Participatory Budgeting History & Principles & Policy Context Davy Jones 24 th July 2008

1. Participatory Budgeting • History & Principles & Policy Context Davy Jones 24th July 2008

2. What Is Participatory Budgeting? “A mechanism or process through which the population decides on, or contributes to decisions made on the destination of all or part of the available public resources” (UN Habitat) “Local people decide how to allocate a public budget” (UK PB Unit) “If it feels like we have decided - it’s PB. If it feels like someone else has decided – it isn’t.” (Brazilian resident involved in PB)

3. Where did PB come from? • Brazil - military dictatorship 1964 to 1985 • Porto Alegre - home of resistance to the military • Huge social movements developed - trade unions, peasants movement, neighbourhood associations • And a large socialist party - the PT (Workers Party) led by Lula, who is now President! • Influence of Paulo Freire’s philosophy of education: “people become aware of their power together to create something new as they overcome what is oppressive - the foundation of participatory politics.” • PB was seen as a way of opening up local government to local citizens

4. Porto Alegre- home of PB Porto Alegre Population approx 1.4m Regional capital Relatively affluent/western Wealth inequalities Identified as THE model of good practice

5. 3 phases of development of PB • 1989 - 1997: experimentation in approx 40 Brazilian cities including Porto Alegre • 1997 - 2000: consolidation of PB in 140 Brazilian cities and development of PB in a few selected cities in Latin America and Europe • 2000 onwards: worldwide export of PB to over 300 cities internationally • Most recently, some Brazilian cities, including Porto Alegre, changed political hands and PB experiment faces new challenges

6. World-wide growth of PB • Brazil & World: 140+ cities in Brazil, 300+ worldwide • Europe: Paris, Sevilla, Cordoba, Berlin… • Models: Variety of different models/approaches • World Bank: Promoting as model of good governance. • OECD: Recent research - 40 international case studies • UN Habitat prize & UNESCO: Porto Alegre prizes • EU: Promoting PB to new and prospective members • DFID: Pro-poor funds and civil society • PB: is moving into the mainstream as it is adapted into new contexts

7. European cities population with PB

8. Key characteristics of PB • Citizen involvement in priorities/budget decisions - choices across sectors, geography, citizen groups • Capacity-building to enable citizens to do it • Annual budget/priorities cycle • Mainstream and investment money – starting small • Budget matrix to link need to citizen choices • Transparent process open to all • Interplay between representative and participatory democracy

9. Citizen involvement in priorities/budgets • Usually, local neighbourhood assemblies open to all - from 1-15% of local people; often women, under-represented groups and the poor well represented • May include additional thematic assemblies - housing, schools - or meetings for citizen groups such as younger citizens or private sector • Assemblies vote on priorities and elect delegates to city-wide assembly - may be link to region • City-wide assembly votes on priorities/budgets and elects a Budget Council to work with council officers & elected members

10. Capacity-building to enable citizens to do it Not realistic to expect citizens to take big decisions on priorities/budgets without significant capacity-building support Budget literacy campaigns/PR material Technical advice and support from the local authority technical staff Out-reach workers in the community to spread the word and mobilise attendance Often, a dedicated central local authority team to co-ordinate the overall PB process

11. Annual cycle planning & review • Cyclical annual process of review and forward planning • Usually, a clear timetable of review and planning linked to budget planning cycle of local authority • Neighbourhood assemblies begin process by reviewing previous year’s decisions and progress • Stage by stage approach to translating local citizen priorities into projects, services and budgets through neighbourhood & city meetings • Brought together in budget/service plans which are in turn reviewed again in the following year

12. Starting modestly • Traditionally, process begins with small amounts of money - some 1 to 5% of budget • Scale builds up as citizens and members more confident of effectiveness of the process • Easier to begin with new investment money before moving on to mainstream revenue budgets • Eventually 17% of overall budget in Porto Alegre was subject to PB process • PB covers 100% of budget in Mundo Novo, Brazil (16,000 people) !

13. Budget matrix link need to choice • Traditionally, there is a clear set of budget rules to accompany citizen assemblies making choices • Formulae for allocating money linked to: • population size in neighbourhoods; • deprivation levels; • and sometimes participation levels • Coupled with citizens’ choices in assemblies to decide on precise allocation of pot to different schemes and neighbourhoods • The rules of the process are themselves voted on in citizen assemblies

14. The Budget Matrix provides precise figures

15. Statistics eh?

16. Statistics eh?

17. Transparent process open to all • Transparency of rules and their agreement by citizens is essential to gain citizens’ trust for PB process • History of corruption/clientism makes open rules very popular with citizens - and with World Bank ! • Good publicity/PR/communication with citizens essential to success • Having media on board can be crucial • Citizens can make complex choices - if relevant information provided - and in an appropriate way

18. Representative and participatory democracy • Citizens’ Budget Council draws up budget for agreed “spending pot” in liaison with council • Council members take final decision to approve/ amend or reject the budget proposed to them • Councillors take final decision - Budget Council acts as a sort of “budget scrutiny panel” • Councillors have to have political will to introduce PB in the first place and to accept its outcome • Enables local councillors to play stronger neighbourhood advocate role • Maturity to balance representative & participatory democracy

19. Changing policy context • Less Government micro-management • Less targets, PIs, inspections • “Bottom up” accountability to local citizens • Shift to focus on areas – LAAs, CAA etc • Multi-agency (LSPs) rather than separate agencies • Co-ordination of strategies – SCS, LAA, LDF, JSNA • Greater “joining up” across Government • Broad cross-party consensus – role of LGA

20. Legislation & guidance 2006 White Paper Governance of Britain Green Paper Local Government & Public Involvement in Health (LGPIH) Act & new statutory guidance New PIs/Places survey LAAs operational guidance CAA consultation document Empowerment Action Plan “Communities in Control”: new White Paper on Empowerment

21. Section 138 – Duty to Involve • New duty to “inform, consult & involve” from April 2009 • Applies to Best Value authorities (except Police, Wales) • Parallel duty in health & WP proposal to extend, includes police • “Where BV authority considers it appropriate…” • It must involve “representatives of local persons or local persons in the exercise of their functions by… • Providing information on the exercise of the function • Consulting about the exercise of the function • Involve in another way about the exercise of function • “Appropriate”: guidance states “routine functions” & “significant one-off decisions” • Comprehensive engagement across LSP now expected

22. Do people want to be involved? 50-60%+ want services to get on with the job 25-40% get involved around specific life choices – schools, moving 2-5% are citizen activists 71% people would get involved in process where they decided how & where local money was spent – Opinion Leader research

23. Engagement cycle in new agenda • Citizens involved in debate on local priorities, services & budgets • Feeds into Sustainable Community Strategy, Local Area Agreement & neighbourhood charters • Annual self assessment by LSP • Independent inspectorate assessment of risks in the area, using customer feedback, PIs etc • LSPs produce annual report for citizens which feeds back into involvement process • LSPs choose from menu of options (PB, Citizens Panels etc) a way to involve citizens cyclically in these processes

24. Participatory Budgeting in UK • Church Action on Poverty – UK PB Unit • National PB Reference Group & DCLG support • Blears: community kitty in each area by 2012 • National strategy on PB & 15 September event • Modest UK pilots over past 5 years • voluntary sector or youth “pot of money” agreed on by sector • local neighbourhood “pot” voted on by local citizens • broad budget consultation approaches • linking to all or part of LAA/SCS process • oher sectors – youth, health, police etc

25. Davy Jones 07932 616843 davy@davyjonesconsultancy.co.uk www.davyjonesconsultancy.co.uk