIPLINA f f1; · ll "':: <,e>"° T 2 i < 8 2 6 d;,.7;$:-,...._ tii;. Agndt.ceri dar fadUdadcs del caso 3 las per,SQrt8$ 1.n1es mencionadas. para c1 buen dcscnipcílo de S:u5 in"1~tiES -UlA.f, U-'TERLOCUTORES Y\UDOS PtR l"'s dtctos de C1.1alqufacr aiCJcrdtt Ylbrc Dt-llnOJo Alte:roativo 1 c.cr ~upef'\":ioldc> por bs ~3cionts línidai.-son f f'¡1~rlOC\.lt().""C.S VflidM: C.\RCO :>O~IBRE L.& l IR\H • ' COORD!NADOR.JoflG"/i ¡J¡¿4,.;t> 7. 2'°82.81/f~~ •r'.;.J.~ CENER.AL ~,- COORDL'(o\DOR DE-O l" ., 1...-;-I ACTASYARCHlVO ~ift' ()v,qf'I)() ..... e.~ 29 211.S' ji:.,"'tt coo ORGAMR01NAD01tllEE ZAOON L01 J.¡:¡,o,q Ce. 2.l!Joo8"1-3 ~~J.:' - - COOROmADOROE V!Ct;NTE fJlll>rJj)o).. ' 2-J-<-831'> 11/ ECO'IOMIA ~~s~ORDE,4 léJ4f'J.ilRo 011>11/'YCo 2~2.'i.J..106 c.ilj C:OORD!l'ADOR DE ~~¡,., rRE.'~~ ••:: a~o. ª" r:; 'Jft~::tar/"' ~~,,.s_...J !tC~i..1,_ e~ ~....e--~d"' rt ~. DISTRITO /-1 V ,o IV r ,A • PROVIJf7 ll'TERLOCl,'TORI:S VAl..IOOS Para. los efectos de cv.llqu1u ~c:nSo s.o-htr Dea1rot1" .\ltcm~u"o a !t-CC '1.lpcr,,.f-~ ~r lis J'aóout) l,;:tidas., '°º loier1ocutocci \lilidos CARGO NOMBRE L.E. nR\l\ g<§~~DO R7¡;:;~oii¡ c!j'Vl§PG ¿¿>2g~~ I COORD~"ADOR DE.JvL ¡;¡¡.¡ ~vz. C 2..0':¡.0Jll...- · ,' ,.<.~_,, ACTAS Y \RCHIVO / ' -> 9 •/o, ~ COORDINADOR OE .P /f. 2 f " -,,.._ , " . ; ~l • OROAML\CJON {()llf'IL o PoJ.Qllt:o • S-n r" • / Lo ;,, .,~ COORDINADOR DE .,._l>N•Clo ''v-"lf'l "N _¡') '-:f<2o>~o· ECONOMIA ye / l"f " ~ • • r »-> COORDINADORDEJ,"'S DEFENSA / l11'1AQv1sp¿.- /7 LI, .,2.8-<.~ooob COORDfNADOR DE t.'- PRENSA Y rROPAO. J tJSG¿#.70 VAt.t:=NCIA n. J.l!/2.8~:}(, COORDINADOR DEJ/~'i1.])Ft.A Ctor{ETS íVJ11í:I INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS ~tos efteOi de cu'lk¡Wer arucrdo sobre OcurraUo Aht:mam·o a 4er "upt:rvfsadc por las Naciooci \,;nidas.. son Interlocutores V~idos: CARGO l1,~I COORDINADO ~A~)lfl ~A~ R DE_ _Jvll __AN __Vllll'N__CO _ ________ A 2..8;¿K3s¿¡(, ~ (J..~ __ .._ - I COORDINADOR DE ¡:¿¡c,e11 soro (XVljl'é ,,,g .. +¡ s el/ ~ /~;,,. ECONOMlA ,c. .--.....u•t.>f~C COORDll'ADORDé ¡¡pN o /Y/17"0 M[;NJ)o • A !J..82. '+ /1102 .(' OEF&'iSA r ' - 1.-H-J COORDDIAt>ORDE ¡t1A.l'IMP f2v1!.PE F. 2. 'il SIÍ':fS.31 PRL'ISA Y PROPAG. COORDI:-IADORDE TFP FANcS V/VAN Co 23k83lf3), DISClPUNA • A¡rade«.re. d:a:- ra.cilidXt.s: dc.I auo • tu pcnon.u .l.fUU rreocionac13S. p.ira el :iueu dCKr.:ipcbo ck SUS foQODU. >i Ft, '- A.N C. o )f. 285 !f /'/SS ORCANlZAOON COORDINADOR DE Cll->'-""'" fJllAfflAN P. Z,8.&8;ió';Jlf ;;;..L ECONOMIA - e""''- COORDINADOR DE.J l'flf"At:-H I .t . .:¿.(1.2..8/1//,- DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE r 0 3;¿ 8 () / :/,) PRENSA Y PROPAG. fV I C CI l A S L l A N ro)' '-" · "" COORDINADO R DE RAYPfl'NJ)o o 2. 8.2.8 tZJ-irr, ,.,,., ' Agradec:crt tlar f3ciUdades. Qel caro a 1M personas antes mcncíon11das,. para el buen de.sempefl.o de sus (unciones. oecha µ ¡;b .:;Í.(f.J' ,?/ .. ...... p al'.Jor de Act.a.s FEDERACION DE PRODUC'l'ORESDE HOJA DE COCA VA.U.E DEI. RlO AYACUCHO Sc.áor : Alht-no Fujinmri Fujlmori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyecto:rOR El. DIALOGO y u. PAZ: ACRJCOL TO RES COCALEROS rlbtiu de Gobicmo · Plan de Armu J/n üuu COMITEDEPRODUCTORESDE :1 Pt,t¿rTO - CH<0v,.,,,,<-;ADOR DE . 1 ORGAMZACION f.,,cJ;,,.., 0 Cur• ..P,,,,.,. 'r'' · e e COORDINADOR DE ECONOMl ... "\ F/(1-...,-.y¡,. ¡;>ÍiN.tt! llv.c.tlk. % COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA u,a Ltt• ") .i 2-;t .lll, # COORDINADOR Dé PRENSA Y PROPAG. 1, .;11.,._r Cº'"' LJ! :t-t" 'l U.fl 7 ; , & ..... COORDl.NADOR Dé ro /"J • • DISCIPLINA aa .... k , C o ... c ri'" 1 ' Agr;adcc.cré das: facilidad.es del auo las personas un.tes para: eJ buen des<.mpt:rto de sus iunc:iones. " Pocha "'• ,./, /" lw /. /f'V I • 137 íEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJADECOCA VALLE DEL RIO APURIMAC AYACUCHO Señor : lngcnicro AIN:.no Fujimon Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE !A REPUBU CA Proyecto;POR EL DIALOGO YLA PAZ: AGRICULTOR.ES COCAUROS Pa.laoo de OobK:rno • Plu;a de. Annuñ · Uma COMITEDE PRODUcroRESDE '! 'Pr n i. """'14 • 3 >" nha.<1-r4! DISTRITO PROVlNCIA REGION 1 NTERLOCU'fO RF.5 V ALI DOS Para los efectos de cualquier a-cuerdo $Obre . .\l1em.atFvo a s-er supervisado pur- las Naciones Unidas, -son fnicrlOcutorcs CARGO NOMBRE L.E. FlRMA COOROJNA.DO'R A'J:Jl Ll?TZ 1:.:l::SS GEl'ERAL COORDINADOR DE ,·..-•- .. , . _, . . - : - ;;;>;;/' ACTAS Y AR.CHIVO 1.: . .. r COORDINADOR DE QRGAN14ACl01" .u.r...:;¡¡o ;;.;u,;03 0584:!916 . COORDINADOR DE ?iJ:.::.L'l?:l aoJA3 o¡¡:; ECONOM!.A COORDINAOOR DE !'::])!!O LO!';:; ;;arAJ»L DEFENSA COORDLN.ADQR UE -- PRENSA y PROPAG •• ;C':'OR UPA 1a5.;.;;no. , COORDINADOR DE '.1111,0GlO "llU::VZVA P.;U:,;¡¡ Z35i2S24¿i' .DISCI PUNA " ' . _ Ag.radecerC dar faei1idade-s de:l caso l:t.S persona\ antes mencionadas. e1 buen de sus funciones. ,- r ladHd4des del caso a las personas ant .. m•o«ooadas, pera el hucn dcsc:mpctla funoooes. ... ci JtJ.t"W / 99/ 138 FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLEDELRJOAPURJMAC AYACUCHO Scftor: lngtn1cro J\Jboerto Fujirr.ori Fujimpri PRESLDE"'TE DE LA REPUBUCA Prorecto:POR EL DIALOGO y lA l'AZ:ACRICULTORES CUCAL.EKOS P~dc.Gobttmo- Pb.za de: Ar.ns s,.a- · Liaa CO~rrEDEPRODUCTORE.SDE: ,112.r(}v"''" - 0·1)"'"""""'"'" DISTRITO : SA,.,r, •• "'"'"'º - - PROVL"CIA : L!".,,,.,.,7,. REGIO!" : j ,l •~F4TA.0#1n ,,,_,,._,,/ ! ll'iTDU.OCUTORES VALIDOS P:ira los cfcct01 de cualquier :icue.rdo sobre Des.arrollo AJtcm.:au\.o 3 kt $Upenuado por las '\;scion~ Unidas. son lnter!oauores Válidos~ CARGO NOMBRS L.E. FlRMA COOROll'IADOR ""' i .-..-~Pe,.,Rs ~,,,,,. ~&~,, c- --;;.n us; tt .}¡/ / GE..~ERAL < ,_¿_ COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO l:A,i! ¿os. /YllL>f ~,J.fe'i<~ J!J~l1!_efei 1?l]'dl)¡a_ --""~.!!_ Ag.radeo=r~ dar f-aa1idades del C3$0 a J35 persona.¡ an1e1 me:ncion:tdU. pan el bUcn de..se.mpcft.o de $tt$ íunoones.. ., ~ FEDERACI0:-1 DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLE DELRIOAPURIMAC AYACUCHO Señor: Ingeniero Alberto Fujimorl Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyect0:l'OR EL DIALOCO Y LA PAZ:ACRICULTORES COCU.EROS P..bcio de~· Pt.&r.a de Armu ~" · Lacu COMrTE DE PRODUCTORES DE : ·r,N•W lllf"A • .:1or , l""•t'.01 • DISTRITO S..i , .. •r•4&.&'-• PROVINCIA REG!O!'I : 1 1 ! 1 ! i,,.. # p!"• f'.# .., • "'> ,,.l)n,.( I lNTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS P;¡ra. 1os t:ftetos de cualqi.lic r :.cuerdo iobre Oc~rrollo Alternativo a ser 'ºf>C"'i·•.ado por W ~:a-clones Unid~ son lntcr1ocutores Vilidc>s; CAACO NOMBRE L.E. HR~IA -~ COORDINADOR J.,,,,.~ e GENERAL . ... .... . c.• •·/111 tllt , ~--.? COORDr.-iAOORDE I' • • •k ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDlNAOOR DE .,. .• , .: ORGANIZACION COOROl:-IADOR DE C1 ~, .• , • ~, ' .. 4. lt/'..,tt- J ¡,A,._ f or"'"""'- 7.. 1•L r~ l~ ,- & .... i'..-· J,.,;.¡. ::'.?'::_ ; - "ll !>' 'U _;f!,,.,(¿;J! ECONOMIA •p-;¡¡ +º'''' ~t'...,.., dk-,;. , /''~ -ri Agradecen! d:.r fadlidadefii: del ~ a 1~ personas in1c.s mcnctonidas. para ~I buen dese:mpc.to de sus funciones. • ..., ... U"ttttfrttn:!~ . . I ¡ .Ftthl "·f& - - / ~~ ~ ~-"" ;::~~ ... Coo~nr.n.1 139 fEOERACION OEPRODUCTORE$0F.. HOJA DE COCA VAU.EOELRIOAPURJMAC AYACUCHO AJbc-rto Fujimori FUJlmori PRE.S108'"T'E DE U REPUBLICA Proycc1o:POR EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCAJ..EROS P&bbu ck • Ptau de Ara-11& .to- Li:ftl• COMrIB DE PR ODUCTORES DE'. I r..Htffyf(1": e""'"''· uJAJ DlsrRITO • 1 .:SMtf.! L\.1. n 1 1 J PROVINCIA : 1 /.(u < odt. . REGION : 1 , ,,,,,,,11.J..ses. tLJ4 !U 1 INTERLOCUTORES V i\UDOS l1 de cualquier aruerdo sobte Ahemaijvo ;¡ $tf supeN1i:KSQ por Jns Í'o11ciones Unidas., son ln1cdocu1are:sYáJiilos: CARGO L..1!. FIRMA COORDINADOR ..J 1 r-- ló' Ce?'-1!:RAL {)Í"(lo(!-. ?fs:tJ/.H f • .r....t .. ,, COORDINADOR OE $ ACT>.S Y ARO-IJVO J?t, M:; 'ar ar r .SJ.11 >1'c t , f '?P5'-0.3 ';e 1't1r1 'fa$ COORD!l'ADOR OE Q) _ :Jul.:q Puj,trj 7 uucr1lca9 ?!'Sit '.\lP'¡( COORDlN..-.vv" · ----- ve. r .. 