Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
INEQUIDAD SOCIOECONÓMICA EN COMUNICADES RURALES DE LOS RÍOS,  
ECUADOR: PERCEPCIONES DE LA COMUNIDAD Y BARRERAS PARA EL  
DESARROLLO  
SOCIOECONOMIC INEQUALITY IN RURAL COMMUNITIES OF LOS RÍOS,  
ECUADOR: COMMUNITY PERCEPTIONS AND BARRIERS TO DEVELOPMENT  
Autores: ¹Angélica Patricia Díaz Villavicencio, ²Haydeé Rocio Lara Suárez, ³Robin Giovanny  
González Echeverría, 4Martha Rocio Cedeño Vergara, y 5Freddy Jonathan Andrade Sánchez.  
¹ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1718-060X  
²ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0005-8240-490X  
3ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1645-6686  
4ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4650-7656  
5ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4188-2948  
¹E-mail de contacto: patriciadiazvi27@gmail.com  
²E-mail de contacto: rocio_lara1@outlook.com  
³E-mail de contacto: rgonzaleze@ecotec.edu.ec  
4E-mail de contacto: mcedeno@ecotec.edu.ec  
5E-mail de contacto: fandrade@ecotec.edu.ec  
Afiliación:1*2*Unidad Educativa 29 de Agosto, (Ecuador). 3*4*5*Universidad Tecnológica Ecotec, (Ecuador).  
Artículo recibido: 22 de Mayo del 2026  
Artículo revisado: 24 de Mayo del 2026  
Artículo aprobado: 26 de Mayo del 2026  
¹Licenciada en Ciencias de la Educación mención Educación Básica, egresada de la Universidad Técnica de Babahoyo, (Ecuador).  
Maestría en Educación Especialidad en Educación Superior, graduada de la Universidad Internacional Iberoamericana, (México).  
²Licenciada en Ciencias de la Educación especialización Computación, egresada de la Universidad Técnica de Babahoyo, (Ecuador).  
Maestría en Educación Especialidad en Educación Superior, graduada de la Universidad Internacional Iberoamericana, (México).  
3Economista, graduado de la Universidad de Guayaquil, (Ecuador). Magíster en Economía y Dirección de Empresas, egresado de la  
Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, (Ecuador).  
4Ingeniera en Auditoria y Contaduría Publica Autorizada, egresada de la Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, (Ecuador). Magíster en  
Administración de Empresas, egresada de la Universidad Tecnológica ECOTEC, (Ecuador).  
5Economista, egresada de la Universidad de Guayaquil, (Ecuador). Magister en Economía y Dirección de Empresas, egresado de la  
Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral, (Ecuador).  
comunidades rurales (Febres Cordero, La  
Resumen  
Unión, Abras de Mantequilla, Zapotal y San  
Carlos) con recolección de datos cualitativos  
incluyendo 120 entrevistas a informantes clave  
y 30 grupos focales. El estudio utilizó análisis  
estadístico descriptivo y análisis temático,  
fundamentado en los marcos teóricos del  
enfoque de capacidades y desarrollo territorial.  
Emergió una variación significativa en los  
patrones de desigualdad entre comunidades,  
con áreas remotas experimentando mayores  
tasas de pobreza percibida (86.7% en Abras de  
Mantequilla vs. 57.2% en San Carlos). Las  
comunidades identificaron consistentemente la  
falta de oportunidades de empleo (77.4%),  
Las comunidades rurales de Ecuador continúan  
experimentando  
desigualdades  
socioeconómicas persistentes a pesar de los  
esfuerzos nacionales de desarrollo y los  
constitucionales  
crecimiento inclusivo. Comprender tanto los  
patrones objetivos de desigualdad como las  
comunitarias  
es importante para  
intervenciones efectivas de desarrollo rural.  
Este estudio examina las desigualdades  
socioeconómicas en comunidades rurales de la  
provincia de Los Ríos, Ecuador, enfocándose en  
las percepciones comunitarias de la desigualdad  
y las barreras al desarrollo, integrando medidas  
cuantitativas con experiencias cualitativas  
comunitarias. Se empleó un diseño de  
investigación de métodos mixtos, combinando  
encuestas cuantitativas a 390 hogares en cinco  
compromisos  
con  
el  
percepciones  
disparidades  
de  
estas  
diseñar  
acceso  
limitado  
al  
crédito  
(65.6%)  
e
infraestructura deficiente (65.6%) como causas  
primarias de pobreza. Las estrategias de  
afrontamiento incluyeron migración temporal  
(51.3%), participación en ayuda mutua (58.2%)  
y preocupante dependencia del trabajo infantil  
Página 572  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
(30.5%). Las comunidades rurales demuestran  
comprensión sofisticada de las causas de  
desigualdad y mantienen capital social fuerte a  
poverty. Coping strategies included temporary  
migration (51.3%), participation in mutual aid  
(58.2%), and a concerning reliance on child  
labor (30.5%). Rural communities demonstrate  
a sophisticated understanding of the causes of  
inequality and maintain strong social capital  
despite structural limitations. However, the  
fundamental disconnect between community  
priorities and the effectiveness of government  
programs suggests that rural development  
pesar  
de  
limitaciones  
estructurales.  
Sin  
embargo, la desconexión fundamental entre  
prioridades comunitarias y efectividad de  
programas gubernamentales sugiere que la  
política  
de  
desarrollo  
rural  
requiere  
reorientación hacia enfoques centrados en la  
comunidad que aborden barreras estructurales.  
Palabras clave: Desigualdad, Percepciones,  
policy  
requires  
a
reorientation  
toward  
Comunidades,  
Territorial.  
Capacidades,  
Desarrollo,  
community-centered approaches that address  
structural barriers.  
Keywords:  
Communities,  
Territorial.  
Inequality,  
Capacities,  
Perceptions,  
Development,  
Abstract  
Rural communities in Ecuador continue to  
experience persistent socioeconomic  
inequalities despite national development  
efforts and constitutional commitments to  
Sumário  
As comunidades rurais do Equador continuam a  
sofrer com desigualdades socioeconômicas  
persistentes, apesar dos esforços nacionais de  
inclusive  
growth.  
Understanding  
both  
objective patterns of inequality and community  
perceptions of these disparities is important for  
desenvolvimento  
e
dos  
compromissos  
designing  
interventions.  
effective  
This  
rural  
study  
development  
examines  
constitucionais com o crescimento inclusivo.  
Compreender tanto os padrões objetivos de  
socioeconomic  
inequalities  
in  
rural  
desigualdade  
comunidade  
fundamental  
quanto  
sobre  
para  
as  
essas  
o
percepções  
disparidades  
planejamento  
da  
é
de  
communities in the province of Los Ríos,  
Ecuador, focusing on community perceptions  
of inequality and barriers to development,  
intervenções eficazes de desenvolvimento rural.  
Este estudo examina as desigualdades  
socioeconômicas em comunidades rurais da  
província de Los Ríos, no Equador, com foco  
nas percepções da comunidade sobre a  
desigualdade e as barreiras ao desenvolvimento,  
integrating  
quantitative  
measures  
with  
qualitative community experiences. A mixed-  
methods research design was employed,  
combining  
quantitative  
surveys  
of  
390  
households in five rural communities (Febres  
Cordero, La Unión, Abras de Mantequilla,  
Zapotal, and San Carlos) with qualitative data  
collection, including 120 interviews with key  
informants and 30 focus groups. The study  
used descriptive statistical analysis and  
thematic analysis, grounded in the theoretical  
frameworks of the capabilities approach and  
territorial development. A significant variation  
integrando  
medidas  
quantitativas  
com  
experiências qualitativas da comunidade. Foi  
empregado um método misto de pesquisa,  
combinando  
aplicados  
questionários  
390 domicílios  
quantitativos  
em cinco  
a
comunidades rurais (Febres Cordero, La Unión,  
Abras de Mantequilla, Zapotal e San Carlos)  
com coleta de dados qualitativos, incluindo 120  
entrevistas com informantes-chave e 30 grupos  
focais. O estudo utilizou análise estatística  
descritiva e análise temática, fundamentadas  
nos referenciais teóricos da abordagem das  
capacidades e do desenvolvimento territorial.  
Uma variação significativa nos padrões de  
desigualdade emergiu entre as comunidades,  
com áreas remotas apresentando taxas mais  
in  
inequality  
patterns  
emerged  
among  
communities, with remote areas experiencing  
higher rates of perceived poverty (86.7% in  
Abras de Mantequilla vs. 57.2% in San Carlos).  
