Sustainable Rural Development Based on CFS-RAI Principles in the Production of Healthy Food: The Case of the Kayambi People (Ecuador)

Abstract

Food production faces significant economic, social, and environmental challenges. The Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture (CFS-RAI), aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), provide a framework for implementing actions and investments in sustainable food production. Farmers are the primary investors in their agricultural activities, playing a fundamental role in the sustainability of rural territories. This study aims to analyze the rural development innovation system implemented by the Fundación Casa Campesina Cayambe and its alignment with the CFS-RAI principles and SDG. Focusing on 129 women producing healthy food within the Kayambi people and adopting a mixed-methods approach, including participant observation, interviews, and focus groups, the research examines the integration of public institutions, academia, and civil society in promoting sustainable rural development. The findings indicate that key innovation processes include a participatory, community-based, and gender-sensitive microcredit system implemented by the Foundation. Additionally, the technical and scientific support provided by the Universidad Politécnica Salesiana enhances investment capacity and knowledge acquisition, strengthening both individual and collective capacities for food production and commercialization. The study concludes that a decentralized and coordinated cooperation system, involving multiple territorial stakeholders, fosters the economic autonomy of female producers while adhering to the principles of CFS-RAI and the SDG.

1. Introduction

The production of healthy food in rural territories faces a series of interrelated challenges across economic, sociocultural, political, technological, and environmental dimensions [1]. These challenges directly or indirectly involve various territorial actors, including community-based producer organizations, the state, academia, and both national and international civil society organizations (NGOs). In many cases, the latter end up replacing the state, which, due to institutional weaknesses, struggles to enforce public policies and secure funding [2]. This situation is particularly evident in low-income countries, where the absence of state support negatively impacts rural development processes [3].

In rural territories, agriculture constitutes the primary economic activity for the population. However, state policies often prioritize incentives for agro-export, marginalizing local food production essential for ensuring food sovereignty [4]. This phenomenon exacerbates the vulnerability of rural areas to global market dynamics, leading to competition for productive resources and negatively impacting not only food sovereignty but also economic and social resilience [5].

Historically, rural populations have created spaces of resistance to secure fundamental rights such as access to land and water and to be recognized as active development stakeholders [6]. In response to the challenges of globalization and social, economic, and environmental changes, these populations have demonstrated the ability to adapt and establish alliances with public, private, and academic institutions [7]. These collaborations have facilitated participatory planning for rural development projects focused on sustainability and healthy food production, aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and the Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture (CFS-RAI) [8]. An example of this is the work carried out by female food producers in Cayambe and Pedro Moncayo, in northern Ecuador.

International cooperation for development (ICD) has been studied from various perspectives; however, few studies have specifically analyzed financing mechanisms and how they could be optimized to ensure efficient agricultural investments. ICD-funded projects’ evaluations are generally financial, without thorough examination of the sustainability of their impacts or the structural changes they may generate. Similarly, projects promote different types of innovations, yet it is essential to identify these innovations, the success factors that drive their adoption by beneficiaries, and how they strengthen synergies among local actors.

There are various studies on the application of CFS-RAI principles in different projects. In Spain, their connection with the rural food industry has been analyzed, showing that they can drive sustainable economic growth and contribute to the revitalization of rural areas [9]. In Colombia, these principles have been reported as a key support tool for actors involved in transforming regions affected by illicit crops, where land legalization, food security, and economic development are considered fundamental pillars for territorial transformation [10]. Similarly, in Ecuador, studies have examined sustainable livestock policies and their alignment with these principles [11].

However, few studies specifically analyze their implementation in indigenous communities. A notable example is a study in Peru that examines the integration of local actions with the CFS-RAI principles in designing a rural development strategy [12]. Likewise, in Ecuador, another study has explored the importance of skills development in strengthening the cooperative system of indigenous artisan women [13].

This research not only contributes to the study of food systems and rural development in indigenous communities but also aims to establish practical recommendations to improve the efficiency of investments and the sustainability of projects focused on sustainable rural development. In this context, the objective of this study is to analyze the innovation mechanisms for sustainable rural development, funded by international cooperation and implemented through investment projects led by the Foundation Casa Campesina Cayambe (FCCC), and their alignment with the CFS-RAI principles and the SDG. The specific objectives were (a) to assess the efficiency of ICD financing mechanisms for responsible investment in sustainable rural development; (b) to identify the innovations in sustainable rural development implemented by the FCCC; and (c) to examine the alignment of the FCCC’s actions with the CFS-RAI principles in healthy food production.

This study focuses on food production in the Kayambi people’s territory in the Ecuadorian Andes, where communities struggle over land and water access for food production [14]. Since the 1980s, various NGOs have promoted and strengthened agroecology in the region [15]. Through sustained technical support for communities, the FCCC has implemented multiple projects aimed at improving access to and control over productive resources. It has also provided training for producers and established local commercialization spaces (bio-markets). These projects have been funded through ICD, and the two most recent phases (Phase 1: May 2018–October 2021 and Phase 2: April 2022–September 2025) have benefited from the technical and scientific contributions of Universidad Politécnica Salesiana (UPS) as a member of the Network of Universities for the application of the CFS- RAI principles [16]. This local cooperation system presents an innovative proposal for sustainable rural development, aligned with the CFS-RAI principles and the SDG. This case illustrates how rural communities can transform their realities through strategies that integrate diverse actors and resources, promoting development models that merge local needs with global commitments and thereby fostering innovation in sustainable rural development.

