Aligning priorities in local budgeting processes

Abstract

Citizen participation in local government processes is touted as an effective means to enhance responsiveness and accountability. The topic has received considerable attention in the normative literature, yet there is persistent evidence that citizen participation occurs infrequently and has little influence on decision making. This study compares the perspectives of three different groups of stakeholders: elected officials, administrators, and citizens. Examination of the perspectives of these three groups of actors is important because it provides insight into the relationships between the groups and expectations regarding how input is used and how it influences decisions. Attention to these items can make participation more valuable and can inform other governments as they ponder how to align the priorities of different actors in their budgeting processes.

E‐Participation, Transparency, and Trust in Local Government

“…Over the last two decades, researchers have emphasized citizen participation in public administration decision making as a means of collaborating with citizens to promote democratic values such as responsiveness and accountability (Franklin and Ebdon ; Fung ; Irvin and Stansbury ; King, Feltey, and Susel ; Nelson and Wright ; Weeks ). The emerging literature on collaborative governance in public administration suggests that citizens should be considered not only customers, but also collaborative partners in a governance era for building democratic and effective governance (O'Leary and Bingham ; O'Leary, Van Slyke, and Kim ).…”

Citizens and the city: the case for participatory budgeting in the City of Zagreb

“…Lack of knowledge about the process is recognized as one of the factors limiting wider citizen participation in budgeting (Beckett and King, 2002;Franklin and Ebdon, 2004). Additionally, participation is costly and time-consuming (Callahan, 25 2002;Franklin and Ebdon, 2004).…”

“…Lack of knowledge about the process is recognized as one of the factors limiting wider citizen participation in budgeting (Beckett and King, 2002;Franklin and Ebdon, 2004). Additionally, participation is costly and time-consuming (Callahan, 25 2002;Franklin and Ebdon, 2004). Local government, representatives and citizens often perceive public budgeting as a difficult administrative task that should be handled by experts who have specialized knowledge, technical skills, and experience.…”

“…Local government, representatives and citizens often perceive public budgeting as a difficult administrative task that should be handled by experts who have specialized knowledge, technical skills, and experience. Franklin and Ebdon (2004) point out that the timing of citizen participation is very important, because input that is received late in the process is less likely to have an effect on outcomes. If citizens are involved early in the local budget process, they gain more knowledge about fiscal situations, which allows them to make informed decisions when casting votes on fiscal matters (Beckett and King, 2002;Franklin and Ebdon, 2004).…”

“…Franklin and Ebdon (2004) point out that the timing of citizen participation is very important, because input that is received late in the process is less likely to have an effect on outcomes. If citizens are involved early in the local budget process, they gain more knowledge about fiscal situations, which allows them to make informed decisions when casting votes on fiscal matters (Beckett and King, 2002;Franklin and Ebdon, 2004). Beckett and King (2002) showed that uninformed citizens are more focused on short-term private gain instead of long-term public benefit.…”