地方治理中的参与式预算——关于浙江温岭市新河镇改革的案例研究

参与式预算是一种公民直接参与决策的治理形式,是参与式民主的一种形式.实施参与式预算,能够促进公共学习和激发公民的权利意识,通过改善政策和资源分配,实现社会公正,以及改革行政机构.在这种直接的、自愿和普遍参与的民主过程中,人们能够平等讨论和决定公共预算、各项政策以及政府管理.在充分吸收国外参与式预算实践的基础上,浙江省新河镇基于国家既有的法律框架,以及民主恳谈的制度平台,开始实施预算改革,扩大了公民参与政府决策的广度和深度,深刻地影响着中国基层民主的发展.在理论分析和实地调查的基础上,运用比较分析的方法,初步探讨了参与式预算在中国地方治理中的兴起与发展,力图为中国地方治理,以及基层民主政治建设提供新的观察视角.     

Assessing the Effects of Public Participation

This article presents the results of research designed to test participatory democracy assertions that high-quality public participation can affect participants' beliefs in desirable ways. It examines the relationships between exposure to quality participation and participant beliefs about the trustworthiness and responsiveness of a public agency and the value of including different viewpoints in public meetings. After participation in quality project meetings, participants were significantly more likely to believe the agency was responsive to public concerns. The results indicate that some specific aspects of quality participation are positively associated with expectations about the agency's responsiveness and performance. Positive associations were also found with tolerance for differences of opinion. These results have important implications for public administrators and theorists of participatory democracy.     

Legislating deliberative engagement: Is local government in Victoria willing and able?

Growing dissatisfaction with representative democracy and concomitantly, the increasing expectation that citizens assert more influence over public policy have seen the emergence of more participatory and deliberative forms of governance in public management practice. This article explores the attempt of the state government of Victoria, Australia to legislate for mandatory deliberative engagement as part of its local government strategic planning instruments. The ambition of the reform was significant; however, it was almost unanimously rejected by the local government sector. Based on analysis of the key themes that emerged from the submissions made during the 3-year Victorian Local Government Act Review process, we explore the limitations and barriers to implementing deliberative engagement practice at a local government level. We demonstrate that whilst the promise of participatory democracy might have been compelling, in the case of Victoria there were a series of contextual and capacity considerations that needed to be taken into account before the implementation of such reforms were pursued.     

Institutionalising participatory and deliberative procedures: The origins of the first permanent citizens’ assembly

In the context of public disaffection towards representative democracies, political leaders are increasingly establishing citizens’ assemblies to foster participatory governance. These deliberative fora composed of randomly selected citizens have attracted much scholarly attention regarding their theoretical foundations and internal functioning. Nevertheless, we lack research that scrutinizes the reasons why political leaders create such new institutions. This article fills this gap by analysing a specific case: the first permanent randomly selected citizens’ assembly that will work in collaboration with a parliament in the long-term (Ostbelgien, Belgium). This case is analysed through a framework that pays close attention to the context in which it developed, the profiles of political elites that supported its creation, as well as the multiple objectives it was vested with. The findings reveal that initiators of citizens’ assemblies fundamentally conceive them as a way to strengthen a polity's identity, to save the electoral model of democracy, and to restore the legitimacy of traditional political leaders. Our analysis of this particular conception lead us to argue for the need of developing context-sentive approaches to participatory and deliberative procedures, as well as to discuss whether we should consider the latter as mere elites’ legitimation tools.     

Political Efficacy through Deliberative Participation in Urban China: A Case Study on Public Hearings

Since the early 2000s, local governments in China have been holding public hearings to solicit opinion from state, city and township residents about legal and administrative issues. Having begun with a relatively small participation rate, in the last 10 years public hearings have achieved sustainable growth in their frequency and visibility in mainstream and social media. Given that public hearings do not offer decision-making power, the increased participation rate reveals an influence not necessarily on public policy making, but on urban citizens’ attitudes towards available participatory and deliberative mechanisms. This article refers to three bodies of literature: political efficacy, deliberative democracy, and social movements. The literature on political efficacy reveals the link between political attitudes and behaviors. The literature on deliberative democracy is an important part of the analysis because Chinese public hearings are based on deliberative designs imported from North America and Western Europe. The literature on social movements complements the deliberative analysis undertaken in an authoritarian context by providing it with conceptual tools to adapt to this new setting. The public hearings held in Guiyang (Guizhou), Wuhan (Hubei) and Qingdao (Shandong) in 2010 and 2011 are used as case studies to demonstrate participation demographics and the impact of public hearing participation on city dwellers. This article investigates the impact of participation in public hearings on the political efficacy of Chinese citizens, and, based on the results, contends that such participation equips the participants with an increased level of political efficacy, and enables the development of political networks and citizen strategies that help to constrain local officials.     

