Does Participatory Governance Matter?: Exploring the Nature and Impact of Participatory Reforms

"New forms of political engagement are being generated, new networks and relationships are being forged. Further, participatory institutions can act as generators - they link citizens to each other, thus bridging social capital and 'bonds of solidarity'; they insert citizens into policy networks, expanding the contacts available to poor citizens..."

This publication presents conclusions from a May 2011 workshop on the impact of participatory governance on the lives of citizens, the organisation of civil society, the contours of state reform, and most broadly, the quality of democracy. Authors Brian Wampler and Stephanie McNulty offer case studies, policy recommendations, and a new research agenda in an effort to reshape understanding of the role participatory institutions can play in improving democracies and public life.

According to context provided at the beginning of the report, participatory governance "consists of state-sanctioned institutional processes that allow citizens to exercise voice and vote, which then results in the implementation of public policies that produce some sort of changes in citizens' lives. Citizens are engaged in public venues at a variety of times throughout the year, thus allowing them to be involved in policy formation, selection, and oversight. The inclusion of citizens in state-sanctioned venues means that they are now in constant contact with government officials. These institutions thus generate new forms of interactions among citizens as well as between citizens and government officials."

Many examples of this concept translated into practice are presented. For instance, in Brazil, participatory budgeting is a year-long decision-making process through which citizens negotiate amongst themselves and with government officials in organised meetings over the allocation of new capital spending on public work projects and social services. After specific policies are selected, the government implements them under the eye of a citizen-based oversight committee.

The two-day conference, which was hosted by the Wilson Center's Comparative Urban Studies Project in partnership with Boise State University (Boise, Idaho, United States), called for a more systematic way of thinking about impact. The core question raised was: What type of research agenda do we need to adopt and implement to improve scholars' and policymakers' understandings of the varied effects of participatory institutions? The conference sought to lay the groundwork for a multi-region, multi-country study of different types of participatory institutions, finding that understanding of any type of impact should be grounded in four areas: 1) the structural context; 2) modalities of adoption; 3) rules, forms, and design; and 4) the nature of participation. The report discusses each of these in turn.

While calling for cautious optimism about what is described here as a vast range of potential impacts, the authors stress that participatory institutions produce change that is incremental in nature - they are specifically designed to incorporate citizens into local-level decision-making processes, which significantly constrains their potential impact. "[T]here was an explicit understanding that we must do a better job of showing how these institutions are reshaping the state, civil society, democratic life and social well-being."

The paper concludes with several recommendations in going forward; in brief:

1. "Be pragmatic....We should design and adopt these programs when they can solve a concrete problem, such as poor management of programs, lack of transparency, or policy outcomes that do not reflect the needs of traditionally excluded sectors....[P]olicymakers should adapt the rules to reflect local demands and needs.
2. When attempting to develop 'top-down' or 'induced' participatory governance programs, never underestimate the importance of government officials' real commitment (i.e., political will) to these programs...
3. When participatory governance programs emerge from the bottom-up as organic experiences, reformers will need to take into account the issue of sustainability....Policymakers should think about promoting coalitions of political reformers and civil society activists who share common interests in the mobilization of ordinary citizens...
4. When designing and analyzing these institutions, always think about the broader environmental factors that affect their implementation. Structural issues such as state formation, the nature of civil society, and the economic environment must be understood so that expectations and rules can be tailored accordingly.
5. ...[B]ecause each context is unique, it is impossible to import participatory governance design and rules...
6. ...To enhance the legitimacy of participatory institutions, it is important to engage a diverse group of organizations as well as participants....Issues such as childcare, the time of the day that meetings are held, and location can increase the likelihood that women, the disabled, and youth will attend events.
7. Educate all involved...
8. ...Reformers often praise consensus-based models, but they need to find ways to allow for and mitigate the naturally occurring conflicts that emerge during any policy decision-making process.
9. Failure is part of the learning process..."