Participatory Budgeting in Russia – Procedural Aspects

TalTech Journal of European Studies

2022

Ordinary citizens today support the local decision-making authorities in the domain of public spending using the instrument of participatory budgeting. The situation is of particular interest in Cracow, the second largest city in Poland in terms of the number of residents, as it stands out for its intensive and advanced use of technology. Here, participatory budgeting is a formalized, multi-stage procedure, composed of an information and education campaign, preparation and submission of projects, verification of submitted projects, submission and examination of protests, voting, implementing of projects, and informing about the concluded projects. Using participatory budgeting, the residents communicate their needs and obtain funds to satisfy them. Participatory budgeting covers on average 0.5% of the municipal budget and is decided by 5–7% of Cracow’s residents. The research covers the years 2019–2021 and takes into consideration the changes resulting from the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic. The article aims to examine the coexistence of forms of communication, supporting dialogue between residents and local officials in the participatory budgeting process. According to the adopted hypothesis, the two forms of communication used within participatory budgeting—the traditional ones and information and communication technologies (ICTs)—are not separated but are integrated into governance process and reinforce each other. The literature, legal provisions, the website on participatory budgeting, media information, social media, and evaluation reports based on qualitative and quantitative methods were analyzed. The results show that the introduction of participatory budgeting resulted in a new type of dialogue and relationship between residents and local officials, based on the traditional tools of communication and ICTs. ICTs cannot replace the traditional forms of communication but their potential should be used to a greater extent. As both forms of communication, direct and indirect (technologically supported), coexist and have their own advantages and limitations, especially under normal, non-epidemic conditions, the two should facilitate and reinforce each other.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participatory Budgeting as the Instrument of Technologically Supported Dialogue in Cracow, Poland

TalTech Journal of European Studies

2022

“…Thus, to ensure public spending in the public interest there is need for an effective form of accountability for protection of the common good. Accountability in the traditional sense has been associated with calling an individual to account for their actions to some higher authority, with an emphasis on external scrutiny and the threat of potential sanctions 35 . Currently, accountability serves as a conceptual umbrella that covers transparency, equity, democracy, efficiency, responsiveness, and integrity.…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accountability, Public Values, and Participatory Budgeting in Poland

Baltic Journal of Law &Amp; Politics

2021

Among the different instruments of collaborative governance, participatory budgeting (PB) is of particular interest in Poland. PB includes the residents who co-decide about local public expenditure. PB proponents suggest that it has the potential to democratize budgeting but others point to the ease with which organized groups sometimes capture the process to serve their interests. The analysis shows that due to the weak axiological grounds that result from the infringements of all nodal public values, e.g. human dignity, sustainability, citizen involvement, openness, secrecy, compromise, integrity, and robustness, PB in Poland has little potential to enhance accountability for the protection of the common good.

O zagrożeniach dla wartości prawdy w stosowaniu paneli obywatelskich – od filozoficznych korzeni do praktycznych konsekwencji koncepcji governance

2022

Na przestrzeni ostatnich lat zainteresowaniem na świecie, w tym również w Polsce, cieszą się instrumenty współrządzenia. Ich podstawą jest zasada partnerstwa, w myśl której podmioty rządowe i pozarządowe są uznawane za równoprawnych partnerów. Stosowanie tej zasady wiąże się z ryzykiem, ponieważ zakłada ona dążenie do przyznawania coraz większego zakresu władzy politycznej partnerom kosztem prawowitych władz. Jednym z rodzajów instrumentów współrządzenia są panele obywatelskie. Uczestnicy tej procedury podczas spotkań decydują o rekomendacjach dotyczących wybranych zagadnień polityki publicznej. Celem niniejszego artykułu jest zbadanie podstaw aksjologicznych instrumentów współrządzenia ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem wartości prawdy. Przedmiotem analizy są gdańskie panele obywatelskie. Posłużono się w pierwszej kolejności badaniami niereaktywnymi, polegającymi na analizie istniejącej literatury, aktów prawnych, treści stron internetowych, a także audycji radiowych. Na podstawie uzyskanych wyników badań przygotowano kwestionariusz pytań do półustrukturyzowanych wywiadów, które przeprowadzono z trzema uczestnikami paneli obywatelskich w Gdańsku. W konkluzji badań stwierdzono, że panele obywatelskie nie są neutrale aksjologicznie. Ich stosowanie, bez wystarczającej kontroli, prowadzi do naruszeń wartości prawdy, jednego z filarów cywilizacji łacińskiej.