The following Section 2 presents a review of the state of the art on the topics related to the research: sustainable cooperation and innovation; governance of food systems; Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture; and international cooperation for development. The Section 3 on materials and methods describes the study area, the approach, techniques, and tools used in each phase. The results and discussion on responsible investment in ICD, innovation in sustainable local development, and the CFS-RAI principles and SDG in healthy food production are presented in Section 4. Finally, key findings are presented in the conclusions Section 5.

2. State-of-the-Art Review

This section presents the state of the art on sustainable rural development as a key objective for transforming food systems into rural territories. It also examines the governance of food systems, guided by the CFS-RAI principles and the SDG, as essential frameworks for global governance. These principles ensure that public and private investments are relevant, efficient, and transparent, contributing to the realization of fundamental rights, particularly the right to food. Additionally, the role of international cooperation (ICD) is analyzed in relation to local organizational processes, participation, and the empowerment of key actors.

Sustainable rural development and innovation. Sustainable rural development seeks to improve the quality of life in rural communities through innovative approaches that integrate economic, social, and environmental dimensions. Social innovation has emerged as a crucial strategy for addressing rural development challenges by promoting creative and sustainable solutions [17]. This process incorporates diverse knowledge systems and fosters empowerment through the co-creation of socially innovative initiatives.

Innovation has become a key driver in tackling issues such as food security, climate change, and social inclusion. The integration of advanced technologies, participatory governance models, and inclusive financing mechanisms has been essential in transforming rural production systems and optimizing financial resource management. Key components of innovations such as collaborative economies, participatory decision-making, ethical banking, and technology for social purposes are adaptable to various rural contexts, enhancing their replicability and scalability [18]. Social innovation is based on empathy, systemic thinking, and adaptability, ensuring that solutions are both effective and long-lasting. Rural development strategies based on territorial integration, which consider the interrelationship between agricultural, environmental, and social sectors, have proven to be more successful in promoting sustainability as part of social innovation [19]. Models such as smart territories, which integrate technology and community participation, enable a more effective response to rural challenges by leveraging digitalization and strengthening local governance [20]. In this way, social innovation becomes a powerful tool for enhancing resilience and sustainability in rural environments.

Governance of Food Systems. The governance of food systems remains a subject of ongoing debate. Perspectives such as food sovereignty—defined as the right of people to determine their agricultural and food production policies in accordance with their cultural and nutritional needs—differ from the food security approach, which focuses on ensuring food availability and access. Given that nutrition is fundamental to public health, the need to produce healthy food becomes imperative.

Healthy eating is a polysemic and multidimensional concept, encompassing not only nutritional and biomedical aspects but also sociocultural, economic, political-legal, and environmental dimensions. It is characterized by the following: 1. A variety and complexity of fresh or minimally processed foods; 2. Safe and age-appropriate foods; 3. Culturally accepted foods; 4. Available and accessible food (food security); 5. Respect for community rights (food sovereignty) and compliance with existing laws; and 6. Environmental sustainability. Thus, adopting a holistic approach to healthy eating is a strategic way to ensure food security and sovereignty, environmental sustainability, and agro-food system resilience. Simultaneously, it significantly enhances public health through disease prevention and health promotion [21].

Beyond individual producers, food system governance involves networks of organizations of varying sizes and types. These networks, deeply rooted in the historical legacy of Andean communities, play a crucial role in promoting food sovereignty, environmental sustainability, and local economic development. They have facilitated women’s access to and retention in markets, enabled support from public and private institutions, and contributed to rural territorial development.

These networks advocate for sustainable food production practices, strengthen solidarity economies by connecting producers and consumers, and ensure fair pricing through equitable commercialization mechanisms that eliminate intermediaries. Through these networks, women have maintained social cohesion around agroecological production, influencing the development of local public policies that address community-specific realities [15]. Strengthening local governance and developing cooperatives have proven to be effective strategies for enhancing the economic resilience of communities, allowing farmers to increase their bargaining power and achieve long-term financial stability.

Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture. As part of global food governance, FAO, in its role of promoting the right to food, introduced the Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture and Food Systems (CFS-RAI) in 2014. These principles provide a framework for guiding agricultural and food-related investments that foster food security and sustainable development. The CFS-RAI principles emerged in response to concerns over the negative impacts of certain investments, such as land grabbing and environmental degradation.

Their primary objective is to ensure that investments not only increase productivity but also contribute to inclusive and sustainable rural development, strengthening the rights of smallholder farmers, women, and indigenous communities. The ten CFS-RAI principles are as follows: 1. Contribute to food security and nutrition. 2. Promote sustainable and inclusive economic development and poverty eradication. 3. Foster gender equality and women’s empowerment. 4. Enhance youth participation and empowerment. 5. Respect land tenure, fisheries, forests, and access to water. 6. Sustainably manage natural resources, increase resilience, and reduce disaster risks. 7. Respect cultural heritage and traditional knowledge, and support diversity and innovation; 8. Respect cultural heritage and traditional knowledge while supporting diversity and innovation. 9. Promote safe and healthy agricultural and food systems. 10. Establish inclusive and transparent governance structures, processes, and grievance mechanisms. The CFS-RAI principles are strongly aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals [22].

Responsible investment, according to the CFS-RAI principles, is based on three fundamental pillars: social inclusion, ensuring that vulnerable groups, such as women and smallholder farmers, actively participate in and benefit from investment processes; environmental sustainability, focusing on practices that preserve natural resources and biodiversity, promoting resilience to climate change; and capacity building, empowering rural communities through knowledge transfer, access to technology, and technical support, enabling autonomous and sustainable development.

