Advertisement

Participatory Budgeting and Democratic Innovation: Some Analytical Variables

  • Lígia Helena Hahn LüchmannEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 25)

Abstract

Having originated in Brazil, participatory budgeting (PB), notably the model created in Porto Alegre in 1989, has served as a reference for democratic innovation in Brazil and abroad, instigating diverse evaluations of its potential and limitations for promoting social, cultural and political-institutional change. This chapter maps the debates on the theme to identify the definitions of PB used in the literature and the analytical references that have been used not only to understand the rise, maintenance and success of PB programs, but also to assess their benefits to democracy, identifying variables and mechanisms which have a greater or lesser capacity to bring about democratic progress, such as the dimension of associativism, or of civil society, and the political will and or commitment of governments, as well as their institutional designs. Aiming at making a contribution to the field of studies on processes of democratic strengthening, the central issue consists in, based on studies on PB programs, discussing to what extent the process of diffusion and pluralization of participatory budgeting has not only affected its definition, but also challenged approaches centered on those variables and mechanisms.

Keywords

Participatory budgeting Democracy Civil society Institutional design 

References

  1. Abers, R 1998 ‘From Clientelism to Cooperation: Local Government, Participatory Policy, and Civic Organizing in Porto Alegre, Brazil’. Politics and Society 26, 511–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allegretti, G & Herzberg, C 2004 ‘Participatory Budgets in Europe: Between Efficiency and Growing Local Democracy’. Amsterdam: Transnational Institute and the Center for Democratic Policy-Making. Available from: http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/archives/reports/newpol/participatory.pdf
  3. Allegretti, G 2013 ‘Cuidar das percepções dos participantes para desencadear um círculo virtuoso’ In: Dias, N Esperança Democrática - 25 anos de Orçamentos Participativos no mundo. Portugal, Associação In Loco.Google Scholar
  4. Avritzer, L 2006 ‘New public Spheres in Brazil: Local Democracy and Deliberative Politics’. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 30.3, 623–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Avritzer, L 2008 Instituições participativas e desenho institucional: algumas considerações sobre a variação da participação no Brasil democrático’. Opin. Publica, vol.14, n.1, pp. 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Avritzer, L & Navarro, Z 2003 A inovação democrática no Brasil. SP, Cortez.Google Scholar
  7. Baierle, S 2005 Lutas em Porto Alegre: entre a revolução política e o transformismo. Relatório de pesquisa. Porto Alegre: Mapas, dez.Google Scholar
  8. Baiocchi, G 2001 ‘Participation, Activism, and Politics: The Porto Alegre Experiment and Deliberative Democratic Theory’. Politics & Society 29.1, 43–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bassoli, M 2012 ‘Participatory Budgeting in Italy: An Analysis of (Almost Democratic) Participatory Governance Arrangements’. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. Volume 36.6, 1183–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bland, G 2011 ‘Supporting Post-conflict Democratic Development? External Promotion of Participatory Budgeting in El Salvador’. World Development, Vol. 39, No. 5, pp. 863–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Borba, J & lüchmann, LHH 2007 Orçamento Participativo: análise das experiências desenvolvidas em Santa Catarina. Fpolis: Insular.Google Scholar
  12. Cabannes, Y 2004 Participatory Budgeting: A Significant Contribution To Participatory Democracy. Environment and Urbanization, 16.1, 27–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cabannes, Y & Lipietz, B 2015 ‘The Democratic Contribution of Participatory Budgeting’. International Development. Working Paper Series, No.15-168, MayGoogle Scholar
  14. Cohen, J & Arato, A 1992 Civil society and political theory. Cambridge: The Mit Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  15. D’albergo, E & Moini, G 2007 ‘Political Consequences of Participative Practices in An Urban Context: Two Case Studies In Rome’. Métropoles, n. 2.Google Scholar
  16. Dagnino, E. et al. 2006 Para uma outra leitura da disputa pela construção democrática na América Latina. In: Dagnino et al. (Orgs.). A disputa pela construção democrática na América Latina. São Paulo: Paz e Terra.Google Scholar