1 ,e ECONOMIA US:F COORDINADOR OE DEFENSA Ci.rrv<•G> [AJh,.1e lfJliZP-5'!' · COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y r),tL< J\IYr•< ORGANTZAOON COORDINADOR DE J/,{ah'o;,10 L.E.'P DEFENSA 2:3 ,..!.l·t'?. COORDINADOR DE ¡Y;i.N•Or e <'6>itJr8() PRENSA Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR • .4 /{re.. C-'"º"' " "',.... .. eh_ DISCIPLINA A¡rndcceré dar facllidl&dcs del a Jas perscnM unics mencionados. pan el bucp deS 1 PROVINCIA REGION : 1 ( INTERLOCUTORES VAUDOS Para los efeoos de a.ialquicr acuerdo lob1e Desarrollo Ahcmativo a ser supervisado por las Naciones Unida.ir.., «>n lntcrloeu1orcs Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE L E. FlltMA COORDJNADOR ----"? J GENERAL $vfLÉNfO OJJ:ii;JV COORDINADOR DE . • .. 1_j A j ACTASYi\RCHJVO l 1 1: /''!..!e1:1---:.1 .. 1-5E- Y/.!!__•11 COORDINADOR DE 1"/h1o'10 ifC.Ye,z...:J i?rl-Jdc !{/. OROANl.Z.AOON ,(., .,- fi!.'1:.575!> 3V COORDINADORDE /J[Ej4,.,;:.f! ,J ll•vt;-.Jt:<) l ..Ji)c-Ü.!> ECONOMIA L •.tf ¿1 .S{J- o'/ o!. _ COORDINADORDE G l:>L.t.J;;;J '/- ,__,,_ do > DEFJ:.'NSA L.. :Z? $Y / 6 Y?. COORDINADOR DE 5 ,;e.1>;:,,.., PRENSA Y PROPAG. .(.. t> r · COORDINADOR DE _j J.>L., ,.,',.,, "t l>Ooé;;, o DISCIPLINA ,1.. •• •• il.S §e o':¡..:> ·I Í.I;, LL,c ,;-',.. --- Agradcu - crio•Nl>G<>T4 I DISTRrro PROVtNCl;\ REO ION INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Paca lo$ tfttt0$ de cualquier acuerdo sobre Desarrollo A1lcrns1ivo 3 ser supcMsado por J:.s Unidas. son ·1n1crlocutorcs Válidos: CA.RCO NOMBRE L.E. FlRMA COORDlNADOR Co 'PAJ:•o..,Q. JAtvo.t.\ GENERAL COORDfNADOR DE -:; - t\CT.o\SY ARCHIVO r-é N a. :.c..-. .... • COORDINADOR DE r1 ........ .,. f/vA,..,;,., Mo1'.• l.Lo :i.ar.eoO/?ES - ..UA"11 j INTEllLOCUTORES VALIDOS Par011os eíec:os de cu:1tquíer n.;ucrdo sobre Dun.rrollo >\l1crnativo :t ser l;u Nadone;- son lntcrhxutorcsv·11idos: CARGO L E. FIRMA COORDJN.\DOR j, tll S 0 -1' S& 8'/69 GE:-IERAl. -:=---- COORDlNo\OOR DE ¡ft>:P"ilGO C:V"fO & LJ'joo/ 96 ,_ 't--. ACTASYARCHJ VO COORDINAOOR QE CE5hi'I <Í(. 2..9 2.8 ORCANlZACION ' ............. -·---- - ·- ,,,,..-.....-r-. COORDIN;\DORDE }-loNofi¡n0 'PP. l.o MI NOS ECONOM1A ' . COORDlN/\OORDE AlflEc.to ¡-/tJAl>i.AN (!¡ DEFENSA f"' ' COORDTN1\DOR DE .o o PRENSAYrROPAG, t 'AVl./N O l/'lof?1' 1\, COORDINADO R DE JV./il1C.I A L 13 , ¿g2e 2.o dc:! del cnso -o las a.nt.cs p:u·a 2:?'5>=-ef'"/ ORGANIZAC!ON / • . COORDINADOR DE /"'/ t P, ECOl'IOMIA t:.l»<.>O So ll••fe. '? !!fHSs" COORDINADOR DE - 0 1 '' ' DEl'E;'ISA j.,#,., <:'° ª 'ZJVr' ·uZ'18' -;4_-/ COORDIN.'\DOR DE J t / i? ). ¡ • y ,....----.,. PRENSA y PROPAG. or \.o./ IH70 132f'JV ( -w- COORDrNAOOR oe. /\ , J D1SCJPLINA 'J),U>,c.10 f¡u ... Agradcteri dar ücilid.adcs del .:-.aso 3 !as P"'-Dr.ioas- antes meoc1ona.das. pan iel buen de&em.peño de sus .f:l!nc11>nes. .... j L f ecti• zO -.iJ;e, · ...f..71 j 142 FEDER,\CIO,, De l'RODuCTIJIU.S Uf, HOJA DECOCA VALLE DEL RJO AJ'URIMAC AVACUCHO lngcníero .-\lbeno Fujimari FuJlmort Pll.ESIDE:."ll'E DE LA REPUSUC\ PrO)'mo:POR EL DIALOGO V U PAZ:AGRICULTORF.S COC:Al.EROS P:Wóo deOobtc:mt> • P1Ua An:ru.l -.In• Uma COM"'ITEOEPROOUCTORES OI! :\--s. . .Tol? -L/o,J,o w,;; . ., 4 ..:, .. ) DISTRITO PROVll'IClA REGION : ... u.,t,....; l : \ ¡.ju1unR 1 •V.l .:j,..f "' 1 ISTERLOCl:TORES VALIDOS P:lra lOi eie.ctto5 de c-J3lqulcr a.cut:r sobre Obarrorto .A..lttmativo a st"r rupel'\uado por la$1'l3tioncs Unida.\ son Tnter1oauo1es 'láliC!os: CAR(lO NOMBRE l...E. FIR.\1A COOR.OJNADOR COORDINADOR DE ACT,..SY ARCHlVO COORDINADO& ca ORGANlZACION COORDIN;\DOR DE ECO:"f'l11 dar facilidades del C!.\O a l:!s persona.¡¡ an1ts pnr.l el de sus iuncioo.._ ftcha :;'() ,/., ,/., ,/,. _./ 1 ,¡ • '· Jj .,¿;;! _, :::::;,_..._ 1 - tas FlWE.RACIOi' OR PRODUCTORES DE lfOJAOECOCA VALLE OE:L RIOAPIJRIMAC Sc.ftor : Tn¡enleroAlbcno Fuji.mori Fuiimori PRESIDENTE DE Lo\ REPUBU C.\ Proye<:totPOR EL DlALOCO V LA PAZ:ACRJCUL 1º0RES COCAJ.EROS l' AJKio i!c. Oobt e nao • l'tUli dci Alcw \In 1.im.i. COMffE DE PRODUCTORES DE : lf&.v• §o/•'º"'ª . 1 DISTRITO :\ ;;,;'='=ll=N=R=======9 PROVl1'CLA : 1 J 1 REGIOl'/ : 1 Wor• - 1 li''TEJU.OCUTORES V·\LlDQS P'ar.1 loi-efeaos de cualqu.icir acuerdo sobre De:o:a:nollo Alternativo a .iO-t .:.tipe:r.ud.JLI por las Unid.u, :!On In1cr-1ocutorc.5 CARGO LP.. FlR\IA COOR.DLNADOR GEl"ERAi. t}.:.,.: \ JJ .... t. ./IJ:,.1t •'ZUIJ1J5' e I COORDINADOR DE p '/ r¡ ). u t ACTAS-Y , ,r Dt!"'lmv G ,,, 2U•l COORDL'-:,\DOR DE ORGMlZACTON 1'1at.I"'" N ef-e · ·Zi>t IOCO COORDINADOR DR ECONOMIA ,. \1 oeG;,4 COOROL'IADOR.OE _ DEFENSA J ... ., ¡v¡,,,Joio. t:'a1v-ez COOROl}JAOOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. ,ten ¡ COORDINADOR DE 7 DISCIPLINA t-LJ.., f. f/_ -' '5.L ,.\gr:idi:«ce dar del cnso a tas, antes moa.:ionadas. pillil el buen desempeño d! sus func;iPnes.. f.,,ho '2·é d. .1?9 { .. '\ - 143 fE.OERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLE DEL RIO APURJMAC A\'ACUCHO Señor : lngcnicm Albcnq Fuj!mon F\Jjimorl PRESIDE/llTE DE LA REPUBU CA Proya.bdll de • 'Pl;ui, de Annaa..tln · Lim• CQMITE DE PRQDUCl'ORES DE : 1 ;f,>c bomlA - l i 1 DIS'l'RITD PROVINCIA REG10N : l/l,,.¿; 11. •;., - 1 : 1 fi-,,_."-/" - 1 : f .i.,A, rl.: 1 VALIDOS Para 105 electQ\ de cualquier sobre OtsnnoUo Ahernatlvo a ser StJpervb"adn por las 'N3ciones Unidns. son lntcrt001J1orcs Válidos: CARGO L E. F'IRMA COORD!N.'\DOR O EN ERAL J¡ - _ :¡""'ri•J.) ' COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHNO ¡:¡¡¿;./i{N.PO J?o ( llS COORDINADOR DE O RGANIZACION !ll;t!'ll !''"'°' !1it.:9fi;;¡ \ ;¡;r¡¡¡/o S1ne1uw'f!ouo1;,cl 2 Bf0'118C --- - . --- -· ----- ---- COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA f!-t• S,,;,,,wa !.•z• 'Jt"" • COORDINADOR DE f PRENSA Y PROP/\G. iJT•lto 'l0$J.lt112 • COORDINADOR DE DISCIPUNA Si"cJt,U Ls::r:c Agr11deccri: d:fr facilídades dtl euo a lu personas antes mcncion:adas. ;>ara el buen de sus funciones. /'J'J/ /Íj¡ : ,,,,. ,,.,,, FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA V A.LLE DEL RIO APURIMAC AVACOCHO S<-ilor : Ingeniero Albcno Fujimori FujirT1ori PRESIDENTE OE l.A REPUBLICA Proyec.ic V1L4. A'1 oo ECONOMIA COORDINADOR DE Ar>C •<>'-' /1u(>n DEFE:ISA COORDINADOR DE :r º""' .,; .J PRENSA Y PROPAG. 1 COOR.Dl'NADOR DE ..D, 0 ,.. 1::... Y,tt Gc..ti "''"\ .... ::i.; DISCIPLINA Agradettri! dar facllidndes del cas,o $ b:s personas mc·ncio.nada pMi1 el dC$cmpefio de sus funciones. ., F.,-»_ - .... e .• 1.t11?T ·' !) 144 FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJ!< DE COCA VAUE DELRIO!btc Oc.w.rro11o Altc.m.:uJ, -o a )Cr 1:upc:t\'dado por las X:saones Unidas.. son hu.cr:Jocutorc.s \'tlidos: CARGO NOMBRE LE. FIRMA COORDINAOOR ' <'.") L ,,,,_ ,,51 y CE>-ERAL l..U&i! ~s e•ft'~ - ...... _ J COOROINAOOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHíVO i"(.o,.:.->J (-<-••LU '"'""·e ~ 'iC'J~ ,, COOROINAOOR OE f'""') ECO MIA /H .. ts-••~ <~;•. lc••/iA PRENS.-\ Y PROPAG . ..;J.iz ft .'4 '-""""- .b e;.# •··--· - COORDINAOOR DE OISClPUNA 1J~r'°.:.""" H;,.ou• He" 26C.lO~~·i'/ Ag:odcccrt El'ft'E DE LA REPUBUCA Pro'fec-.o POR EL DIALOGO Y U PAZ:ACRICULTORES COCALEROS Pi&Kia te c;c.c¡...roo • !'tw: de. .\fmu ''ª • t..a CO~IITE DE PROOIJCfORES DE DISTRITO '"~~~.Jls. - ¿pc.Qll. "4 !)¡) PROVl!'CIA -..::. ... ... ~ ·~~_,..,,, 1 .1 u ~ .. . ...: 7 REGIO'l 1 , _ =.'AT'-'O•r:. ·~1- yJ ... .;. : 1 IST€RLOCU10R€.s VALIDOS Pan los c:.tccto.5 ce cu¡,lqwer 21cucrdo $Obre IJcs.uToUo Allunauvo a ~cr \\J~:'\iudo por 1t} ~X:onei Unidas. . .son lmcrloruiort..s !:.i~: C\.RCO :-IOMB~E LE. flR..\IA COORDP.'ADOR í'i-... ~eoc.· .. 4...lc,... C"' ~··"'i>,,, !621 lé b! GE.'-:ERAI.. COOl!OlNADOR OE tF ,_¡ ~ s ORGANlZAOOl'I COORDINADOR DE;-h~.;;:,.,, C'vl1t/I;'¿.,.; c.,. ~g S-~6'9>(9 EC0~0."'1A COOROfl'IAOOR 01! · • DEFE.\l'SA V<.C.7• "- µ "" ' """"., C •c.l>!H • .J l.t!'Jl..=t ,,,e COORl)INADOR DE l'RE:"SAYl'ROPAG. vo.r.n -''?'"'" C f .• ,..i.;r S"trHJ COORD!l'ADOR DE DISOPLC-:A C.l.l.; i:. ''"'c .. ¡/J .. •t. p.1' 2.t;~~ y. Ag.rad-...«rf d.:u ía.a.'tc!adcs c!cl CbO ;a. llb p4!Nln&.< antes mtOCIOc~ pan e-. oo~ de$Cmpeilo de sus. fur.cion~ r. FtOR DE .<\CTAS Y ARCH[VO C /.1 ul L..ll. ....,,. f pr; COORDl)O'ADORQE • d 1 l;> {)..,,,,,_, 1-(.,,._IJJ._,.S O o +8J:?