International Cooperation for Development (ICD). ICD plays a crucial role in ensuring that agricultural investments are both efficient and responsible. It is important to recognize that ICD has undergone significant evolution. Initially, it was structured as economic assistance under the Marshall Plan, later shifting toward cooperation focused on industrialization and economic modernization in developing regions, particularly in Latin America [23].

Over time, ICD has transitioned from a dependency-based, aid-driven approach to more participatory and sustainable models, driven by initiatives such as the Millennium Development Goals and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) within the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. However, structural challenges persist, including financial dependency, aid conditionality, and the limited autonomy of recipient countries in managing resources [24].

ICD has shifted towards decentralized models that involve multiple stakeholders, including Indigenous communities. The participation of these groups in development cooperation has been strengthened by international legal frameworks, such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which emphasizes their right to self-determination and sustainable development [25]. Cooperation strategies in indigenous contexts focus on strengthening community self-management through integrated programs that address socioeconomic and cultural aspects.

Sustainable rural development requires ICD and multisectoral alliances that integrate producers, academic institutions, the private sector, and civil society. These collaborative networks facilitate information exchange, the formulation of policies tailored to territorial needs, and social innovation, reflected in a planning system based on the theory of liberating action [26]. This theory serves as a fundamental tool for understanding human behavior in various contexts, including rural development. Through the knowledge-action-communication framework, stakeholders identify and propose solutions to their challenges [27]. In many cases, rural development processes lack direct support from national governments, underscoring the crucial role of ICD, NGOs, and academia in driving sustainable initiatives.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Study Area

The research was conducted in the territory of the Kayambi people, which encompasses the Cayambe and Pedro Moncayo cantons in the Pichincha province, Ecuador. Hydrologically, this region is part of the Pisque River Basin. The territory is located at an altitude of 2500 to 3300 m above sea level, with an average temperature of 16 °C and annual precipitation of 700 mm. Three main production systems have been identified in the area: (i) greenhouse rose production for export, covering 5473.8 ha, which is the region’s primary economic activity and main source of employment [28]; (ii) bovine milk production, mainly located in the higher-altitude areas and indigenous territories; and (iii) family farming, primarily focused on the production of vegetables, cereals, and potatoes [29].

This territory has been under the influence of the FCCC since 1994. With financial support from ICD originating from civil society, the FCCC implements development projects focused on production, health, education, and community organization. Over the past six years, the foundation has executed two projects with a total investment of $943,385.80, primarily aimed at healthy food production through agroecological practices and the traditional Andean chakra system, benefiting 129 female producers organized into 10 groups. Historically, the region has experienced struggles over access to land and water, where community organization has played a fundamental role in the process (Figure 1).

3.2. Methodological Approach

This research employs a mixed-methods approach at a descriptive and correlational level, allowing for an analysis of the relationships between studied variables while providing an in-depth description. The conceptual framework is based on the Working with People (WWP) metamodel [30], which promotes participation, social learning, and the integration of ethical values in stakeholder engagement in development projects. This model connects knowledge and action toward a common objective, integrating technical results, the production of goods and services, and the human value contributed by project participants [31]. The WWP model consists of three key components: (i) Political-contextual: facilitates relationships among stakeholders and manages common objectives. (ii) Ethical-social: promotes responsible values and practices to build trust. (iii) Technical business: mobilizes resources, ensures quality, negotiates among stakeholders, and manages project risks.

The interaction of these components fosters social learning, connecting them through collective processes that transform knowledge into concrete and effective actions. Cazorla et al. [30] emphasize the need to shift planning from theory to practice, promoting sustainable transformations that address real contextual needs in project implementation.

3.3. Data Collection, Analysis, and Interpretation

The implemented methodology ensures a robust and multidimensional approach. To analyze the interventions by combining qualitative and quantitative methods, three stages of data collection and analysis were established (Figure 2). For each stage, techniques such as document review and institutional database analysis were used while maintaining confidentiality. Participant observation, interviews, and focus groups were conducted with the informed consent of the participants. Qualitative data were processed using NVivo (14) software, while quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS software, version 30.0.0.0 (172).

In the first stage, investment flows from civil society through NGOs were identified. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with officials from three NGOs, local government representatives, and academics from UPS, totaling nine key informants. The collected data were analyzed by categorizing common terms. Additionally, a documentary review of NGO-led projects was carried out to determine investment amounts, disaggregated by specific budget categories.

The second stage focused on identifying innovations in rural development. A participatory action research approach was applied, using participant observation and focus groups. Interviews were conducted with officials from decentralized autonomous governments (DAG), NGO technicians, UPS academics, and female leaders of beneficiary groups.

In the third stage, project actions were linked to the CFS-RAI principles and SDG. A phenomenological method was used, beginning with a literature review to define the concept of healthy food production. This process narrowed down the analysis to three key aspects: nutrition/health, social well-being, environmental sustainability, and food system governance.

Thus, categories, subcategories, and keywords were identified using NVivo (14) software to process document reviews and interviews. The alignment with the CFS-RAI principles was established based on information from projects, institutional reports, and data collected from all 129 project beneficiaries. These data were analyzed using SPSS software version 30.0.0.0 (172), applying statistical analyses based on frequencies, percentages, and means.

4. Results and Discussion

For our analysis, healthy food production is defined as a system that preserves the nutritional benefits of food and ensures equitable access to nutritious food. It also minimizes environmental impact, considering ecosystem sustainability, as well as the health and well-being of both producers and consumers, within an effective governance framework for local food systems. The following section presents the research findings.