  17. Dias, MR 2000 Na encruzilhada da teoria democrática: efeitos do Orçamento Participativo sobre a Câmara Municipal de Porto Alegre. Tese (Doutorado em Ciência Política) – IUPERJ, Rio de Janeiro.Google Scholar
  18. Dias, N & Allegretti, G 2009 ‘Orçamentos Participativos em Portugal. Em busca de uma democracia de maior proximidade ou de uma racionalidade funcional?’ Cidades - Comunidades e Territórios, n.18, pp. 59–78.Google Scholar
  19. Dias, N 2013 Esperança Democrática - 25 anos de Orçamentos Participativos no mundo. Portugal, Associação In Loco.Google Scholar
  20. Dias, N & Martins, V 2016 Orçamentos Participativos. Guia de Disseminação. Portugal, Associação In Loco.Google Scholar
  21. Fedozzi, L 2007 Observando o orçamento participativo de Porto Alegre. Porto Alegre: Tomo.Google Scholar
  22. Fedozzi, L 2009 ‘Cultura política e Orçamento Participativo’. Cadernos Metrópole (PUCSP), v. 11, pp. 385–414.Google Scholar
  23. Fedozzi, L & Martins, ALB 2012 Novas instituições participativas, processos de elitização e o Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre. In: Encontro Anual da ANPOCS, 2012, Águas de Lindóia.Google Scholar
  24. Font, J; Pasadas del Amo, S & Smith, G 2016 ‘Tracing the Impact of Proposals from Participatory Processes: Methodological Challenges and Substantive Lessons,’ Journal of Public Deliberation: Vol. 12: Iss. 1.Google Scholar
  25. Fung, A & Wright, EO 2001 ‘Deepening Democracy: Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance’. Politics & Society, Vol. 29 No. 1, 5–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ganuza, E & Baiocchi, G 2012 ‘The Power of Ambiguity: How Participatory Budgeting Travels the Globe’. Journal of Public Deliberation, Vol. 8, Iss. 2, Art. 8Google Scholar
  27. Ganuza, E et al. 2013 ‘The Struggle for a Voice: Tensions between Associations and Citizens in Participatory Budgeting’. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research.Google Scholar
  28. Goldfrank, B 2006 ‘Los procesos de ‘presupuesto participativo’ en América Latina: éxito, fracaso y cambio’. Revista de Ciencia Política, 26 (2): 3–28.Google Scholar
  29. Goldfrank, B 2012 ‘The World Bank and the Globalization of Participatory Budgeting’, Journal of Public Deliberation: Vol. 8: Iss. 2.Google Scholar
  30. Gugliano, A 2004 ‘Participação e governo local. Comparando a descentralização de Montevideu e o orçamento participativo de Porto Alegre’. Sociologia, problemas e práticas, n. 46, pp. 51– 69.Google Scholar
  31. Gurza Lavalle, A 1999 ‘Crítica ao modelo da nova sociedade civil’. Lua Nova, n. 47, CEDEC.Google Scholar
  32. Gurza Lavalle, A 2003 ‘Sem pena nem glória. O debate da sociedade civil nos anos 1990’. Novos Estudos CEBRAP, n. 66.Google Scholar
  33. Habermas, J 1997 Direito e democracia: entre facticidade e validade, Rio Janeiro: Tempo Brasileiro, v.2.Google Scholar
  34. He B 2011 ‘Civic Engagement Through Participatory Budgeting in China: Three Different Logics at Work’. Public. Admin. Dev. 31, 122–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Horochovski, RR & Clemente, AJ 2012 ‘Democracia deliberativa e orçamento público: experiências de participação em Porto Alegre, Belo Horizonte, Recife e Curitiba’. Rev. Sociol. Polit., vol. 20, n. 43, pp. 127–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lopes, MA & Allegretti, G 2012 ‘(In) stability, a key element to understand participatory budgeting: Discussing Portuguese cases’. Journal of Public Deliberation, 8, Issue 2, article 3.Google Scholar
  37. Lüchmann, LHH 2002 Possibilidades e limites da democracia deliberativa: a experiência do Orçamento Participativo de Porto Alegre. Campinas: Unicamp (Tese de doutorado em Ciências Sociais).Google Scholar
  38. Lüchmann, LHH 2008 ‘Participação e representação nos conselhos gestores e no orçamento participativo’. Caderno CRH (UFBA), vol. 21, pp. 87–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lüchmann, LHH & Borba, J 2008 ‘Participação, desigualdades e novas institucionalidades: uma análise a partir de instituições participativas em Santa Catarina’. Ciências Sociais Unisinos, vol. 44, pp. 58–68.Google Scholar
  40. Matos, AR & Neves, D 2008 ‘Participação pública, capacitação e sistemas de accountability: experiências de Orçamento Participativo na América Latina e na Europa em comparação’, E-cadernos do CES. http://www.ces.uc.pt/e-cadernos/media/documentos/ecadernos2/ana_raquel_matos_e_daniel_neves.pdf
  41. McNulty, S 2012 An Unlikely Success: Peru’s Top-Down Participatory Budgeting Experience’. Journal of Public Deliberation, Vol. 8 Iss. 2, Art. 4Google Scholar
  42. Montecinos, E 2011 ‘Democracia participativa y presupuesto participativo en Chile: ¿Complemento o subordinación a las instituciones representativas locales?’ Revista de Ciencia Política/ volumen 31/ n 1/ 63–89.Google Scholar
