Value of participatory budgeting

Individuals’ participation in governance is an ancient global practice that may be traced back to the city-state of Athens around 2,500 years ago, when individuals were given an active role in civic governance.

IT was a democratic participatory system under which Athens developed in a variety of ways and created a unique culture, the results of which have enriched humanity for all time. Rome followed suit, though the process was occasionally sabotaged by power-hungry tyrants. Subsequently, countries in the Middle East and North Africa developed their own forms of citizen involvement, eventually institutionalising the tradition of “hura” — the consultative assembly that is still in place in Arab countries to advise the monarch.

There are several important reasons for public engagement in budgeting, which are as follows: 1) Because budgetary decisions have such a large impact on people’s lives, they should be informed by residents’ viewpoints and values.

2) Involving citizens in the budget process provides decision makers with additional information about the projected effects of their actions in communities, which can help to avoid unintended consequences.

3) Citizen scrutiny can help to guarantee that decision-makers make sound decisions, increasing Government efficiency, responsiveness, and accountability, and preventing corruption.

4)By integrating individuals in the budget process, they may face the same trade-offs that decision-makers must face, resulting in a more meaningful dialogue between residents and government.

5) Involving citizens in essential decisions, such as budget decisions, can help overcome public suspicion and cynicism and boost government legitimacy.

6) Citizen engagement can help to guarantee that government is responsive to citizens’ needs, opinions, and ideals.

Good public involvement techniques can assist governments in becoming more accountable and responsive to their communities, as well as improving the public’s impression of governmental performance and the value they receive from their government. Transparency is a fundamental value of government spending. Creating a transparent budget procedure will boost the government’s legitimacy and community trust.

Typically, public engagement meant voting, seeking for office, participating in political campaigns, attending public hearings, and staying updated on current events by reading government reports or the local newspaper. At a higher degree of involvement, individuals and groups pushed for specific government

policies by attending or sponsoring public meetings, lobbying government officials, or bringing policy concerns to the notice of the media.

Surveys, focus groups, neighbourhood councils, social media, and Citizen Relationship Management systems, among others, have been utilised by governments as inputs to choices on service levels and preferences, community priorities and organisational performance. While public participation activities can be incredibly beneficial, superficial or poorly structured efforts may simply squander precious staff time and financial resources, and at worst, may foster public scepticism if the public believes their opinion was not taken seriously.

In an era of growing public scepticism in government and its institutions, involving the public in decision making has the potential to promote democracy while also resulting in more effective allocation of scarce public resources. Participatory budgeting is becoming more popular around the world, yet it is still a novel concept in some nations. However, there are various impediments to genuine citizen participation, such as a lack of financial resources, occasional incompetence in government management, citizens’ apathy and bureaucratic inefficiency. Citizen engagement is a social contract between citizens and government that allows citizens to participate in decision-making. It not only enhances development outcomes through public input, collaboration, and participation, but it also promotes transparency and government quality. Citizen participation in many forms has achieved great success in several nations, and it would be useful to learn from some of these unique kinds of

engagement.

The purpose of a public participation process must be articulated because it serves as the foundation for deciding who to involve, how to select them, what activities they will participate in, what information will be collected and how the government will use the information. As a result, deciding on a purpose should be the first step in planning a participation attempt. Governments should not begin public engagement activities without first identifying a clear purpose or set of goals.

In its 2015 survey results, at least one of its three pillars was deemed to be weak in all but four of the 102 countries assessed.

It also concluded that “The vast majority of the world’s population live in countries where governments still fail to provide enough budget information for the public to fully understand or monitor how public funds are raised or spent.” Only 24 of the 102 nations surveyed give adequate budget information. The public is largely unaware of budget policies in 34 countries, while limited budget information is only available in 44 countries, limiting civil society and the public’s ability to assess a country’s overall fiscal health and evaluate the effectiveness of government policies.

The role of the Parliamentary Caucus on National Planning and Budget (PCNPB) in Bangladesh, as well as its relationships with various Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) that provide various types of support to MPs. Statistics suggests that the PCNPB’s strategic partnerships with diverse outside organizations have been useful in a variety of ways. There is now more room for ‘educated’ analysis of the budget than ever before, while measuring its consequences is challenging.

Most essential, governments should explain how public participation has impacted plans, finances, and performance, as well as solicit public input on how effective the process has been in their view. The information gained from public participation processes is crucial for making decisions in planning, budgeting, and management. However, such information should be examined alongside expert knowledge and judgment (such as the engineering expertise required to build a bridge) and objective data (such as economic and demographic data, all of which are very important in making smart decisions).

People can only be enabled to participate in decision-making on issues that directly touch their lives if the necessary accountability space is created through the institutionalization of citizen participation. Citizens can successfully undertake participatory planning and budgeting in Bangalore and Pune, regardless of the state’s ruling administration. These can result in better neighbourhood results and a larger role for citizens in decision-making. Overall, these may result in improved national planning and governance. Once the experiments become widespread at the local level, their reach can be gradually expanded to the subnational and, eventually, national levels, effectively ending the use of Black Box Budgets.