Communities consistently identified lack of  
employment opportunities (77.4%), limited  
access to credit (65.6%), and deficient  
infrastructure (65.6%) as primary causes of  
Página 573  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
elevadas de pobreza percebida (86,7% em  
Abras de Mantequilla vs. 57,2% em San  
Carlos). As comunidades identificaram  
multiple dimensions including access to quality  
education, healthcare services, productive  
infrastructure,  
financial  
services,  
and  
consistentemente a falta de oportunidades de  
emprego (77,4%), o acesso limitado ao crédito  
(65,6%) e a infraestrutura deficiente (65,6%)  
como as principais causas da pobreza. As  
estratégias de enfrentamento incluíram a  
migração temporária (51,3%), a participação  
em ajuda mútua (58,2%) e uma preocupante  
dependência do trabalho infantil (30,5%). As  
participation in decision-making processes that  
affect community development (Larrea, 2020).  
Such multidimensional inequalities not only  
limit individual and household opportunities  
but also constrain the overall territorial  
development potential of rural communities  
(Benita et al., 2022).  
comunidades  
compreensão  
rurais  
sofisticada  
demonstram  
das causas  
uma  
da  
Understanding socioeconomic inequalities in  
rural contexts requires moving beyond purely  
desigualdade e mantêm um forte capital social,  
apesar das limitações estruturais. No entanto, a  
desconexão fundamental entre as prioridades da  
comunidade e a eficácia dos programas  
governamentais sugere que a política de  
desenvolvimento rural requer uma reorientação  
para abordagens centradas na comunidade que  
abordem as barreiras estruturais.  
quantitative  
measures  
to  
incorporate  
community perspectives and lived experiences.  
Research has increasingly recognized that local  
perceptions of inequality, development barriers,  
and community priorities are crucial for  
designing effective and culturally appropriate  
Palavras-chave: Desigualdade, Percepções,  
interventions  
Community  
(Hartinger  
members  
et  
al.,  
2023).  
Comunidades,  
Capacidades,  
possess  
intimate  
Desenvolvimento, Territorial.  
knowledge of local challenges, social dynamics,  
and potential solutions that may not be captured  
through external assessments alone.  
Introducción  
Rural communities in Ecuador have historically  
faced significant development challenges  
The theoretical framework of this research  
despite the country's constitutional framework  
promoting good living (buen vivir) and  
inclusive development policies (Espinosa,  
2019). Los Ríos Province, located in Ecuador's  
coastal region and characterized by its  
draws  
on  
capabilities  
approach,  
which  
emphasizes the importance of understanding  
what people can actually do and be, rather than  
focusing solely on resource distribution (Ansari  
et al., 2012). This perspective is particularly  
relevant for rural development contexts where  
predominantly  
agricultural  
economy,  
exemplifies these persistent rural development  
disparities. While Ecuador has made substantial  
progress in poverty reduction at the national  
level, rural areas continue to experience  
traditional  
inadequately capture the complexity of rural  
livelihoods and well-being. Additionally,  
income-based  
measures  
may  
territorial development theory provides insights  
into how place-based characteristics interact  
with broader economic and social processes to  
shape local development outcomes (Escobar &  
Berdegué, 1990). This study aims to examine  
disproportionate  
inequality, with Los Ríos ranking among the  
provinces with notable rural-urban  
development gaps (Díaz et al., 2022). The  
levels  
of  
socioeconomic  
persistence of socioeconomic inequalities in  
rural Los Ríos reflects broader structural  
challenges that extend beyond simple income  
disparities. These inequalities manifest across  
socioeconomic  
communities of Los Ríos Province, Ecuador,  
with particular attention to community  
inequalities  
in  
rural  
Página 574  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
perceptions of these inequalities and the barriers  
that constrain equitable development. By  
approach  
highlights  
the  
significance  
of  
institutional contexts in facilitating individual  
liberties, empowering rural communities: the  
role of financial literacy and management in  
sustainable development (Xu, 2025). This  
theoretical framework has been successfully  
applied across Latin American contexts,  
providing insights into how education, financial  
combining  
quantitative  
analysis  
of  
socioeconomic indicators with qualitative  
exploration of community perspectives, this  
research seeks to provide a comprehensive  
understanding of inequality dynamics that can  
inform more effective and inclusive rural  
development policies and programs.  
literacy,  
and  
institutional  
development  
contribute to rural empowerment and inequality  
reduction (Lezana et al., 2022).  
Research on socioeconomic inequalities in rural  
communities has evolved substantially over the  
past decades, with particular attention to  
understanding both the objective dimensions of  
inequality and the subjective experiences of  
those living in marginalized areas (Backhouse  
et al., 2021; Clark et al., 2022). This literature  
review examines key theoretical frameworks,  
Territorial inequality represents a persistent  
challenge across Latin America, with important  
implications for rural development policy.  
Territorial inequality is found to be persistent  
and reduces the pro-poor effect of local income  
growth (Kay, 2008), this finding highlights the  
importance of understanding how spatial factors  
interact with socioeconomic processes to shape  
empirical  
findings,  
relevant  
and  
to  
methodological  
studying rural  
approaches  
socioeconomic inequalities in Ecuador, with  
emphasis on community perceptions and  
barriers to development (Wan et al., 2022).  
development  
outcomes  
(Wietzke,  
2025).  
Research on spatial inequality in Latin America  
reveals that unlike OECD countries (G. Liu et  
al., 2025; Saha, 2025), in Latin America, the  
concentration of economic activity rises in  
tandem with income inequality across regions,  
these patterns have particular relevance for  
understanding rural disadvantage, as they  
suggest that economic concentration processes  
may exacerbate rather than reduce territorial  
disparities (Zou et al., 2025).  
The  
capabilities  
approach  
provides  
a
comprehensive framework for understanding  
rural inequality that extends beyond traditional  
income-based measures. Sen's framework  
emphasizes the importance of examining what  
people can actually do and be, rather than  
focusing solely on resource distribution (Ansari  
et al., 2012). The capability approach claims  
that freedom to achieve well-being is a matter  
of what people can do and be. This theoretical  
perspective has been particularly valuable in  
rural development contexts where traditional  
economic indicators may inadequately capture  
the complexity of rural livelihoods and well-  
being (Dou et al., 2025). Recent applications of  
the capabilities approach in rural development  
The literature reveals important insights about  
effective approaches to addressing rural  
inequality. to the extent that neoliberal policies  
freeze into place the highly inequitable overall  
structure of asset and income distribution in  
Ecuador and elsewhere, such policies inhibit the  
widespread replication of the two successful  
cases  
(INEC,  
2018),  
highlighting  
the  
contexts  
demonstrate  
its  
relevance  
for  
importance of addressing structural factors in  
inequality rather than focusing solely on  
technical interventions. Contemporary policy  
understanding community empowerment and  
institutional barriers. Wang et al. (2025)  
Página 575  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
approaches have begun to incorporate territorial  
and San Carlos (Quevedo Canton). These  
communities were selected to represent varying  
degrees of market access, infrastructure  
development, and economic diversification,  
ranging from highly accessible San Carlos (6.8  
km from cantonal center) to remote Abras de  
Mantequilla (15.7 km from center) (Díaz et al.,  
and participatory perspectives. The publication  
gathers the contribution of the Rural Territorial  
Development  
contemplates  
(RTD)  
approach,  
which  
dynamics  
of productive  
transformation and institutional development  
Fifteen years of rural territorial development in  
Latin America: what has the experience shown  
us (Backhouse et al., 2021). These approaches  
recognize the importance of place-based  
strategies that build on local assets and  
capabilities.  
2022).  
This  
selection  
strategy  
ensured  
representation of different agricultural systems,  
demographic characteristics, and development  
intervention histories while maintaining focus  
on the specific territorial context of coastal  
Ecuador's rural areas.  
Despite significant advances in understanding  
rural inequality, important gaps remain in the  
literature (Y. Liu & Dong, 2025; Saha, 2025;  
The quantitative component utilized a random  
sampling approach targeting 390 households  
distributed across the five communities (71-84  
households per community based on population  
size). A structured household survey instrument  
captured seven main dimensions: demographic  
characteristics, economic activities and income,  
Wietzke,  
2025).  
