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

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?

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

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 up-scaled from municipal to state-level of government (in Rio Grande do Sul)

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

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

Participatory Budgeting in Europe I Source: Sintomer et al 2005

Participatory Budgeting in Europe II Source: Sintomer et al 2005

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

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

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

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