참여예산

본문

 
OECD의 다른 나라에서는 참여예산을 도입할 때에도 바로 지방정부에서 시행하기보다는 이른바 pilot study를 진행하여 검토한 후에 이를 도입하는 경우가 있는 듯하다. 
 
-----------------------------------------------
Udecide Participatory Budgeting in Newcastle 2007/08
 
Consultation Details

------------------------------------------------

Participatory budgeting – Leeds gave local residents an opportunity to influence how money should be spent on initiatives in their community
Participatory budgeting (The Beacon Scheme)
  
Summary
Elected members saw the potential of participatory budgeting to give real influence to local residents in more deprived parts of the city. They also wanted to raise the confidence of local people in these communities to speak out, discuss choices and the merits of each choice and decide for themselves how to spend over £30,000 on their community.
 
Key lessons
- Participatory budgeting is demanding in terms of planning, officer-time and finance.
- Matched funding adds to the significance of the process and the size of the pot as other bodies are seen to invest in the process.
- Officers can support the development of bids by helping people explore ideas but should not substitute residents’ ideas with their own.
- Participatory budgeting is easier to implement where there is already a network of community groups and a strong sense of community ‘spirit.
- Participatory Budgeting process offers a highly successful way of engaging and supporting local residents in becoming active in their community.
- It is an effective way of promoting Ward Councillors in their role as Community Champions.
 
Who was involved?
A small, focused group of members meet regularly to suggest innovative ways to ‘narrow the gap’ between the wealthier areas and the rest of the city. They proposed that a participatory budgeting pilot could direct some resources and build community capacity in more disadvantaged parts of the city.
 
A small steering group was established to:
- identify potential areas
- set the ground rules for the pilots
- work to publicise the project
- work with local residents to develop robust and credible bids. 
 
An elected member was part of the group to ensure that the views of residents were not drowned out.
Area management officers worked on the ground to publicise the project, working with local residents to develop bids and organise the decision days. After the decision days they helped residents implement the winning bids. Area committees of councillors were briefed and local councillors acted as champions for the pilots.
Most important were the residents of two parts of the city, one in the west and the other in the south of Leeds.
 
The problems and how we tackled them
Local residents may be acutely aware of the problems in their area or what facilities are lacking. They may have less understanding, on the other hand, of what resources are required to address such problems.
Council budgets are tight and there is little new money to support new initiatives. Drawing matched funding from the Arm's Length Management Organisation (ALMO) and from small budgets that members have to use to improve conditions in their area, increases the amount of money available. It shows that there is real commitment to making participatory budgeting work.
A larger pot and involvement from other bodies, not just the council, can help to relieve suspicion and cynicism among local people.
 
Outcomes and impact
Support sessions in preparation of the decision days attracted a fair degree of interest in the south Leeds pilot. In both pilots 11 bids were developed and submitted. Only four of the bidders though attended the decision day in the west Leeds pilot.
Two participatory budget decision days were held in mid May 2008 with over 120 local residents attending the south Leeds event. Although only eight people attended the west Leeds decision day, six of these people were completely new to any form of community participation.
As a result of the participatory budgeting pilot there has been a renewal of interest in the local residents association.
A number of projects were approved:
- Money for the local scouts
- Senior citizens club
- Environmental improvements
- Unusual ideas: including the purchase of bikes so that the local police could patrol the area more effectively.
 
What could we have done better?
The pilot demonstrated that participatory budgeting works best where there are already strong networks of community groups. Parish councils can provide a channel for voicing local concerns.
Participatory budgeting also works best where there is a high degree of trust and confidence in public institutions. Overcoming cynicism and distrust cannot be achieved quickly.
Involving other bodies in organising the event or implementing the successful schemes can increase confidence in the process. It adds to the scale and significance of the funds available and the final outcome.
 
Next Steps
During the summer we will implement the successful schemes that local residents approved in the decision days.
We will evaluate the costs and benefits of participatory budgeting as a way of developing community capacity and giving real power to local residents.
We will consider what other sources of funding and support are available to support future participatory budgeting exercises.