Date post: | 31-Mar-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | jailyn-churchwell |
View: | 218 times |
Download: | 2 times |
Participatory Budgeting:Concepts and Practices
Participatory Budgeting Pilot
World Bank WorkshopTirana May 12, 2004
Content
What is Participatory Budgeting (PB)?Why LGs promote PB?How to implement PB?PB best practicesLessons learntReferences
What is Participatory Budgeting?
It is a process of prioritization and co-joint decision making through which citizens and local
government decide together the final allocation of public investment
Include citizens in the formulation of annual budgetIt is a complement of formal representation structuresPB rules prioritize the poorestIt is based on territorial and thematic divisionsIt is the cutting edge of participation in LG
Why LGs promote PB?
To increase effectiveness and efficiency of budgeting and service delivery making budgeting formulation and implementation more transparent and
accountable to citizens Matching technical capacity of LG in budget formulation with citizens needs
To increase equity Creating an simple mechanism of involving the poor and traditionally excluded
in accessing public resources and decision making
To ensure sustainability Increase LG government revenue capacity and investment quality Strengthen civil society organization Build a constructive dialogue between LG and civil society Building active citizenship and accountable institutions
How to implement PB?1- LOCAL
MEETINGS
2- PB COMMITTEE
ACTIVITIES
3- APPROVAL IMPLEMENTATION
How to implement PB?
1 - LOCAL MEETINGS (2 months)Awareness campaign/preparatory community meetingsInformation about financial situation and forecast Information about public works in progress Discussion of PB rules
Identification of local priorities Discussion of local and thematic priorities Selection of local and thematic priorities
Election of PB local delegates Each local areas elects their representatives to the PB
Committee
How to implement PB?
2 - PB COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES (2 months)Establishment of PB Committee 50% civil society + 50% LG delegates (usually)
Discuss of all local and thematic priorities Official opening of the PB Committee Presentation of all priorities Capacity building activities
Understanding the overall situation Visit of all priorities Deepening discussion of municipal revenue and capital
investment Monitor current investments
How to implement PB?
PB COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES (May-June)Technical and financial analysis by LG\ Analyses to fit proposal according to technical criteria Several institutions and departments provide technical information Reconciliation of demands with budget
Prioritization Analysis of priorities based on prioritization matrix Discussions with Municipal Council members Consensus building Allocation of resources based on prioritization matrix
Budget detailing
How to implement PB?
APPROVAL & IMPLEMENTATION (July-)Approval of the Budget Proposal by the PB Committee Usually by consensus If necessary by voting
Formal Approval of the Budget by the Council Submission of PB budget to Mayor PB Committee send the budge proposal for approval Strong participation of citizens Municipal Council hold the final decision
Budget Implementation and Follow-up Delegates and citizens monitor the budget implementation Discussion of necessary changes in the rules of PB Start of a new year of the PB
Best Practices
15 countries have some kind of PB Brazil, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Peru, Mexico Check Republic, Scandinavian countries US, Canada
In 2003 there were more than 250 municipalities with PB in Brazil59% of municipalities over 100.000 inhabitants have implemented PBAll political parties despite ideological positions have implementedSome State governments have started to implemented the methodologyThe Federal Government adopted PB methodology in the formulation of the last Multi-Year National Investment Plan (PPA)
Best Practices: Porto Alegre
The first and most well-know experience in participatory budgetingStarted in 19891.3 million inhabitantsCapital of the Rio Grande do Sul State
Best Practices: Porto Alegre
GOAL
The objective is to ensure a progressive and transparent public expenditure ensuring that regions with great needs received receive a greater budget
PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA
Population weight = 2
Lack of service weight = 4
Thematic priorities weight = 5
ACHIEVEMENTS 1989-1996
number of households with access to water services rose from 80% to 98%number of children enrolled in public schools doubled30 kilometers of roads were paved annually in poorer neighborhoods revenue increased nearly by 50%.
