The Participatory Budgeting Towards a New Governance and Accountability
Author(s)
Christian Rainero , Valerio Brescia ,
Download Full PDF Pages: 54-67 | Views: 1499 | Downloads: 426 | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3483343
Abstract
Public sector governance covers responsibility tasks in relation to the specific objectives of this sector, which are not only limited to the provision of services but include the impact of policies on the community or on society in general. New public management and new public governance in local authorities highlight the growing need for accountability towards stakeholders and the evolution of the concept of citizen, from the customer / service user to that of an active stakeholder able to contribute to the definition of company conduct. The phenomenon of the Participated Budget is identified and examined considering five fundamental criteria that have the potential to indicate aspects that are always present in the participated budgets and which at the same time must analyze the various stakeholders. In the analysis through the comparison between representative and participatory democracy, we try to highlight the right path to defining the participatory budget and the choices of the citizen. In particular, the research analyzes the main characteristics and functions of the participatory budget as an instrument of accountability. The analysis conducted is of a qualitative nature supported by the use of a case study. In particular, the phases and characteristics of the participatory budget are analyzed starting from the case of the Municipality of Collegno (Italy) in order to highlight characteristics and future prospects.
Keywords
participatory budget; accountability; public governance; deliberative democracy, participative democracy
References
i. Adams, C. A. (2002). Internal organisational factors influencing corporate social and ethical reporting: Beyond current theorising. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(2), 223-250.
ii. Alegre, P. (2003). Case Study 2-Porto Alegre, Brazil: Participatory Approaches in Budgeting and Public Expenditure Management
iii. Amoretti, F. (2006). La Rivoluzione Digitale ei processi di costituzionalizzazione europei. L'e-democracy tra ideologia e pratiche istituzionali. Comunicazione Politica.
iv. Baierle, S. (2009). The Porto Alegre Thermidor: Brazil's' Participatory Budget'at the crossroads. Socialist Register, 39(39).
v. Bäckstrand, K. (2006). Multi‐stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: rethinking legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness. Environmental Policy and Governance, 16(5), 290-306.
vi. Baiocchi, G. (2001). Participation, activism, and politics: the Porto Alegre experiment and deliberative democratic theory. Politics & Society, 29(1), 43-72.
vii. Belal, A. R. (2002). Stakeholder accountability or stakeholder management: a review of UK firms' social and ethical accounting, auditing and reporting (SEAAR) practices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 9(1), 8-25.
viii. Biancone, P. P., Secinaro, S., & Brescia, V. (2016). The Popular Financial Reporting: Focus on Stakeholders—The first European Experience. International Journal of Business and Management, 11(11), 115.
ix. Biancone, P. P., Secinaro, S., & Brescia, V. (2017). Popular financial reporting: Results, expense and welfare markers. African Journal of Business Management, 11(18), 491-501.
x. Biancone, P. P., Silvana, S., & Valerio, B. (2017). L’informazione consolidata e gli indicatori Bes: strumenti per una rendicontazione più accessibile ai cittadini. L’esperienza Italiana del Popular Financial Reporting. RIVISTA ITALIANA DI RAGIONERIA E DI ECONOMIA AZIENDALE, 68-85.
xi. Bobbio, L. (2005). La democrazia deliberativa nella pratica. Stato e mercato, 25(1), 67-88.
xii. Boston, J., & Pallot, J. (1997). Linking strategy and performance: Developments in the New Zealand public sector. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 382-404.
xiii. Brusca, I., & Montesinos, V. (2006). Are citizens significant users of government financial information?. Public Money and Management, 26(4), 205-209.
xiv. Caceres, P., Rios, J., De Castro, V., Rios Insua, D., & Marcos, E. (2007). Improving usability in e-democracy systems: systematic development of navigation in an e-participatory budget system. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 7(2), 151-166.
xv. Caperchione, E. (2003). Local government accounting system reform in Italy: a critical analysis. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 15(1), 110.
xvi. Chen, C. M., & Delmas, M. (2011). Measuring corporate social performance: An efficiency perspective. Production and Operations Management, 20(6), 789-804.
xvii. Chess, C., & Purcell, K. (1999). Public participation and the environment: Do we know what works?. Environmental science & technology, 33(16), 2685-2692.
xviii. Deegan, C. (2002). Introduction: The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures–a theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282-311.
xix. Doh, J. P., & Guay, T. R. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, public policy, and NGO activism in Europe and the United States: An Institutional‐Stakeholder perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 47-73.
xx. Efremov, R., & Rios Insua, D. (2007). An experimental study of a web-based framework for group decision support with applications to participatory budget elaboration. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 7(2), 167-177.
xxi. Farnham, D., Hondeghem, A., Horton, S., & Barlow, J. (Eds.). (2016). New public managers in Europe: Public servants in transition. Springer.
xxii. Freschi, A. C. (2004). Dall'e-Government all'e-Governance. C'è bisogno di e-Democracy. Rivista italiana di comunicazione pubblica.
xxiii. Goddard, A. (2005). Accounting and NPM in UK local government–contributions towards governance and accountability. Financial Accountability & Management, 21(2), 191-218.
xxiv. Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons?. Public administration, 69(1), 3-19.
xxv. Kelly, J. M., & Swindell, D. (2002). A multiple–indicator approach to municipal service evaluation: correlating performance measurement and citizen satisfaction across jurisdictions. Public Administration Review, 62(5), 610-621.