4.1. Responsible ICD Investment in Healthy Food Production and Sustainable Rural Development

In the territory of the Kayambi people, rural development projects are implemented with funding from the ICD. This cooperation provides financial resources directed toward impoverished or emerging sectors, which are channeled through civil society organizations, businesses, clubs, and state entities. Funds are transferred to beneficiaries through state institutions in the recipient country, working in partnership with local foundations.

In the case of the FCCC, an innovative approach has been proposed for project implementation, with a particular focus on healthy food production (Figure 3).

As shown in Figure 3, there are four mechanisms for channeling financial resources: (i) State-to-State: Funds from the donor state are transferred to recipient states, which are responsible for implementing rural development projects. (ii) State-to-State and Civil Society (NGOs): Donor state funds are combined with those of the local recipient state, and project implementation is delegated to a local NGO. (iii) State-to-Civil Society: Funds are transferred from the donor state directly to a local NGO. (iv) Civil Society-to-Civil Society: Funds from private donors, businesses, community organizations, parishes, and clubs are collected by an NGO in the donor country and then transferred to a local NGO in the recipient country, as is the case with the FCCC. The civil society-to-civil society cooperation model developed by the FCCC operates without pre-established agendas or rigid conditions, allowing for the design of local development proposals with direct participation from beneficiary groups. This approach incorporates community wisdom, based on liberatory action theory [32]. As a result, the project is positively received, fostering stakeholder empowerment through a joint planning process aligned with common objectives [33] (Figure 4).

Another fundamental element is the flexibility in project execution, which does not imply disregarding implementation regulations, schedules, and budgets but rather allows for adaptability to unforeseen changes. As shown in Figure 4, of the total funds raised, 10% remain with the donor organization for administration, 18% are allocated to the local NGO to cover administrative expenses and technical assistance, and 72% of the funds are directly invested in the beneficiary group. This cooperation model enhances budget execution efficiency due to the fundraising system, minimal bureaucracy within the cooperating NGO, the counterpart contributions from the local NGO, and the ability to form partnerships with other local actors. In essence, two cooperation systems coexist: international cooperation and local cooperation, both operating under a decentralized cooperation framework [34].

The direct investment of cooperation funds is focused on the following: generating individual and collective/community knowledge, strengthening organizational structures; providing incentives through productive inputs, such as seedling and seed distribution, which serve as seed capital; and investing in productive infrastructure through microcredit, which has proven to be an efficiently utilized production tool in rural sectors [35].

International cooperation has played a fundamental role in the development of Indigenous communities by financing various projects. The approaches, models, and conditions of these interventions vary depending on the context and the characteristics of the beneficiaries. In the specific case of indigenous communities, the application of a participatory approach throughout the entire planning cycle stands out. This approach recognizes communities as equal partners, allowing them to actively participate in decision-making regarding their own development [36]. Moreover, it entails the recognition of indigenous peoples’ and nationalities’ rights to benefit from their resources and to define their development priorities, thereby ensuring a more equitable and sustainable model [37].

4.2. Innovations in Sustainable Rural Development Implemented by FCCC

The current trend in International Development Cooperation focuses on innovation linked to sustainability dimensions. In the implementation of healthy food projects, four types of innovation have been identified: social, economic, technological, and food governance innovation. In these innovation processes, the participation of diverse territorial actors is fundamental, including beneficiary groups, academia (such as UPS), local decentralized autonomous governments (DAGs), and civil society, represented by foundations, businesses, and second-tier organizations. Based on action theory [38], these actors engage in planning processes through knowledge dialogue and practical implementation, leading to learning transformations that drive innovation [39]. This process embodies the knowledge-action-innovation approach.

Innovation in development also requires a shared vision based on common objectives, ensuring respect for the specific roles of each institution. These roles include research, training, financing through credit systems, technology transfer, and public policy development [33]. This interinstitutional coordination facilitates the creation of enabling spaces for promoting the production and distribution of healthy food while also fostering inclusive economic opportunities within the framework of the popular solidarity economy [40]. This is particularly beneficial for women in the territory, contributing to the preservation of food sovereignty. The implemented actions and innovation components align with a global governance process, contributing to the achievement of the SDG under the CFS-RAI principles (Figure 5).

4.2.1. Social Innovation

Social innovation consists of creating producer networks through groups and/or associations to improve access to production resources and markets. It also reinforces local governance, citizen participation, participatory budgeting, and accountability, facilitating the enforcement of rights, food sovereignty, and project empowerment. Through organization, women are able to implement healthy food distribution systems for potential consumers, using innovative approaches such as bio-markets and food basket sales, thereby creating sustainable value chains and inclusive community business models [41]. The use of information technologies to improve commercialization is a key innovation today. Eighty percent of beneficiaries use WhatsApp, and UPS provided a WhatsApp Business course to develop alternative sales strategies, leveraging new communication and marketing systems. This strengthens rural associativity through digital platforms [42].

4.2.2. Economic Innovation

In project development, economic innovation is observed from various perspectives. During the production phase, the reuse of inputs such as solid and liquid bionutrients—through a combination of ancestral and contemporary practices—aligns with the concept of the circular bioeconomy [43]. This approach, based on waste reduction and the efficient use of resources, helps lower production costs and enhance sustainability [44]. In the commercialization of healthy foods, a phenomenon of collaborative economy emerges, where producers apply fundamental principles of social and solidarity economy: solidarity, unity, reciprocity, and complementarity [45]. These principles are also reflected in market spaces, where consumers demonstrate increased awareness of pesticide-free food consumption, thereby promoting fair trade practices that strengthen local markets and ensure more equitable prices.

