User:Moiraplowey/sandbox

Participatory budgeting (PB) is a process of democratic deliberation and decision-making, and a type of participatory democracy, in which ordinary people decide how to allocate part of a municipal or public budget. Participatory budgeting allows citizens to identify, discuss, and prioritize public spending projects, and gives them the power to make real decisions about how money is spent. When PB is taken seriously and is based on mutual trust local governments and citizen can benefit equally. PB has the potential to provide social inclusion and social equity in the decision making of the allocation of resources in communites with low socioeconomic statuses.

History

The first full participatory budgeting process was developed in the city of Porto Alegre, Brazil, starting in 1989. The initial success of PB in Porto Alegre made it attractive to other municipalities in Brazil. By 2001, more than 100 cities in Brazil had implemented PB, while in 2015, thousands of variations have been implemented in the Americas, Africa, Asia and Europe. Participatory Budgeting was founded in the early 1980s, the Brazilian Workers’ Party has maintained that electoral success is not an end in itself but a spring board for developing radical, participatory forms of democracy that will enable the country to start redressing the enormous inequalities in Brazilian society. The city where the Worker’s Party has made the most advances in this sense is the city of Porto Alegre, a capital city of the relatively wealthy state of Rio Grande do Sul, a busy industrial, financial, and service center with a population of then 1.2 million people.

Porto Alegre

In Porto Alegre as throughout Brazil, city departments and their leading officials had vested interests in their inequality. Corruption was endemic. The local Workers’ Party believed that the only chance of achieving change was to open up secretive municipal institutions, particularly their finances, to a process of popular participation. This is when participatory budgeting gained control in Porto Alegre. Over its 15 year of existence, however, the participatory budget has opened up a state bureaucracy that is normally hidden. Such openness repels corruption and forces municipal officials and employees to be more accountable to local residents. The participatory budgeting also provides an opportunity to pesue broader social goals.(Wainwright, H. (2003). Making a People's Budget in Porto Alegre. NACLA Report On The Americas, 36(5), 37-42)

Economic Status Before is in "History" After: The local success of the participatory budget process has moved the Brazilian Workers Party on to brand new political ground: The Workers party would play the leadership role in the formation of municipal policy and strategy. When the Workers Party came into office and turned to its own supporters to join the government, about 10 percent of the local membership moved into government jobs Wainwright, H. (2003). Making a People's Budget in Porto Alegre. NACLA Report On The Americas, 36(5), 37-42.

New York

New york first adopted the process in 2011-2012 using a bottom-up technique within their community to make the rules. New York is using the participatory budgeting process in their 2014-2015 budget cycle with 24 more council members adopting the process in their districts.

Castillo, M. (2015). Reflections on Participatory Budgeting in New York City. Innovation Journal, 20(2). 1-11.

Argentina

Buenos aires, the city of Argentina, adopted the PB process in 2001 hoping to emerge a political economy. There were manipulators like people watching the system and third parties forming for or against the PB system. Buenos aires used a system where the communites allocated where the government would take action first by ranking where the cities resources would go. After participation decreased by 50% in the 2005 cycle, PB came to an end and "the new communes" emerged.

California

Passage of Proposition 13 the Jaris-Gann Initiative, in California on June 6, 1978. Limitations on taxes are not new. However, Proposition 13 had some unique features and special impacts which make it all the more interesting since it quickly became the prototype for limitation attempts in other states. The Propositions includes a property tax reduction of a major proportions (spread unevenly over California’s governmental structure) and property tax relief captured only partially by California’s, serious problems of taxpayer equality, and a restructuring of intergovernmental relationships in California.

• “Outcomes” (references) -D
• “Criticism”: What are the insights regarding the opportunities for and barriers to accomplishing the goal of participatory-based budgeting? It takes leadership to flatten the organizational structure and make conscious ethical responsibilities as individuals and as committee members try to achieve the democratic goals means that the press should be present for the public, and yet the presence of the press inhibits the procedural need for robust discussion. Or, while representation is a cornerstone to participatory budgeting, a group being so large has an effect on the efficiency of the group.

• Some information in “Outcomes” -D

Castillo, M. (2015). Reflections on Participatory Budgeting in New York City.

Innovation Journal, 20(2), 1-11

• Wampler, B. (2007). Participatory budgeting in Brazil: Contestation,                cooperation, and accountability. Penn State Press