Participatory Budgeting: a Meta-synthesis of Qualitative Case Studies

Abstract

Abstract This article presents a meta-synthesis of qualitative case studies on Participatory Budgeting (PB), a democratic tool that enables citizens to engage in local budgetary decision-making. Based on a systematic review of 15 articles, this study examines how PB has been conceptualized and implemented across different countries, identifying the theoretical frameworks employed. The analysis highlights the diversity of contexts where PB is practiced, ranging from post-Soviet countries to Western democracies. While emphasizing citizen participation as a core element, the studies reveal different theoretical approaches, including governance, local government, development, participatory democracy, and institutionalization. This study critically examines PB's success factors and limitations, revealing that its effectiveness is contingent upon context, democratic traditions, and institutional structures. The review identifies concerns regarding elite capture, limited participation, and the challenge of achieving sustainable institutionalization. By synthesizing the existing literature, this article offers a comprehensive definition of PB,emphasizing its ongoing nature, collective decision-making, social oversight, and alignment with good governance principles. The study emphasizes the importance of deliberative democracy as a viable model for PB, recognizing its potential for inclusivity and reasoned consensus. This meta-synthesis provides a valuable resource for scholars and policymakers, offering a nuanced understanding of PB’s global implementation. It identifies key gaps in the literature, suggesting future research directions to strengthen PB’s theoretical foundation and guide its successful implementation in various contexts.