  43. Moynihan, D 2007 Citizen Participation in Budgeting: Prospects for Developing Countrie. In: Shah, A Participatory Budgeting, Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  44. Oliveira, OP 2016 ‘Mecanismos da difusão global do Orçamento Participativo: indução internacional, construção social e circulação de indivíduos’. Opin. Publica, vol. 22, n. 2, pp. 219–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pape, M & Lerner, J 2016 ‘Budgeting for Equity: How Can Participatory Budgeting Advance Equity in the United States?’ Journal of Public Deliberation: Vol. 12: Iss. 2, Article 9.Google Scholar
  46. Pateman, C 2012 ‘Participatory Democracy Revisited’. Perspectives on Politics, 10.1, 7–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pinnington, E et al. 2009 ‘Participatory Budgeting in North America: The Case of Guelph, Canada’. J. of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 21 (3), 455–484.Google Scholar
  48. Romão, W 2011 ‘Conselheiros do Orçamento Participativo nas franjas da sociedade política’. Lua Nova, n. 84, pp. 219–244.Google Scholar
  49. Ruesch, MA & Wagner, M 2013 ‘Participatory Budgeting in Germany: Citizens as Consultants’.http://www.buergerhaushalt.org/sites/default/files/German_PB_final_engl1.pdf#overlay-context=en/start. Acessed January, 24.
  50. Santos, BS 1998 ‘Participatory Budgeting in Porto Alegre: Toward a Redistributive Democracy’. Politics & Society, 26(4): 461–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Secondo, D & Lerner, J 2011 ‘Social Our Money, Our Decision. Participatory Budgeting Takes Root in New York City’. Policy.Google Scholar
  52. Sgueo, G 2016 ‘Participatory budgeting. An innovative approach’. EPRS| European Parliamentary Research Service, January, available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2712213
  53. Shah, A 2007 Participatory Budgeting, Washington, DC: The World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Silva, MK 2006 ‘Sociedade Civil e construção democrática: do maniqueísmo essencialista à abordagem relacional’. Sociologias (UFRGS), vol. 8, pp. 156–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sintomer, Y et al. 2008 ‘Participatory Budgeting in Europe: Potentials and Challenges’. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 32.1, 164–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sintomer, Y et al. 2010 ‘Learning from the South: Participatory Budgeting Worldwide—an Invitation to Global Cooperation’. Dialog Global 25. (http://www.buergerhaushalt.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/LearningfromtheSouth-ParticipatoryBudgetingWorldwide-Study.pdf). Accessed January, 27, 2014.
  57. Sintomer, Y et al. 2012 ‘Modelos transnacionais de participação cidadã: o caso do orçamento participativo’. Sociologias, vol. 14, n. 30, pp. 70–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Souza, C 2001 ‘Construção e consolidação de instituições democráticas: papel do orçamento participativo’. São Paulo Perspec, vol. 15, n. 4, pp. 84–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Souza, L 2011 Orçamento Participativo e as novas dinâmicas políticas locais’. Lua Nova, 2011, n. 84, pp. 245–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tatagiba, L & Teixeira, ACC 2006 ‘Participação e democracia. Velhos e novos desafios’. Civitas: Revista de Ciências Sociais, vol. 6, pp. 223–240.Google Scholar
  61. Wampler, B 2005 ‘Expandindo accountability através de instituições participativas?’ In: Lubambo, C et al. (Orgs.) Desenho institucional e participação política. Petrópolis: Vozes. pp. 33–62.Google Scholar
  62. Wampler, B 2007 A Guide to Participatory Budgeting. In: Shah, A Participatory Budgeting, Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  63. Wampler, B. 2008 ‘A difusão do Orçamento Participativo brasileiro: “boas práticas” devem ser promovidas?’ Opinião Pública. Campinas, vol. 14, n. 1, pp. 69–95.Google Scholar
  64. Wampler, B 2011 ‘Que tipos de resultados devemos esperar das instituições participativas?’ In Pires, RR (Org) Efetividade das Instituições Participativas no Brasil: estratégias de avaliação. Brasília, IPEA.Google Scholar
  65. Wampler, B 2012 ‘Participatory Budgeting: Core principles and Key Impacts’ Journal of Public Deliberation: Vol. 8: Iss. 2, Article 12. Available at: http://www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd/vol8/iss2/art12
  66. Yan Wu, Y & Wang, W 2012 ‘Does Participatory Budgeting Improve the Legitimacy of the Local Government? A Comparative Case Study of Two Cities in China’. The Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 122–135.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de Sociologia e Ciência Política, Centro de Filosofia e Ciências HumanasUniversidade Federal de Santa CatarinaFlorianópolisBrazil

Personalised recommendations