Latin America & Caribbean · edition 2024

Ecuador 2024: strong rules, weak institutional capacity

Ecuador's strongest dimension is enabling environment; its weakest is capacities and processes. The framework is not yet translating evenly into practice.

93 indicators 30 procuring entities 4 dimensions

Overall ITI score

27.7/100

Global average: 44.2

First edition

The ITI score

Ecuador enters the index at 27.7 of 100

16.5 points below the global average. Enabling environment carries the score; capacities and processes holds it back.

The 2024 baseline

27.72024

View as table

Edition	Overall ITI score
2024	27.7

Score by dimension, 2024

Enabling environment49.8

Capacities and processes13.7

Citizen participation14

Data publication32.8

Dashed marks show the global average.

Inside the four dimensions

Where the score comes from

Enabling environment

49.8/100

Strongest area:Access-to-public information law · Right to request public information +1 more100

Weakest area:Infrastructure data disclosure standard · Organisation responsible for the infrastructure data disclosure standard +1 more0

Explore 3 sub-areas

1.1Legal framework and digital tools49.8

1.1.1Access to public information regulatory framework90

1.1.2Transparency standards in the public infrastructure sector36

1.1.3National digital information tools28

Capacities and processes

13.7/100

Strongest area:Computer equipment · Visualisations based on infrastructure projects data30

Weakest area:Plan to mitigate limitations for publishing information · Level of disclosed infrastructure projects +1 more0

Explore 5 sub-areas

2.1Institutional capacities21.1

2.1.1Basic knowledge17.7

2.1.2Digital capacities24.4

2.2Institutional processes8.8

2.2.1Procedures to disclose information16.4

2.2.2Enablers and barriers to disclose information8.6

2.2.3Control over infrastructure projects disclosure0

Citizen participation

14/100

Strongest area:Awareness of participation opportunities22.7

Weakest area:Improvements as a response to citizen participation7.3

Explore 2 sub-areas

3.1Participation practices14

3.1.1Participation opportunities15

3.1.2Use of information by citizens13.1

Data publication

32.8/100

Strongest area:Project owner100

Weakest area:Variation to contract price · Reasons for price changes +4 more0

Explore 6 sub-areas

4.1Disclosure practices32.8

4.1.1Project identification57.1

4.1.2Project preparation27.1

4.1.3Execution contract procurement68.4

4.1.4Supervision contract procurement7.9

4.1.5Execution contract implementation6

4.1.6Supervision contract implementation0

Procuring entities

How 30 procuring entities compare

Scores run from 51.1 to 8.1, with a median of 14.9.

0Leading80 to 100

0Strong60 to 79

4Developing40 to 59

26Weak0 to 39

#
1	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO MUNICIPAL DEL CANTON CUENCA	51.1	67.1	75.7	21.7
2	EMPRESA PÚBLICA METROPOLITANA DE AGUA POTABLE Y SANEAMIENTO	50.2	73	91.7	4.3
3	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO PROVINCIAL DE EL ORO	41.1	46.4	71.5	17.4
4	PREFECTURA CIUDADANA DEL GUAYAS	40.2	50	57.9	20.5
5	SECRETARÍA TÉCNICA DE GESTIÓN INMOBILIARIA DEL SECTOR PÚBLICO	37.6	25.6	6.6	67.5
6	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO MUNICIPAL DEL CANTON MANTA	37.5	46.3	37.9	29.4
7	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO MUNICIPAL DEL CANTON SAMBORONDON	34.8	40.2	29.9	33.2
8	MUNICIPIO DE MILAGRO	31.4	33.7	30.8	29.9
9	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO MUNICIPAL DE MACHALA	24.4	0	0	61.1
10	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO ILUSTRE MUNICIPALIDAD DEL CANTON DAULE	20	0	0	50
11	MUNICIPALIDAD DE GUAYAQUIL	18.5	0	0	46.3
12	GOBIERNO PROVINCIAL DE LOJA	17.3	0	0	43.2
13	MINISTERIO DE TRANSPORTE - SERVICIO DE CONTRATACION DE OBRAS	16.7	0	0	41.8
14	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO MUNICIPAL DE SANTO DOMINGO	16.2	4	0	36.9
15	GUAYAQUIL SIGLO XXI, FUNDACIÓN MUNICIPAL PARA LA REGENERACIÓN URBANA	15.7	23.9	17.8	7.3
16	EMPRESA PUBLICA METROPOLITANA DE MOVILIDAD Y OBRAS PUBLICAS	14.9	0	0	37.3
17	CONSEJO PROVINCIAL DE MANABÍ	14.9	0	0	37.3
18	EMPRESA ELÉCTRICA QUITO S.A. E.E.Q.	14.9	0	0	37.3
19	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO MUNICIPAL DEL CANTON QUEVEDO	14.9	0	0	37.3
20	EMPRESA MUNICIPAL DE AGUA POTABLE Y ALCANTARILLADO DE GUAYAQUIL EP - EMAPAG EP	14.9	0	0	37.3
21	ILUSTRE MUNICIPALIDAD DE SANTA ELENA	14.3	0	0	35.8
22	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO DEL DISTRITO METROPOLITANO DE QUITO	13.9	0	0	34.7
23	GOBIERNO PROVINCIAL DE TUNGURAHUA	13.7	0	0	34.2
24	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO PROVINCIAL DE SANTA ELENA	13.2	0	0	33.1
25	GOBIERNO PROVINCIAL DE LOS RIOS	12.5	0	0	31.3
26	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO MUNICIPAL DEL CANTON DURAN	11.1	0	0	27.9
27	UNIVERSIDAD TECNICA ESTATAL DE QUEVEDO	10.5	0	0	26.4
28	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO DE LA PROVINCIA DE SUCUMBIOS	9	0	0	22.6
29	EMPRESA ELÉCTRICA PÚBLICA ESTRATÉGICA CORPORACIÓN NACIONAL DE ELECTRICIDAD CNEL EP	8.4	0	0	21
30	GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO MUNICIPALIDAD DE AMBATO	8.1	0	0	20.2

