The Modes of Participation: A Revised Frame for Identifying and Analyzing Participatory Budgeting Practices

Abstract

Participatory budgeting is a democratic process through which citizens make decisions about budgeting. It has received attention in public administration literature. Many scholars apply “participatory budgeting” too broadly. They conflate nominally participatory practices with those that emanated from the Global South and now expand throughout the United States. This article explores various applications of “participatory budgeting.” It also presents a heuristic framework, developed out of the work of Arnstein and Fung, which assists practitioners and researchers in identification and evaluation of participatory processes, including participatory budgeting. This framework is applied to four cases to illustrate determination of participatory budgeting practices.

Does Participatory Budgeting Alter Public Spending? Evidence From New York City

“…The framework's dimensions include the participants in the process, how communication and decisions are made in the structure, and how participation influences public policies (i.e., the amount of impact). Miller et al (2017) further separate the communication and decision-making domains into two separate dimensions, because they can vary independently from each other. Nevertheless, Fung's (2006) "Democracy Cube" is a three-dimensional space in which participatory mechanisms can be located and compared with each other and other public decision-making arrangements.…”

“…Miller et al (2017) note that scholars have labeled many diverse practices under the umbrella of “participatory budgeting,” which obscures differences between forms in various locations. Despite this definitional challenge, most scholars assume that PB influences how public resources are allocated because of the inclusion of private citizens in the budgeting process.…”

“…Despite its popularity, Wampler (2012) notes that while PB can empower citizens, enhance democracy, and increase overall well-being, PB can also act as a way for governments to co-opt activists pushing for increased democratization. Miller et al (2017) note that scholars have labeled many diverse practices under the umbrella of "participatory budgeting," which obscures differences between forms in various locations. Despite this definitional challenge, most scholars assume that PB influences how public resources are allocated because of the inclusion of private citizens in the budgeting process.…”

Administrative Reform and the Quest for Openness: A Popperian Review of Open Government

“…The policymaking processes supporting decision-making approaches are missing or not clearly laid out. Some scholars recognize that digital democracy success largely rests on a piecemeal decision-making approach where decision makers design the program implementation policy and consequences from an early stage (Folz & Hazlett, 1991; Knox, 2016; Miller, Hildreth, & Stewart, 2017). For example, forms of public participation such as participatory budgeting where citizens can vote on a portion of central budget allocations (He, 2011) and open source models of direct citizen participation (Chun, Shulman, Sandoval, & Hovy, 2010; Lodge & Wegrich, 2015) rely on these designs that connect participative initiative to specific goals.…”

The promise and limitations of participatory budgeting

“…Understanding the paradox between more inclusive processes and prevailing forms of exclusion is aided by conceptual frameworks such as Miller et al's (2017) Modes of Participation. Combining measures provided by Arnstein 1969 and Fung 2006, this framework focuses on the specific dimensions of i) participant selection, ii) quality of communication, iii) processes of decision‐making, and iv) ultimate authority over the implementation of decisions.…”