Limited  
research  
has  
systematically examined how community  
perceptions of inequality relate to objective  
measures of socioeconomic disadvantage in  
specific territorial contexts like Los Ríos  
Province (Luo et al., 2025; Zou et al., 2025).  
Additionally, while theoretical frameworks like  
access  
perceptions  
development barriers and constraints, coping  
strategies and adaptive responses, and  
to  
services  
and  
infrastructure,  
of poverty  
and inequality,  
the  
capabilities  
approach  
and  
territorial  
development theory provide valuable analytical  
tools, their integration in empirical research on  
rural Ecuador remains underdeveloped.  
aspirations and future expectations. Survey data  
collection was conducted by trained local  
enumerators over a four-month period, with  
quality control measures including supervisor  
accompaniment for 20% of interviews and daily  
data review sessions to ensure consistency and  
accuracy. The qualitative component involved  
multiple data collection methods across all  
communities, including 120 key informant  
interviews (24 per community) and 30 focus  
group discussions (6 per community). Key  
informants were purposively selected to  
represent diverse community roles including  
leaders, teachers, health workers, agricultural  
extension agents, and long-term residents with  
historical knowledge. Data analysis employed  
both descriptive statistical techniques using  
SPSS and R software for quantitative data, and  
Materiales y Métodos  
This study employed a mixed-methods research  
design to examine socioeconomic inequalities  
in rural communities of Los Ríos Province,  
Ecuador. The research integrated quantitative  
descriptive analysis with qualitative case study  
methodology, giving equal priority to both  
approaches to capture objective inequality  
patterns and subjective community experiences  
simultaneously. The study focused on five  
purposively  
selected  
rural  
communities  
representing diverse contexts within Los Ríos  
Province: Febres Cordero and La Unión  
(Babahoyo Canton), Abras de Mantequilla  
(Vinces Canton), Zapotal (Ventanas Canton),  
Página 576  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
systematic thematic analysis using NVivo  
software for qualitative data.  
Resultados y Discusión  
When applying the selected instrument to  
collect data, we gathered important information  
that is detailed in this section. First of all, Table  
1 presents demographic information about  
communities.  
Table 1. Community Characteristics and Sample Demographics  
(FC) Febres  
Cordero -  
Babahoyo  
AM Abras de  
Mantequilla -  
Vinces  
(LU) La Unión -  
Babahoyo  
(ZV) Zapotal  
– Ventanas  
(SC) San Carlos –  
Characteristic  
Total Sample  
Quevedo  
Sample Size  
Households  
surveyed (n)  
Individual  
interviews (n)  
Focus groups  
conducted  
78  
24  
6
82  
26  
6
75  
23  
6
71  
22  
6
84  
25  
6
390  
120  
30  
Demographics  
Average household  
size  
4.2  
3.8  
4.5  
4.1  
3.9  
4.1  
Female-headed  
households (%)  
Average age of  
respondents  
Indigenous/Afro-  
Ecuadorian (%)  
28.2  
47.3  
15.4  
31.7  
45.8  
12.2  
25.3  
49.1  
18.7  
29.6  
46.7  
14.1  
33.3  
44.9  
11.9  
29.7  
46.8  
14.4  
Economic Activity  
Primary agriculture  
(%)  
Non-farm  
employment (%)  
67.9  
32.1  
72.0  
28.0  
81.3  
18.7  
74.6  
25.4  
58.3  
41.7  
70.8  
29.2  
Distance to Services  
Distance to  
cantonal center  
(km)  
Distance to health  
center (km)  
Distance to  
secondary school  
(km)  
8.5  
3.2  
5.1  
12.3  
8.9  
15.7  
11.4  
14.3  
18.2  
12.6  
15.8  
6.8  
2.7  
4.6  
12.3  
7.8  
9.2  
9.8  
Fuente: Elaboración propia  
representation across communities with 390  
total households surveyed and 120 key  
informant interviews conducted, ensuring  
adequate statistical power for comparative  
analysis while maintaining qualitative depth  
through focus group discussions. Table 2  
demonstrates that self-perceived poverty is  
highest in the most remote communities, with  
86.7% of residents in Abras de Mantequilla  
considering themselves poor or very poor  
compared to 57.2% in San Carlos. Across all  
communities, lack of employment opportunities  
emerges as the most frequently cited cause of  
poverty (77.4% overall), followed by limited  
credit access and poor infrastructure. Notably,  
Table 1 provides foundational information  
about the five study communities and research  
sample  
composition.  
The  
table  
reveals  
important variation across communities in  
terms of distance from urban centers, with San  
Carlos being most accessible (6.8 km from  
cantonal center) and Zapotal most isolated (18.2  
km). Female-headed households are most  
prevalent in San Carlos (33.3%) and least in  
Abras  
de  
Mantequilla  
(25.3%),  
while  
agricultural employment dominates in Abras de  
Mantequilla (81.3%) compared to more diverse  
economic activities in San Carlos (58.3%  
agriculture). The sample achieved good  
Página 577  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
the majority of residents (67.4%) believe  
respondents (73.6%) maintain belief that hard  
work can lead to improvement, suggesting  
resilience and agency even amid difficult  
circumstances.  
inequality has increased over the past five years,  
with this perception strongest in Abras de  
Mantequilla (74.7%). Despite challenges, most  
Table 2. Community Perceptions of Poverty and Inequality  
Perception Indicator  
FC  
LU  
AM  
ZV  
SC  
Total  
Self-Assessment of Economic Status (%)  
Very poor  
Poor  
18.0  
44.9  
33.3  
3.8  
24.4  
48.8  
24.4  
2.4  
32.0  
54.7  
13.3  
0.0  
29.6  
50.7  
19.7  
0.0  
15.5  
41.7  
38.1  
4.8  
23.8  
48.0  
25.9  
2.3  
Neither poor nor rich  
Comfortable  
Perceived Causes of Poverty (% mentioning)  
Lack of employment opportunities  
Limited access to credit  
73.1  
79.3  
67.1  
68.3  
53.7  
48.8  
45.1  
42.7  
84.0  
72.0  
77.3  
58.7  
61.3  
56.0  
49.3  
81.7  
70.4  
74.6  
56.3  
59.2  
52.1  
45.1  
69.0  
57.1  
52.4  
45.2  
38.1  
35.7  
31.0  
77.4  
65.6  
65.6  
52.6  
49.7  
45.4  
40.5  
61.5  
Poor infrastructure  
55.8  
Lack of education/training  
Climate/environmental problems  
Government neglect  
48.7  
42.3  
38.5  
Lack of land/small farm size  
34.6  
Inequality Perceptions  
Inequality has increased (past 5 years) (%)  
Feel treated unfairly by government (%)  
Believe hard work leads to improvement (%)  
62.8  
51.3  
76.9  
68.3  
58.5  
73.2  
74.7  
69.3  
68.0  
71.8  
64.8  
70.4  
59.5  
48.8  
79.8  
67.4  
58.5  
73.6  
Fuente: Elaboración propia  
Table 3. Perceived Barriers to Development by Community  
Barrier Category  
FC  
LU  
AM  
ZV  
SC  
Average  
Market Access and Infrastructure (% rating as major barrier)  
Poor road conditions  
Lack of transportation  
Distance to markets  
42.3  
35.9  
29.5  
46.2  
58.5  
48.8  
42.7  
56.1  
74.7  
66.7  
61.3  
69.3  
69.0  
62.0  
57.7  
64.8  
38.1  
31.0  
26.2  
41.7  
56.5  
48.9  
43.5  
55.6  
Poor telecommunications  
Financial Services  
Lack of formal credit access  
High interest rates  
Complex loan procedures  
No collateral for loans  
65.4  
59.0  
53.8  
48.7  
72.0  
64.6  
61.0  
56.1  
78.7  
69.3  
66.7  
62.7  
76.1  
67.6  
63.4  
59.2  
61.9  
56.0  
50.0  
45.2  
70.8  
63.3  
59.0  
54.4  
Government Services  
Limited technical assistance  
Bureaucratic procedures  
Corruption/favoritism  
56.4  
44.9  
38.5  
63.4  
52.4  
45.1  
70.7  
58.7  
53.3  
67.6  
54.9  
49.3  
52.4  
41.7  
35.7  
62.1  
50.5  
44.4  
Lack of information about programs  
51.3  
58.5  
65.3  
62.0  
48.8  
57.2  
Social and Cultural  
Discrimination  
Limited social networks  
23.1  
30.8  
29.3  
37.8  
36.0  
44.0  
32.4  
40.8  
21.4  
28.6  
28.4  
36.4  
Lack of community organization  
34.6  
42.7  
49.3  
45.1  
31.0  
40.5  
Fuente: Elaboración propia  
Table 3 reveals systematic patterns in how  
communities identify obstacles to progress,  
with financial barriers consistently ranking  
highest across all locations. Lack of formal  
Página 578  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
credit access affects over 70% of households in  
social barriers like discrimination and limited  
community organization are less frequently  
cited but still affect substantial minorities,  
suggesting that structural and institutional  
most communities, while poor road conditions  
and telecommunications emerge as critical  
infrastructure constraints, particularly affecting  
remote areas like Abras de Mantequilla (74.7%  
citing roads as major barrier). Importantly,  
factors  
outweigh  
social  
constraints  
in  
community perceptions.  