<¡ === COORDINADOR DE " C 1 i!.t...., Oc.'4 cA b.'.1Ql..1.1cc de M t'linoones. 2 e. et;. JI"\\ - · .. t:as FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE FIOJ A DE COCA YA.LLE DEL RJO APURJMAC "YACUCHO Señor : JngcoicroAlheno Fujimori Fujimorl PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Pro)ctto:POR EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: AGRJCUL TORF.S COC\J..EROS P-.lieio de> Oob;erno • de Anls&s 1111 • Limo COMrra DE PRODUCTORES DE :[ci#,a;,e¿; - ..rPA¡;J,o.«'eA 1 :I 1 PROVINOA : 1 h'PA#T<" 1 REGION : 1 .t, !! S-t.!/4CcLlif W,.,,_, 1 L'iTE.Rl.OCU'l'ORES VALIDOS Para 1m erectos de c:ua.tquicr 3cuc-rdo sobre Ot.wroUo Altr-maúvo a ser supervL.Ude> por la.$ Nnnoncs Unidas. son ln1erlocutores Válidos: CARGO liOMl!RE LE. F'IRMA COORDll'ADOR GE.'iERAL COORDINADOR DE M L;•<'S:.H$ y ,,,.,,¡j'.., ACTAS y ARCHIVO /lffl./l.crnl ns:.1:r1,-i; COORDINADOR DE ORGM'JZ,\OON NI. COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA /.;(, COORDINADOR DE DEFENS,\ .h15,,_·¿ H úl >Jwn_g COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. '//;.. 7C 1i COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA b E Agradece.rt i.!ar (acflidades del C3.SO 1 las personas 3nres mencionadas, paro e1 buen dcstn1pctio di:: tus fundonc:.s. dt At-t.as 146 FEDE:RACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VAU.E OEl. RIO APURIJ\tAC A Y.ACUCliO SchQr: Ingeniero Albeno Fujimori Fujimorl PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proye<1o:POR El. DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCAU:ROS P&laoo dt G('obftmo • t'lan de: An:lw \fn .. ·Um..t COMITE DE DE : 1 S ;tOS Para tos- de cualquier acutrdo sobre Desarrollo Alternativo a $CI pior tas Nacio!)es Unidas, son Válidos: CARGO COORDL'IADOR GENERAL COORDINADOR DE ,\CfASY ARCHJVO COORDIN1\ DOR DE ORGANIZACION COORDINADOR DE ECONOMlA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENS,\ Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA :-IOMBRE L &. FUIJ\\,\ A 8f/IQ 6411iE;;c.'-'..: C.,,t .. ,D.¡.,r.l'"Tot:./'a Be . H t18L--< "i1A.e6o2o o.e.e ' =- /Jl"I .ss Pr !4 :;;:;;;" . ¡/,,/4tU1.111T¿ ,,,,,.., ,,JjV.,fp/ _..,, <: 11c .. ct-Gw. ?.l/.,e-111 t S - '7' .. C-4trl .. • ,\.grndé'.c.eri dar (acilidades dc.l caso e la.s pcrwnttS isnt.C.S me.nc-ionAdat, p:u-o e1 buen dcscmpdio de sus· funciones. .. J'Q __ CUtores V-&lido': C,\RCO COORDINADOR GENERAi.. .. i￾NQ,\18.RE LE. FIRMA Feno Fufim<>n Fujimori PRESfDEl'tlE DE LA REPUBUCA Proy•cto:POR EL DIALOGO y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS Pal.aao de Cob;cMO - pta.u de ,Armu t.'n • Um.a COMITEDE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 //.Sl:/27"!7 ,./",,,./"" - 1 OISTIUTO PROVINCIA REG ION INTERl..OCUTOR.ES VALIDOS de nialqu1cr -ac.ut.rdo sobre Des3nQUet AJtentadvo a ser s·uperv\s:ldO por las Naciones Unidas. ·Son ln1crlOC\11ore¡ Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE L.E. l'lRMA COORDINADOR S.iuCJf¡¡z. ;l/EAJOOlc> lius o GENERAL p , - COORDfNADOR DE ACTAS y ARCHIVO ,5,,,,,,¡,.' /J,¡,,, ... ,., COORDINADOR Dé ORGANIZACION E,¡,. CC•>d￾COORDINADOR DE ECONO!'.f!A fll(b 1o 5,,,.,,1,,, COORDlNA DOR DE DEFENSA 'f:>¡ l/rhlo" ,p,/,/!rl '-1''1'& 4' Z COORDINADOR DE - PRENSA y PROPAG. .. • "'- COORDINADOR DE " • OISCIPI..INA (j)iu¡.¡;no IJ!fr>to,k c.;;_ ....... , . , . ., ... ,,,f, Agi:ndeccrt dar facilid:ades del C3.SO lns pe.rSOna$ antes m.cntionadas, parH -=:I buen de: sus íunciones. ., FEUERACIU:> llE PROlllCTOKES Dt: liOJA l>E COCA VALLE DEI.. RJO APURJMAC AYACUCliO Sefaor : Tngen1c:o Alberto Fu.jii:nori Fujimoñ PRES!DE!'>'TE DE LAREP\.:BU CA Proyecto:POR EL DIALOGO Y U. PAZ' ,\CRICUl..TORES COCALEROS Pisliii:w · Plin de Armu - Lic:i1 COMl'rE DE PRODUCTORES DE ; 1 _ _ =r: .. ·1 DlsrRrtO l>R.O\r'l."'l:ClA RECI01'1 fNTI:RI..OCUTORES VALfOOS f':l.ra Jo¡ efectos decu.alqu.ier acuerdo sobre DcsarroUo 1\ltc..rnatJvo a ser supt!mStldo por 1as ,:..I;ad,oncs Unidas. son Interlocutores Váiidos: CMCO COORDINADOR GENERAL e A .t. ..... c:os NOMBRE f."t..wf*',&. ''· I...E. FIRMA c@-st -le .::-f- a;.J.., ... _. COOROJNADOR DE Y ARCHIVO ........... c-.4Ae:i.¡1o 1.. /Je,., .... , .. !,. .... COOROINADO!l.OE :r,,, 1• ;l,.<11.,,_,. ¡].,,,,,., - ORGA.'112.ACION 7. ., 1 /fv•,rl" "' 7"' COORDL'IADOR.DE ,. .Jo .Jr,:>.•,- ECONOMlA -v t 1'--l 0 e --- COORD!NAOOR DE p 0 ,. r￾CO(íROIN/\DOR D E - PRENSA 'i' PROPr-\G. .,:... COOROIN.-\.DOR DE .... . ..., l tl DISCIPLINA .,. q 1 .{(_.:¡_ C"'·>J·- '· A.gradcc..:cC d.ir di:l a la$ persona5 ante¡ m:.nciolli'.!das, parn cd bu.e.o de sus iur.ciones. 20- - - t 1j,tlt, · .. < :· re - ..... . ' - _Q ª' 148 FEDERACION DE PRODUCTOR.ES DE HOJADECOCA VA.LLE DEL RIO APURI MAC AVACUCHO Scftbre Dcs.arroUo Ah.cmadvo a supervisado por las t.:nidas. son lntcrlocutorcs vaudos;: CARGO COORDINADOR GEN.ERAL NOMBRE ( 1,t; ¡;,, (],, ¡:! .•• , LE. FIR.l\>U 1 !'St15 t fS COORDINADOR DE ACTr\S V ARCHJVO l//t'l'r;T,. T"a &td•f°r t:'r,, r,. V COORDINADOR DE ORGANlZACION j' í?· . /, //¡ y.., 7r. •''2 .... - -, z :ia _:¡ro ..¡- COOROLNADOR DE E COl'OMIA '/?/l/7.J u,/_ COORDINADOR DE uJ7 DEFENSA /";,. ... .... COORDINADOR DE /if. PRENSA Y PROPAC. .:lmo,,, r,, R r%-ra -,. ¡-,e • ., r" s r COORDINADOR DE / DISCIPLINA 4{ /?,§ta z<- r" '?3.ferto Fujimori Fojimoñ PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proycao:POR EL DIALOGO Y U PAZ' AGRJCULTORB.S COCAU:ROS P!l:.-- = k , . .._ AgrodeccrC dar facllidad::.s de.I ca.so 3 13$ p:rsonas ilntes mencionadas, para el buen de. su.s funciones.. Fteba ;J.a -· L 'f._,, / g f!/ - 149 FEDERACION DE PRODUC'l'ORES DE HOJA DECOCA VALLE DEL RIO Al'URJMAC AYAet;CllO S.oor: lngen•ero AJ.heno Fojlmori f'ujimori PRESIDE1'l"E DE LA REPUBUCA r~ccto!l'OR EL DIALOGO Y V. PAZ:ACRICULTORES COCAu:ROS t.a.ao dt Gobtcrao - Pbu. óc Arm.a sto • ü.. C0~11TE DE PRODUCTORES DE : ¡./,,,·t.&.-. _ ¡;,,;¡·- =------i DISTRITO PRO\ 1NCIA RECIO;-; #;¡r• J., /far 1 ;f t,.¡,.-:'.:lc'r~;_ ¡·~ J INTER.LOCUTOllES VALIDOS Para ~os ef~aos d~ cualquier -aruerdo ~re Drsarrolltt Ahernat.ívo ¡ $Cr supef'\'\Mdo pOr ~ "ª'Lonts Un1das. son lnterlocutorct V!hdos; CARGO NO\IBR.E t.E. f1R.\IA COORD~AOOR ~: .. - 0.ESERAL ~., ------"'""'' ªJLOAnrJa C1 r .,crcs O,as 1" &1'11151 ~ COORDINADOR DE ACfASYARCHIVO ¡1,¿z;, 4t,. /llñ" p·fl, _ •r ly!p ~ COORDL'S CQCAU;ROS hlaOodc:~·~de ~.i..a t.uu COMITE DE PROOl,.;CTORES DE DISl1Uf0 PR0\1!\Cl.\ 'PAL(rl/l.S -/...VIC-tPNA :=~_,.A y jV /.l.~~ ,/.,4 ¡v!Arf RF.GIO:< }., I a ¡j fl .,...¡. Jilif? F5 -v7A ;'( 1, "' TERLOCl TOIU:S VALIDOS Para los- l . 2'!~~ ¿=1-.:f CQOru)lNADOR OE - fn ORG.-\l'llZ.~C!ON .Al!íeMIO 0 4N SOA IX• 2.92.°5o3'f'I COORDINADOR DE ftlof'l.:r•"' c9v1NTi;1to '5'. Z.f?.813>(.s F.CO'IOMlA "'"" É~~.?J~AOORDE R•l"INl,1 C "''iS.OJ/d. c.~ 'Z 8 H12-108 ª4~-í COORDINADO PRE.'1SA Y PROPAG. RDE JllflN lf.'vANllO LAr'.A Z..6' '2..li .3o'li/ ¿g . .. ~"J · COORDINADOR DE ¡~~~'l"IN All~ACll} rr, 'J •/ .J;f J> ~"'J 1 DJ.SCIPUNA ~ " .,. ~~-..... ~!''"Ari"-. . .\_;;ade:cer:: Cu faOJid:=1de1 del c::uo J .:a¡ ,peno~ ~te\ mcr.cion:adas-. p¡ra e) !tucn duempef..o de .sus iuru."lOl16. '"-""··-~ > M• ~ - • <'· 9) U:-.t.:-; .t_,:::?:~·~.:t¡ ::.• r F .l. t!: 'Jo\¿-;..lh f&f· ~F < •"'~ :dh1'ido"Gcntttd-. "' \ - ~ .. • I ~. "-" . 150 FEOERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJADECOCA VALU: DEL RIO A.PURJMAC AYACUCHO SeMr lngeruero Albeno Fuftmon Fujimori PRESIDE!>"TE DE L.\ REPUllUCA Proyetto:l'OR EL DIALOGO YJ.,\ PAZ; AGRICULTORES COCALEROS P.aJaciQ de 4 Ptau de Arcnu Wa • Ul'IU COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE ; 1 ¡/<4/C•""" - /.,,;,,;,,, 1 DISTRITO ; \ /Ít/111> 1 PROVINCIA : /tr /(<¡, ] REGION 1 P,Jtt,1' 1 INTERLOCU'l'ORES VALIDOS P:ira los de cualquier aciJerdo sobre DesarroUo •. \ Jlemati\'O :1 ser rupervi&ado por la.5 N3c-íones Unid.as. wn Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE 1-E. FIRMA COORDINADOR OENERAL COORDINADOR DE. ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDINADOR DE ORGANTZACION COORDINADOR DE ECONOMJA COORDlNADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR DE DISOPUNA e. ...,,...¡.¡,; _.;:;;'.¿,...,. :o>. ¿_...,7,-: ¡.. .. u_-r""-<4,... t?