Can service providing NGOs build democracy? Five contingent features

This article studies the role of service providing NGOs in the Middle East in promoting democracy. Challenging the assumption that service providing NGOs are apolitical, the authors argue that service providing NGOs play important roles in promoting democracy. They do so by serving as public arenas, or spaces in which members and beneficiaries practice democratic habits such as discussion and debate, collective problem solving, free expression, rights claiming, and the like—all of which contribute to the cultivation of a participatory form of democracy. Drawing upon existing literature, interviews, and participant observation of NGOs in Egypt, Lebanon, and Palestine, the authors argue that five features shape the role of service providing NGOs in promoting democracy. These include: (1) organizational readiness, or the organization's embeddedness in its beneficiary community and its organizational capacity; (2) organizational governance, or organization's commitment to participatory representation and transparency; (3) the nature of service an organization provides; (4) an NGOs' collaboration with other NGOs and the government; and (5) donor risk tolerance. The article's analysis contributes to our understanding of the varied, and often overlooked, roles of service providing NGOs, advancing the literature on NGO-state relations, NGO-donor relations, and democracy promotion.     

Governance and Democracy in Northern Ireland: The Role of the Voluntary and Community Sector after the Agreement

Since 1998, Northern Ireland has been the subject of a unique experiment in governance and democracy. The experiment includes the establishment of a participatory Civic Forum in which the voluntary and community sector has an important stake. Beginning with a discussion of the merits of a participatory aspect to democracy in the contemporary age, this paper identifies factors that might help establish the Civic Forum as a successful participatory institution in Northern Ireland. Key factors include the attitude towards the Forum of political representatives and their willingness to foster a participatory dimension to the new democracy. Other important factors are inclusiveness and the balance of sectoral representation in the Forum.     

Participatory storylines and their influence on deliberative forums

For all the recent discussion on the virtues and vices of public deliberation, surprisingly little attention has been given to how deliberative procedures actually operate in different policy contexts. This article takes up this task with a specific focus on how deliberative designs such as citizens' juries and consensus conferences interface with their participatory context. The concept of the participatory storyline is developed to describe the competing narratives associated with a policy issue on who constitutes the public” and how “they” should be represented and involved in the policy process. An analysis of two Australian cases reveals how existing participatory storylines can productively or destructively influence deliberative forums. The empirical research suggests that a more productive deliberative procedure is one that supports or “speaks to” existing narratives on what constitutes public participation. Under these conditions key policy actors are more likely to engage in the deliberative process and endorse its outcomes. Some suggestions are provided for how practitioners can better anticipate the way a deliberative forum might interface with its participatory context.     

The limits to local participation and deliberation in the French 'politique de la ville'

Abstract.  Over the past twenty years in France, the politique de la ville (a public policy initiative targeting impoverished urban areas) has constituted one of the main sources of renewal of the discourse concerning social participation. This article looks at whether it has led to a genuine democratisation of policy making. The following four questions are discussed: Have participatory procedures improved the efficiency of public policy? Have they fostered the strengthening of the social bond? Has setting up new procedures improved deliberation between political and nonpolitical actors? And has this new policy generated a renewal of local elites and modified the decision-making process? The authors conclude that these different attempts have had only a very limited impact.     

Word and Deed: A Deweyan Integration of Deliberative and Participatory Democracy

This article draws on the political philosophy of John Dewey as one way to re-think the relationship between deliberative and participatory democracy. Rather than focusing on differences, Dewey's ideal of democracy allows us to bridge these two theories while still being attentive to the tensions between them. In particular, Dewey helps us conceptualize deliberative and participatory practices as distinctive yet complementary phases within a larger circuit of cooperative inquiry. To illustrate the argument, a case study of one democratic experiment that effectively combined different forms of practice is presented. In doing so, it is contended that we might be able to recover and incorporate some of the more radical features of participatory democracy into deliberative practices. Participatory theory's focus on political action and structural inequality, in addition to deliberation, as essential to citizen-centered democratic practice is specifically emphasized.     

Must Feminists Give Up on Liberal Democracy?

