Participatory Governance to counter Post-Democracy?

1. Participatory Governance to counter Post-Democracy? Bernhard Leubolt University of Vienna Brussels, Dec 21 2010 Workshop „Cities of Tomorrow“ European Commission

2. Outline • Post-Democracy • From Latin America to Europe: Participatory Budgeting (PB) • PB in Porto Alegre • PB in Europe • Participatory Governance as an Alternative to Post-Democracy?

3. Post-Democracy (Crouch) • Rising Complexity of Political decisions • Politics seems to be subordinated to economic interests • Elections seem to lose importance • Citizens assume a more and more passive role (severe case: social exclusion) • Rising discontent with politics by the people  rise of radical right wing politics

4. Participatory Budgeting in Porto Alegre • PB established in 1989, as social movements put pressure on the new governing Workers‘ Party  bottom up • Combination of direct and representative democracy • PB as the main strategic project (until 2004) – year-long participation cycle – budget decisions taken within PB (not only consultative • Relatively high numbers of participants until 2004; combined with redistributive effects • From 1998-2002 up-scaled from municipal to state-level of government (in Rio Grande do Sul)

5. PB in Porto Alegre – priciples • Grassroots democracy: assemblys open to everybody, decisions binding to local government  democratic lobbying  „participation pays off“ • Social justice: allocation formula ensured preferential funding for poorer neighbourhoods/ people  strong presence of traditionally underrepresented groups (women, poor) • Citizen co-administration concerning the rules of the game • Political will by the ruling party to open up government to civil society • Government changed communication of programmes and budget • Independent NGO for capacity building of participants

6. Year-long cycle of PB in Porto Alegre • Multi-scalar arrangement: • Communities meet in district assemblies • Or on thematic basis city-wide • Representatives of districts or thematic fora set priorities and final decisions

7. Participatory Budgeting in Europe I Source: Sintomer et al 2005

8. Participatory Budgeting in Europe II Source: Sintomer et al 2005

9. PB in Europe – different forms Source: Sintomer et al 2005

10. PB in Europe – positive effects • Contribution to administrative modernization • Accountability of local governments strenghtened (e.g. communication of budgetary figures) • Contributions to openness of ruling parties (e.g. PC in France) • In some cases (e.g. Albacete) increased representation of underrepresented minorities • Contributions to civic culture

11. PB in Europe – main problems • PB implemented in top-down manner  less participation of community organizations; conflicts with established corporatist communities • Participation most often meant consultation  government decisions hardly affected by participation processes • Limited financial means open to participation processes • Very little impact on social (redistributive) justice • Middle class bias

12. Participatory Governance as an Alternative to Post-Democracy? • PB permits democratic forms of multi-level governance on the local scale • PB as a technical instrument is insufficient to reach the double goal of attaining democratization and social justice • Strategies to mobilize poor sections of society are vital • Decision-making power and impact of decisions important (participation should „make sense“) • Efforts towards capacity building of both civil society and government actors as possible first step • Inter-linking PB with multi-scalar governance initiatives as a possible advance