-''"''"S 1.- i 5• .:">'-'! " ' •'-' Q "u,.,., '-"11-l-(..O 6 - 2 V5"1.tf.!'I 11o - / -L. , ... '1 J,f.;..,; l . zas-) ?a•º4 e F),_i 'l .p() 'JV.O'JO (; tSS" i- S9l1 A.gradettr! dat fo.dHdad1!$ Ca50 a las anles mcndooadas. para et buen desempeño de rus fundor.es. Ftcba 20' · 1/ c1í.& ..{.9 f / fEDERAOON DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA COCA VALLE DEL RJO AJ'URIMAC AYACUCHO Señor: logeniero .·\lherco Fujimoñ Fujlmati PR ESl.OE!'ITE DE 1-.\ REPUBLICA Proymo:POR EL DIALOGO Y U PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS Plbdo de Oobicf'tlO - f'1a:La de A.nAs 'lln · UCRi COMITEDEPRODUCTORESDE ;I -" "M./'l'Bl>N ¡j.j. ,....,J. lJJ C/A NA 1 DISTRITO PROVINCIA REGION : 1 .3 _ _,..,. " 1 ; 1 .... ... .... ... .... 1 :ic.os 1 INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Pura 1m efectos de rualC[!Jic..r sobre .Deurrollo a ser superv\.sado poi las Naciones Unidas. lntcrlocu1ores Vdlfd0$: CARCO NOMllRE 1-E. FIRMA COORDfNAOO.R C"4 • .: ,,. :,.-,., ... L.10. / 'ó .J-. O"ENERAL , e ....... 1 -t • ., ¡f COORDINADOR DE ? ACTASYARCHJVO GtLuf'l{'rc (;. COORDINADOR DE ORGANÍZACION COORDINADOR DE j r ECONOMIA e,"::> C.3 jJ iJ8 A ·... ¿ x;tor COORDLNADOR DE - DEFENSA ' fltG•lJrO \.E:>ort COORDINADOR DE r> PRENSA Y PROPAG. 2.3'.1.l!Ol O'f O"'ef'.<1»;o .¡.,, _ /M·u _/ tlnr facilidade..s del caso a 1as persorras antes meacionad2s, para e1 bue.o desc:mpefto de tus. funcio(les. -*:;f[.;;"''-'-o f 1 -; - 1 ' O# ,.., nador de A.to.tas '-- . .' 151 FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJADECOCA \'ALU?. DEL RlO APUfUMAC AYACUCHO Seóor ; Ingeniero Afben.o Fujimori Fuji.man PRESIDE.''TE DE LA REPUBLICA Pt0)«10;POR EL Dl,\J..OCO Y LA PAZ: AGRJCULTOR&S COCAl.EROS PMacio de: G~ · Pbza de ...,_ s/'a - U... COM rrEDEPRODUCTORES DE ': 6/0 ,¡o Q.t• • /u•<'ª''" ' ,¡ 1 DIS'lllITO : 1 ¡J ~"o PROVISC ; r r a ,., •• IA REGION : 1 ¡;1;~;1-:-tfr-'~":_ l'1.'0r'..:. J IXTERLOCUTOR.F.S VALIDOS hn b cftü05 de a.:31qu.cr IOJc rdo sobO•,..,.,,· - ~ 6(5µ¡, COORDINADOR DE fl ECOSOMIA L,0 ..... ,0 C at?· QJ"a''ó ,,. .,. r ... r .,,.o?,.,, \I ÍJ.:...•""6( .. , .., ... ......................... ·- OOROIN~ vv*' ve: DEFENSA 1C"' "Vt,. .1 .11,,.,...J~..,,_ Q I~ ~ COORDIN,\ DOR DE PRENSA Y PRO PAG. ID~,~ ;::;.,• _,,/., >-- r-_ O h;. --·~ ~'"-,.,dS COORDINADOR DE DISCIPU1'1A . ~ - )."~ lr:.:z=: -: , ~ r lr• ......... ·ta-.:,.1 1:;.&..v.7- ... t..:/ ) r / ·«~ tlM faclidad« dd caso a '.as persorm an1e.1 t:1cncionadu, para cl buen ~m.pc.ño de JUS iuric:ioM~ Pttha •. c. /_< ~ q~" • rr.oERACION DE PRODUCTO Res or. HOJADECOCA VAU.EOEl..JUOAPUR.l \1AC AYACUCftO Stllor : Insenjero Alben o FuJimori FuJtmnri PRESIDENTE DE U\ RFPUBU CA !'to¡c«o:l'OR El. OIALOCO \' u rA7: ACRU .. Ul..TORr.s COCALEROS P..Jaao i;.c ~ • Plmck Arirw "'ª · ~ COl.llIB DE PRODUCTORES DE DISTRITO MA Pl'rf/IYA Ffl -1. (l/CIANA ~ ----~ .AYl'l _ A __ _ PRO\'ll'OA 1- A MA R REGIO~ ·: L 18Ef.'T A :Po f!.E 5 -WA 1U INTUlLOCUTORES \'Al lllOS Pata los efectos de cualquier 3tuctdo sobre: Oc:ial'TOUo \hc:rn1livn a '-Cí sure:,.....t,.aJo r--.s :u ~;!ctonu Unidas. wn tntcrloanoreJ Vtlid(K: C.<\RCO :"- 01\ 1URC l...E. l IR\V. COORDINADOR .,.Ax11no (;,1J €f/,RA $ , Z.8S''-2.~ GENERAL I'' - COORDINADOR DE F G . J .KTAS v ARCHIVO •t.ic, .... .,, .1111 s H, z.1 ¡ +. !f9~ " r, - .r y=~. COOftDINADOR Dll p - t ~ -.. OltGANIZACION Eilllo l.? •~ t.oA 5 . l.8 ¿ ':?-'!!J SO COORDINADOR DEL 1.Dlo Are; g¡.¡,,.t.t11 ·~S'S&. /ISS ECONOM.IA g~~J~AOO DE6AMANlét. VAAGAS e 2.13S"8SJ/,~ '6>ws;:,-_ C:OOROll"l\DOR OE - rRENSAY r ROPAG.EV(;c /'1 111 ~Jf\ {;...LvA~ t~l~c3•:..~~ COORDINADOR DE p- l' Y ,, • .;:> 2 <" o > .- " DISCIPLINA 'l.. • o n E li /1. !: ~ /¡ f, ., "-o> C .> º"'.,, ~·-/'"r,. Agadettr! dar f:tdlid~des del .;a5.0 a las peorJRES DE · 1 '1i.r.;-<;_,;ADQR GE:"ERAL ~(; P_¿,U_.e- .H. ... 6t"?- t : g-i~ ~~¿ d~ · ~ COOROL'IADOR DE - J/ ACTAS Y ARCH1VO l'}_<-,~ -..i-Jc Gj¿///µ,. ¡y,,,, - COORDl:-IADOR DE I - Gk"JlZA O'!~ ~·l"' -,. rr i'1;1 ~J_ fi. fll ¡;~. COORDINADOR DE" ">. O?'O~ A ~ '"_J A 't~ - A¡;ndetere dar bc:1ldad.s del CliO a !as personas •ntcs mcncior ... clo.;, l'V1I el buen dcumpc.t.o de ¡m funaor.e.s.. .. ~e ~ J "/ ~.l?étneral rEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJ .. DECOCA Y Al.LE DEL RJO .-PURJMAC "YACUCHO Sdior: lneenicro AJ heno Fujimori FuJímori PRESTDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA ~ecto:POR EL DlALOCO y u P.U: .. c RJCUL TO RES COCAUtllOS hlaoo de Gd:knio. Pbl:a de A.n9U t.ima CO!.trrEOE PRODUCTORES OE : r,,,~t_.,,., _ 'tD!(,;,11,. ,. _( OlsrRITO PROVL' CL\ REGION .. ,. : 1 ¡ .. o .. 1 • l 1 - ( • . • 1 -._¡,_J• · .J!:"(•* 1 ·,\/¡r1 l 'ITl:RLOCUTORES VALIDOS Pan tos efectos de cu:t.lqu•er acuerdo sobre Desarrollo Ahcmativo t. ser supe:~ por la$ Naoond Un1d:L$. 50n lntet,Ot'\ltOrC-1 V4Jidos: CARCO COORDINADOR GENERAL COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDINADOR DE O'RGANIZACION COORDINADOR DE ECONOMJA COO!Wl1"ADOR DE DEFE NSA :-IOMllRf L.E. FIRMA , • - . ¡_ 1 ;'7 "" 11" lll'ff n •)( /'. "' d_o1 :L {f~t.•-1;t; ~ ('~~·lo & . . " ~~·!', 50 _.t~y. ~ COORDll'IADOR DE 4 · DISCIPLINA S~ t." l,"'1,,¡e• Í w 9 'ftt "t f•l. ~ Agradecere dar faciJJdadcs del c:aso a las pcl"$0nas 2.ntcs. mcnaonactas. par1 t i bu.en dcscmp.e 6o de sus funcioncs ,. / 1,1t· 0 • /~ 91· fecha de· ,.,_ _ _ _ , ; ' ,,. 153 FEDERAOON DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJADECOCA VALLE DEL lUO APURIMAC AYACUCllO S.ñor: lngeniero Alb<>no Fujimori Fujímori PRES!DEN1E DE LA REPUBLICA PtoyoC!o:POR EL DIALOGO y l.A PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS PalAOo de-Gobk.roo de $/n • UnlA; COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 e;,.,,,,,P•liri - 1 DISTRITO • : ( i PROVINCIA REGION : 1 s. 1-1•. 1 : f J; b4li'C 'VllR 06 ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDINADOR DE ORGAN12AOON NOMBRE L.E. FlR.\1A P R 1 ,., , n v o 5ttJ< Hir..,c1.. 9v 1J>JO LOtVAsco Ri-lul ¡; ON.ilO RI 9 COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA i:UGl:Nto LLJJFl"i .2 &'69 212 1 e * > ---..i _ . COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA Tl'01>051 O O:::ilPl¡.¡A COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. /\G:UIL AR -:"4-r__\J COORDINADOR DE DISClPUNA H.ARINO FLDIUS Agradect:r6 dar fadHd3dcs del e.aso a las pcr-sonas -antes mencionadas.. para ti buen dcsc.mpci\o de sus funciones. .. •• 171 l'EDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJ,1.DECOCA VALLE DELRIOAJ'URlMAC AYACUCHO Sc-f&Ot : Ingeniero Alberto Fujimori Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPIJBUCA Pcoyecto:POR EL DIALOCD Yl.A PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCAU:ROS PaJ:aido de Gobierno • Armu sin · Lima COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE; l ..... 1:: _ 1 DISTRITO : 1 .-41 )1.u PROVINCIA REO ION . : 1 ¡.¡,.,, 1 : 1 ,;:;JA,J,,_-k-,_-, ' 1 INTERLoCUTORES VALIDOS Para los efectos de cualquier acuerdo sobre Oes3rroUo Ahcrna1lvo n ser s'Upcl"\'¡J\ádo por hu Unidas. son lnletlocutores Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE L.E. f"IRJ>IA COORDIN,\DOR C..·"'._,...¡_ GENERAL - ('.:rÍ'//..: Zft9 ... COORDINADOR DE ;J '!>,¿,, f " l ·; L ,>\CTAS Y ARCHIVO COORD!NAOOR DE •"' ,,,,.,r ORCANIZACJON ... -- ?i-1"J"ll ,'f5-2' ' .. COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDrNADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR DE DISCIPLINA ,,/. f"IS. ,[_ t¿;.c...., ...:114:r."'& 'te" .... f»lil"# &t"/ ...... #-"Jt..<. ¿., ¿'lSt eor I ..,,._./ . =-r • . ,., • .11¿¿,,¡.u ""-. 'C ?;.>C;>.($ f. l'Yo.r-· ,.. dar íacilldade.s del Q,SO n las personas antes meocion3d:ls, para e\ buen des.empeñn de- su¡ funciones,, Fecha ? f. - ''1- - <'!J ' ----· rt Ocsarro11o . .-Ytcrnativo a $Cf .St.lpervt-.ado por las Naciones Unidas. son 1n1trlocuiores C,\RGO N01\18RE L E. FIRMA COORDINADOR I • 1. • • GENERAL . .._,,,, ',t COORDllMDOR DE - , ACTAS Y ARCHIVO f-,,;>_•t1'.\ii J.!:.' "ilt COORDINADOR DE A ' ;") . ORGAN!ZACJON ilJ;!:tmJ 'lj/Jt/1 .-Ji 1 COORDINADOR DE r1 ' 4 r,J .. , • • , J..; ;, ""' i!CONOMIA , >rafi) r.0tet supcrvlsadu par hu Unidas. son lni.erlOt'lUOres VAiidos: CARGO NOMBRE LE. FIRMA COORDIN,.