One of the key economic innovations in sustainable rural development is the microcredit system implemented by the FCCC. Producers perceive this financing model as a production tool that expands their opportunities to increase food production. The loans are aimed at acquiring equipment, implementing irrigation systems, and constructing greenhouses and barns for small livestock farming.

For the microcredit system to function effectively and remain sustainable over time, several key factors must be considered. These include securing financial resources, shared management between beneficiaries and the FCCC Foundation, and regulatory oversight by participating in intercommunity organizations represented in credit committees. Additionally, decision-making regarding loan eligibility, loan monitoring, and ensuring repayment accountability are essential aspects for guaranteeing the system’s long-term sustainability (Figure 6).

There are two credit committees involved in the formulation of regulations and oversight of invested resources, while the FCCC is responsible for the financial management of these funds. Each committee is composed of various communities within the territory, and each community elects a representative, known as the credit delegate.

This system differs from other microcredit models due to its socially managed structure, where the community plays a central role in governance. This approach ensures the long-term sustainability of resources from ICD while enhancing investment efficiency and loan recovery [46].

Access to credit is determined by the collective and community-based decision-making process of community members or producer groups. Loan approval depends on the applicant’s behavior within the community and/or group, requiring compliance with community life regulations. In cases of non-payment, no other member can access financing until the outstanding debt is settled, fostering co-responsibility in credit management. This community-based control mechanism has resulted in low delinquency and default rates, reaching just 1% among the 129 producers. Furthermore, this financial governance model strengthens producers’ autonomy and optimizes the use of resources from ICD, aligning with inclusive finance approaches and territorial development strategies [35].

4.2.3. Technological Innovation

Technological innovation in healthy food production is dynamic and constantly evolving due to scientific advancements and their interaction with ancestral knowledge. The adaptation of technologies is carried out in collaboration with project beneficiaries and with the support of UPS. Each stakeholder plays a specific role, facilitating interaction and knowledge exchange to achieve common goals. However, these innovations progress slowly due to various factors, such as uncertainty about potential reductions in production. Nevertheless, these perceptions can be managed by applying the diffusion of innovations theory through training, technical assistance, and experience exchange [27].

Among the main innovations in the production stage is the use of bionutrients and biostimulants, which are formulated from resources available within the chakra. Additionally, the promotion of crop association and the recovery of local products contribute to the conservation of agrobiodiversity—fundamental principles of agroecology, regenerative agriculture, and the Andean chakra system [45]. The integration of small animal husbandry is key to closing the healthy food production cycle. The combination of plant and animal biodiversity not only diversifies the range of products but also improves profitability. Another innovative process is agricultural production planning based on the lunar calendar phases. For example, research has documented that sowing in September during the “new moon” phase positively influences crop yield and development, which are technological practices applied in biodynamic agriculture and the Andean chakra system [47].

To optimize water use and enhance soil sustainability, drip and sprinkler irrigation systems have been implemented, increasing efficiency to 96% and 65%, respectively [48]. In these systems, pressurization is achieved through gravitational energy, avoiding the use of external energy sources. Additionally, rainwater harvesting has been integrated, covering up to 36% of water needs for greenhouse crops [28]. Through its research, UPS has developed strategies that reduce pressure on surface and groundwater sources, increasing resilience to the effects of climate change and water stress. This highlights how communities sustainably manage shared resources such as water and soil [49]. It has been shown that social appropriation of knowledge goes beyond scientific dissemination—it requires community participation to develop concrete solutions that directly benefit rural populations [50]. Technological innovation has transformed rural agriculture, optimizing production efficiency and strengthening agri-food systems against climate change and growing food demand [51].

In Latin America, improvements in traditional maize and potato varieties have increased yields and adaptability, while seed banks and in situ conservation have preserved genetic diversity [52]. In Africa, sustainable practices such as agroecology and biofertilizer use have revitalized traditional crops, improving food security and climate resilience [45]. Processing innovations have added value to crops like quinoa and amaranth, enhancing marketability and preservation [53]. Precision agriculture, adapted to traditional crops, has optimized irrigation and fertilization through sensors and drones, increasing productivity without compromising cultural characteristics [54]. These innovations highlight technology’s potential to sustainably strengthen rural agriculture.

A fundamental aspect of innovation in rural development is knowledge transfer and capacity building. The implementation of agricultural extension programs and training enables farmers to adopt appropriate technologies and improve production practices sustainably. The collaboration between local actors has been crucial in developing training programs adapted to local needs, promoting a participatory approach that integrates traditional knowledge with technological innovation.

4.2.4. Innovation in Local Food Governance

The management of public policies related to territorial planning, production promotion, and the creation of commercialization spaces that integrate diverse stakeholders can be considered an innovation in food governance. This approach allows for an analysis of equity in resource access, empowerment of community association, and their relationship with public policies. In this regard, a multi-level governance process has been observed [55], facilitating an understanding of the interactions between different levels of government (national, provincial, and municipal) and producer organizations and academia in the management of bio-inputs, training, and regulatory frameworks for the use of public spaces.

In this context, provincial and municipal decentralized autonomous governments (DAGs), within their jurisdiction, provide bio-inputs and promote training processes in coordination with academia and the FCCC.