Entity dashboard

Inspect one entity in depth

Choose an entity

GOBIERNO AUTONOMO DESCENTRALIZADO MUNICIPAL DEL CANTON CUENCA

Ranked #1 of 30 entities

51.1PE ITI score

Capacities and processes53.4 above average67.1

Citizen participation61.7 above average75.7

Information disclosure11.1 below average21.7

Ticks mark the average across all 30 entities.

Full detail The complete 93-indicator breakdown

National ITI ScoreScore27.7

1Enabling environmentDimension49.8

1.1Legal framework and digital toolsVariable49.8

1.1.1Access to public information regulatory frameworkSub-variable90

1.1.1.1Access-to-public information lawIndicator100

1.1.1.2Right to request public informationIndicator100

1.1.1.3Sanctions over non-compliance with access to public information mandatesIndicator100

1.1.1.4Organisation guaranteeing the sanctionsIndicator60

1.1.2Transparency standards in the public infrastructure sectorSub-variable36

1.1.2.1Proactive publication of information on public procurement processesIndicator60

1.1.2.2Proactive publication of information on public infrastructure projectsIndicator60

1.1.2.3Infrastructure data disclosure standardIndicator0

1.1.2.4Infrastructure data disclosure standard proactively published as open dataIndicator60

1.1.2.5Organisation responsible for the infrastructure data disclosure standardIndicator0

1.1.3National digital information toolsSub-variable28

1.1.3.1Centralised digital information platformsIndicator40

1.1.3.2Easy access to information in digital information platformsIndicator40

1.1.3.3Infrastructure projects geographic information system (GIS) platformIndicator0

2Capacities and processesDimension13.7

2.1Institutional capacitiesVariable21.1

2.1.1Basic knowledgeSub-variable17.7

2.1.1.1Knowledge about the access-to-information lawIndicator28.7

2.1.1.2Knowledge about transparency initiatives in the infrastructure sectorIndicator14

2.1.1.3Knowledge about the transparency data standard in the infrastructure sectorIndicator6.7

2.1.1.4Knowledge about sanctions due to non-compliance on the access-to-public-information lawIndicator16

2.1.1.5Knowledge about different data categoriesIndicator23.3

2.1.2Digital capacitiesSub-variable24.4

2.1.2.1Computer equipmentIndicator30

2.1.2.2Connectivity to the internetIndicator28.7

2.1.2.3Institutional websiteIndicator28.7

2.1.2.4Information systems for infrastructure projectsIndicator18

2.1.2.5Use of digital information systemsIndicator16

2.1.2.6Infrastructure open data publicationIndicator5.3

2.1.2.7Visualisations based on infrastructure projects dataIndicator30

2.2Institutional processesVariable8.8

2.2.1Procedures to disclose informationSub-variable16.4

2.2.1.1Procedures for the publication of informationIndicator9.3

2.2.1.2Responsibilities for disclosureIndicator16.7

2.2.1.3Information officer profileIndicator18.7

2.2.1.4Information officerIndicator20

2.2.1.5Follow-up mechanisms on information requestsIndicator17.3

2.2.2Enablers and barriers to disclose informationSub-variable8.6

2.2.2.1Internal policy for information publicationIndicator4

2.2.2.2Disclosure training programmeIndicator6

2.2.2.3Identification of limitations for publishing informationIndicator4

2.2.2.4Plan to mitigate limitations for publishing informationIndicator0

2.2.2.5Bureaucratic barriers to publish informationIndicator20.7

2.2.2.6Documentation of non-compliance and sanctionsIndicator19.3

2.2.3Control over infrastructure projects disclosureSub-variable0

2.2.3.1Level of disclosed infrastructure projectsIndicator0

2.2.3.2Level of investment represented by disclosed infrastructure projectsIndicator0