\DOR "---:-< GE·NERAL é ;,,.,s\\t ))ui.;>m r\= COORDINADOR DE - _ • . _¡ • ACTAS Y ARCHIVO 11, .,,tj\. )•m• •;fg .,41q - COORDINADOR DE , Cf±., l/f{. ORGAN'Ll.ACION 11\\ 5 Si.,. COORDL'lc\DOR DE ,., ECONOMIA J( !.; ... ,,o ,., '!\,0, Hé!\ 2• ¡> _;µ:.. COORDlNADOR DE DEFENSA .s de cualquier -:lcucrdl) sob:e -oesarro:lo Altemaü\'n a Sn V:ilitlos: C \Rr.O NOMllRE LE. FIRMA COORDINADOR vENERAL L?Z'4AIO s e VIF/l.f&# COORDINADOR DE ACTAS y AACHJVO reop,,., /WJ ... . COORDl;.!ADOR DE ORG,<\."'IZACJON oo,.,,.,n, ,ti. z ... s,, '173.f￾COORDL'lADOR DE ECONOML.;. O.GfHV7fi2 V . COORDINADOR DE V Dl!FENSA ,PV/Jl'6 /). COORDfNADOROE PIU!NSA y PROPAG. ,.,,, .... /,.,..., ¡:. 'Z !'r0/9/> COORDINADORDE / /'11 OISCTPLIJ'IA c.t:¿So l'eJ!e& lA;'-1 . 2d'G,?t7 y9, _, .o\¡;rado a lw. !""º""" '1llle.5 meacionadao, poto el b"cn de1empcdo d01us fundo""'- / {' , Ft COC\ VALLE DEL RIO AJ'URIMAC Scf:or: tngcn1cro Albeno Fujlmon Fujimorl PRESIDfu'ITE DE LA REPUBLICA Pruyccto:POR l>L DIALOGO y Ll PAT.: AGRICULTORES COCALtROS PAlaao de Oobicmo • óe Armas sir. • l.i=.a COMITE Db PRCIDUCl'ORES 05 : 1 .r,fN .JWe "$ / rA?·•Ml"/!Nl"A 1 DISTRITO : J ,l/Y #// 1 :¡ N- 1 REGJON G 4.e&r&J"'&>A>J"' w '9t;I 1 l'NTRRLOCUTOJU:S VAi.iDOS P:tta :ns tiectns de cualquier tlcucrdo 1obre-Oc.s.arrollo Ahtmat:tvo a ser por 1351'11ciones Unidas. son Tntcrlocu.tores Válidos: CARGO :-IOMBRE LE. flRMA COOR:>INADOR C/;>,e 1-1/>/ t:J f})_ # CE."-'ERAL NVA tt-1'4 Z,/' r /?O 9' ;;n COORDL'h\.DOR DE ,-,,uU./-?t,, ACTA> Y ARCl-OVO 7'4Y/E z.o ,, "' 9 ;«? COORD!NAOOll. DE t,,4,l';'J ORGM/17..ACJON Z ,f Z'I t?/ <;'/ COORDINADOR DE ,<;'4,ec..1.ro C.'4Nt;H#I ./ 7 ECQNOMIA Z é'6/'.Sj1.0Z COOllD!NAOOR DE ""'""1"'6 º v-?,,._. DEFENSA M ,P./41-9t:.4 .2,¡> Zr 'i'tf $ 3 -= COORDINADOR DE .n,e,;¿; ""1/'.A PRENSA YPROPAG. 2J"G? 9...S ">P COORDfNADOR DE 4E&V4/.?/NO T-41'1'6 DISCll'L!NA M&e,«é/!/rr ó2 'í' z d:i..r ñieiiidade$ del caso ::. las persona¡ anteS. m(:ntitJn:od:.u.. d t>Uca desc111peb0 de sus funciones. , , .H. , i<4J ,J-o p:u J! 7/ l'C"Z::; ;\ t . ·I' • 1 156 FEOERACIOll DE PRODUCTOR.ES DE llOJA DE COCA VALLEDELIUOAPURIMAC AYACUCHO Sci)or . íng.c.nicro Atbe.rto Fufimori Fufuooñ DE LA REPUBUCA Pro¡ .. cto POR EL DL\LOCOYLA PAZ: AGRIC U LTOR.ES COCl.l.EROS PUaeao de G-Obitmo • oe Ami4.S :Jn • Lima. COMITT DE PRODUCTORES DE . ..... ' ' - P# A-IA P1f , _ _J Dl>rRITO REulOI' : 1 t-'4 ,crvu;HJo ro1 ltti son Interlocutores Vdlitlos; CARGO !'IOM 6RE LE. Fllt\1A ' COORO!:-:ADOR GENERAL FP,.t1.7t,,1N.41"'0 G-S.-.- $./JA// c;o COORDINADOR DE ACTAS y "'-9-¿,e>,.., ¡,.,, (> zr zr .. w/&NO T!?.N,,IJft./;1 - 2rf"r06<-Z9 COOROl.NAOOR OE ORGANlZACfON <:OOR))INADOR OE ECONOMTA COOROl!'IADOR DE COOROINAOOR DE PRENSA YPROPAG. COORDINADOR DE DlSCTPLL'fA ;= 5 ¿,/,(' / &-1.A (:.,fNCC4 ,,,,, ;/ d"J'tf"/ o -r.a :z..r21 3/3Z "'74.V (;/ N 0 /IJ'/?7'7A fla.7'9' 2,f-Z ;z. ?t?- FEDERACIO.S DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJAOECOCA AYACUCllO Señor: Ingeniero Alhert0 Fujimori Fujimori PRESr.DENTE DEL"- REPLffiUC.A Proyecto:POR EL OIAl.OCO Y 1.A PAZ:ACRICOLTORES COCALEROS Plllll*óo de. Oobkrm;i • Mata de. All'l•» 11n Lial.-. PROVINCIA REGION ll"TE&J..OCU1'0RES VAUOOS Para 1os di! ciJalqu1c:r :i.cuerdo sobi:e Desarrollo Allematlv0 p0r- t-as Naciones lfnidas., wn lnterlocutorc.s Válidos: CARGO NOMllRE LE. FIRMA COORDIN,\DOR GENERAL ¡: q,-y,,_,19,,_,t?Í, ,FJ,,µ, --- COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHfVO V • ..P 11 ,..; é .1,,hau r l/8>.h C"C -¡;- COORDINADOR DE ORGANIZ.ACJON I - -=--' COORDfNAOOR DE /J _ _í;;, / / '• ECONOMIA @ t{?-/,,,4 m º·" -'<> "º FO COORDINADOR DE • DEFE.' lk t,;obiemo-· Pl.M.a d"C o'\m)» s.'ft • L.i:Jnl CO Mn'EDEPRODUCTORES DE ,, __ ( .. . DISTRITO PROVINCIA REGION : l . 1l'bAQ 1, ' . : 1 Ja_,,,,,p.z 1 ' 1 /, 'k ./;; .hJU.t di; 1V i 1 . ll'o . , ,- GENERAL . 0 ;t;;;;,,.y ..,.-.,,..,..,,,,.,,,¡t, J/ ¡ COORVll"ADOR Oto ACTAS Y ARCHIVO P&u j,:,,,_,., 9,nbd,,, W!t1;;:_ r /, ' ' COORDINADOR DE J . . , ORGAN!ZACION @:11 fy {J,/(ffl _7?-v COORDINADOR DE • ecot...io,\.UA ...... ,#., ':Y'... ""-d 4 ó COORDINADOR DE "' DEFENSA ff .1. P.. "'""_,,_,_.. 4 4.c.,.u%- "'.:::" ? 4"¿. ;ti COORDINAD OR DE PRENS • .\ .$t-il.d;_ 7;1 ,/,.rl r I • COORDINADOR DE !:{ V' DISCI PLINA __ /kvu1',.o JU?,, o'if , .,.. Agradeceré dar facilidades del ea.so a las. personas arue.s meoclonadas, para el buen desempcflo de sus funciones. Fecha -;,_- .. lt:_zts:: rtZ VEDERACION oe PRODUCTORES DE llOJAOECOCA VAU.E DEL RJO APURIMAC AYACUCHO Señor : Ingeniero Alheno Fujimori Fujimori PRESTDENTE DE 1A REPUBUCA Proyecto:POR EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: AGRICUL.TORF.S COCAl-ER05 rAb.cio de Coblc:mo. ria: .. de AnnM $/n • Uma COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE: - --?1rN1>r:r 1 DISTRITO : ¡Ú,J i..tdrill 1 PROVTNC!J\ : 1 LoJ 1 REGION :¡"uve.-.- 1 TNTERLOCUTOR.ES VALIDOS Po;ra los eitctos de auaJquier 3cucrdo sobre Ahemati\to a ser supervludo por l:u Nacion<.s. Unidas, son lnter1orutores Validos:: CARGO FIRMA COORDINADOR Tt0>'1,; (,,U r;.¡ I''- C.-Ji • DISCIPLINA ., 1-I 19orJJ'2e / V'24.-'¡f9.J ¡t;c;-"'T;,_, - 'i'. ' ,. .. ___.....::::_ Agradeceré dar facilidades del caso a las personw ante$ mencionld21s, par11 t::I buen dcsempefH> de .sus fu11cioncs. • • 158 FEOERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HO.JA DE COCA VALl.EDE.LR10APUR1MAC AYACUCHO SeilQr l fngcn:tcro Albcno fujimori Fujimori PRESIO!ONTf. DE. LA REPUBUCA Proyccw:POR EL DIALOGO Y L.\ PAZ: /.CRJCULTORES COCALEROS Pafadc,. de aob:c:mo- Plu.t de s/o . COMrffi DE PRODUCTORES DE ; 1 (j}p#',;,,e, _ P-'CHn,.., 1 DISTRITO PROV11'1CIA RECION : ! if'p;#SM' 1 ; ' .)..N ' :I JN·cA l INTERLOCUTORES VAUDOS Para la,- efectos de cuo.lquicr acuerdo sobre Ocsw-roUo Alt.cma.ttvo 4 ser !-Upc.rvi.\Ado por las Naciones t:nidas, son ln·tcrloaitorc.s V4Jidos-: CARGO NOMBRE L..E. FIRMA COORDINADOR HP,.vi5l Of:Nrul.Al.. ,?;7,,::-,.;,¡GA¡v 4.1 1...- :2?>º"'"7' F COORDINADOR DE , . ACTAS Y ARCHIVO -p....4,, fr .... 4. V .20 Y1 J f COORDINADOR DE , ¡ ORGANIZACION IJJ1 .Jro /.JitnlJ];, /b. t>, COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA .?J(f'.J!..O COORDINADOR DE // n .,,-.u. • • DEFENSA JrVJ<> 'l· V"2< 6 • '{..> COORDINADOR DE ¡ l. C, -r.- PRENSA Y PROPAG. S11...,.._, 7c.u-w.""':> COORDINADOR DE ,,.. '< • DISCIPUNA i; •<> h /Je> .:¡f.,.2 2.,..2?¿IJL!.._Q ,.._ \ Agradece.re dar íacilidadu del caso a liu pcnonas anees me.nt"lon.adas. para ti btlen descmpc6o de sus funciones. ., FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLEDELRIOAPURIMAC AYACUCRO Scftor : Ingeniero AlbililLCJ Plli1Z>c H?' "¿;>/, · (.1f ECONOMlA - C.:-' . ' COORDINADORDE COES?111Jo flRHUJ o C'RU2 • <·59·,_t¡·1-, DEFENSA - . r,:;:;.¿,/. .q;'_>?' \ \Ú COORDINADOR DE ,, u ...,. t( ..,;;',.. PR.Et'JSA y PROP.A.G. l"''º.v4S'1' o nOP11 f-.IC l ¡....>j. í'c<>< :..- OlSCIPLINA { :P ·• ,, Agndca.ré: dar f-acilídades del ¡ las personas: mencionadas, paúl el buen desempeño de sus funciones. )e- lltJ• te 'Ai _ tr.\I f"ttb... '2 e':.. &> .)- - 9 e s•q-r e • Coordinador de Actas / 159 Fl!.DEl<.\CIO.S 01:'..P RODUCl'ORES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLE OEL RlON' URlMAC AYi\CUC HO Sellor: Ingeniero Alberto Fujimon Fujimon PRESrDlll'-'TE DE l..\ REl'UBUCA Proy¡:cto:POR EL DIAl.OGO Y LA PAZ:AGRJCU LTORES COCALE ROS Plbrio dt Ciobic.rlli1 · Plaza de. tolo • üau COM.ITEOE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 ftc.r,.;a; - • .,,,,,.,.,- ] DISTRITO ; 1 e¡?.,, ,H61 /'-" . 1 PROVL' /)1 A / COORDL'IADOR ;-f / -¡ GEl'ERAL 1J4.cA' _Zi. - -- -- - - COORDl!\ADOR DE lf!