Table 4. Adopting Strategies and Community Responses  
Coping Strategy  
FC  
LU  
AM  
ZV  
SC  
Total  
Economic Strategies (% of households using)  
Temporary migration for work  
Increased women's labor participation  
Child labor involvement  
46.2  
38.5  
25.6  
34.6  
30.8  
52.4  
43.9  
31.7  
28.0  
58.7  
49.3  
37.3  
20.0  
42.7  
56.3  
46.5  
33.8  
25.4  
39.4  
42.9  
35.7  
23.8  
41.7  
28.6  
51.3  
42.8  
30.5  
29.9  
35.6  
Diversification to non-farm activities  
Selling assets/livestock  
36.6  
Social Strategies  
73.2  
Borrowing from family/friends  
Community mutual aid (minga)  
Joining community organizations  
Religious group support  
67.9  
55.1  
42.3  
48.7  
77.3  
68.0  
54.7  
58.7  
74.6  
64.8  
50.7  
56.3  
65.5  
52.4  
39.3  
45.2  
71.5  
60.3  
47.2  
52.6  
61.0  
48.8  
53.7  
Consumption Adjustments  
Reducing food expenses  
Cutting education expenses  
Postponing health care  
59.0  
23.1  
33.3  
51.3  
64.6  
29.3  
39.0  
56.1  
70.7  
34.7  
44.0  
61.3  
67.6  
31.0  
40.8  
58.5  
56.0  
21.4  
31.0  
48.8  
63.6  
27.9  
37.6  
55.2  
Reducing celebration expenses  
Fuente: Elaboración propia  
Table 4 illustrates the diverse adaptive  
mechanisms rural households employ to  
manage economic hardship, with borrowing  
from family and friends being the most common  
strategy (71.5% of households). Temporary  
migration for work affects over half of  
households in remote communities like Abras  
de Mantequilla (58.7%) compared to 42.9% in  
accessible San Carlos, highlighting how  
geographic isolation drives labor mobility.  
Concerning patterns include significant reliance  
on child labor (30.5% overall) and reduction of  
food expenses (63.6%), indicating that coping  
often involves sacrificing human capital  
development and basic needs. Community-  
based strategies like mutual aid (minga) and  
religious support remain important, suggesting  
that social capital provides crucial resilience  
mechanisms even as economic pressures  
intensify. Table 5 demonstrates clear consensus  
on infrastructure needs, with road improvement  
ranking as the top priority (78.2% of  
communities mentioning, weighted score 2.65).  
Access to credit emerges as the second highest  
priority, reflecting the financial constraints  
identified in barrier assessments. Notably, while  
governance and participation issues receive  
lower priority rankings, they still represent  
important concerns for substantial minorities.  
The weighted scoring system reveals that  
communities prioritize tangible, immediate  
improvements in connectivity and economic  
access over longer-term institutional changes,  
suggesting  
a
pragmatic  
approach  
to  
development that focuses on addressing the  
most pressing daily challenges before tackling  
more complex systemic issues.  
Página 579  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
Table 5. Community Priorities for Development Interventions  
Rank 2  
(%)  
Rank 3  
(%)  
Weighted  
Score*  
Community  
Mentions (%)  
Priority Area  
Rank 1 (%)  
Infrastructure  
Road improvement/maintenance  
Reliable electricity supply  
Internet/telecommunications  
Water and sanitation systems  
Economic Development  
23.6  
15.9  
8.7  
18.7  
16.4  
12.3  
14.6  
15.4  
14.1  
16.9  
13.3  
2.65  
2.08  
1.45  
1.79  
78.2  
65.6  
52.8  
58.7  
12.6  
Access to credit/microfinance  
Technical assistance for agriculture  
Market facilities/commercialization  
Job creation programs  
18.5  
11.3  
6.9  
15.6  
13.8  
9.5  
12.8  
15.1  
11.8  
9.7  
2.26  
1.69  
1.19  
1.29  
71.5  
63.8  
45.6  
48.2  
8.2  
10.3  
Social Services  
Healthcare facilities/services  
Educational improvements  
Training/capacity building  
9.5  
7.4  
5.1  
12.1  
9.0  
13.6  
10.5  
8.2  
1.51  
1.21  
0.94  
56.4  
44.9  
38.5  
7.7  
Governance and Participation  
Transparent government processes  
3.8  
2.6  
5.6  
4.1  
6.4  
5.1  
0.71  
0.54  
29.2  
24.4  
Community organization strengthening  
Fuente: Elaboración propia  
Table 6. Access to Services and Infrastructure by Community  
FC LU  
Basic Services Access (% of households)  
AM  
ZV  
SC  
Average  
Piped water inside home  
Electricity connection  
Sewerage system  
34.6  
96.2  
12.8  
23.1  
28.2  
89.7  
18.3  
12.0  
86.7  
2.7  
15.5  
88.7  
4.2  
42.9  
97.6  
16.7  
28.6  
33.3  
92.9  
24.6  
92.1  
8.5  
91.5  
6.1  
Solid waste collection  
Internet access  
12.2  
17.1  
78.0  
5.3  
8.5  
15.5  
20.4  
79.8  
10.7  
66.7  
12.7  
71.8  
Mobile phone coverage  
Service Quality Ratings (% rating as good/excellent)  
Water quality  
Electricity reliability  
41.0  
67.9  
35.9  
25.6  
24.4  
52.4  
22.0  
14.6  
16.0  
44.0  
12.0  
8.0  
19.7  
47.9  
16.9  
11.3  
45.2  
71.4  
40.5  
29.8  
29.3  
56.7  
25.5  
17.8  
Road conditions  
Public transportation  
Health Services  
Health center in community (%)  
Satisfied with health services (%)  
Education Services  
38.5  
44.9  
18.3  
31.7  
13.3  
24.0  
15.5  
28.2  
42.9  
48.8  
25.7  
35.5  
Primary school in community (%)  
Secondary school in community (%)  
Satisfied with education quality (%)  
100.0  
25.6  
52.6  
100.0  
12.2  
39.0  
100.0  
6.7  
100.0  
9.9  
100.0  
29.8  
56.0  
100.0  
16.8  
42.9  
32.0  
35.2  
Fuente: Elaboración propia  
Table 6 quantifies the substantial infrastructure  
gaps affecting rural Los Ríos, with basic service  
communities. While electricity coverage is  
relatively good (92.1% average), access to  
piped water inside homes affects less than 25%  
access  
varying  
dramatically  
across  
Página 580  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
of households overall, dropping to just 12% in  
consistently poor, with less than 30% of  
residents rating water quality as good or  
Abras de Mantequilla. Internet access remains  
extremely limited, particularly in remote areas  
(10.7% in Abras de Mantequilla vs. 33.3% in  
San Carlos), reflecting the digital divide  
constraining rural development opportunities.  
Quality ratings for existing services are  
excellent,  
highlighting  
that  
even  
where  
infrastructure exists, service quality remains  
inadequate for supporting improved living  
standards.  
