Quito's objectives

Nearly five hundred representatives from Africa (Cameroon, Burundi, Kenya, Madagascar, Morroco, Nigeria, Uganda, Tanzania), Latin America (Argentina, Bolivia, Brasil, Chili, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela), Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, India, Indonesia, Nepal, Tadjikistan, Thailande, Uzbekistan) and Europe (Albania, Bulgaria, France, Georgia, Italy, Roumania, United-Kingdom, Switzerland) met in Quito from 17 to 22 September 2002 on the invitation of the World Mountain People Association to answer a central question : can the mountain peoples of the world arrive at a common vision of mountain regions that will enable them to construct a common equitable and sustainable development project and to act together to achieve it ?

The foundation of a joint action
At the conclusion of the four days of discussions, the representatives of mountain territories observed that two mountain cultures were expressed during the deliberations. On one hand, that for which the mountains are conceptually differentiated from the rest of the territory, subject to analyses, measures, policies which are very concerned with effectively valorizing these territories in their own right or in order to provide a place for leisure and relaxation for urban citizens -this conception is widely found in Europe. On the other hand, that for which the mountains, rather than the subject of analyses, are territories structured by values cultural and spiritual that must not disappear by taking a path to development that would result in a denial of their identity -this conception is more widely found in the South. The exchanges that took place in Quito showed that these two cultures could be mutually beneficial and that close relations should be established between them to bring these two visions closer together without sacrificing the values specific to each.
However, the feeling of belonging to a common world and of being confronted with similar challenges was felt strongly and resulted in the adoption of common guidelines for action.

The objectives of common action
Participants considered that priority should be given to efforts along five lines, in order to move towards more sustainable and more equitable development of mountain regions, better controlled by the mountain populations, that could adopt the dynamics of progress but avoid serious imbalance in the evolution of the mountain regions, an abrupt break with the past and a loss of control of the management of the territory to outside interests whose objectives are limited to profit seeking rather than balanced, humanitarian development.

Participants at the Quito Encounter consequently agreed to set the following common objectives :

1. Gain greater empowerment and control in the management and use of resources of the mountain areas, while developing heightened awareness in the population of its responsibility as the manager of resources of a general interest. The populations must be able to fully exercise their rights over their territories, but they must also be conscious of their responsibilities and duties with regard to the community. 
2. Broaden the bases of the mountain economy - while maintaining the essential role of agricultural and forestry activities which are the real foundation of mountain territories - by developing activities and enhancing the value of the territories in a complementary, integrated way and by seeking products and means of production that will avoid putting excessive pressure on natural resources and destructive confrontation with territories or sectors that are much more competitive from the standpoint of productivity. 
3. Obtain a level of service and facilities comparable to those of other territories by affirming the principle of territorial equality that targets equal development opportunities for all territories and living conditions as similar as possible, to promote national cohesion and highlighting all the nation's assets; this should logically lead to the implementation of equalizing, redistribution policies that could compensate unfavourable initial conditions. This is a prerequisite to ensure balanced development of the national territory, which should be an objective adopted by all nations by means of resolute land use policies to correct imbalances and to ensure equality of citizens.
4. Maintain the vivacity of the traditions and cultures that cement the cohesion of groups and populations to ensure that development does not undermine resources, culture and values, and local societies, but on the contrary, integrates new resources, cultures and values. The objective is to allow for progress that does not threaten individual or social structures. The mountain authorities and communities must be in a position to continually incorporate tradition and modernity to ensure continuity of the history of the community while preparing for the future.
5. Reinforce autonomy and the capacity for action of municipalities - or other local authorities - to construct and carry out a common development project in a difficult context, the mountains, where obligations and assignments more demanding because of the geographic and social context and the need to manage a territory where valorization and facilities are much harder to provide, and simultaneously to ensure good integration and participation of the population in the life and management of local communities.

These objectives - the broad lines of which are presented briefly here - were considered a priority by the representatives of mountain territories. Nevertheless, it is up to each country and territory to adapt them to its own situation. But the development of a coherent "project" for mountain regions was considered as the first indispensable stage that could enable mountain populations to come together to pool their efforts.

Resources to be mobilized

How can these objectives be reached in a context where the resources for development are lacking, where the capacity for political negotiation of mountain regions is small as compared to the needs expressed by urban areas with their demographic and political weight, where States objectively have limited capacity to redistribute resources, where the dominant culture intrudes on local cultures, where the risk of isolation or rejection exists for these territories ?

Three categories of answers were made.