_lfMr..v'' ACTASYARCHlVO ():;rAe/€/UJt: COORDINADO a DE (/'-•''"' {i)n' " 'd'9 - OR.G.4.NIZACIOI\ d.u 5,,¿ "" f4 c-4_ 2 l $] (" f/,,M 6& <,-,.., iJ (//,.,;z.. (} ...J A S "s"' /.f.,,Q,..,t;. COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. ,,,-A-S7ú-.:tS' COOR DINADOR DE Poa.,"1;:,1 DISCIPUNA C,v;z" n : e tJar facilidade..c; del ca\O a las pcr\onas 3ntes m-tncior.adas. ¡y.tr01 'l'1 el buen dc.4it'.mpcfio de sus funrione.co. rráttc!b Cl t &¡1 ' ' r{. C-!!1l,,t'1JU ttl t' d:t -- • 1 4 _.. _ _ · --=----- - -· ..::._- Ft•h• ,..2-P cÍl .Ju.f.,_;, I j .9/ ¿:; - -"""'"" deActu 160 F"EDERACION Ot PROnur.roru::s DF. HOJADECOCA VAi.LE OEI. RJOAPURfM,\C ,\YACUCHO Señor : Ingeniero '"\lbertQ 'Fujim.oci Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE U REPUBUCA Proy••wPOR EL DI ALOCO y LA PA2: AGRICULTORES COC:ALEROS Pilado de Gobkmo · PJ1:a de. Sin· llm:a COMrra DE PRODUCTORES DE : l l 1 $E "í' Tll l> - f' I &HA"'? I 1 OIS'lllITO : [ @11 !/V 6 I !'{ I 1 PROVTNCL... =I -l/l C.ol'I Ve/\J&/(7/'J 1 REGION : J J: IY C /' . INTF.RLOCUTORES V,\UllOS Par3 1os ei«ios de cualq\.lfcr Acuerda sobre Desanol!o Ahcn1a1ivo :i ser supcrvisadfl poi N:icioncs Uriidas. son lruerloo.uor« CARr.O NOM URF. 1.-E. COOROTN,\OOR jVl.A/Jfio f"/Q/l.A E, O 911- g:¿ O EN ERAL COORDINADOR DE . . ALTASYA.RCH1VO .JASJNTO .J.A//lfA /?. . .!c •' -;. COOIWINADOR DE rc/.IC.lrN o é-'lfl J DEFENSA · ' :_.::;.t¡. COOROll'JADOROEJ>¡o MtCI o J¡VI L{'\ 9. Z.9280 / · --.,""' PR&'ISA Y PROPAG. ' - - ' COORDINADOR DE Cfl8flLL/+ L 2.!?Ul DISCIPUNA • . . ,.\gr.t.dccc:ré J:ir ca:MJ a lR.5 pe.n;ona., anle.$ meni:;:ionados, buen de.sempe ño de sus íuncio..,7r F _ ..:ha ·:., - - L -..... -. .... :ur ,. ,J ;: .. -. .,. FEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLE DELRJO APU RlMAC AYA CUCHO Scftar: lngcnicno Fujimori Fujimori PRESIDE!'ITE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyecto: POR EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: ACRICUL'l'ORES COcu.EROS de Gobi-::-mo • Pt.u ,\ nms j)q • Llmi COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : [C'A"t'rl' "'"' rA - 1 Dl!ITRITO : \ , 1, PROVTNClA REGlON = 1 ;,:,.,. 1 : l ¿¡vc4 · 1 INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Para Jos. eieC'tOf de cu:Uqutér acuerdo sobre Dc:s..1rrolto t\J\cmath·o a str supcrvi!:ado por IM t-Jaciones Unida$, $On lnttrlocuiorc-.s Válidos( CARCO NOMBRE L.E. COORDINADOR . r41'kc-tt>c:rJ lcÁ 7 GENERAL tfl/?fU,v,V¡? 21'€')"6?0Jl' 0-'- COOROINAOOR DE ....fu¡.. " ACTAS Y ARCHJVO 41.,;¡,, COORDINADOR DE . ORG/\NlZAOON ho ... Gs-r;¿;Q> COORDINADOR DE ECONOMIA COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. COORDINADOR DE DISCIPL..L'< r 2 > \ Li(l/oocPo# flrAm;,11si COORDINADOR DE ¡ DEFENSA l!Li;;111il/?fl o DELO c;qvz ¡Ju&cl.//J/A :HI rc!. Válidos: CARGO NOM.BRE l-E. f'I R"'IA COORDINADOR )v.<.«h'-" ti ..LAí' '7'f:ll>"t OENERAL. t3t>! fur;,. COORDINADOR DE Qt';'}a""'"'' /f'v«.r••.e."n ;lJ'l'l/.f03 ACTASYARCHJVO Á.-.Í- /f;:v.z_ COORDll'IADOR DE /(o/,/,v, .Z!!Z'/01 t I OROANl2.AOOl'I COORDlNADOR DE ¡.,,d,,'Y" )l,L.A.m.¿,., f?.tf$'?-:U D -:;uu,;:;f ECONOMIA ,Ja,.,f;¡ tfi¡,Q.z. - COORDINADOR DE. f/l.t..e.-c,li DEFENSA t a .i //.t>. /,.,.," 'i COORDINADOR DE ¡i/(t:t'1.u.f.ww )ilo r chr"- PRE'ISA Y PROPAO. (/¡/.lar: ,,L· ff$ U;:: Y":? i' COORDfNAOOR DE DISCIPLINA ,,,.; ,...,, z s ¿ 5' ¿ "f .Z'f 7. ,o\gr.tdeccré dar facilidades del caso a 1m personas antes menciOn3rlBS, f>"dttl d .f>'uen dc.>empct\o de sus funciones. ••- ,!!'/->! Fi;DEl1.AC10N OEPROOUCIORES DF. FIOJADECOCA AYACUCflO Scf1or: Albe-rto Fujimon Fltjimori PRESIDENTE DE v . REPUBUCA P1oyrnu:POR EL DIALOGO y L.,\ PA.Z:,\GR.ICULTORES COCALEROS P,lado c!c Gobreroo • Ptau de Af!nl.$ \In. · LllM COMITl!DE PRODUCrOR.ESDE :j 5/lNPANTIJAIT. 1 - DISTRn'O !J (.RlliN IJll't/ 1 PROVINCIA :j .lA C.l?N V é"NCfON=-i :C 'J::NCA INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS los eíenos de cualquier ncuerdo SQl)re Desarrollo 1\ lternaúYo a !.er ¡upcrvís,«do por W Naciones Unidas.. son lnterloc·u1ores Válidos: CAJIGO COORDINADOR GENERAL NOMBRE L.E. COORDI1'1A.OOR DE /'I . 1 ACTAS Y ARCHIVO 1/.$01{/g YéG"A COOODINADOR DE '/tc7'ol( 0Vf> N.}O CS:. 2..8 2.. 'fo 519 3 'f OROANfZACfON COORDINADOR DE_,.. L> ':t. " ;¿o " ECONOMIA I Eo8Al1'o r (J'ZO "!-• ¿,8 o .v/OS DE.51 Agradeceré d:n fac.ilidt\dts- dtl caso a las pcrso113.S antes. meoc.ionadas, tl \\utn des.ecr.pe.ñode.sus funciones. Pecha ,_:.o - O r - 9 / ....... ... t!' .. '_-., €Jl.71'" ;-' < !«e "1/) Ji ,. • ' - - . • 5-.)J7. 1 : --.. ...... - Ul:. HOJADCCOCA VALLE DEI. J\Yi\CUCHO $C!ñor: loge.nie.ro Al berto Fujimon Fujimori PRES!DE1'"TS o e R EPUl.lUCA Praye<1o; POK EL DI ALOGO Y LA l'AZ:.IGRICU LTORES COCALE ROS rtllc\o de f'l.au de Armas -sin · Lima COMITl! OEPRODUCTORES DE :j f!}IJ I NOl l'l l A LTI' - PIC"'Al'lJ I DISTRITO Pr\ OVll"CIA RUCION :I 1 :! úA CoN V e"NC.tDN 1 =I .T/\I cA 1 tNTERl..O C UTORF.S V,l!gJ · ', 1 COORDINADOR DE ' ACTAS Y AACH1vo.se6ic.10 /lu¡:¡MflAl5 ¡;/ O[t;7B9rs 7 COORDINADOR DE . t f · . fl -i'. ' ORGANlZACION JF8R1N'[n 1/Vlfl/(O 1:1.Ut"/tR) .1R1781.!o;¡$-'of?,., COORDINADOR DE : ECONOMIA Ci,gé,;..,"'º R -l'&niü>o C <:rsonas antes mcoc.ionada.s. para ea buen de$em _pcño de: sus funciones.. .. / / Ftth& S? 0 Co f2 'J / -- ......_ , J . """ "''' , ce • FE.DERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJAOECOCA V A.LLE O.EL RJO APURJ.MAC AYACUCHO Serior ; Ingeniero Alberto Fujimori Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyccto;POR EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZ:AGRICUL TORES COCALEROS Pa.ladá de- - P1aZlfl de. Amias tJn - UAl.A DE PRODUCTORES DE :{)r..e1 6'4P - }7c 1 DISTRITO PROVINCIA REGION 1:-ITERLOCUTORES \/AUOOS los de cualquier 3cuerdo .¡obre Dc+:utotlo Alternativo a Se.r por: !as Nn.C'iones Unidas. son lntcrfocutora Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE COORDINADOR Cu1<0 µAJL!Svl GENER-'\.L COORDINADOR DE '1J:,t.J.,., ACTAS Y ARCHIVO • COORDINADOR DE , ORGANIZACION -fr.. ¿ u,·_ , U., LE. FIRMA Á ;;:F)3t6S3 7 / .. _,(..,., LJ-f/ ".__, COORDlNADOR DE ,.._ , _ r _ . , .¡J ECONOMiA t'éft¿LUÍto e .l.,ili.Y, .. t.2 0 .. il - ,/ COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA -#,'(';AJ-j,,,p1,,, //.v.["$ - z¡ < COORDINADOR DE . PRENSA Y -¡t<,. tf,..J;I., d .,. COORDINADOR DE DISClPLINA ,C /(,, '"'"'" S,,¡f.,,.,_ ,,o Agrtldecert dar facilidades de1 é3SO a las pel'M'oas antes mencionadas., pan el buen de. sus funciones. . Pecha :z.o ·.,/U l..o / 9 'l / 165 FEOERACION DE PROOUCTORESOt HOJA DE COCA V Al.LE D EL.Rl O APU RJJllAC AVACUCHO Señor: Ingeniero Alber10 Fuj¡mori Fujimori PRESfOENTE DEL" REPUBUC\ Proyecto:POR EL DIALOGO Y LA P.U: AGRICULTORES COCi\LEROS f>:úario Je Coblicmo • P't.Ar.t dt. Ann;u. sin· Uma DE PRODUCl'ORES OS : !m -f.,<27º 11.¡y; - ==:J DISTRITO : 1 rft•,mdr,;/ 1 PROVINCIA : 1 .jP 1 REGION : j j INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Para los eícetos de C\lalquier scbro o ·erorrolio Alternativo o. ser svpervtS3do por las Nacione.s Unjdas., son lnicrlocutores Válidos: CA.RGO NOMBRE COORDINADOR ,,d '1 .J' CBNERAL rOORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVÓ ,t-3_,¿,-:u J¡;,·,5 COORDINADOR DE //, .' • .? ORGANIZACION //'¿,.,,,,¡ COORDlNAOOR DE ,#qp 5 Bi;,.;.¡; lJP.,1 ECONOMIA COORDINADOR DE /' DEFENSA / v e1 r J:Í;24 á•d /f,,,Tr COORDINADOR DE L J I l'RENS1\ YPROPr-\G.¿ '17q,AJ C VFAÍ COORDINADOR DE,17 JI DJSCJPUNA //""'.r,,v,,: ¡1,,""'617e LE. FtR."IA r ' , W P_ . ...... .l . lnad·or de AclaS￾F'EDERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE ROJAOECOCA VALLE DELR.10 APtJRJMAC AVACUCHO Scnor: Ingeniero Alb J d2/ 1 : 1 La ( O/./ .:;e.ve.,; ,v 1 :j 7MC,tl 1 INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS l.os tfe<",OS de cu3lqu1er aCtJerdo sobro Desarrolla ser supervisarlo por l:as Nacio.ics Unidas. son lnterloanorcs Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE L.E. FIRMA COORDINADOR GE1'1ERAL ) .rdMf r !ll é Q.¡; M-'«i•w '/1 COORDINADOR DE I;¡- 7 ACTAS Y ARCHIVO M J. KrNJ • ZMitlr-VtL R. ,- ,, ;?- COORDINADOR DE · o C oRGANIZACION PoRft /(. 16 _:e-:s COORDINADOR DE _ o /. ' ECONOMIA (} 11r F / ¡/A.f V!.,R lt .12. ']_:¡ 'f< COOROINADOR DE b -- oeFENsA 01A R ¡ ti g CA r< 1 LJ¡ -:ZíJ .n ;::::== .-- COORDINADOR DE . ,--.- PRENSA y PROPAG.( t A lid to A Ir A OA r>-:''il _;¿--=?';)Job￾COOROfNADOR DE --1"' ' ¡ ".: Íi'Qfl.Jz 5 ji/-'('-- DISCIPLINA J ¡_;;(/ • .'li 'f? ' .;¡:r .1\&tAdcc:cré. dar facilidade$ del caso a hu persono.s antes mencionadas. pora - t:l - buen des.empeño de fundones.. •• I??