Table 7. Community Perceptions of Government Support and Institutional Trust  
Perception/Trust Indicator  
FC  
LU  
AM  
ZV  
SC  
Total  
Government Program Awareness (% aware of)  
Bono de Desarrollo Humano  
89.7  
42.3  
34.6  
51.3  
92.7  
36.6  
28.0  
46.3  
94.7  
32.0  
24.0  
42.7  
93.0  
35.2  
26.8  
45.1  
88.1  
45.2  
36.9  
54.8  
91.5  
38.2  
30.0  
48.0  
Agricultural credit programs  
Technical assistance programs  
Rural road programs  
Program Participation (% participated in past 2 years)  
Cash transfer programs  
Agricultural training  
35.9  
15.4  
23.1  
41.5  
12.2  
18.3  
45.3  
10.7  
16.0  
42.3  
12.7  
19.7  
33.3  
17.9  
26.2  
39.7  
13.8  
20.5  
Community development projects  
Institutional Trust (% expressing trust)  
Municipal government  
Provincial government  
National government  
Local NGOs  
28.2  
25.6  
23.1  
44.9  
61.5  
22.0  
19.5  
17.1  
39.0  
56.1  
17.3  
14.7  
12.0  
34.7  
52.0  
19.7  
16.9  
14.1  
36.6  
54.9  
31.0  
28.6  
26.2  
47.6  
64.3  
23.6  
21.0  
18.5  
40.6  
57.8  
Community leaders  
Perceived Government Effectiveness (% rating as effective)  
Poverty reduction efforts  
Rural development programs  
Infrastructure development  
19.2  
23.1  
33.3  
14.6  
17.1  
26.8  
10.7  
13.3  
21.3  
12.7  
15.5  
23.9  
21.4  
26.2  
36.9  
15.7  
19.0  
28.4  
Satisfaction with Local Services (% satisfied)  
Municipal services  
32.1  
48.7  
24.4  
42.7  
18.7  
37.3  
21.1  
40.8  
35.7  
52.4  
26.4  
44.4  
Community participation opportunities  
Fuente: Elaboración propia  
Table 7 reveals low levels of institutional trust  
and perceived government effectiveness across  
all communities. While awareness of major  
programs like Bono de Desarrollo Humano is  
high (91.5%), participation in agricultural and  
development programs remains limited, with  
only 13.8% participating in agricultural training  
over the past two years. Trust in government  
institutions is consistently low, with national  
government trust at just 18.5% and municipal  
government  
slightly  
higher  
at  
23.6%.  
Community leaders maintain the highest trust  
levels (57.8%), suggesting that local social  
capital  
remains  
stronger  
than  
formal  
institutional relationships. The pattern indicates  
a significant disconnect between communities  
and formal government structures, potentially  
limiting  
the  
effectiveness  
of  
top-down  
development interventions.  
Página 581  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
Table 8. Aspirations and Future Expectations by Community  
Aspiration/Expectation FC LU  
Personal/Family Aspirations (% mentioning as top priority)  
AM  
ZV  
SC  
Total  
Children's education improvement  
Own home improvement  
Start/expand small business  
Buy more land  
67.9  
48.7  
25.6  
33.3  
41.0  
72.0  
53.7  
22.0  
37.8  
46.3  
74.7  
57.3  
18.7  
42.7  
50.7  
73.2  
54.9  
21.1  
39.4  
47.9  
65.5  
45.2  
29.8  
31.0  
38.1  
70.5  
52.0  
23.3  
36.9  
44.9  
Healthcare access improvement  
Community Development Hopes (% believing achievable in 5 years)  
Better road access  
Reliable water supply  
53.8  
44.9  
23.1  
35.9  
17.9  
43.9  
34.1  
17.1  
28.0  
14.6  
36.0  
26.7  
13.3  
22.7  
10.7  
40.8  
31.0  
15.5  
25.4  
12.7  
57.1  
48.8  
26.2  
39.3  
21.4  
46.2  
37.1  
19.0  
30.3  
15.4  
High school in community  
Health center establishment  
Job creation/industry  
Migration Intentions  
Plan to migrate within 2 years (%)  
Children planning to migrate (%)  
Optimism Indicators (% agreeing)  
"Life will be better in 5 years"  
"Hard work pays off"  
15.4  
42.3  
19.5  
48.8  
24.0  
54.7  
21.1  
50.7  
13.1  
39.3  
18.5  
47.2  
56.4  
76.9  
48.7  
21.8  
48.8  
73.2  
42.7  
17.1  
41.3  
68.0  
36.0  
12.0  
45.1  
70.4  
39.4  
14.1  
59.5  
79.8  
52.4  
24.0  
50.0  
73.6  
43.8  
17.8  
"Community can solve its problems"  
"Government will help our community"  
Fuente: Elaboración propia  
Table 8 shows that despite current challenges,  
rural residents maintain strong aspirations for  
their families and communities, with children's  
education ranking as the overwhelming priority  
(70.5% overall). Migration intentions remain  
significant, with 47.2% of families expecting  
their children to migrate, rising to 54.7% in the  
likely to assess their households as poor (74.0%  
vs. 69.2% for men) and identify discrimination  
as a major barrier (35.4% vs. 21.7%). Gender  
differences in coping strategies show women  
more likely to reduce food expenses and borrow  
from family, while men more frequently  
migrate for work. Women prioritize healthcare  
most  
remote  
community  
of  
Abras  
de  
services  
and  
education  
while  
in  
development  
emphasize  
Mantequilla. Optimism about the future varies  
considerably, with residents of more accessible  
communities like San Carlos expressing greater  
confidence that "life will be better in 5 years"  
(59.5%) compared to remote areas like Abras de  
Mantequilla (41.3%). The persistent belief that  
"hard work pays off" (73.6% overall) suggests  
maintained individual agency, while lower  
confidence in community problem-solving  
capacity (43.8%) and government support  
(17.8%) reflects structural constraints on  
collective action. Table 9 reveals significant  
disparities in how men and women experience  
and perceive rural inequality. Women are more  
preferences,  
men  
infrastructure like roads. The data reveals  
substantially lower trust in formal institutions  
among women, but much higher engagement  
with women's organizations (38.0% vs. 12.6%  
for men), suggesting that gender-specific  
institutional relationships may be crucial for  
inclusive development approaches.  
Página 582  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
Table 9. Gender Differences in Perceptions and Experiences  
Male Respondents Female Respondents  
Indicator  
Difference  
Significance  
(n=198)  
(n=192)  
Economic Perceptions (% agreeing)  
"Our household is poor"  
69.2  
34.3  
58.1  
74.0  
67.7  
78.6  
-4.8  
-33.4  
-20.5  
*
"Women work harder than men"  
***  
***  
"Women should work outside home"  
Barriers to Development (% rating as major barrier)  
Lack of credit access  
Limited education opportunities  
Discrimination  
67.2  
48.5  
21.7  
45.5  
74.5  
56.8  
35.4  
52.6  
-7.3  
-8.3  
*
*
-13.7  
-7.1  
***  
ns  
Lack of transportation  
Coping Strategies (% using)  
Migration for work  
Reducing food expenses  
Borrowing from family  
Selling assets  
56.1  
58.6  
65.7  
38.9  
46.4  
68.8  
77.6  
32.3  
+9.7  
-10.2  
-11.9  
+6.6  
*
*
**  
ns  
Development Priorities (% ranking in top 3)  
Road improvement  
Healthcare services  
Educational improvements  
Credit access  
82.3  
51.0  
40.4  
75.3  
74.0  
62.0  
49.5  
67.7  
+8.3  
-11.0  
-9.1  
*
**  
*
+7.6  
ns  
Institutional Trust (% expressing trust)  
Municipal government  
Community leaders  
26.8  
61.1  
12.6  
20.3  
+6.5  
+6.4  
-25.4  
ns  
ns  
54.7  
38.0  
Women's organizations  
***  
Future Aspirations (% mentioning)  
Children's education  
Business development  
Community leadership role  
66.7  
28.8  
15.7  
74.5  
17.7  
9.4  
-7.8  
+11.1  
+6.3  
*
**  
*
Note. Significance levels: ns = not significant, * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001  
Fuente: Elaboración propia  
Table 10 measures the social capital and  
with more accessible areas like San Carlos and  
Febres Cordero showing higher trust and  
participation rates. The relatively low levels of  
social conflict (11.3-19.7% across categories)  
suggest that communities maintain internal  
organizational  
community  
capacity  
resilience  
that  
and  
underpin  
development  
potential. Religious participation shows the  
highest engagement (71.8%), followed by  
traditional work parties or minga (58.2%),  
indicating that both formal and informal social  
cohesion  
despite  
economic  
challenges,  
providing a foundation for collaborative  
development approaches if external support can  
strengthen organizational capacity. This study  
addresses several critical gaps in the rural  
development literature, particularly regarding  
institutions  
remain  
important.  