Thanks to the efforts of female producers and their demands to local authorities, public policies have been established through ordinances that allow for the use of physical spaces in various locations. In these spaces, bio-markets have been implemented, enabling direct consumer access to healthy food with quality assurance [15]. However, it is crucial to ensure continuous improvements in infrastructure and management to optimize long-term functionality and sustainability.

Thus, food governance encompasses processes, regulations, and institutions that govern food systems, involving government actors, civil society, the private sector, and academia in decision-making [11]. This approach enables the implementation of public policies related to territorial planning, equitable access to productive resources, and community participation in food commercialization.

From the perspective of food sovereignty theory, emphasis is placed on the importance of producers having control over their productive resources and markets [56]. The struggle of women producers to obtain commercialization spaces can be analyzed within this framework, highlighting their autonomy from large agro-industrial markets. In this regard, it is possible to consider common goods and the community-based management of natural resources.

One of the main challenges for the sustainability of healthy food production is the aging of producers. To address this issue, a training program in sustainable agriculture has been implemented for young family members of project beneficiaries. This initiative not only facilitates knowledge transfer but also creates economic opportunities for younger generations, supporting generational transition and youth entrepreneurship.

Finally, equitable resource access and community empowerment reflect an attempt to democratize access to sustainable technologies, aligning with the food sovereignty approach. However, it remains necessary to discuss whether these measures are sufficient or if institutional barriers persist, limiting the empowerment of communities and producer associations.

4.3. CFS-RAI Principles and SDG in Healthy Food Production

The actions implemented by FCCC for each type of innovation, along with their alignment with CFS-RAI principles and the achievement of the relevant SDG in ongoing projects, are presented in

Table 1. SDG and CFS-RAI principles in healthy food production in FCCC projects.

Type of Innovation	Healthy Food Production		Actions Implemented in the FCCC Project	Relation with
	Scope	Elements		CFS-RAI	SDG
Social	Nutrition—Health	Nutritional Biodiversity	10 traditional products offered at bio-markets: morocho, wheat, barley, fava beans, machica, uchujaku, melloco, mashua, sweet potato, jicama.	RAI 1 RAI 8	SDG 2
			Consumer access to healthy food options at 7 bio-markets.	RAI 1 RAI 8	SDG 2
		Consumer Rights	Promotion of healthy and responsible consumption: 5 posts on Facebook, 5 on TikTok, 7 videos on YouTube, 4 posts on X (Twitter), 1000 fabric bags, and 1000 recipe booklets.	RAI 10	SDG 16
		Producer Health	Family self-consumption: 60% of production is sold at bio-markets, 28% for self-consumption, and 12% is sold on farms.	RAI 1 RAI 8	SDG 8
Economic	Social Well-being	Economic Accessibility	Each bio-market has a steady flow of 10–20 permanent consumers.	RAI 1	SDG 2
			Variety of fresh or minimally processed foods: mixed vegetables, toasted grains (savory and sweet), fried fava beans, toasted fava beans, bread.	RAI 1	SDG 8
		Working Conditions	Women producers dedicate 4 to 6 h daily to farming activities on their plots.	RAI 2 RAI 3	SDG 5 SDG 8
		Training	28 training events on organic production, agroforestry, soil and water management, post-harvest handling, livestock farming, cooperative marketing, family bioeconomy, organizational strengthening, and citizenship-rights-gender topics.	RAI 3 RAI 4	SDG 4 SDG 5
			Knowledge exchange visits to agroecological farms, fruit farms, certified organic livestock farms, and guinea pig breeding and processing facilities.	RAI 3 RAI 4 RAI 7	SDG 4 SDG 5
		Organizational Structures	Strengthening women’s producer groups: 2 organizational capacity-building workshops, 1 workshop on citizenship-rights-gender topics.	RAI 3 RAI 4	SDG 5
		Fair Trade	Local agroecological production: 8% cultivate 50–100 m2; 48% cultivate up to 500 m2; 26% up to 1000 m2; 11% up to 5000 m2; 7% over 10,000 m2.	RAI 2	SDG 13
		Inclusive Finance	55 microcredits granted, with an average loan amount of $2500 per producer.	RAI 2 RAI 3	SDG 5
		Job Creation/Gender	72% of women producers receive help from their children or spouses for agroecological farming activities.	RAI 2 RAI 3	SDG 5 SDG 8
Technological	Environmental Sustainability	Use of Natural Resources	Production of bio-inputs: 45% of producers use 4 types of biofertilizers, 27% use 3, 22% use 2, and 6% use 1 type.	RAI 6	SDG 12
			Irrigation systems: 69% of women use sprinkler irrigation, 21% use drip irrigation, and 10% use flood irrigation.	RAI 5	SDG 12
		Pollution Reduction	Training: 2 workshops on integrated pest management and ethnoveterinary practices.	RAI 8	SDG 12
		Biodiversity	Diversified production: 13% cultivated 6–12 products, 26% cultivate 13–18, 30% cultivate 19–24, 23% cultivate 25–30, and 6% cultivate 31–36 products.	RAI 8	SDG 12
			Seed conservation and exchange: 1 annual seed exchange fair.	RAI 8	SDG 12
		Animal Welfare	Producción de especies menores:77%—Cuyes; 61%—Pollos; 40%—Gallinas ponedoras; 53%—Porcinos, 42%—Ovinos; 51%—Bovinos.	RAI 2 RAI 8	SDG 12
		System Resilience	Production of small livestock: 77% raise guinea pigs, 61% raise chickens, 40% have laying hens, 53% raise pigs, 42% raise sheep, and 51% raise cattle.	RAI 5	SDG 11
Governance	Food Systems Governance	Multi-level and Decentralized Governance	Strengthening the Producers’ Council and Cantonal Women’s Movement: 2 organizational capacity-building workshops, 1 workshop on citizenship-rights-gender topics.	RAI 9	SDG 17
			Project activity discussions with DAG Pichincha, DAG Cayambe, DAG Pedro Moncayo, DAG San José de Ayora, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock.	RAI 9 RAI 10	SDG 16
		Local Development	Local policy (ordinance): granting public spaces for agroecological fairs, 39% of producers meet Participatory Guarantee System Green Card standards.	RAI 2	SDG 8

.

