Does Collective action guarantees equitable disribution of resources?

Collective action strategies require forms of organization based on the principle of achieving objectives gradually, starting with those that are less complex (building human and social capital) and moving on to those of greater complexity (eliminating poverty, modifying power relationships, deepening democracy). Second, the policies and strategies of some international agencies, governments and institutional donors, which demand immediate and visible results against complex objectives within three to five years, may be dramatic but they will not be effective, and much less sustainable.
Collective action is no guarantee by itself that opportunities or benefits will be distributed in an equitable manner among the different segments and strata of rural groups, communities or organizations. In particular, experience suggests that rural collective action has failed to achieve the expected results in terms of promoting gender equity. On the contrary, collective action often leads to the exacerbation of inequalities within rural societies. If the intent is to change power relationships in the direction of greater equity, this must be made explicit and actions of the magnitude necessary to achieve that goal must be taken.
The success or failure of collective action strategies intended to improve living conditions for rural populations will depend on internal factors (values, standards of conduct, formal rules, mechanisms for enforcing rules and commitments, type of leadership), external factors (communication and cooperation among various stakeholders, linkages to "engines of sustainability" in collective actions) and contextual factors (in cultural terms, individualism versus solidarity; in economic terms, competition versus cooperation; and in political terms, autocracy versus democracy).

But combination of all these three factors always guarantees success?