However,  
collective efficacy measures reveal concerning  
limitations, with less than half of residents  
believing their community can solve problems  
together (43.8%) and only 21.3% believing they  
can influence government decisions. Social  
trust varies significantly across communities,  
the  
intersection  
of  
objective  
inequality  
measures and community perceptions in  
specific territorial contexts. While previous  
Página 583  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
research has extensively documented rural  
poverty and inequality in Latin America using  
standardized indicators, limited attention has  
been paid to how these patterns are experienced  
and  
understood  
by  
rural  
communities  
themselves (Gortaire & Carrión, 2016; Kay,  
2008; Sepulveda et al., 2020).  
Table 10. Community Social Cohesion and Collective Efficacy Indicators  
Social Cohesion Indicator  
FC  
LU  
AM  
ZV  
SC  
Total  
Community Participation (% participating regularly)  
Community meetings  
56.4  
69.2  
38.5  
61.5  
48.8  
73.2  
32.9  
56.1  
42.7  
76.0  
28.0  
53.3  
45.1  
74.6  
31.0  
56.3  
59.5  
66.7  
41.7  
64.3  
50.5  
71.8  
34.4  
58.2  
Religious activities  
Sports/cultural events  
Work parties (minga)  
Mutual Support (% agreeing)  
"Neighbors help each other"  
"Can count on community in crisis"  
"People share resources when needed"  
Social Trust (% trusting)  
Most community members  
Community leaders  
74.4  
67.9  
55.1  
68.3  
61.0  
48.8  
62.7  
54.7  
42.7  
66.2  
59.2  
46.5  
77.4  
71.4  
58.3  
69.7  
62.8  
50.3  
48.7  
61.5  
79.5  
71.8  
42.7  
56.1  
75.6  
67.1  
36.0  
52.0  
72.0  
62.7  
39.4  
54.9  
74.6  
66.2  
52.4  
64.3  
81.0  
73.8  
43.8  
57.8  
76.4  
68.2  
Teachers  
Health workers  
Collective Efficacy (% believing community can)  
Solve common problems together  
48.7  
25.6  
35.9  
17.9  
42.7  
19.5  
29.3  
12.2  
36.0  
14.7  
24.0  
8.0  
39.4  
18.3  
28.2  
11.3  
52.4  
28.6  
39.3  
21.4  
43.8  
21.3  
31.3  
14.1  
Influence government decisions  
Organize development projects  
Attract external investment  
Social Conflict (% reporting significant conflict)  
Over land/water rights  
12.8  
7.7  
17.1  
12.2  
20.7  
22.7  
16.0  
26.7  
19.7  
14.1  
22.5  
10.7  
6.0  
16.7  
11.3  
19.7  
Between community groups  
With local authorities  
15.4  
13.1  
Community Organization Strength (scale 1-5, mean)  
Leadership quality  
3.2  
2.8  
2.6  
2.9  
2.9  
2.6  
2.2  
2.0  
2.3  
2.8  
2.4  
2.2  
2.5  
3.4  
3.0  
2.8  
3.1  
2.98  
2.58  
2.38  
2.68  
Decision-making transparency  
Inclusion of marginalized groups  
Project implementation capacity  
2.5  
2.3  
2.6  
Fuente: Elaboración propia  
The systematic comparison of five communities  
within a single province addresses the gap  
between broad national-level analyses and  
isolated case studies that characterize much  
rural development research. Previous studies  
have either focused on national patterns that  
obscure local variation or examined individual  
communities without comparative context.  
capture both the measurable dimensions of  
inequality and the lived experiences that shape  
community responses (Wang et al., 2019;  
Zhang et al., 2025). While capabilities approach  
has been widely applied theoretically, fewer  
studies have operationalized this framework to  
examine  
how  
communities  
themselves  
understand their capabilities and freedoms. The  
findings reveal how objective constraints like  
poor infrastructure and limited credit access  
Significantly,  
this  
research  
fills  
a
methodological gap by demonstrating how  
mixed-methods approaches can effectively  
translate  
into  
perceived  
barriers  
that  
Página 584  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
communities prioritize for intervention (Ansari  
maintaining traditional support systems while  
seeking improved access to modern services  
and opportunities. The study's systematic  
analysis of gender differences reveals patterns  
that both confirm and extend previous research  
on rural women's experiences. The finding that  
et al., 2012). The study's findings both confirm  
and extend previous research on rural inequality  
in Ecuador. Consistent with national-level  
analyses, the research confirms that rural areas  
experience  
disproportionate  
poverty  
rates  
compared to urban areas, with remote  
communities facing the greatest disadvantages  
(Benita et al., 2022; Y. Zhang et al., 2025).  
However, the community-level analysis reveals  
important variations within rural areas that  
aggregate statistics obscure.  
women  
are  
more  
likely  
to  
identify  
discrimination as a major barrier (35.4% vs.  
21.7% for men) provides empirical support for  
feminist analyses of rural development while  
quantifying the extent of these perceptions.  
The community identification of employment  
opportunities as the primary cause of poverty  
(77.4% of respondents) aligns with structural  
analyses of rural labor markets but provides  
new insights into how communities understand  
these constraints. Unlike economic analyses  
that focus on market failures or productivity  
Previous research has documented gender  
inequalities in rural Ecuador, but fewer studies  
have examined how women and men differently  
perceive and experience these inequalities  
(FAO, 2017; Intriago et al., 2017; Martínez,  
2015). The gender differences in development  
priorities (women emphasizing healthcare and  
education, men emphasizing infrastructure)  
suggest that development planning processes  
constraints,  
communities  
emphasize  
the  
absence of opportunities rather than inadequate  
skills or resources (Sjaf et al., 2025; Zhang et  
may  
perspectives if they rely primarily on male  
community leaders or mixed-group  
systematically  
exclude  
women's  
al., 2025).  
The research confirms previous  
findings about the importance of migration as a  
rural coping strategy while revealing new  
insights about how migration decisions vary  
across different types of rural communities  
(Jianhua et al., 2025). Previous studies have  
documented migration as a common response to  
rural poverty, but this study shows how  
geographic isolation intensifies migration  
pressures, with 58.7% of households in the most  
remote community (Abras de Mantequilla)  
engaging in temporary migration compared to  
42.9% in more accessible areas.  
consultations. The higher engagement of  
women with women's organizations (38.0% vs.  
12.6% for men) indicates that gender-specific  
institutional channels may be necessary for  
inclusive development approaches (Buchy &  
Basaznew, 2005; Chong et al., 2022).  
However, the research also reveals limitations  
in how capabilities approaches have been  
operationalized in development practice. While  
communities clearly understand capability  
constraints, development programs continue to  
focus on resource provision rather than  
capability enhancement. The low perceived  
effectiveness of government programs (15.7%  
rating poverty reduction efforts as effective)  
suggests that programs designed around  
resource transfers may not address the structural  
constraints that communities identify as most  
The persistence of traditional mutual aid  
mechanisms (minga) across all communities  
(58.2% average participation) contrasts with  
literature  
suggesting  
that  
modernization  
processes weaken traditional social institutions.  
Instead, the findings suggest that formal and  
informal institutions coexist, with communities  
Página 585  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
important. The gender differences in barrier  
not fully capture how regional and national  
policies affect local development outcomes.  
Future research should examine how multi-  
identification and coping strategies provide new  
insights into how capabilities vary within  
households and communities. Women's greater  
reliance on social networks and different  
prioritization of development needs suggests  
that capability enhancement requires attention  
to intra-household dynamics and gender-  
specific constraints.The research reveals that  
territorial development must address not only  
economic factors but also institutional and  
social dimensions that shape community  
capacity for collective action (Devaux et al.,  
2009). The lower collective efficacy in remote  
communities (36.0% believing community can  
solve problems in Abras de Mantequilla vs.  
52.4% in San Carlos) suggests that isolation  
affects not only material conditions but also  
social capital and organizational capacity.  
level  
governance  
systems  
affect  
rural  
development,  
particularly  
the interaction  
between local community capacity and broader  
institutional frameworks (Chen et al., 2024;  
Zhao & Zhu, 2025). The study's geographic  
focus  
on  
Los  
Ríos  
other  
Province  
rural  
limits  
generalizability  
to  
contexts,  
particularly highland and Amazonian regions  
with different ecological and cultural  
characteristics. Comparative research across  
Ecuador's diverse rural regions would enhance  
understanding of how territorial characteristics  
interact with inequality dynamics.  
