## 1 Introduction
### Fit-for-Purpose Participatory Land Administration  
Different studies have addressed participatory mapping with Indigenous peoples [14; 15; 16; 17; 18]. These studies indicate that to understand the situation and tradition of the Indigenous peoples, their communal knowledge should be used to map land boundaries and important places by mapping together with the Indigenous peoples. They must be present in the process to extract and map local knowledge. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [14], for example, stated that this approach helps local Indigenous groups to be incorporated as active subjects in the registration of their cultural heritage, as well in the defence and management of it. Additionally, [PERSON] [19] mentioned how the development of participatory mapping increases the possibilities for Indigenous peoples to use cartography to better represent their conceptions of space and place. Nowadays, Indigenous land rights are included more, after years where state maps often did not include Indigenous toponyms, where Indigenous lands were labelled as \"empty\", and where contiguous Indigenous land use zones had been fractured in isolated reserves or donated to other land users, such as settler farmers, as described by [PERSON] [20]. From [PERSON] [21] study, where different participatory mapping methods to capture land perceptions of Indigenous peoples were compared, it can be concluded that a social cartography session is a useful tool for conflict resolution and for increasing Indigenous empowerment. However, this will only be reached with involvement of all stakeholders, such as neighbours and the State. The State's reality in official registries often differs from the Indigenous people's reality, and makes decisions based on their information; therefore, involvement of the State is essential to establish and guarantee Indigenous land rights. Other researchers [22] stress that the government has to protect Indigenous land rights to prevent market forces, such as settler farmers and companies, from grabbing more Indigenous lands and thereby undermining communal land rights. An approach with this participative, community-based focus is the FFP land administration approach. It is used to reach agreements between neighbours on their mutual boundaries and easements [23; 24; 25]. Following [PERSON] et al. 's guidelines [25], FFP focuses on flexible, efficient, affordable, and transparent land recording methods, including all types of land occupation, to be able to improve land tenure security. This FFP methodology contributes to some of the Sustainable Development Goals' (SDGs) objectives, as [PERSON] highlighted. According to [PERSON] [25], land administration systems should be designed for the needs of the people when identifying the occupation and use of land, whether these land rights are legal or locally legitimate. To meet the actual needs in society today, the systems need to be flexible in terms of the legal regulations, as well as the institutional arrangements. [PERSON] [25] stated that good land administration is essential to be able to reach the accorded Sustainable Development Goals, because it provides a country with an infrastructure for implementing land management strategies in support of sustainable development. The FFP approach was also applied in the Cumaribo project. Since conventional Colombian land data collection methods are expensive and time-consuming, an efficient and user-friendly data collection scheme was developed for the current Colombian situation, using advanced but easy-to-use technological tools [26; 27]. Parcels are always measured together with the land users and community members, who are trained to carry out the work with professional supervision. After the data collection, a public inspection is held to show the results to the community and to collect signatures of approval on the measured limits.