Feminists have taken issue with liberal democracy on a number of counts, including the conditions necessary to achieve political equality and the importance to be attached to political participation. This paper considers issues currently raised under the rubric of citizenship, earlier and continuing arguments for a more actively participatory democracy, and questions associated with representing social heterogeneity and group difference. The argument throughout is that while liberal democracy has signally failed to deliver on its promises to women, it does not help to address these failings in terms of giving up on liberal democracy.     

The effects of rules on local political decision-making processes: How can rules facilitate participation?

It is often claimed that participation empowers local actors and that an inclusive decision-making process is crucial for rural development. We aim to investigate how formal and informal rules are set in local decision-making processes and how those rules may impact the actual level of participation by local actors. In a comparative case study, the rules-in-use for the planning of community projects in Thailand are examined. For our analysis, we use the Institutional Analysis and Development framework, which allows for more precise analysis of the impact of the rules. Fifty-three villages are served by four selected Tambon Administrative Organisations (TAO) which are either known for success in achieving participation or ranked as problematic in implementing the decentralization and local participation goals of the Thai government. The study is based on 60 semi-structured interviews with TAO staff, a survey of village leaders in 50 villages and a household survey of 104 villagers. We scrutinize seven types of rules and show some particular differences in terms of the impact from the rules-in-use. In the TAOs ranked as less participatory, the attendance rate in the meetings is found to be lower (boundary rule), villagers are informed about a meeting with a shorter notice (information rule) and more villagers mention that elites interfere in the project selection process (aggregation rule). A high level of fuzziness appeared in the position and authority rules. Further, we obtained information on the particular deontic logic, showing generally a high share of de facto may-statements in the implementation of the rules. We conclude that if the policy goal is enhancing participation, rule-setting offers good scope for intervention. From a practical perspective, information on administrative procedures has to be made more accessible and public administrators should receive procedural training.     

Governance through civil society? An Anglo-Italian comparison of democratic renewal and local regeneration

Abstract

The UK has become a prime case for the implementation of the ‘new governance’ of partnership between central government and civil society. This perspective has become central to New Labour policies for both local socio-economic regeneration and democratic renewal in the United Kingdom. However, limitations in its redistribution of power, its transparency in the policy-making process, including the representativeness of civil society participants, and, in the effectiveness of its outcomes have all been alleged by academic critics. These issues are explored by contrasting a robust, British case of local, participatory governance in Bristol with a quite different, and more conventional approach to democratic renewal in the Italian city of Naples. Despite similar problems of socio-economic dereliction and similar schemes of regeneration in the two cases, the Italian approach emphasized the exclusive role of a renewed constitutional democracy, while in Bristol central government agencies promoted an accentuation of local trends to participation by local civil society organizations. Applying an analytical framework composed of national policies and regulations, institutional rules and norms, and the collective ‘identity’ factors identified by social capital theory, governance changes are here treated as ‘exogenous shocks’ and/or as opportunities for choice. However, over and above differences in these institutional frameworks the key factors are shown to be the longer-standing political cultures influencing local actors and their own repertoires of action; with repertoires influenced by objective validations of previous policy choices, or economic or electoral successes. The study finds that the achievements of the ‘inclusive’, participative governance approach do not significantly exceed those of an exclusivist, ‘neo-constitutionalism’, as practised by a more autonomous local government in Naples. Thus, on this evidence, enhanced civil society engagement still requires greater freedom from central government direction.     

Between governance-driven democratisation and democracy-driven governance: Explaining changes in participatory governance in the case of Barcelona

Scholars of participatory democracy have long noted dynamic interactions and transformations within and between political spaces that can foster (de)democratisation. At the heart of this dynamism lie (a) the processes through which top-down “closed” spaces can create opportunities for rupture and democratic challenges and (b) vice-versa, the mechanisms through which bottom-up, open spaces can be co-opted through institutionalisation. This paper seeks to unpick dynamic interactions between different spaces of participation by looking specifically at two forms of participatory governance, or participatory forms of political decision making used to improve the quality of democracy. First, Mark Warren's concept of ‘governance-driven democratization’ describes top-down and technocratic participatory governance aiming to produce better policies in response to bureaucratic rationales. Second, we introduce a new concept, democracy-driven governance, to refer to efforts by social movements to invent new, and reclaim and transform existing, spaces of participatory governance and shape them to respond to citizens’ demands. The paper defines these concepts and argues that they co-exist and interact in dynamic fashion; it draws on an analysis of case study literature on participatory governance in Barcelona to illuminate this relationship. Finally, the paper relates the theoretical framework to the case study by making propositions as to the structural and agential drivers of shifts in participatory governance.     