Conclusions  
This research demonstrates that understanding  
rural  
socioeconomic  
inequality  
requires  
integration of objective measurement with  
community perceptions and experiences. The  
findings reveal that while structural constraints  
Importantly, the findings challenge approaches  
to  
territorial  
development  
that  
assume  
communities can drive their own development  
without addressing structural constraints. While  
communities maintain strong social capital and  
clear development priorities, their limited  
influence over government decisions (21.3%  
believing they can influence policy) indicates  
that territorial development requires both  
significantly  
opportunities, communities maintain strong  
social capital and clear priorities for  
improvement. However, the disconnect  
limit  
rural  
development  
between community priorities and government  
program effectiveness suggests that rural  
development policy must be fundamentally  
bottom-up  
supportive  
community  
organization  
and  
reoriented  
toward  
community-centered  
the structural  
institutional  
frameworks  
approaches  
that address  
(Albuquerque, 2008). While this study provides  
comprehensive analysis of rural inequality in  
Los Ríos, several limitations suggest directions  
for future research. The cross-sectional design  
constraints communities identify as most  
important. The research contributes to rural  
development theory by demonstrating how  
capabilities  
approach  
and  
territorial  
can be  
limits  
dynamics change over time, particularly in  
response to external shocks or policy  
understanding  
of  
how  
inequality  
development  
frameworks  
operationalized to understand community  
experiences of inequality. The findings indicate  
that effective rural development requires not  
only resource provision but attention to the  
conversion factors that enable communities to  
transform resources into improved well-being  
interventions. Longitudinal research would  
provide valuable insights into the persistence  
and evolution of inequality patterns and  
community responses (Hu et al., 2023). The  
focus on household and community levels may  
Página 586  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
and expanded freedoms. Most importantly, the  
Technology and Development, 9(2), 235–  
251.  
research reveals that rural communities are not  
passive recipients of development interventions  
but active agents with clear understanding of  
their constraints and priorities. Development  
policy that fails to engage with community  
knowledge and priorities is likely to remain  
ineffective regardless of resource levels. The  
path toward reducing rural inequality requires  
genuine partnership between communities and  
institutions, based on recognition of community  
expertise and commitment to addressing the  
structural barriers that communities identify as  
https://doi.org/10.1177/09718524050090020  
4
Chen, Z., Li, X., Zhang, J., & Xia, X. (2024).  
Does digital finance alleviate household  
consumption inequality? Evidence from  
China. Finance Research Letters, 60.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2023.104844  
Clark, S., Harper, S., & Weber, B. (2022).  
Growing up in rural America. RSF: The  
Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the  
Social  
Sciences,  
8(4),  
1–47.  
https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2022.8.4.01  
Devaux, A., Horton, D., Velasco, C., Thiele, G.,  
López, G., Bernet, T., Reinoso, I., &  
Ordinola, M. (2009). Collective action for  
market chain innovation in the Andes. Food  
Policy.  
most  
constraining  
their  
development  
aspirations.  
Referencias Bibliográficas  
Albuquerque, F. (2008). Innovación,  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.10.00  
7
transferencia de conocimientos y desarrollo  
económico territorial: una política pendiente.  
ARBOR: Ciencia, Pensamiento y Cultura,  
Díaz, M., Gortaire, D., Jiménez, Y., & Aguilar,  
J. (2022). Gender-focused analysis in rural  
agricultural producers in Los Rios, Ecuador.  
184(732),  
687–700.  
Ciencia  
Latina  
Revista  
Científica  
https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2008.i732.210  
Ansari, S., Munir, K., & Gregg, T. (2012).  
Impact at the “Bottom of the Pyramid”: The  
Multidisciplinar,  
6(6),  
7980–7991.  
https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v6i6.3969  
Dou, R., Zhu, B., Chen, W., Li, Q., Zhang, S.,  
& Xu, W. (2025). How does townships’  
role  
of  
social  
capital  
in  
capability  
development and community empowerment.  
Journal of Management Studies, 49(4), 813–  
economic  
income inequality in China? Socio-Economic  
Planning Sciences, 98, 102150.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2024.102150  
Escobar, G., Berdegué, J. (1990).  
landscape  
affect  
urban–rural  
842.  
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-  
6486.2012.01042.x  
Backhouse, M., Lehmann, R., Lorenzen, K.,  
Lühmann, M., Puder, J., Rodríguez, F., &  
Tittor, A. (2021). Bioeconomy and Global  
&
Tipificación de sistemas de producción  
agrícola.  
https://repositorio.rimisp.org/items/ca7d2c3e  
-6e4c-4ef0-b1df-9c1d4f4a7f2e  
Inequalities.  
Publishing.  
030-68944-5  
Springer  
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-  
International  
Espinosa, C. (2019). Interpretive affinities: The  
constitutionalization of rights of nature,  
Pacha Mama, in Ecuador. Journal of  
Environmental Policy & Planning, 21(5),  
608–622.  
https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2019.164  
9129  
FAO. (2017). Marco Nacional de Prioridades  
para la Asistencia Técnica de la FAO en  
Benita, F., Rebollar-Ruelas, L., & Gaytán-  
Alfaro, E. (2022). What have we learned  
about socioeconomic inequalities in the  
spread of COVID-19? A systematic review.  
Sustainable Cities and Society, 86, 104158.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.104158  
Buchy, M., & Basaznew, F. (2005). Gender-  
blind organizations deliver gender-biased  
services: The case of Awasa Bureau of  
Agriculture in Southern Ethiopia. Gender,  
Ecuador  
2013–2017.  
https://www.fao.org/3/bl922s/bl922s.pdf  
Página 587  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
Gortaire, S., & Carrión, M. (2016). Incidencia  
de la asociatividad en el desarrollo  
Change,  
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-  
7660.2008.00518.x  
39(6),  
915–943.  
socioeconómico de las comunidades rurales  
de la Parroquia Febres Cordero, Provincia de  
Lezana, B., Guede, B., & Cancino, C. (2022).  
Características de emprendimientos  
unicornios en América Latina. GECONTEC:  
Revista Internacional de Gestión del  
Los  
Ríos.  
https://repositorio.uteq.edu.ec/items/4c84eaf  
7-6a6c-4f35-b92f-8e54fd7f41d  
Hartinger, S., Yglesias-González, M., Blanco-  
Villafuerte, L., Palmeiro-Silva, Y., Lescano,  
A., Stewart-Ibarra, A., Rojas-Rueda, D.,  
Melo, O., Takahashi, B., Buss, D., Callaghan,  
M., Chesini, F., Flores, E., Gil, C., Gouveia,  
Conocimiento y la Tecnología, 10(3), 32–50.  
https://www.gecontec.org/index.php/geconte  
c/article/view/263  
Liu, G., Yang, Y., & Zhang, F. (2025). Reduced  
urban-rural  
inequality  
in  
household  
N.,  
Jankin,  
S.,  
Miranda-Chacon,  
Z.,  
greenhouse gas footprints and rising trade-  
related inequalities in China. Cities, 163,  
106009.  
Mohajeri, N., Helo, J., & Romanello, M.  
(2023). The 2022 South America report of  
The Countdown on health and climate  
change: Trust the science. Now that we know,  
we must act. The Lancet Regional Health –  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2025.106009  
Liu, Y., & Dong, C. (2025). Digital finance,  
social welfare investment, and urban–rural  
income inequality: Moderating role of  
regional economics and regional disparities.  
Finance Research Letters, 77, 107077.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2025.107077  
Luo, Y., Zhou, L., & Zhang, W. (2025). Can e-  
Americas,  
20.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lana.2023.100470  
Hu, D., Zhai, C., & Zhao, S. (2023). Does  
digital  
finance  
promote  
household  
consumption upgrading? An analysis based  
on data from the China family panel studies.  
commerce  
bring  
dividends  
to  
rural  
Economic  
Modelling,  
125.  
households? New evidence from the income  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2023.106  
377  
inequality perspective. Economic Analysis  
and  
Policy,  
86,  
363–379.  