3Citizen participationDimension14

3.1Participation practicesVariable14

3.1.1Participation opportunitiesSub-variable15

3.1.1.1Institutionalised citizen participationIndicator20

3.1.1.2Permanent and inclusive citizen participationIndicator19.3

3.1.1.3Citizen participation in infrastructure projectsIndicator8.7

3.1.1.4Citizen attention officeIndicator9.3

3.1.1.5Online form for consultation or requestsIndicator10

3.1.1.6Awareness of participation opportunitiesIndicator22.7

3.1.2Use of information by citizensSub-variable13.1

3.1.2.1Centralised citizen complaintsIndicator15.3

3.3.2.2Requests and responses of access to informationIndicator9.3

3.3.2.3Institutional response capacityIndicator21.3

3.3.2.4Institutional use evidenceIndicator19.3

3.3.2.5Citizens use evidenceIndicator8.7

3.3.2.6Evidence of joint projectsIndicator12

3.3.2.7Improvements as a response to citizen participationIndicator7.3

4Information disclosureDimension32.8

4.1Disclosure practicesVariable32.8

4.1.1Project identificationSub-variable57.1

4.1.1.1Project reference numberIndicator63.3

4.1.1.2Project ownerIndicator100

4.1.1.3Sector and sub-sectorIndicator58

4.1.1.4Project nameIndicator91.3

4.1.1.5Project locationIndicator61.7

4.1.1.6Project descriptionIndicator42

4.1.1.7PurposeIndicator39.7

4.1.2Project preparationSub-variable27.1

4.1.2.1Environmental impactIndicator17

4.1.2.2Land and settlement impactIndicator12.7

4.1.2.3Contact detailsIndicator31.3

4.1.2.4Project budget and date of approvalIndicator65.3

4.1.2.5Funding sourcesIndicator20

4.1.3Execution contract procurementSub-variable68.4

4.1.3.1Procuring entity and contact detailsIndicator73.3

4.1.3.2Procurement processIndicator66.7

4.1.3.3Number of firms biddingIndicator96.7

4.1.3.4Contract typeIndicator85

4.1.3.5Contract titleIndicator53.3

4.1.3.6Contract priceIndicator90

4.1.3.7Contract start dateIndicator65

4.1.3.8Contract durationIndicator58.7

4.1.3.9Contractor(s)Indicator52.7

4.1.3.10Contract scope of workIndicator43

4.1.4Supervision contract procurementSub-variable7.9

4.1.4.1Procuring entity and contact detailsIndicator8

4.1.4.2Procurement processIndicator6.7

4.1.4.3Number of firms/individuals biddingIndicator13.3

4.1.4.4Contract typeIndicator10

4.1.4.5Contract titleIndicator1.7

4.1.4.6Contract priceIndicator13.3

4.1.4.7Contract start dateIndicator10

4.1.4.8Contract durationIndicator10

4.1.4.9Contract firm/individualIndicator3.7

4.1.4.10Contract scope of workIndicator2.7

4.1.5Execution contract implementationSub-variable6

4.1.5.1Variation to contract priceIndicator6.7

4.1.5.2Reasons for price changesIndicator6

4.1.5.3Variation to contract durationIndicator5

4.1.5.4Reasons for contract duration changesIndicator6

4.1.5.5Variation to contract scopeIndicator6.7

4.1.5.6Reasons for scope changesIndicator6

4.1.6Supervision contract implementationSub-variable0

4.1.6.1Variation to contract priceIndicator0

4.1.6.2Reasons for price changesIndicator0

4.1.6.3Variation to contract durationIndicator0

4.1.6.4Reasons for duration changesIndicator0

4.1.6.5Variation to contract scopeIndicator0

4.1.6.6Reasons for scope changesIndicator0

Ecuador 2024: strong rules, weak institutional capacity

Ecuador enters the index at 27.7 of 100

Where the score comes from

How 30 procuring entities compare

Inspect one entity in depth

Compare this country with others