What is Driving the Increasing Presence of Citizen Participation Initiatives?

Nowadays there is an imperative for governments to be more responsive to community needs, and public sector modernisation programmes are introducing opportunities for citizen participation. We look at citizen participation initiatives through the lenses of institutional and stakeholder theories. Using survey data and exogenous variables we analyse experiences in thirty OECD and MERCOSUR local governments. We find that the possible gains in legitimacy and trust explain the efforts made towards citizen participation. In addition, the different levels of commitment towards meaningful citizen participation suggest that factors such as power and urgency can be complementary to legitimacy when analysing citizen participation.

[1]  S. Arnstein,et al.  Ladder of Citizen Participation , 2020 .

[2]  Steve Letza,et al.  Reframing privatisation: Deconstructing the myth of efficiency , 2004 .

[3]  C. Hood,et al.  From old public administration to new public management , 1994 .

[4]  Vicente Pina,et al.  Accrual Accounting in EU Local Governments: One Method, Several Approaches , 2009 .

[5]  Mingyi Hung,et al.  ACCOUNTING STANDARDS AND VALUE RELEVANCE OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS: AN INTERNATIONAL ANALYSIS , 2000 .

[6]  T. J. Brignall,et al.  An Institutional Perspective on Performance Measurement and Management in the 'New Public Sector' , 2000 .

[7]  J. Tiefenbacher,et al.  Evaluating the Effectiveness of Public Participation Efforts by Environmental Agencies: Repermitting a Smelter in El Paso, Texas, USA , 2008 .

[8]  Cosmo Howard,et al.  Rethinking Government-Public Relationships in a Digital World , 2008 .

[9]  Archon Fung.  Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance , 2006 .

[10]  Marc Holzer,et al.  The Performance–Trust Link: Implications for Performance Measurement , 2006 .

[11]  R. Kempen,et al.  New trends in urban policies in Europe: evidence from the Netherlands and Denmark , 2003 .

[12]  Vicente Pina,et al.  Delivering Public Services—Mechanisms and Consequences: Changes in Public Service Delivery in the EU Countries , 2002 .

[13]  Vicente Pina,et al.  Analysis of the efficiency of local government services delivery. An application to urban public transport , 2001 .

[14]  John W. Meyer,et al.  Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[15]  A. Kakabadse,et al.  Reinventing the Democratic Governance Project through Information Technology? A Growing Agenda for Debate , 2003 .

[16]  Kaifeng Yang.  Public Administrators' Trust in Citizens: A Missing Link in Citizen Involvement Efforts , 2005 .

[17]  Vicente Pina,et al.  Are ICTs promoting government accountability?: A comparative analysis of e-governance developments in 19 OECD countries , 2007 .

[18]  Christos Bouras,et al.  An electronic voting service to support decision-making in local government , 2003, Telematics Informatics.

[19]  J. Edelenbos,et al.  Managing Stakeholder Involvement in Decision Making: A Comparative Analysis of Six Interactive Processes in the Netherlands , 2006 .

[20]  E. Vigoda-Gadot,et al.  Trust, Participation and Performance , 2010 .

[21]  Graham Smith,et al.  Citizens' Juries and Deliberative Democracy , 2000 .

[22]  R. Craig,et al.  Assessing international accounting harmonization using Hegelian dialectic, isomorphism and Foucault , 2007 .

[23]  R. Kluvers,et al.  Participation in the budgetary process in local government , 2009 .

[24]  P. Smyth.  Place management: A new way forward in redressing social exclusion in Queensland , 2000 .

[25]  M. J. Moon,et al.  Linking Citizen Satisfaction with E-Government and Trust in Government , 2004 .

[26]  Annette Boaz,et al.  The Modernization and Improvement of Government and Public Services: Public Participation and Citizen-Centred Local Government: Lessons from the Best Value and Better Government for Older People Pilot Programmes , 2000 .