/ 167 fEDERACION DE PRODUCTORES OE UOJADECOCA VAl..LEDELRIOAl'URIMAC /\YACUCHO Señor : Ingeniero Alheno Fujimori Fujünori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUllUCA Proywo:POR EL Dl/\LOCO Y U PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS P:abiciu &:: Gcbicnao .. de. ., " .. t.:me. COMtrEDE PRODUcroRes DE : fue - """' YO 1 DISTRITO PROVlNCIA REGION :i @w1rl St/2./ 1 : 1 J-ll CtJ-'"''e.-.,c °,,.; 1 :¡ .J"N'C.L> 1 INT'ERLOCUTORES VALI DOS Plra los de cualquier 3rotrdo sobre De5i!rrollo Alternativo :i. ser .supenrls.ado por las Naciones UnidM. son lntcrlocu1otcs Válidos: CARGO COORDINADOR GENERAL COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHlVO N OM.BRE L.E. FIRMA /• , ' /1 tJl•OH o•lt Cto.. J.Ju&<.nO l..t 2SS',"'!OS·9 ,;.'u..,(.,_,, COORDINADOR DE / ORGANlZACJON fi., ', DE - ECONOMIA R,¿." .• G,, .. ,,t,p. l{w .. .,.. ·-'" <,o6Si'., 41"-.P COORDINADOR DE Se.,-.01' COORD11'A.DOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. Agradeceri: d:lr facilidades del C:1S0 :a l!!S personas ménclonadas. part1 til buen desempeño de funciones. /ff?/ ' 1b .__, rdJnador de. Ac:.tn.s f EOEfUCIO .... 0EPRO lJLC10RES DE HOJA DE COCA VALLEDELRJ OAr lJRIMAC AYJ\CUCHO So-hor -:_ ln¡;enicrn Albeno Fujirnori fujimori PRESlDENTE DE lAREl'U'BUC:,\ Proye<10:POR E L 01/.LOCO Y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COQU.EROS r111aa de: Gobicmo · l"tw An:nl.\ -lo'" Li:r.JS COMITEDE?RODUCTORES DE M f!J.o DISTRITO . : PROV!NClA : 1 V-1- CO-V véiA/O aN 1 REG ION / ,Y VAL! OOS los c!caOI de rualauier acuerdo sobre .·\.htm:u.ivo a ser por tas Nadttncs: Unirlas_ sori lruerlocut'lrcs Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE L.E. COORDINADOR GENERAL IU Uo/f,,.1) 0 .f'9- (, C.e /JO M º"-'re ;zor COORDINADOR DE. ,4>.,q eµ> ACTAS y ARCHIVO tz-9.M os ¿¿:43S$9.S COORDINADOR Di '< ORGAN17.ACl0 1' (Ílv/.r¡te DE 1tt1,f.JtrA/ ,f'.4,l;-f'l'./G-4 C/..vt/f:'_¿CJS c.§ .S:;G / S Z .6 COORDlNADOR DE ffJT'Otfl/O t;'///,f l"i! DEl'"ENSA V"efN,,_,.f,1?4 COORDINADOR DE ..f' COORDl1'ADOR DE ..._..;: d&/e;us DISOPUNA M ENtJ/P6-1Z...f 2S.33 IY6S FIRMA .., . d;u-- del CMO a 'a.s. p.ersonf!l .inteJ para el buen de&empoOO de rus funciortt1. Fecha .k ()/; _,., d//1}'/ • ¡ ........ 168 FEDERACION O E PRODUCTORESDE HOJA DE COCA VAu.E DEL RIO AP URlMAC AYACUCHO Seóor : Ingeniero Albeno fujimori Fujim9ri PRESfDENTE DélA REPUBUCA Proyceto:POR EL DIAL O GO y u PA Z: A GRJCULTOJU:S COC/\1,E ROS Palacio de Gobkm-o • P'1*28 de A-rm/14 $.In · Lima COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE :¡(1;,.,,._f; DISTRrro PROVINCJA REG ION : l_jí U.<"-• 1 : !:]¿ c,v,, • () ,-..) 1 : l ;:¡ 1 IN TERLOCUTOR.ES VAJJ DOS Para. los de cualquier acuerdo sobre DcsarroUo Alternativo a ser supervisado por las Sadoncs Unidas. soo lnrcrloctHore.s Válidos: CARGO NO Mll RE 1.-E. FIR.MA COORDINADOR J /J · _j -k,_ GE.!>lEIW.. fú/;'C5 /b-'-'':fr•' 9 F :,t COORDINADOR D.!L-{ • . ' ·· - .-\CTAS Y ARCHIVO< /; ¡/,/. rlf¡N-;/¡,t /A/.-,:.S,,pi• Á e,.,: '5"/::>-& l-..C,/ / " - - _ .... COORDINADOR D&--- r ¡/. ,.., / ->" ., º"'''"' r /' ' -1 ORGA.NTZAC.ION 14L iL.¡() r'¡n;:¿ //,.¿• /.¿",,<.7 ·"' ;.- , ' •. COORDINADOR DE t-i--,r- v 1 ,,.- • --"«,·u., ECONOMIA t=;t>/-··-' [6 ...,. • .,,-. :::4?- COORDJNADOR -o E J r · _ - Jo ,,..,_;, DEFENSA .. fUi70"' ¡ r:: ¡f.,_iv.>}.'é _M.,:,,1./-0,c k:«·/- " , • _, COORDINADOR ÓE /1 . 1./,,,,c M¿:J.o ·Z -"f' PRENSA Y PROPAC..:....l-l,($1l:C¿:J )'í-' 7 · ...... COOR DINADOR DE • _ · • .. . .e · f.?. .. DISCIPLINA ¡.> a/lfa:.# :-1- ";lo . Agn1deceré- dar íacilidades del a tas- personas anres rneoctonado,s, para el buen desempef\o de sus /'; _JJ..., ¡ . _n Fecha < ». = ..1.v...b...o ,,q'/519/ ,d-;¡¿d f!,, · ·a?- COOniinador de A.ceas DE l'ROllUCTOR.ES UE llOJA DE COCA \'Al.LEDELRI OAPURJMAC AYACUCHO Scf1or: J.ngcnicro Alberto Fujimori Fujimori PRESIDENTE OE L.<\ ilEPUllUCA P1oywo:POK F.L DIALOGO Y u l'AZ:ACRICULTO RES COCALEROS t:t-.bdo de º*'no · Plan Anuas )/n. • Linu COMITEDEPRODUCTORES DE :!Gl'í'AN S Hl/\fONG,4RI -f'T-.,/1( ... yoj DISTRITO : 1 @t.I IN B 1 R 1 J : 1 )..A C,.o N V5 N C..I O N 1 RECIOf'I : 1 J"'N CA l INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Pu--a Jo¡ cícnos de c1,13lquier ac:ucrdo sobre- Desarrollo Ah.crnativo s ser .st.tpervt.i.ado por ll'!$ Naciones Unidas. son l.nterlOC\irores CARCO NOMBRE L..E. COORDINADOR (Í)tlMur 2.3'2."f- GE.'lERAL COORDINADOR tJJk. 2..t' 1-8l'f1 t. .... cr .... s y ARCHIVO COORDlf'IAOOR DE c. ..... í.·"'-0 ft>...,,,.,, ?.. 8 '11>> D r ORGA>"IZ1\C!Ol" ·:J ""!""- COORDll'IADORDE µ:_:,;,'.,-, -is:>.:rovs ECONOMt,\ vr-··- COORDINADOR DE ) --h "" f":. -t ..... - F. DEFENSA · COORDINADOR DE C\.. - . ' r_ l ,{\ .2. o • -- PREl'S•\ Y l'ROPAG. 7n11J1.CMU l..I(, 4 ¿ \'9l, COORO!NA.OOROE k;.¿ j·I · ...._ ¡fi__,; 'i8' "-/'30 01saruNA o- - ""· "" --=.__..; ;< dar l:aci1id:idcs del a las pcrsonao;, nntl'5 menc:ínnaó:t\, ,.., desempcñO rk sus funciones. 169 íEOERACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJ..- DECOC/. VALU:OEl.RIOAJ>URIMAC AYACUCHO Señor: Ingeniero Albeno Fujimori Fujimori PRESfDENTE DE lA REPUBUCA Proycc1o:POR El DlAl.OGO y LA PAZ: ..-ciucut.TORES COC\LEROS P-.bóo _>\(TAS Y 1\RCHJV0.2't>1;/t ( ¿tf'.&i Al:-,,,.;.:.1'. b COORDlNAIX)R QE....-• • • ORGAN!ZAC!ON lc.r.""/-,,•;-" L. ;: Í;"í Fil 15 FIRMA 2r;c/??1 AiJ"'deeer! dar P.idUdadcs del c:uo 3 las 2nte1 mencionada.\, par: el t>uen de!cmpcflo de .sus f\lneione,.. 4 J. . J) • , ) Fecha ,u? OÍ.f !..A..t;.<..O di/ J' .P/ 170 Ft.1>1:RAC10:-. OEPROOl..CTORl:.S OE HOJAOECOCA VALLEOELRIOAPVRl~ C AYACUCHO Señor: ln¡trtit-ro Afhe.no Fujimori FujimM PRESIDEJYTE DE LA REPlJBUCA ~"'Y«IO:J"OR ELOIALOCO Y U PAZ;ACRICUl.TORES COCAJ li'.fJ< "fAN7.P,t! oz~. DISTRJTO : tPV/-'f~/~I PRO~CIA REGIO;-/ p,-, &c:w/t-6.V&/EA/ ·pc,/1- INTERLOCLIORES VALIDOS """""'" ~ Par3. los eícC'.05 ck cualquier arocrdo snbrc Dt'sa."Tollo Ahe.~Iauvo" U:r supcrv!udo por 13! '.':2c.one.s Urudas. son 1oterloa.itorc-s \r'1klos; · CARGO NOHRRE L.E. f'1R\IA COORDINADOR GE:-.ERAI. ~µ~o 1..:.0,rAJ e~sr,e. o Z3 J/~~:;. ,~~ COORDINADOR DE """'"'&&ero ¡pw.r l't: ACfAS Y ARCHIVO ~(j) v / i!.-' ~ YPrY COORD!N • ...OOR QE ,._,._,.,'1N ÑlhfA'-f }'4 ORG/\NlZACION / A/7"Qf&"f 23 fcil J P < [t,,1a 1.. ep~,.;.x~ - . . !Jt-.... :1> COORDINADOR DE 6rR/&O J f/&&. 2'?'! 1 y<,¿' Z /2/1' 6 #.P .r OISCIPL!NA Ct-'NC4S :r.~97/J>.Jr . .\¡;radcc.cré d:i.r ~clidad:.s del aso a 1::s pctSOnll$ m1c1 mcnaor.adu. p1r1 •il 'i.u.co de IORF.S V .\U DOS P.::.tt IOi ciecios d:: cualqw:.r 3CUcrdt.) snbrc 0c..a.rro)tl0 :\Jtcmauvo a ¡ec »ipccvi'-'tdo por !as :"':.aones Li"cid;is. ion ln~tr1onuorcs \'ilidOI: C \.RCO COORO!r-:ADOR GE..">:ERAL l>O\lllRE l..E. ~_p Q57'4,11"4' ~º C!ffe6t~ COOROL'IADOR 06 '7 . ORGAN!ZACION ..f/'f'.,(),ll(U CP.f/J62: ll--sPJ O?f'S6~S' COORDL"1ADORDE4 · 17, ECOt'IOMIA ¿~A~ Z.N~ct?tfit;emvH t€560~0~ COORDINADOR DF. DEFE..'<:íioderu> ñrnooncs. ' ! e . { :J {l f'tti.o ~ OV_r_.... ~~'-f:l§ I la> 171 FEDERACIOI< DE PRODUCTOIU:S DE HOJA DE COCA VAU.& DEL RIOAPURJMAC AYACUCHO Senor: Ingeniero Aibwo Fujimori Fujlmori PRESIDENTE DE L.._ REPUBUCA Proyccio:l'OR EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZi AGRICULTORES COCALEROS P.Uáo de Oobiemo • '1ua tk Arm:a.$ sin· Um• COMITE DE PRODUCíORES DE : JSSN.:ir.?Ul:'Aro -;<7b rl&y o 1 ormrro : 1 rf),,,, .. ,1Jt'2t 1 PROVINCIA : 1 CCid ¿ L°c t<. 1 REGION ' 1 .7 ,,., e .a ' ' 1 INTERLOCu'TORES VALIDOS Para los cícC1os. dc cualquier acuerdo sobre Des.arrollo Ahcmadvo a .ser superviS1do µor Nac.iones ünidas.,-son Válido$! CARGO NOMBRE L E. flR.MA COORDl,NADOR . GE .. "'fERAL M !!f'lu { ? Mffjftl ;q'2Q ifl.a COORDINADOR DE • ACTAS y ARCHIVO '"1 a;, ,.,, ,., MceE«/" "11 ;?b'sz- ,JO,- ' < - COORDINADOR DE ORGANlZ.ACl'ON C'nÍ/ ll!-8M <" l 11_(¿ 1t D,(".;l? G COORDINADOR DE , .Jtikfl ECONOMlA gcwltcJ v,#ttn=fu ¡1t .:k?.:J 5 1 -=:¿ COORDINADOR DE , - OE.FENSr\ -D! M flé¡ a C_cHnr,? 