xxvi. Koonings, K. (2004). Strengthening citizenship in Brazil's democracy: Local participatory governance in Porto Alegre. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 23(1), 79-99.
xxvii. Northcott, D., & Ma'amora Taulapapa, T. (2012). Using the balanced scorecard to manage performance in public sector organizations: Issues and challenges. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 25(3), 166-191.
xxviii. Moon, J. (2004). Government as a driver of corporate social responsibility: The UK in comparative perspective.
xxix. Oliver, C., & Holzinger, I. (2008). The effectiveness of strategic political management: A dynamic capabilities framework. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 496-520.
xxx. Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American political science review, 94(2), 251-267.
xxxi. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2004). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford University Press, USA.
xxxii. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public Management Reform: A comparative analysis-new public management, governance, and the Neo-Weberian state. Oxford University Press.
xxxiii. Pollitt, C., & Summa, H. (1997). Trajectories of reform: public management change in four countries. Public Money and Management, 17(1), 7-18.
xxxiv. Rainero, C., & Brescia, V. (2016). Corporate Social Responsibility» and «Social Reporting»: The Model of Innovation «Piedmont Method. International Journal Series in Multidisciplinary Research (IJSMR)(ISSN: 2455-2461), 2(3), 18-40.
xxxv. Regonini, G. (2005). Paradossi della democrazia deliberativa. Stato e mercato, 25(1), 3-32.
xxxvi. Roome, N. (1992). Developing environmental management strategies. Business strategy and the environment, 1(1), 11-24.
xxxvii. Rosanvallon, P., & Goldhammer, A. (2008). Counter-democracy: Politics in an Age of Distrust (Vol. 7). Cambridge University Press.
xxxviii. Sintomer, Y., Herzberg, C., & Röcke, A. (2008). Participatory budgeting in Europe: potentials and challenges. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 32(1), 164-178.
xxxix. Sternberg, E. (1997). The defects of stakeholder theory. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 5(1), 3-10.
xl. Turnpenny, J., Radaelli, C. M., Jordan, A., & Jacob, K. (2009). The policy and politics of policy appraisal: emerging trends and new directions. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(4), 640-653.
xli. Wallis, J., & Dollery, B. (2001). Local government policy evolution in New Zealand: radical reform and the ex post emergence of consensus or rival advocacy coalitions. Public Administration, 79(3), 533-560.
xlii. Joskow, P. L. (1974). Inflation and environmental concern: Structural change in the process of public utility price regulation. The Journal of Law and Economics, 17(2), 291-327.
xliii. Walker, A. P. P. (2013). Embodied identity and political participation: Squatters’ engagement in the participatory budget in Brazil. Ethos, 41(2), 199-222.
xliv. Books
xlv. Allegretti U., 2010, Democrazia Partecipativa. Esperienze e prospettive in Italia e in Europa, University Press, Firenze, pp.12-13.
xlvi. Allegretti, G., Campos, G., & Siqueira, F. (2010). Anestetizzare il conflitto? Slittamenti di significato di due casi brasiliani di Bilancio Partecipativo. Partecipazione e conflitto.
xlvii. Allegretti, G., & Sintomer, Y. (2009). I bilanci partecipativi in Europa.
xlviii. Bertocci L., 2010, Il Bilancio Partecipato negli enti locali. Evidenze e riflessioni in una prospettiva economico-aziendale, Giappichelli, Torino.
xlix. Dewey, J., & Rogers, M. L. (2012). The public and its problems: An essay in political inquiry. Penn State Press.
l. Di Maria, E., & Micelli, S. (Eds.). (2004). Le frontiere dell'e-government: cittadinanza elettronica e riorganizzazione dei servizi in rete (Vol. 243). FrancoAngeli.
li. Gangemi G., 2015, Dalle pratiche di partecipazione all’e-democracy. Analsisi di casi concreti, Gangemi, pp. 60-62.
lii. Gbkpi B., 2005, Dalla teoria della democrazia partecipativa a quella deliberativa: quali possibili continuità? In Stato e mercato, Giuffrè, Milano, pp. 97-130.
liii. Jacobs, R., & Goddard, M. (2007). How do performance indicators add up? An examination of composite indicators in public services. Public Money and Management, 27(2), 103-110.
liv. Habermas, J., & Habermas, J. (1985). The theory of communicative action (Vol. 2). Beacon press.
lv. Habermas, J. (1991). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT press.
lvi. Lerner, J., & Schugurensky, D. (2005, November). Learning citizenship and democracy through participatory budgeting: The case of Rosario, Argentina. In conference Democratic Practices as Learning Opportunities, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York City.
lvii. Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming government. Reading Mass. Adison Wesley Public Comp.
lviii. Reichard, C. (1998). The impact of performance management on transparency and accountability in the public sector. Ethics and accountability in a context of governance and New Public Management, ed. Annie Hondeghem, 123-37.
lix. Romolini, A. (2007). Accountability e bilancio sociale negli enti locali (Vol. 34). FrancoAngeli.
lx. Conference acts
lxi. Alfiero, S. (2007). Social accountability nella pubblica amministrazione: dal bilancio sociale al bilancio" partecipato": un percorso innovativo per implementare la creazione di valore verso i cittadini. Rirea.
Cite this Article: