Efficient administrative management in social programs is a key factor in ensuring effectiveness, sustainability, and beneficiary satisfaction. The projects of the Decentralized Autonomous Provincial Government of Santa Elena (DAPGSE) require a structured approach to planning, organization, direction, control, and evaluation to optimize resources and outcomes. The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between administrative management and the results achieved in the social projects implemented by DAPGSE. A descriptive and correlational quantitative approach was applied, surveying 352 beneficiaries and 75 public officials in 2023 through questionnaires based on the Likert scale and the SERVQUAL model, assessing dimensions such as tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy. Data were analyzed using Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficient with GNU Octave. Beneficiaries rated reliability (4.46), responsiveness (4.54), assurance (4.56), and empathy (4.46) positively, while tangibility obtained a lower mean score (3.76), highlighting the need for improvements in infrastructure and resources. The correlation between administrative management and the outcomes achieved was strong and significant (r = 0.821; p < 0.001), confirming that efficient management directly impacts service quality and beneficiary satisfaction. A well-structured administrative management system in DAPGSE’s social programs enhances operational efficiency, optimizes the use of public resources, and strengthens perceptions of quality and trust among beneficiaries. The implementation of control mechanisms, continuous feedback, and staff training emerges as a key factor in ensuring sustainable and effective results.
The Ecuadorian Constitution of 2008, shows the concern that the Ecuadorian government has in relation to the environment, therefore prioritizes the protection, preservation and proper use in its Chapter Two, Section Two, Healthy Environment, in Articles 14th and 15th. The main objective of this study is to analyze the South South Cooperation, at the regional level in environmental matters in Ecuador according to the 2008 Constitution between 2007 and 2012. The Theory of Interdependence was chosen for this study. The main referents of the theory are Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye. One of their main ideas is that in order to achieve optimal development in a State, it needs from the actions and experiences of others, which can be applied to the reality of itself, in this sense, foreign policy and domestic policy are closely linked to each other in order to form a single process. This points us to the international cooperation as a good tool to accomplish national and international goals. In the first chapter, we can find the several sources and ways of international cooperation. In this study, the technical cooperation is prioritized. Ecuador makes part of several international organizations that show the running of the international relations in the country, since being part of these organizations the government must achieve objectives and guidelines. CELAC and UNASUR are the two regional spaces that are prioritized organizations for this research. By giving importance to environment, laws and regulations applied at the national level must be adjusted to the objectives of Good Living, in that way environmental protection is ensured. Since Ecuador is a developing country, it is necessary to access to the international aid that exist in the region, but it is very important to follow national laws in order to participate in international cooperation projects. In this regard, it should be mentioned that in the Constitution of Ecuador, the regional integration is a priority. In the second chapter the situation of South-South cooperation between the years 2007-2012 was analyzed in order to have a greater understanding of its evolution and implementation in the country through regulating entities, that facilitate access and tracking of the activities performed in the framework, of cooperation such as SENPLADES and SETECI. It is clarified that each Autonomous Decentralized Government have the power to search and manage their own cooperation, without going through the process that SETECI has, but the goal should accomplish national objectives. In the government agencies case, such cooperation must be access through SETECI, but more international instruments such as Memorandum of Understanding cannot be excluded. In the third chapter, priorities of cooperation are known, these are given by the Ministry of Environment, and the main priorities are: adaptation, mitigation of climate change; solid waste management; bio trade; protected areas management; invasive species eradication; among others. Ecuador keeps relations of South-South international cooperation with countries like Mexico, Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, and Venezuela. Three projects have been developed successfully in Ecuador and have been offered nowadays to be replicated in other countries of the region. It has been concluded that South-South cooperation cannot be measured or evaluated for amounts of money paid or received; as this cooperation is technical, administrative costs that are generated by the implementation of this cooperation are not always real, so the south-South cooperation is measured by the impact but not the financial part. The South-South cooperation projects on environmental issues, have increased since 2007, so we can see that under the State's and the Ministry of Environment priorities, a greater number of actions are identified at the regional level, actions that can contribute with the preservation of the environment in the country.