From the perspectives of nutrition, environmental sustainability, social well-being, and governance, healthy food production has been addressed by the FCCC through various actions aligned with CFS-RAI Principle 1, which focuses on availability, acceptability, and quality of food, ensuring that it is safe and healthy. Essentially, the goal is to consolidate the right to food and health. Increasing the consumption of these foods stimulates agroecological production among female producers, ensuring both their health and that of the population. Likewise, these actions contribute to raising awareness about food security and nutrition, providing consumers with evidence-based knowledge about food types, nutritional content, and the socio-organizational processes behind healthy food production. While nutraceutical products are currently trending, the approach is not necessarily to introduce new products but rather to rescue and promote traditional foods with these properties, such as quinoa, mashua, and melloco.

CFS-RAI Principle 2 aims to contribute to sustainable and inclusive economic development and poverty eradication. In this regard, FCCC strengthens women’s agricultural production, with 90% of them dedicated exclusively to agroecology, 7% being homemakers, and 3% involved in small-scale flower production, livestock farming, and midwifery. The daily work on the chakras ensures that producers’ health conditions are safeguarded, as they are not exposed to agrochemicals, and the food they consume is safe. Additionally, these women engage in embroidery, childcare, elderly care, and household responsibilities. Their agroecological activity generates monthly incomes of $250–300, used for personal expenses and family contributions. However, productive, reproductive, and community work is still undervalued within their families, and many do not have decision-making power over their income—only 31% do.

Bio-markets serve as employment spaces for these women, generating essential household income. The innovation in governance within the food system, facilitated through cooperation between international financial institutions and NGOs, supports dignified employment for women, aligning with their family and social dynamics. This innovation highlights how synergies can improve livelihoods in rural communities.

It is worth noting that 56% of these women have primary education, 17% have secondary education, and only 2% have higher education. Despite having basic education, many have undergone training in various topics, boosting their self-esteem. Initially, they considered themselves inferior to men (heads of households), but now they recognize themselves as heads of their own homes and productive agents. The FCCC’s actions contribute to gender equality and women’s empowerment (CFS-RAI Principle 3) through training processes, enabling them to access theoretical knowledge that strengthens their empirical practices, leading to technical innovations. These actions also align with CFS-RAI Principle 2.

Women have also fought for the recognition and visibility of their ancestral knowledge, integrating it with innovation to develop better production techniques, manage zoogenetic resources and biodiversity within farms and chakras, and maintain traditional diets while using medicinal plants (CFS-RAI Principle 7). Through their experience, they pass agroecological knowledge and chakra farming practices on to their children, not only as a means of ensuring food sovereignty but also as a potential source of employment for young people (CFS-RAI Principle 4). This has been reinforced through the training programs within the project. Leveraging their innovativeness and technology skills, young people could establish thriving businesses in emerging value chains, keeping them in rural areas, enhancing agricultural value, ensuring employment, and reducing rural-to-urban migration [57].

Sixty percent of women have a savings account, and 40% also belong to a community savings or credit bank. Fifty-eight percent access loans averaging $2555–5000, making this a mechanism for maintaining continuous production. Fifty-eight percent invest in small livestock, 24% invest in greenhouses, and 5% invest in irrigation infrastructure. This has significantly contributed to improving their productive capacity and consolidating their economic autonomy. As for individual productive assets, 71% own land, 75% have irrigation infrastructure, 48% have equipment and tools, 60% raise small livestock, and 40% raise large livestock. It can be said that they have a varying level of economic autonomy, conditioned by asset ownership. However, regarding their control over these assets, there is no evident need for individual decision-making, as they are considered family property, even if acquired by the women themselves. The financial assets obtained through the organization have fostered economic, social, and political autonomy, allowing them to build collective empowerment.

In the context of the climate crisis, access to water is becoming increasingly critical, which is why water use efficiency in food production is one of the project’s objectives. While sprinkler and drip irrigation systems optimize water use, assessing the water footprint in food production remains pending to identify new ways to reuse water and prevent contamination. These practices are related to CFS-RAI Principle 6, which focuses on conserving and sustainably managing natural resources, increasing resilience, and reducing disaster risks. Additionally, in agroecosystems incorporating small livestock farming, women apply ethnoveterinary practices to ensure the health of both animals and themselves, preventing zoonotic diseases and significantly reducing the use of conventional medicines. Similarly, extensive farming systems guarantee animals’ freedom to enjoy comfort, increasing productivity.

Regarding governance (CFS-RAI Principles 9 and 10), the FCCC promotes training in rights so that women, by knowing them, can propose public policies and advocate for them based on their interests, making their social contributions visible and participating in decision-making spaces at the local level as organized political subjects. The internalization of rights, both individually and collectively, strengthens unity and common objectives. CFS-RAI Principle 9 is also reflected in the transparency mechanisms of the FCCC’s inclusive finance system, where communities manage this mechanism, which they have strengthened and maintained for many years, serving as a replicable model in similar contexts.

