Beyond the public hearing: citizen participation in the local government budget process

Abstract

This study explores the use and effects of citizen participation in city budgeting. Interviews were conducted with budget directors in 28 midwestern cities. Participation was found to affect budget decisions, but the public hearing remains the primary formal opportunity for input in most cities. Technology is increasingly being used to expand the budget information available to the public. Budget complexity and citizen disinterest were cited as the major barriers to participation. However, a number of cities have successfully used participation mechanisms in the budget development process that can serve as models for other cities.

Normative and Instrumental Perspectives on Public Participation

“…Maintaining the assumption that administrators will be somewhat rational and care about their organization's policies and functions, participation benefits will be defined in instrumental terms rather than the normative values. Administrative views described in qualitative research on participation provide evidence of such an instrumental perspective (Ebdon, 2002;. Public input can provide information that helps managers improve public efficiency-either allocative efficiency through better resource allocation choices or managerial efficiency through information that leads to improvement of the processes of public service provision.…”

“…They have also been critiqued for fostering self-interested claims rather than concern with the general welfare of the citizenry and deemed unsuitable to foster choices between policy trade-offs. Citizens attending public hearings tend to have little background information on issues, often leading to poorly informed opinions about policy and the working of government (Ebdon, 2002).…”

Attitudes towards Citizen Participation in the Local Decision-Making Process: A Comparative Analysis

“…Croatia) show that local participation is stronger in cities than in rural areas due to the lack of human and financial capacity for the activities directed towards local and regional government (Pavić-Rogošić, 2012). In Hungary, Greece, Latvia, Serbia, Slovenia and Ukraine, public hearings are the most ubiquitous form of citizen participation (Soos, 2003 Citizens can participate in local governance by expressing their own needs and by participating in local project planning (Day, 1997) and/or budget planning and monitoring (Ebdon, 2002;Tanaka, 2007). The participatory budgeting method is one of the methods which involve citizens in the financial planning of the city, participating in local budget planning, and capital investment plan.…”

“…Moreover, responsibility transferred to local authorities for the provision of public services is not fully in compliance with the existing level of fiscal autonomy of sub-national government units (Table 3). Recent experiences indicate that countries with more independent local governments, in other words, countries with a higher degree of local and political autonomy have a positive attitude toward citizen participation in decision-making (Box, 1998;Ebdon, 2002). Razin & Hazan (2014) show that there is a difference between Northern and Southern Europe regarding the attitudes of local councillors towards reforms and notions of democracy, participation and devolution of public functions.…”

Yeni̇ Kamu Yöneti̇mi̇ Ve Güvenli̇k Hi̇zmetleri̇ne Vatandaş Katilimi: Kahramanmaraş Örneği̇

“…Öte yandan, kamu hizmetlerine vatandaş katılımını sağlamanın hiç de kolay olmadığı; birçok katılımın kâğıt üzerinde uygulanabilir görünmesine rağmen pratikte uygulanmasının o kadar kolay olmadığı görülmüştür (Ebdon, 2002;Firsby ve Bowman, 1996;King, Feltey ve Susel, 1998). Ayrıca, vatandaşların kamu politikalarının oluşturma süreçlerine katılmaları ve fikirlerini rahatlıkla söyleyip tartışabildiği uygun mekanizmalar olmadan katılımın bir manası olmadığı anlaşılmıştır (Bryer, 2008;Hummel ve Stivers, 1998).…”