'Fe t¡q -- COORDINADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAG. dar í3oilídi:tdt.s de! e.aso a lni pcr"OQA.S mcncion,adas-. para di buen dc:senlpeho de sus .. Fecha ;:!O ./<,( M / '/ 9 / .. ' . . . ..... , FEOERACION OE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA VAi.LE DEL RIO APURIMAC A'(AC(JCHO Señor: Ingeniero Alh-eno Fujin1ori Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBU CA Proyecto:POR EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS 1'al1e1Q de. Goblcmo - PJ.u dc-Armu s{n - Um¡ COMITB DE PRODUCTORES DE : . .,7, _.,,.,, 1 OISTRn'O ' 1 (4-_,,,_, 6 ,,,,,, 1 PROVINCl A REGION : ,Á., ¡lj-,.1.._"J .. 1 : 1 "PC ;J j INTEKl..OCUTORES VALIDOS P:i10 los eíe-c,<:>s de C\.!a.lquicr acuerdo sobre -Ocs.arrollo Ahern:nivo o ser jupcr.iisndo por las Unídns, son ln1erton11orcs \ 1.2.tidos: CARGO NOMBRE 1-F- FIRMA. ,,,.,.- ,.(), J .... d,?,¿J :¿s•.J,j.JJ_ ¡;v COORDINADOR DE ,,(6,,,,,,, ACTAS Y ARCHIVO - r •r· ·• o/'--::" COORDINADOR DE 64,1c,,._,,; ;<>.U•"W¿9'M.S,; \ ORGANIZACION í'' f '¡J/;:ii,' 1 COOR DlNADOR DE .¡ /, . ;/ • ;¿¡,:JJ/Z.11 <:! • ·¡' ECONOMIA ¡YC Jr,P • " 1r"' l'l'-•'·,ou ,,.z, _'-:/1#>..,/ _ COORDINADOR DE - -O, .o ,- "71'< DEFENSA. - · <"'-:'*.-.e .. :;z COORDINADOR DE ,,, ,/., • v y PROPAG. /VA&t.t.t.:-k /.:Zr}'t;.1t,.11,.' /"'r.l.Ji COORDINADOR .... Md _;.; Sf,e-v• tJJ?.Jt.r/z ;;¡, ,_ DlSClPUNA - ._., - _ e I "' 172 l'E1Jt:RAC10,\ tlEPROOll lUR.t.SOl:: HOJA DE COCA \'ALLEDELRJOAPURJMAC AYACUCf10 . SoJ\or: fn¡cníe10 Alberto Fujitnorl Fujimori PRE.stDE?-trE DE LA REPUBUCA PrO)'e : F.:rtUHP,¿iJ.- 1 PROVINCIA : 7 Ú"1t/#1'-'C: .,,;., 1 REOION ·I ' 11' TERLOCUTORES V,\J..fDOS Para Jos efectos- ée- cualquieracoerdo Sobre Des3n'Ollo Alttrnativo a por 13$ Nao.onc-s Unid.1111 5Qn lntetlocutores￾CARGO BR.E LE. FTRMA COORDINAPOR h.JObtc Des.arrollo .-\Jtcrnaúvo J. .M:r supcrvisac!Q por tu Unldns, $0n lnlerlocu1orcs Válidos: CARGO NOMBRE LE. ftRMA COORDIN • .\DOR GE!'IERAL 4"!1/./IJ_e-P-TO COORDINADOR DE ACTAS Y ARCHIVO COORDINADOR DE ORCAN12AOON P:l l.11!./IJl'//1 o;_"'-52'!01 .:t3SC5 ,., ,.,-E COORDINADOR DE • ,, . • ECONOMIA lfl'P.10 A Y/JUJ 8éUli>()· :i'd'5¡ "fCtf.. \. --- 1,d - /.7h,/Hl'fl }f,4 Agradeceré dar facflidadt.s del caso a las personas antes mencionad.as., paro el buen de!empc:OO de sus .. . Fecha '°º' ,,,. ,. .. 173 l'F.DF.RACION DE PRODUCTORES DE HOJA DE COCA \ 'Al.U: Df!l. RIO APURIMAC AYACUCHO Scaor: lngeruero Albcno Fujimori Fujimori PRESIDENJC DE U\ REl'UBU CA Proyccto:l'OR EL OIALOCO Y LA PAZ: ACRICULTORES COCAU2.ROS Palado d: Oobitmo · Pb.u de Arm.as Va - ÜJU COMITEDEPRODUCTORESDE :l 'fv!:R T/J 01STRITO :[ SAN "'1.Al'l/ll'l :J>é P/>r<.GoA 1 PROVlNCIA : 1 S /1 T 1 -;> /) 1 REGION :j_MAJj'/SCA l. $ j INTERLOCUTORES V;\UDOS Para lS-¿A C RIJS .23 93 /;(.52. ACTAS Y .AROITVO cooJWINADORD.E¡>1µ-1..io V.4s11>11e-s }.,, 23 93/S.R-S ORGANIZAC!ON DE ,A 61\ 11"1 :J..3 '19 ECONOML'\ COORDINA.OORDE ¿;¿,qup;o f'ttt-AC.A 3! '1& 2.818 DEFENSA COORDINADOR DE __/ A -2 3 94' / fi' t9 PRENSA Yl'ROPAG. COORDINADOR DE ¡t.N rcNID í3€lJt VIJ/)E 2 3 91/ / r t.3 DISCll'LINA Agradcce.rt dar radlidadC$ del a las perscnas antes p3r3 et buen dc.s.empeñQ de sus funciones. . F"cch• $p - Coordlniidat dt: Actk!I Señor: Ingeniero Alhcno Fujimori Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE U. REPUBU CA Proyccto:POR EL DlALOCO YlA l'AZ;i'GRJCULTOll.ES COC\U'.ROS de Gobierno 4 PI.u.¡ de Armas sin .. LlN COMrrE DE PRODUCTORES D E : :º'º t"A ,.,._ - ""- i DISTRITO PROVINCIA REGION '1 &.f!/S?,4' td9e'é/Zé'? - =i INTERLOCUTORES VAU DOS Para los eféctos de C\lalquier acuerdo sobre Desarro!io AlrernOliYO a ser supervisado por hu. N:u:-¡ones Unidas. son lnterlocutore.s \':ílidos: CARGO NOMBRE L E. COORDIN,o\DOR ,,tl'1 LL0. COORDINADOR DE ,;:-'P/2. ,4/H /1 GÁID s . ECO!'OMlA A/il ,N1.t2€_2 ÍP/.Jrl17€; - COORDINADOR DE DEFENSA COOROlNADOR DE PRENSA Y PROPAO. COORDINADOR DE DISClPWNA .(JL/; > e SPl'N<.:>2/9. :t# JH ff /2.1' D e/1 (. '1 /2 0 5"f (, r. 9'S95", -f7í/.;/7 /2. r ,a tiE' cN B , ,t-,. Agradeceré dar facilidades caso a las personas antes mencionadas, parn el buen desempeño de s:us iunciones. .. te r.1)1 it '.· Coordl nador dt- Aetas 174 DÉ PRODUCTORES DE HOJADECOCA VAU..EDELRIOAPURIMAC AYACUCHO Sc5or: Ingeniero Fujimori Fujtmori PRESIOEm"E DE LA REPUBUCA Proyecto:POR EL DIALOGO V LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS Palacio de · Plua de. • Uma COM rrE DE PRODUCTORES DE : Ctl8 R / - Z.· € ¡./ €. 1 DtSrRITO : 15,q,,; HM iílv ,)E fnN(áoP· - 1 PROVINCL\ : 1 SºPí11'0 1 REG lON : 1 l'f PtiJ.St:.Ht. ,c,&.c¿rn.8 . 1 VALlllOS Para los eíec1os de c:ualquier acuerdo sobce .Dc.sarroUo Ahc.rnativo n ser superv\sado por las Naciones Unidas., son lntcrlOC'JtOres V:tlidos: CARGO NOMBRE L..E. FlRl\\A COORDINADOR -:J'V t.1 t> PO :Z.o JENERAJ.. FE ¡2.N,4J.l,)E ?. ' COORDINADOR DE _e,.,z.¿.p.s / r:>:>J; ]SS711 ::'l ACT,\S V ARCHJVO .#AJ,/! PIO COORDINADOR DE 5'¡12;:¡u,o1 ti DISCIPLINA ,l!oHé'Rt:J. LLJ!28-?ol!P ...... K;? . ., r\ a.rsdeccré dar faciUdadt-$ dd é3SO a tas personas- mencionada' para el buen desempeño desusfuntioncf. ,, Coordinador de Actas ..>COVt. Ingeniero Albeno Fujimori Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPIJBUCA Proyccto:J>OR EL DIALOGO Y LA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCAl.EROS Palacio de .. P1ab de Arma. /Jn • L.im REOION INTERLOCUTORES VALIDOS Para los efcct0$ de rualquicr acuerdo sobre De.sarrollo Alternativo a ser supervísado por IM. "iacione:s Unidas. son tniedoonorc.s \lálidos: CARGO COORDINADOR GENERAL COORDINADOR DE NOMBRE L.E. FIRMA Mu,: d-;..Uft...u. t . ....._ ORGANlZAClON .S.: ( 4'06f'/'.¡;: /V]tJ/Z.& ¿'¿-s. COORDINADORDE /ZAúL if>,¿J;1/ellAéS ACT,.\SYARCHJVO C-} COOROINAOOR DE ORGAN'IZ,\ CION E&> .JI .1/Z Pd s.!" Né'ltl:'J e?"lt!Jf?i. COORDIN1\00RDE ECONOMIA /Y 1'-y.o ... u:1oy. . " " - COORDINADOR DE A G1/4 n:. !fjo/,?¡, OE"E.'ISA. Y JI¿ .,;- 0 COORDINADOR DE f'"'"'¡, PRENSA Y PROPAG. f!l u,'s¿ - g:;y91Nt., . """ COORDINADOR DE.,{,_.,,., p;,.t,_.,;.,.o • _ A 1t,; 8 ->.., º e J dar fidtid.ades C:!SO 3 las antes mencion.ada.s. para el buen de .sus fu.nci.onc.s. . . \ .,mtrtrltt<-1'1N!l i• hll Ct r Coordinador dt ÁC-Uli i 1- J .... úu; . Ingeniero Albeno Fujimori Fujimori PRESIDENTE DE LA REPUBUCA Proyecto:POR E.LDIALOCO YLA PAZ: AGRICULTORES COCALEROS r.i.ao de Gobicroo. Pl:au dc.Annu-w - t..i.ma COMITE DE PRODUCTORES DE : 1 -,O,.;.r.1,v/;:J4 IZI_::. & - -=i DISTRITO : l SAN ,M .OIZ -tíN :¡]. lj>,11-Vs "d 1 PROVINCIA : 1 S LJ 1í P O 1 REGION : J C .A .t:: E ,rz..¿; S · 1 INTERJ..OCUTORSS VALIDOS Paro los efectos d" cualquier acuerdo tobre Desarrollo Alternativo o ser supemSl!do por las Naciones Unida.<, son Interlocutores Válidos: CARCO NOMBRE L.E. COORDINADOR MAn.,a /1)'4Ld i3ca-J:;o i!ll' .5 -'/<71S COORDCNADOR DE yY ,,u;;/F7Z (!l.p,;r'c' :!!8 "/{d3.S<;, ACTAS Y AROllVO C' ¿,Al,,,,,,...,,,,. COORDINADOR DE ,Nl/.J,V D tfJ.'iV€DéJ ORGANIZAOO!'f e. u,,....,;?;;,..,"'. .e 7" e" J 6 COORDL'IADOR DE ,4 ECONOMIA Y,u> ¡IWOZ.-/.J Lé'S . COORDINADOR DE ,El•;,.-,, ¿ / ocT;i,!,,,....,,;.,, f!.3 /l'Ot:. DEFENSA ¿"' """ COORDINADOR DE 1 JJ A-v ¿;,1;'1/J J'e;'O PRENSA Y PROPAG. 'I" ¡:?.,: /7A COORDINADOR DE JaC44/i'1; .P..o_/.«to:POR F.L Dl"LOCOY l.A PAZ: ACRlClll-TORES COCALE ROS P•t.Kto de: (id)ic.rno • Pi.Ln .-!: Armas 1.'n: • 1..i:nt COMITEDEPRODUCTORES DE ·[Gl'í'-'N "'SÑi/\IQ N,.-,.,.., -f'ro,/lfl\YO DISTRITO · 1 (QIJIN 1 , Pl\OVll"Cl.A 'ÜA VéNC..ION ] RECION =C TNCA ' 1:-ITERLOC\J"TORES V \LJDOS P&r11 lo> cícc:tM de <'•31qulc:r aC11c:do •obre Oounollo Altcrn>tivo a>« 1opervú.!ldt• I'"' I•! Sae,.,nc• Unídu. '°' lntcrlocu1nrt! Vfüd'-' z;r¿i '!'H'f COORDINADOR DEi\.v. • 11 J 11 ACTAS Y ARCHJVO l rt&."""""' 2.f Uf l'flf, COCIROl"AOOR DE ORIJA.'11Z.ACIO:-I }-J. ,u,u> '2. 8 7- D Lf / 'j<; COORDINADOR DE µ. _ ;,.;..:., ¡J..w-14, f" 8 :)-? O 2.1 ECONOMIA .,,,.---- F. t ¿ 1.3 79 COORDINADOR DE C\.. _ ' 9 r _ 1 ({) - ·' PREl'SA vrROPAG \C..(IM.IOb (',, :;_g 2.=t-'H'H, COOPO!Nl\DOR DE \e>.2. ¡·I . ·(J ' DISCll'LL'1A - 1 INTERLOCUTORES ViUJDOS Pva loo c!cetos de cualquier llC\lerdo sobre OcurroUo A11emati•o a ser supcMSldo por las Naciones Unk!as, son lnterloc:u1ores Vtlidos: CAllCO NOMBRE LE. COORDINADOR /19¿ ¡;(IPYl9 GE.'IERAL 71/V:>[_c n YI? .: kl?Y//'n;> ú? S?S:2. 'p c,o7/ll# G /?. E Yl'IP t. ]Yr; ,f Q D.7,. {' 1: ;u, #D /'LCE "1r'll- ;¿.e-,JJt:j) e ::> .H' óVC'í. 'l.J