With the goal of improving their community and family situations, women producers have organized themselves to ensure full and effective participation with equal leadership opportunities in economic, political, and public life. They acknowledge that it is an ongoing process that requires strengthening. With the creation of the Cantonal Women’s Movement and their collective work, women have begun to generate their own economy with a more informed perspective, which empowers them and helps them revalue themselves, not only as producers but also in reclaiming rights, culture, and knowledge. All project actions aim to promote women’s participation in broader organizational processes, where empowerment, linked to CFS-RAI Principle 3, is reflected in political advocacy, particularly in proposing local policies such as the ordinance on the use of public spaces for bio-markets, which is in the implementation phase and requires follow-up and evaluation.

Although CFS-RAI Principle 10 was not explicitly outlined in the project design, it will be incorporated into its evaluation. This is essential to assess the fulfillment of deliverables, effects, and impacts through data and compliance with baseline indicators. Complying with this principle is also directly related to general project planning meetings, where actions can be rescheduled if necessary to optimize resource use. This represents a social innovation in action planning through social learning. Finally, by sharing progress and projections with public institutions, CFS-RAI Principle 10 is applied, as transparency in securing contributions from these entities has strengthened the territorial agroecological proposal.

The CFS-RAI principles underpin the achievement of the SDG. In the FCCC project, they contribute to SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) by promoting investments that enhance food security and improve nutrition in rural populations. They also support SDG 5 (Gender Equality) by emphasizing the equitable participation of women in decision-making, access, and efficient use of resources (SDG 12). Furthermore, they strengthen SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) by fostering cooperation between governments, the private sector, international organizations, and local communities, ensuring that investments are implemented inclusively and in a coordinated manner.

5. Conclusions

The research shows that the following components are essential for the rural development innovation system in the production of healthy foods implemented by the Fundación Casa Campesina Cayambe and their alignment with the CFS-RAI principles and SDG.

1. Community microcredit model in healthy food production. The microcredit system managed by the FCCC has proven to be a key tool in strengthening healthy food production within the Kayambi people’s territory. This model, based on community co-responsibility, allows producers to access financing without relying on traditional financial intermediaries, significantly reducing delinquency rates and increasing resource efficiency. The loans are primarily used for acquiring agroecological inputs, implementing irrigation systems, building greenhouses, and purchasing equipment. Unlike conventional financing schemes, this model fosters self-management and collective decision-making, strengthening women’s economic autonomy and ensuring financial stability in rural areas.

2. Innovation and diversification in healthy food production. The implementation of agroecological technologies and the recovery of ancestral knowledge have been fundamental in enhancing the sustainability of the local agri-food system. Key innovations include the production of bio-inputs using local resources, crop diversification through the reintroduction of traditional varieties, the integration of small livestock farming, and the adoption of efficient irrigation systems. Additionally, the strengthening of short supply chains, such as bio-fairs and direct sales through digital platforms, has improved market access without intermediaries. These strategies have not only increased profitability but also ensured the availability of healthy food for the local population, aligning with the SDG and CFS-RAI principles.

3. Strengthening territorial governance and women’s participation. The collaboration between various territorial actors, including academia, local governments, and community organizations, has contributed to consolidating a participatory governance model in healthy food production. The FCCC, in partnership with UPS and DAGs, has promoted dialogue spaces and joint planning, as well as the design and implementation of public policies favorable to agroecology. Women producers have played a central role in this process, improving access to productive resources through networks, strengthening community leadership, and actively participating in decision-making on rural development. These actions have driven women’s empowerment, ensuring that female producers are recognized not only as economic agents but also as political actors with influence in territorial management.

4. Innovation for sustainable rural development. Innovation has become a central element in sustainable rural development, encompassing social, economic, technological, and food governance innovations. Strengthening cooperation networks between communities, universities, and NGOs is key for knowledge exchange and agroecological and financial training. The implementation of decentralized financing mechanisms, such as microcredit, ensures economic autonomy without dependence on traditional banking. Additionally, digitalization can optimize commercialization and training through virtual platforms. For its expansion, it is crucial to adapt the model to each territory through participatory planning that integrates ancestral knowledge and local practices.

5. International and local cooperation in sustainable rural development. The FCCC experience demonstrates that a decentralized cooperation model, based on the collaboration between local and international actors, can significantly impact the transformation of rural agri-food systems. Unlike traditional cooperation, which often imposes external agendas, ICD—centered on strengthening local capacities—has fostered greater autonomy in decision-making and better project adaptation to territorial needs. This approach has facilitated the implementation of innovative strategies in production, commercialization, and financing, ensuring long-term sustainability while addressing the economic, social, and environmental challenges of rural communities. Furthermore, aligning these initiatives with the SDG and CFS-RAI principles reinforces their impact on food sovereignty, gender equity, and climate resilience, consolidating a replicable model for similar contexts.

However, one of the biggest challenges to the sustainability of agroecological production and food sovereignty is the low participation of young people in agriculture. The lack of access to productive resources and the perception of agriculture as an unprofitable activity have reduced younger generations’ interest in continuing these practices. Nevertheless, the FCCC experience demonstrates that when opportunities for training, financing, and market access are created, young people can play a key role in revitalizing the agri-food sector.

Finally, it is recommended to further investigate the viability of the ICD model in different contexts, the long-term sustainability of projects, and the integration of young people into agroecological production to ensure its continuity and evolution.