Designing for equitable civic engagement: Participatory design and discourse in contested spaces

A common theme of research on participatory democracy and citizen engagement centres on the need for empirical studies that conduct a deep exploration of the nuances and complexities of these processes. This article offers a distinct response to this need through an examination of two ethnographic case studies of a participatory budgeting process in a multilingual, highly diverse community in which Spanish-speaking Latino immigrants were involved. By analyzing participants discourse from the case studies, the findings highlight the risks and rewards of reframing participatory processes as design decisions rather than static procedures.     

Deliberative Innovation to Different Effect: Consensus Conferences in Denmark, France, and the United States

Democratic reformers are attracted by the role that advisory forums composed of lay citizens can play in public consultation on complex policy issues (such as participatory technology assessment). Using a comparative study of consensus conferences on the issue of genetically modified food in Denmark, France, and the United States, the authors show that the potential of such deliberative "mini-publics" is quite different in different sorts of political system. They attend to the mode of establishment, perceived legitimacy, policy impact, and influence on public debate of the forum in each case. In actively inclusive Denmark,mini-publics are deployed in integrative fashion; in exclusive France, in managerial fashion; and in the passively inclusive United States, in advocacy fashion. Proponents and practitioners of deliberative participatory reforms should take into account the constraints and opportunities revealed by this analysis and attend to the different roles that mini-publics might play in different political systems.     

Pragmatism and Radical Democracy

Abstract

This paper suggests that pragmatism makes a distinctive contribution to the theory and practice of radical democracy. It investigates the relation ship between the renewal of interest in pragmatism and the recent attempts to develop radical democratic alternatives to political liberalism. With particular reference to the contemporary critical social theory of Habermas and Honneth, the paper outlines key dimensions of the civic republican, deliberative democratic and reflexive cooperative reconstructions of John Dewey's conception of democracy. These reconstructions are shown to have explicated important pragmatist insights concerning public participation in civic associations, the discursive practices of deliberation, and the cooperative organization of the division of labour. However, it is argued that each of these reconstructions pre suppose some facet of the additional pragmatist understanding of the creativity of action and that the most distinctive contributions of pragmatism to radical democratic theory and practice derive from a notion of democracy as instituted and emergent meaning.     

Participatory Versus Radical Democracy in the 21st Century: Carole Pateman,Jacques Rancière,and Sheldon Wolin

What is the relationship between participatory and radical democracy and why are they relevant? This paper answers these questions by bringing into conversation the participatory theory of Pateman and the radical theories of Rancière and Wolin to see what they can learn from each other. I argue that participatory democracy demonstrates the value of attending to questions of institutional transformation, due to the ability of greater participation to both empower citizens and legitimize democratic authority structures. Radical democracy, on the other hand, calls attention to the ways in which the conditions of democratic possibility have changed in the past half century, thus making the dream of institutionalizing a participatory democracy much more difficult to realize. In doing so, I demonstrate that participatory and radical theories of democracy have much to offer to one another and to broader ongoing debates within democratic theory.     

Representation and Democracy: Uneasy Alliance

The concept of 'representation' is puzzling not because it lacks a central definition, but because that definition implies a paradox (being present and yet not present) and is too general to help reconcile the word's many senses with their sometimes conflicting implications.
Representation has a problematic relationship with democracy, with which it is often thoughtlessly equated. The two ideas have different, even conflicting, origins. Democracy came from ancient Greece and was won through struggle, from below. Greek democracy was participatory and bore no relationship to representation. Representation dates – at least as a political concept and practice – from the late medieval period, when it was imposed as a duty by the monarch. Only in the English Civil War and then in the eighteenth-century democratic revolutions did the two concepts become linked.
Democrats saw representation – with an extended suffrage – as making possible large-scale democracy. Conservatives instead saw it as a tool for staving off democracy. Rousseau also contrasted the two concepts, but favoured democratic self-government.
He was prescient in seeing representation as a threat to democracy. Representative government has become a new form of oligarchy, with ordinary people excluded from public life. This is not inevitable. Representation does make large-scale democracy possible, where it is based in participatory democratic politics at the local level.
Three obstacles block access to this possibility today: the scope of public problems and private power; money, or rather wealth; and ideas and their shaping, in an age of electronic media.