Higher Education and Sustainability
Science, Technology, and Education in Latin America
espanolEn este articulo analizamos los retos a los que se enfrenta el sistema de gobierno de las universidades publicas espanolas. Para ello tomamos el concepto de «dilemas de gobierno» utilizado por Larsen et al. (2009) y por Lazerson (2010). Concretamente se abordan los dilemas entre: la democracia representativa y la eficacia organizacional, los modelos de estructuras integradas y matriciales; las influencias externas o internas en la toma de decisiones y, entre la centralizacion y la descentralizacion en el contexto de la autonomia universitaria. Optamos por una metodologia cualitativa en la que aplicamos entrevistas y grupo focal de discusion. Las entrevistas se realizaron a veintitres informantes de cuatro universidades publicas espanolas triangulandose tres perfiles diferenciados de informantes: academicos que ejercen funciones de direccion; expertos analistas del gobierno y gestion de la educacion superior y personal de administracion y apoyo al academico-gestor. Tras ellas organizamos un grupo focal de discusion con expertos. Los resultados obtenidos indican que los expertos defienden una mayor autonomia para los directivos y un menor control por parte de organos colegiados de representacion estamental. Por otro lado, la estructura matricial se aplica sabiendo que el profesorado asume temporalmente tareas de direccion y gestion, lo que puede confundir los limites entre ambos focos organizativos. El profesorado que ejerce en la actualidad funciones directivas considera que el modelo vigente es el mas adecuado a las particularidades del sistema universitario espanol y, aunque se reconocen ciertas disfunciones en el modelo de representacion estamental, lo defienden ante un posible modelo de profesionalizacion externa. Concluimos que el modelo de analisis basado en los cuatro dilemas es capaz de reflejar los principales retos que debe asumir la universidad espanola en la actualidad. EnglishThe present paper aims at analyzing those challenges that public Spanish universities face nowadays. Hence, we will deal with the concept of «dilemma in governance» as used by Larsen et al. (2009) as well as by Lazerson (2010). The present paper breaks down into four: dilemma between representative democracy and organizational effectiveness, dilemma between integrated management structures and dual management structures; dilemma between external and internal influence in institutional decision making; dilemma between centralization and decentralization in more autonomous universities. The research has been conducted by means of qualitative methods: survey and focus-group. The survey has targeted 23 respondents, selected from four public Spanish universities, made up of: university managers; governmental and higher educational management experts; administrative personnel and counselors. After this phase, a focus-group with experts was conducted. The results obtained show that experts prefer autonomy of regulations and less control from the state representatives. Moreover, the model applies taking into account the fact that didactic activity temporarily implies counseling and managerial tasks which may create confusion between the two organizational focuses. The didactic activity that nowadays carries out managerial functions views the current model as the most appropriate to higher educational Spanish system and, despite several drawbacks in the model, it is still observed by representatives. Finally the results show that representatives of the centralized bodies are reluctant to share and disseminate power among peripheral organizational structures such as departments and faculties for whom autonomy is still debatable. Summarizing we can consider that the four dilemmas reflect the current challenges that Spanish universities have to face.
T he National Education Program states that creating distance between private and public education is not its intention, nevertheless, the scheme it has adopted, inherited from previous governments, discriminates private higher education and has monopolized education surveillance through the Secretariat of Public Education. Such task must be in the hands of the civil society and in its capacity to accredit self-financed higher education institutions, with the same autonomy and scope as those of public universities, the relationship between the civil society and the government will remain unchanged in the Program. It will still perceive the public university as a decentralized entity created, financed and ruled by a Hegelian State and, at the same time, it will still see the private university as if it had a governmental concession to render a public service to be academically controlled by the State. This posture inhibits the undertaking of actions by universities because the Program has chosen not to analyze the prevailing behavior.