Measuring Collaborative Stakeholder Influence and Open Budget Actions

Abstract:
Collaborative stakeholder influences (CSI) and open budget actions (OBA) are important elements in Governance in order to promote social development (Ansell e Gash, 2008). However, one point that needs to be clarified is how to measure these supposedly independent elements. Social development improves social welfare and individual quality of life (Davis, 2004). Therefore, open governments prioritise people in decision-making processes, giving them the opportunity to participate in the budgetary process to deliberate on public policies. OBA relates to transparency, participation, and accountability (Ling & Roberts, 2014). Moreover, the CSI act in forums along with public agents to engage in consensus-oriented processes seeking decisions’ openness (Ansell e Gash, 2008). The combination of CSI and OBA should support an effective open budget framework to support social development improvements. However, a point to be demystified is how to gauge these open budget core elements. The aim of the paper is to identify ways to measure the influence of collaborative stakeholders and open budget actions. To make public budgeting more effective, people need to take part of the process. In spite of that, continuing secrecy has been the subject of much discussion since the proposal of the open budget approach. However, the open budget approach remains only a theoretical proposition. This is probably one of the reasons why Khagram et al. (2013) state that the open budget consequences are still unclear. The methodological aspects focus on the collect data by interviews and content analysis for the result identification. We conducted, in Brazil, fifteen open-ended interviews among National Congress consultants, government finance analysts, social government executives, public budget researchers, and leaders of civil society organisations. Afterwards, we carried out content analysis of the data to describe the open budget core elements. We conclude that the number of civil society organizations and the presence of social councils and their operational components are relevant measures of collaborative stakeholder influence and open budget actions, respectively. In addition, this paper proposes of research agenda for governance studies, focusing on collaborative stakeholders and open budgets. Finally, we highlight some practical recommendations for governments’ openness. Among these are to create channels to interact with collaborative stakeholders, use clear specifications of budget actions, prioritise budget education and consider the power of collaborative stakeholders to influence the decision-making process in a better manner. Key Words: Collaborative Stakeholder; Open Budget; Governance Outcomes; Measurement Forms; Social Development. References: Ansell, Chris; Gash, Alison. Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of public administration research and theory, v. 18, n. 4, p. 543-571, 2008. Davis, G. (2004). A history of the social development network in The World Bank, 1973-2003. Khagram, S., Fung, A., & De Renzio, P. (2013). Open budgets: The political economy of transparency, participation, and accountability. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Ling, C., & Roberts, D. K. (2014). Evidence of development impact from institutional change: a review of the evidence on open budgeting. Retrieved from Washington, DC
Área(s) temática(s):
Año:
2017
Tipo de publicación:
Paper/Extenso Congresos GIGAPP
Palabras clave:
Congreso GIGAPP
Número:
GIGAPP2017
Serie:
VIII Congreso Internacional en Gobierno, Administracion y Politicas Publicas
Dirección:
Madrid, España
Organización:
GIGAPP. Asociación GIGAPP
Mes:
Septiembre
Comentarios:
Propuesta aceptada Ponencia/Comunicacion 2017-32 Gobernanza y Participacion Social en la Administracion Pública
Hits: 1517