Best Practices: Belo Horizonte
Capital of the Minas Gerais StatePB started in 1993OP held every 2 yearsArea-based planning rather than project-basedThrough integrating with the Master Plan and Land Regularization and Urbanisation programsResources are distributed by territorial units (81 UPs)Resources alloacted based on population size and map of quality of life indicator (IQVU) giving priority to areas of poverty concentration
Best Practices: Belo Horizonte
81 UPs Highest IQVU
26 Special Ups = 10% budget
Norte
Nordeste
Leste
Centro-sul
Venda
Nova
Pampulha
Oeste
Barreiro
Noroeste
Lowest IQVU
Priority areas = 56% budget
Best Practices: Belo Horizonte
REGIONS PRIORITY AREAS NUMBER OF INVESTMENTS
%
BARREIRO 10 14 71%CENTRO-SUL 9 15 60%LESTE 6 11 55%NORDESTE 5 11 45%NOROESTE 5 12 42%NORTE 11 12 92%OESTE 5 14 36%PAMPULHA 4 10 40%VENDA NOVA 9 15 60%
TOTAL 64 114 56%
PRIORITY AREAS INVESTMENT APPROVED FOR 2003/2004
Best Practices: Belo HorizonteInfrastructure 439 45,30%Slum upgrading 254 26,21%Education 97 10,01%Health 92 9,50%Social 30 3,10%Sport 26 2,68%Housing 16 1,65%Culture 12 1,24%Green areas 3 0,31%
969 100,00%
Best Practices: Santo André
One of the 39 municipalities of the Metropolitan Region of São Paulo, located in the Southeastern region of Brazil (Greater ABC Region)Industrial heartland of Brazil and Latin’s America largest industrial complex 174.38 km2 648.443 inhabitants 39% in urban area and 61% in
watershed protected area 139 slums (18,5% of population)
Best Practices: Santo André
Started during the 1989-1992, but was interrupted and re-started in 1997
The municipality is divided in 19 geographic regions and 9 thematic issues
Education
Health
Cultural Identity
Social Inclusion and Housing
Environmental Quality
Economical Development
Urban Development
State Reform
Urban Violence
Best Practices: Santo André
In 2001 the PB was merged with the Strategic Planning to broaded target group in the participatory processes: community and private sector together debating the city
Now participants from both processes would build alliances and consensus in resource allocation
Investments in short-term needs, such as water, sewage, upgrading, pavement have also to consider investments in the long-term, less visible and immediate problems
Best Practices: Barra Mansa
“Children’s Participatory
Budgeting
Citizenship does not have size”
Population: 166.745 inhabitantsChildren and adolescents in the age group 0-19 years represent 35,2% of the population
Best Practices: Barra Mansa
A dynamic process around the definition of the use of a percentage of the municipal budget according to the demands and needs established by the children and youngsters
Children and youngsters with the 9-15 years old, both school-going and non-school going children are eligible to participate
Best Practices: Barra Mansa
OBJECTIVESTo stimulate the participation of the children and youth in the issues related to the development of the cityTo promote and create leadership towards democratic participationTo value and incorporate the contribution that young citizens can give to the city
Best Practices: Barra Mansa
Best Practices: Barra Mansa
ACHIEVEMENTSAround 6.000 children and youngsters have been involved in the years of 1999 and 2000
A percentage of the municipal budget is established to attend the children’s priorities every year (around 75.000 USD) Approval by the municipal council to designate a percentage of the municipal
budget for this program (around 0,13% of the total)
The inclusion of the subject “ public budget” in the curriculum of the municipal schools from 3°primary level 120 volunteers called agents of the participatory budgeting
37% of the population in the age bracket participated in the process
Lessons Learnt
FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT PERSPECTIVECommitment and leadership to involve citizens in decision making Need minimum level of autonomy in budget allocation Need to avoid reinforcing paternalism
Require good budget, tax and capital investment information system Need to strength municipal finance system Limited discussion on operational costs
Constructive dialogue and consensus building depends on good facilitation,communication and conflict resolutions skills and techniques Technical staff not prepared to dialogue with citizens Need training of facilitation, communication and conflict
Need to avoid creating tension with formal elected representatives Important to involve from the beginning elected councilors
Lessons Learnt
FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT PERSPECTIVEPB methodology is needs to be flexible to adapt from its learning process and context (ex. urban – rural) Set up good monitoring and evaluation practices Do not institutionalize things that will need changes later
PB does not imply substantial extra costs for LGs, but it requires commitment and time from staff PB requires attitudes changes in technical staff to learn how to dialogue with
people
Increased financial capabilities, accountability and political support Budget implementation has become more efficient, effective and inclusive Revenue has raised due to better understanding of tax uses
Lessons Learnt
FROM CITIZENS’ PERSPECTIVENeed to address the specific challenges for involving vulnerable groups (attitudes, constraints for participation, formal knowledge) Need to overcome individual conflict of interests and political ambitions Civic groups better organized have greater opportunities to influence
At the beginning it is difficult to overcome mistrust in government institutions and ensure strong participation Citizens wiliness to put time in the process
In the most successful cases PB is guided by formal mechanisms while less successful ones are dominated by informality and limited direct decision-making
Lessons Learnt
FROM CITIZENS’ PERSPECTIVECitizens trust in government has improved due to better understanding of budget constraints, tax and investments People become more informed and engaged in public life at local, regional and
national levels Increased people understanding on territorial and sector issues
People learn to look to their needs within a broader perspective of all citizens It become a learning experience as going to university
It has successfully opened political opportunities included traditionally under-represented groups in decision-making Increased social capital and empowered the poor
Lessons Learnt
Participatory Budgeting as implementing mechanism of good governance and
decentralization has shown unprecedented political, social, economic and institutional
achievements
References
Abers, R. “Practicing Radical Democracy Lessons from Brazil”. Paper presented at the Workshop: Insurgent Planning Practices – Perugia, Italy, June 21-27, 1998
Acioly, C.,Herzog, A., et al. “Participatory Budgeting in the Municipality of Santo Andre, Brazil: the challenges of linking short-action and strategic planning”. SINPA paper, Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies, 2002.
Blanco, C. "Citizen Participation and Social Inclusion Procedures in Santo André, Brazil: Participatory Budgeting and City of the Future Project“. Presentation at the World Bank Urban Research Forum in December 2002
Cabannes, Yves. Belo Horizonte Orcamento Participativo. Powerpoint presentationCosta, Emly. Barra Mansa: Orcamento Participativo Mirin. Powerpoint presentationReuben, W. Participatory Budgeting in Brazil and Implications for Local Government Projects .
Presentation given at the World BankWorld Bank. Porto Alegre an Interesting Example. WBI video developed based on the video “voices de
una ciudad: democracia participativa en Porto Alegre” produced by Marta Hanercker and Luis Acevedo Falls