1. It is up to the mountain people to depend on themselves first, as generations have done in the past under still more difficult conditions, and to mobilize their own energy before counting on outside assistance. As in the past, they must implement forms of active solidarity and - contrary to today's trends - seek collective solutions to their problems. Cooperation should be a rule of action in all fields. Community awareness of the situation, of the interests the members have in common and the need to meet challenges together should help them in this approach and encourage them to adopt this line.
2. The nation must show solidarity in favour of these territories. This is justified by the objective situation of these territories and by the services they supply to society. Mountain populations must make the government understand the importance of the issues that the mountains represent for the future in terms of natural, environmental, cultural and human assets. They must generate a national discussion on the future of these territories and their role and their place in the nation. The success of this approach will depend to a large extent on their capacity to present a clear vision of the future of their territories and the development path they propose to take.
3. International solidarity must be exercised actively also. This entails taking account of mountain regions and their specificity in the major international and regional programmes to promote development and fight poverty. This is a prerequisite for the effectiveness of their implementation in these regions. These programmes are financed by citizens of the entire world by means of contributions paid by their countries. It is only fair for those managing these funds to take account of the interest they have for mountain regions. This solidarity should also be exercised by means of cooperation programmes. These are still directed in too great a proportion to urban issues. Mountainous countries or the regional organizations that group them - like Europe - are invited to make a greater effort in favour of mountain territories on other continents in keeping with the effort they make for their own mountain areas on a national or regional scale.

An organisation to be put in place

To mobilize greater resources, to make themselves heard more broadly, to cooperate, to implement their project, mountain populations should set up an organization that brings them together-this was the opinion of the representatives of mountain territories present in Quito. This organization should be set up - or be reinforced where it exists - at the level of each country and the continental or sub-continental regions. It should be coordinated on worldwide scale.

This organization should carry out two essential functions.

1. The first function consists of representing and expressing mountain populations and making proposals. The representatives of the territories present in Quito are aware that they must meet, set up a dialogue, jointly define guidelines and in general constitute a social force to present their just demands, and be recognized as correspondents, which means they must be able to mobilize for the mountain peoples' project.
2. The second function is to mobilize the means and skills of mountain territories from the entire planet to put them to serve all. Considerable potential exists in mountain communities and institutions, research establishments, experts, etc. This cooperation and exchange function is based in priority on territorial authorities. A network of these authorities will be constituted to permit and promote relations and the development of a cooperation programme. This cooperation should be based on reciprocity; it should bring partners together who must cope with the same issues given their location in mountain regions. The foundation will initially be an exchange of experience and skills, but this should give rise to the mobilization of human and financial resources.

The representatives of mountain territories present in Quito decided to carry out their action in the framework of the WMPA, without making this organization an exclusive instrument, giving it a federating role beyond direct membership, due to the extreme diversity of situations and the methods of organization that already exist to serve mountain regions. The WMPA can play this role thanks to the flexible statutes it has adopted, the diversity of membership possibilities offered to NGOs, experts - alongside mountain authorities and communities that are the hard core - and the possibility for administrations or public institutions to become associate members.

Alliances and partnership to be developped

The representatives of the territories present in Quito felt that alliances and partnerships are very much necessary to increase the chances of promoting the cause of mountain regions. With this in mind, they invited the WMPA to respond affirmatively to the proposals made at the Johannesburg summit for a world partnership on mountain regions. They express the hope that all these partnerships or alliances would be coherent with the objectives defined in Quito.

Organising commitee of Quito encounter (Ecuador), September 2002

• Ministeries of Environment, Tourism, Agriculture, external relations, social welfare
• Quito municipality
• CONCOPE (Consorcio de Consejos Provinciales del Ecuador)
• AME (Asociacion de Municipalidades del Ecuador)
• CODENPE (Consejo de Desarrollo de las Nacionalidades y Pueblos del Ecuador)
• Consejo Provincial del Pichincha
• CONESUP (Consejo Nacion de Educacion Superior)
• ODEPLAN Oficina de Planificacion de la Presidencia de la Republica)
• CONAIE (Confederacion de Nacionalidades Indigenas del Ecuador)
• CEDIME (Centro de Investigacion de los Movimientos Sociales del Ecuador)
• CAMAREN (Consorcio de Capacitacion en Manejo de Recursos Naturales)
• ECLOF (Comité del Fondo Ecuménico del Préstamos de Ecuador)
• Federacion de Barrios Populares del Noroccidente
• Ecuarunari (Ecuador Runacunapac Riccharimui)
• Grupo del Programa Paramo
• FEPP (Fondo Ecuatoriano Populorum Progressio)