Participatory Budgeting: A Comparative Study of Croatia, Poland and Slovakia

Džinić Jasmina (), Svidroňová Mária Murray () and Markowska-Bzducha Ewa ()
Additional contact information
Džinić Jasmina: Faculty of Law, University of Zagrebv, Zagreb, Croatia
Svidroňová Mária Murray: Department of Public Economics and Regional Development, Matej Bel University in Banska Bystrica, Banska Bystrica, Slovakia
Markowska-Bzducha Ewa: Department of Regional Development and Quantitative Methods, Kazimierz Pulaski University of Technology and Humanities in Radom, Radom, Poland

NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 2016, vol. 9, issue 1, 31-56

Abstract: The New Public Management movement regards citizens as customers and, accordingly, focuses on the quality of services provided by public-sector organizations. Since this approach negatively affected democratic values, there has been a shift of the focus from consumer satisfaction and quality of services to quality of governance. The latter implies the improvement of the relationship between government and citizens as active members of the community. Over the last twenty years, participatory budgeting (PB) has become a popular form of co-production intended to improve the quality of local governance. The aim of the article is to provide a comparative analysis of the use and role of PB in Croatia, Poland and Slovakia and to identify the models of PB used in selected countries. In order to compare the case studies of municipalities in selected countries, a qualitative analysis has been used and the classification of PB models applied. Most analyzed local units use the “Porto Alegre adapted for Europe” model, but the “Consultation on public finances”, “Representation of Organized Interest” and “Proximity participation” models are also represented. The main findings are that PB indeed enables better allocation of public sources according to citizens’ needs (various public services were delivered following the trend of social innovation and co-creation), but the problem lies in the low amount assigned for PB from public budgets and the relatively low interest of citizens to participate in the PB processes. PB might also bring certain risks linked with its implementation, e.g. misuse of the idea for political reasons or additional costs of projects delivered in the PB process.

Keywords: public services; governance; participatory budgeting; citizens; Croatia; Poland; Slovakia (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1515/nispa-2016-0002 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:vrs:njopap:v:9:y:2016:i:1:p:31-56:n:2

DOI: 10.1515/nispa-2016-0002

Access Statistics for this article

NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy is currently edited by Juraj Nemec

More articles in NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy from Sciendo
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Peter Golla ().