[27]  Vicente Pina,et al.  E-Government and Accountability in EU Local Governments , 2009 .

[28]  C. Oliver.  STRATEGIC RESPONSES TO INSTITUTIONAL PROCESSES , 1991 .

[29]  Mark C. Suchman.  Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches , 1995 .

[30]  Kaifeng Yang,et al.  Citizen Involvement Efforts and Bureaucratic Responsiveness: Participatory Values, Stakeholder Pressures, and Administrative Practicality , 2007 .

[31]  R. Burby.  Making Plans that Matter: Citizen Involvement and Government Action , 2003 .

[32]  J. Bryson.  What to do when Stakeholders matter , 2004 .

[33]  William R. Nylen.  Testing the Empowerment Thesis: The Participatory Budget in Belo Horizonte and Betim, Brazil , 2002 .

[34]  Archon Fung,et al.  Deepening Democracy: Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance , 2001 .

[35]  L. Torres.  Trajectories in public administration reforms in European Continental countries , 2004 .

[36]  C. Deegan,et al.  An examination of the corporate social and environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983‐1997: A test of legitimacy theory , 2002 .

[37]  Renée A. Irvin,et al.  Citizen Participation in Decision Making: Is It Worth the effort? , 2004 .

[38]  Vicente Pina,et al.  E-government developments on delivering public services among EU cities , 2005, Gov. Inf. Q..

[39]  Jennifer A. Summerville,et al.  Community Participation, Rights, and Responsibilities: The Governmentality of Sustainable Development Policy in Australia , 2008 .

[40]  Jane Broadbent,et al.  Control and Legitimation in Government Accountability Processes: The Private Finance Initiative in the UK , 2001 .

[41]  Marilyn Taylor,et al.  Community Participation in the Real World: Opportunities and Pitfalls in New Governance Spaces , 2005 .

[42]  C. Weare,et al.  Designing Web Technologies for Local Governance Reform: Good Management or Good Democracy? , 2000 .

[43]  Terry L. Cooper,et al.  Citizen-Centered Collaborative Public Management , 2006 .

[44]  Lawrence C. Walters,et al.  Putting More Public in Policy Analysis , 2000 .

[45]  Robert W. Scapens,et al.  Institutional Theories and Management Accounting Change: Contributions, Issues and Paths for Development , 2006 .

[46]  Felix Rauschmayer,et al.  Participation in EU Biodiversity Governance: How Far beyond Rhetoric? , 2009 .

[47]  Christopher D. Ittner,et al.  Implementing Performance Measurement Innovations: Evidence from Government , 2004 .

[48]  J. C. Thomas.  Public Involvement in Public Management: Adapting and Testing a Borrowed Theory. , 1990 .

[49]  Eran Vigoda.  From Responsiveness to Collaboration: Governance, Citizens, and the Next Generation of Public Administration , 2002 .

[50]  Ronald K. Mitchell,et al.  Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of who and What Really Counts , 1997 .

[51]  Brian Smith,et al.  New Approaches to Local Democracy: Direct Democracy, Participation and the ‘Third Sector’ , 2000 .

[52]  J. Bryson.  A Review of: “Stakeholder Theory, A European Perspective edited by Maria Bonnafous-Boucher and Yvon Prequeux” , 2008 .

[53]  T. Reddel,et al.  Beyond Participation, Hierarchies, Management and Markets: ‘New’ Governance and Place Policies , 2002 .

[54]  Sonia Royo,et al.  ARE ICTs IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN THE EU REGIONAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS? AN EMPIRICAL STUDY , 2007 .

[55]  Digby Race,et al.  The Twists and Turns of Community Participation in Natural Resource Management in Australia: What is Missing? , 2001 .

[56]  K. Blackstock,et al.  ‘Recruitment’, ‘Composition’, and ‘Mandate’ Issues in Deliberative Processes: Should we Focus on Arguments Rather than Individuals? , 2005 .