The journey of participatory budgeting: a systematic literature review and future research directions
| Published date | 01 September 2023 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/00208523221078938 |
| Author | Luca Bartocci,Giuseppe Grossi,Sara Giovanna Mauro,Carol Ebdon |
| Date | 01 September 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
The journey of
participatory budgeting:
a systematic literature
review and future research
directions
Luca Bartocci
University of Perugia, Italy
Giuseppe Grossi
Kristianstad University, Sweden; Nord University, Norway,
Kozminski University, Poland
Sara Giovanna Mauro
Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Italy; University of Modena and
Reggio Emilia, Italy
Carol Ebdon
University of Nebraska Omaha, USA
Abstract
This systematic literature review analyses the body of knowledge on the budgeting practice
known as participatory budgeting (PB). This review identifies and analyses a dataset of 139
English-language papers focused on PB in the public sector published over three decades
(1989–2019) in academic journals of different disciplines. The findings shed new light on
PB, by systematizing this body of knowledge and explaining the PB idea journey. A research
agenda is also set by clarifying overlooked areas of research and practical interests.
Points for practitioners
•The review provides a conceptual model to cope with specific issues in each phase of a
PB journey, and it also sheds light on the role of political and managerial actors.
Corresponding author:
Giuseppe Grossi, Kristianstad University, 291 88 Kristianstad, Sweden; Nord University, Postbox: 1490, NO-
8049 Bodö, Norway.
Emails: giuseppe.grossi@hkr.se, giuseppe.grossi@nord.no
Article
International
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
International Review of Administrative
Sciences
2023, Vol. 89(3) 757–774
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00208523221078938
journals.sagepub.com/home/ras
•Traditional and new themes to design a PB and implement participatory mechanisms
are proposed.
•Practitioners can benefit from indications about the use of technological tools in mobil-
izing participation.
Keywords
idea journey, literature review, longitudinal thematic analysis, participatory budgeting
Introduction
In the public sector, the practice of participatory budgeting (hereafter, PB) has received
growing recognition among scholars, practitioners and policy-makers over recent
decades (Cabannes and Lipietz, 2018; Ebdon and Franklin, 2006∗
1
; Jung, 2021; No
and Hsueh, 2020; Rubin and Ebdon, 2020; Wampler, 2007). PB can generally be
defined as a budgeting practice built on the active participation of citizens in budgetary
decisions with the aim of influencing resource allocation. In practice, approaches range
from a general view, interpreting PB as a process whereby citizens are able to provide
input on at least a part of the budget, to a stricter understanding that includes openness
to all citizens, a combination of direct and representative democracy, deliberation and
not simply consultation, self-regulation and redistribution towards the poor (Goldfrank
and Schneider, 2006∗). The variety of approaches to PB is visible in the different existing
definitions of the practice (see online Appendix 1 for a selected sample).
PB has a long history, as testified by the experiences that emerged in South America
since the end of the 1980s and the long tradition of citizen involvement in the budget
process in the United States, through mechanisms such as public hearings and citizen
budget committees (Ebdon and Franklin, 2006∗), which have supported a wide approach
to the concept of PB. Currently, this practice has re-gained prominence owing to the
increasing attention paid to citizen engagement, co-production and democratic govern-
ance. To improve the quality of public services, satisfy the growing needs of the commu-
nity, and address multiple societal challenges, citizen involvement has been considered a
valuable element (Michels, 2011). The engagement of citizens can support a better iden-
tification of problems helping the organizations to deal with reductions in state expendi-
tures and can allow an efficient and effective collaboration to deal with crisis times
(Anessi-Pessina et al., 2020).
The variety of PB interpretations, together with its journey across the world, has char-
acterized the development of this practice through experience. This results in a wide set of
models of PB (Sintomer et al., 2008∗) and several normative expectations have been
developed on the issue. Despite the relevance of the topic and the lively debate on its
development, surprisingly, the body of knowledge on PB in the public sector remains
largely unsystematized, as shown by the lack of reviews of the topic, while a few previous
attempts have reviewed the practice limitedly to the private sector (Shields and Shields,
1998). The current study fills this gap, by systematically reviewing previous research on
758 International Review of Administrative Sciences 89(3)
To continue reading
Request your trial