Participatory Budgeting in the Philippines

IF 0.7 Q4 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
A. Franklin, C. Ebdon
{"title":"Participatory Budgeting in the Philippines","authors":"A. Franklin, C. Ebdon","doi":"10.22140/cpar.v11i1.250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Participatory budgeting has been adopted and adapted by governments around the world. Existing literature points to a variety of desired outcomes from these efforts, but does not clearly distinguish the impacts on individuals, groups, and society. This study uses the case of the Philippines to explore the differences in impacts of participatory budgeting within and across the three levels. Reforms in the Philippines were similar to efforts in other countries, but there were adaptations, including a national mandate for the decentralization of participatory budgeting to local governments and the required representation of civil society organizations in local resource allocation processes. Some gains in individual education and efficacy, representation of marginalized groups and social justice, and government accountability were seen in the Philippines, but they seem to be idiosyncratic to the local context. Civil society and democratic legitimacy advances, though, were weaker, at least partly due to challenges in involving third-party intermediaries in the process, and continued issues with elitism and corruption. Like other participatory budgeting cases, the outcomes have not been uniform, and transitions in national leadership hinder institutionalization.","PeriodicalId":41625,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Public Administration Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Public Administration Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22140/cpar.v11i1.250","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Participatory budgeting has been adopted and adapted by governments around the world. Existing literature points to a variety of desired outcomes from these efforts, but does not clearly distinguish the impacts on individuals, groups, and society. This study uses the case of the Philippines to explore the differences in impacts of participatory budgeting within and across the three levels. Reforms in the Philippines were similar to efforts in other countries, but there were adaptations, including a national mandate for the decentralization of participatory budgeting to local governments and the required representation of civil society organizations in local resource allocation processes. Some gains in individual education and efficacy, representation of marginalized groups and social justice, and government accountability were seen in the Philippines, but they seem to be idiosyncratic to the local context. Civil society and democratic legitimacy advances, though, were weaker, at least partly due to challenges in involving third-party intermediaries in the process, and continued issues with elitism and corruption. Like other participatory budgeting cases, the outcomes have not been uniform, and transitions in national leadership hinder institutionalization.
菲律宾的参与式预算
参与式预算已被世界各国政府采用和调整。现有文献指出了这些努力的各种预期结果,但没有明确区分对个人、群体和社会的影响。本研究以菲律宾为例,探讨参与式预算编制在三个层面内和三个层面之间的影响差异。菲律宾的改革与其他国家的改革类似,但也有一些调整,包括国家授权将参与性预算下放给地方政府,以及要求民间社会组织在地方资源分配过程中有代表性。菲律宾在个人教育和效率、边缘化群体的代表性和社会正义以及政府问责制方面取得了一些进展,但这些进展似乎与当地情况不同。然而,民间社会和民主合法性的进步较弱,至少部分原因是在让第三方中介参与这一过程方面存在挑战,以及精英主义和腐败问题持续存在。与其他参与式预算编制案例一样,结果并不一致,国家领导层的过渡阻碍了制度化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Chinese Public Administration Review
Chinese Public Administration Review PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信