INEC. (2018). Poverty and Inequality Report of  
Ecuador.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2025.03.036  
Martínez, L. (2015). La agricultura familiar en  
el Ecuador. En La agricultura familiar en  
https://www.ecuadorencifras.gob.ec/docume  
ntos/web-inec/POBREZA/2018/Junio-  
2018/Informe_pobreza_y_desigualdad-  
junio_2018.pdf  
América  
comparativo  
Latina:  
Un  
(pp.  
nuevo  
análisis  
1–44).  
https://rimisp.org/wp-  
Intriago, R., Gortaire, R., Bravo, E., &  
O’Connell, C. (2017). Agroecology in  
Ecuador: Historical processes, achievements,  
and challenges. Agroecology and Sustainable  
content/files_mf/1467327607N902015Agric  
ulturafamiliarenAL.pdf  
Saha, T. (2025). Assessing the impact of rural  
electrification on gender inequality in rural  
India: A state-level analysis. The Electricity  
Food  
Systems,  
41.  
https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2017.1284  
174  
Jianhua, Z., Zijin, Z., & Yanxi, S. (2025).  
Income growth and inequality reduction  
through rural industrial integration: Evidence  
from small-scale farmers in China. Journal of  
Journal,  
38(1),  
107460.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tej.2025.107460  
Sepúlveda, C., Gallego, J., Cárdenas, J.,  
Sarango, J., Ropero, S., & Alianza, E. (2020).  
Empleabilidad e informalidad: Un análisis  
del mercado laboral juvenil para 5 países  
latinoamericanos.  
Asian  
Economics,  
100,  
102009.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asieco.2025.102009  
Kay, C. (2008). Reflections on Latin American  
rural studies in the neoliberal globalization  
period: A new rurality? Development and  
https://repository.eafit.edu.co/items/3d43fd6  
1-1c80-4f0f-9d39-48770c6f4a53  
Sjaf, S., Malik, A., Sampean, Harits, A.,  
Maulana, S., Hakim, L., Arsyad, A., Gandi,  
Página 588  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
R., Barlan, Z., Muhammad, B., Elson, L., &  
consumption. Finance Research Letters.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2025.108341  
Zou, G., Fan, C., & Yang, C. (2025). Research  
on the impact of public data openness on  
urban-rural income inequality. Finance  
Cakrawinata, F. (2025). Analysis of spatial  
inequality and rural development in the  
supporting region for Nusantara capital city,  
Indonesia. Wellbeing, Space and Society, 9,  
100286.  
Research  
Letters,  
79,  
107193.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wss.2025.100286  
Wan, G., Zhang, X., & Zhao, M. (2022).  
Urbanization can help reduce income  
inequality. NPJ Urban Sustainability, 2(1), 1.  
https://doi.org/10.1038/s42949-021-00040-y  
Wang, X., Shao, S., & Li, L. (2019).  
Agricultural inputs, urbanization, and urban-  
rural income disparity: Evidence from China.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2025.107193  
Esta obra está bajo una licencia de  
Creative Commons Reconocimiento-No Comercial  
4.0 Internacional. Copyright © Angélica Patricia  
Díaz Villavicencio, Haydeé Rocio Lara Suárez,  
Robin Giovanny González Echeverría, Martha  
Rocio Cedeño Vergara,  
Andrade Sánchez.  
y
Freddy Jonathan  
China  
Economic  
Review,  
55,  
67–84.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2019.03.009  
Wang, Z., Liu, C., & Tian, Y. (2025). The effect  
of urban–rural public service gaps on  
consumption gaps under the perspective of  
sustainable development: Evidence from  
China.  
Sustainability,  
17(13).  
https://doi.org/10.3390/su17136148  
Wietzke, F. (2025). Beyond urban bias? Urban-  
rural inequalities and popular protest in  
Africa. World Development, 192, 107005.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2025.107  
005  
Xu, D. (2025). Rural-urban inequality in  
drinking  
socioeconomic outcome in Nigeria. Utilities  
Policy, 93, 101864.  
water  
accessibility  
as  
a
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2024.101864  
Zhang, X., Zhu, Y., & Hou, A. (2025). Fiscal  
decentralization and urban-rural inequality of  
income acquisition opportunities: Micro  
evidence from China. Finance Research  
Letters,  
85,  
107859.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2025.107859  
Zhang, Y., Wu, X., & Cai, R. (2025). The  
effects of rural e-commerce on income  
inequality: Evidence from the National Rural  
E-Commerce Comprehensive Demonstration  
policy in China. Economic Analysis and  
Policy,  
87,  
221–234.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2025.05.052  
Zhao, T., & Zhu, S. (2025). Digital inequality,  
uncertainty  
risk  
and  
rural  
residents’  
Página 589  
Ciencia y Educación  
(L-ISSN: 2790-8402 E-ISSN: 2707-3378)  
Vol. 7 No. 5.2  
Edición Especial V 2026  
Declaraciones éticas y editoriales del artículo  
Contribución de los autores (Taxonomía CRediT)  
Angélica Patricia Díaz Villavicencio: conceptualización de la investigación, diseño metodológico, desarrollo del proceso investigativo, análisis formal  
de los datos, redacción del borrador original del manuscrito, revisión crítica del contenido científico y supervisión general del estudio.  
Haydeé Rocio Lara Suárez: curación y organización de los datos, participación en la recolección de información, validación de los resultados obtenidos  
y elaboración de representaciones gráficas y visualización de los datos.  
Robin Giovanny González Echeverría: provisión de recursos académicos y materiales para el desarrollo del estudio, apoyo en la administración del  
proyecto investigativo y revisión editorial del manuscrito antes de su publicación.  
Martha Rocio Cedeño Vergara: conceptualización de la investigación, diseño metodológico, desarrollo del proceso investigativo, análisis formal de los  
datos, redacción del borrador original del manuscrito, revisión crítica del contenido científico y supervisión general del estudio.  
Freddy Jonathan Andrade Sánchez: curación y organización de los datos, participación en la recolección de información, validación de los resultados  
obtenidos y elaboración de representaciones gráficas y visualización de los datos.  
Declaración de conflicto de intereses  
Los autores declaran que no existe conflicto de intereses en relación con la investigación presentada, la autoría del manuscrito ni la publicación del  
presente artículo.  
Declaración de financiamiento  
La presente investigación no recibió financiamiento específico de agencias públicas, comerciales o de organizaciones sin fines de lucro. En caso de  
existir financiamiento institucional o externo, este deberá ser declarado explícitamente por los autores en esta sección.  
Declaración del editor  
El editor responsable certifica que el proceso editorial del presente artículo se desarrolló conforme a los principios de integridad científica, transparencia  
y buenas prácticas editoriales. El manuscrito fue sometido a un proceso de evaluación mediante revisión por pares doble ciego, garantizando la  
confidencialidad de la identidad de los autores y revisores durante todo el proceso de dictamen académico. Asimismo, el editor declara que el artículo  
cumple con los criterios científicos, metodológicos y éticos establecidos por la revista.  
Declaración de los revisores  
Los revisores externos que participaron en la evaluación del presente manuscrito declaran haber realizado el proceso de revisión de manera objetiva,  
independiente y confidencial. Asimismo, manifiestan que no mantienen conflictos de interés con los autores ni con la investigación evaluada, y que sus  
observaciones y recomendaciones se fundamentan exclusivamente en criterios científicos, metodológicos y académicos.  
Declaración ética de la investigación  
Los autores declaran que la investigación se desarrolló respetando los principios éticos de la investigación científica, garantizando la confidencialidad  
de los datos y el respeto a los participantes del estudio. En los casos en que la investigación involucre seres humanos, los procedimientos deben ajustarse  
a los principios éticos establecidos en la Declaración de Helsinki y a las normativas institucionales correspondientes.  
Declaración sobre el uso de inteligencia artificial  
Los autores declaran que el uso de herramientas de inteligencia artificial, en caso de haberse utilizado durante el proceso de investigación o redacción  
del manuscrito, se realizó únicamente como apoyo técnico para mejorar la claridad del lenguaje o el análisis de información, manteniendo siempre la  
responsabilidad intelectual sobre el contenido del artículo. Las herramientas de inteligencia artificial no fueron utilizadas como autoras del manuscrito  
ni sustituyen la responsabilidad académica de los investigadores.  
Disponibilidad de datos  
Los datos que respaldan los resultados de esta investigación estarán disponibles previa solicitud razonable al autor de correspondencia, respetando las  
normas éticas y de confidencialidad establecidas por la investigación.  
Página 590