This is a CTP of initiative: Participatory Budgeting Belo Horizonte (Brazil)
In 2006, the Municipality of Belo Horizonte launched "Digital Participatory budgeting" which, unlike the regional participatory budgeting, forwent the physical presence of the participants, that is, the process happens only through online voting. Through the site http://opdigital.pbh.gov.br, any citizen with the right to vote in Belo Horizonte was able to choose 9 out of 36 projects that had been pre-selected by the City and the PB associations, covering projects by region. In all regions the vote was optional.
The digital PB process and the regional PB process occur in different years and have different approaches. The regional PB focuses on demands from a specific region and has representatives, assemblies and a long decision-making process. The digital PB relates to the whole city and concerns big investments and construction works. The government gives citizens the option to vote and the most voted project is undertaken.
The PB process in Belo Horizonte was always dynamic and the digital participation was introduced as one of the new ways of engaging the population. This process began in 2006 and was a huge step towards citizen participation.
The government perceived that the rate of citizen engagement in the regional PB process was falling and the digital PB came as a new way to participate, which the government thought would involve more of the city’s citizens in the PB process. In addition to promoting further participation, the digital PB also includes a part of the population that does not engage in the regional PB. As a result, the implementation of the digital platform was a critical turning point in the PB process in Belo Horizonte.
The idea of the digital PB came from the government perception that the number of participants in the assemblies was falling and they needed to promote new ways of engagement. Furthermore, during the first decade of the 2000s, the government in Brazil was being transformed into a digital government: documents and bureaucratic processes were being held on digital platforms and a “digital revolution for government” began, as commented by the interviewee.
In order to minimize any problems related to the digital exclusion in the project, the City Hall released several voting kiosks throughout the city.
Headquarters of associations, cooperatives and schools were also indicated as official voting locations.
The site of the 2006 Digital Participatory Budgeting (totally separate from the regional PB) presented basic information about the projects, such as cost, location. Moreover, online participation tools were offered in e-mails and in discussion forums. Also it is important to specify that the group of citizens that participates in the regional PB is not the same as the one that engages in the digital PB. The regional PB is mostly attended by lower-income classes while the digital PB is mostly used by people with more access to technology. The interviewee was not sure if the citizens had been demanding a new way of participation when the digital PB was proposed, but it gained a huge response from the population, receiving over 80 thousand votes in its first year of existence.
There are different kinds of contextual characteristics that relate to this CTP:
2000 – Digital transformation in the government - The process of digitalization of procedures in the government became a reality in 2000. That motivated a series of other interactions between the city hall and the citizens.
2002 – Decrease of participation in the PB process - In 2002 the city hall realized that the number of participants had been decreasing. They started thinking about solutions to promote more engagement.
2006 – Digital Participatory Budgeting indicated to the SUCESU - MG - The Municipality of Belo Horizonte was indicated as recommended practice by the Digital Participatory Budget experience in SUCESU-MG, which rewards personalities, projects, companies or institutions that contribute to highlight nationally the sector of Information Technology and Minas Gerais Telecommunications.
2007 – Award won: "Good Practice in Citizen Participation", was awarded by OIDP - The Digital Participatory Budgeting won the highest distinction for "Good Practice in Citizen Participation", awarded annually by the Observatory of Participatory Democracy in recognition of innovative experiences in this area and promotion of participation and implementation of public policies.
2008 - The Digital PB website ran the Big Fish Award - The Digital PB website ran the Big Fish Award, in the popular vote category, which awards the best designs and online ideas in Brazil.
2008 – Continuity of digital PB - In 2008 the digital PB had its second round, aiming to consolidate the initiative.
2009 - Digital Participatory Budgeting is finalist in the Millennium Development Goals Award - The program was among the finalists for the Millennium Development Goals Award (MDGs) in Brazil, 2009, as proposed by the Federal Government to encourage national practices and actions for achieving the MDGs, which were eight targets set by the Organization of United Nations (UN) to make a more just and united world by 2015.
2012 – Decrease of participation in the digital PB - After a successful start in 2006 and 2008, participation in 2012’s digital PB decreased by 90%. The lack of confidence in the process because some projects had not been delivered was pointed out as the main factor for this low participation rate.
There was no clear contestation because the digital PB had broadened the participation channels.
“If we had promoted a replacement of the regional PB with the digital PB, we would have faced a lot of contestation, but as a new channel, a new way of participation, the citizens did not demonstrate any kind of discontentment”, said the interviewee.
In the digital PB participation is direct, in other words, the person can vote directly on the platform. In the regional PB participation is indirect; people have representatives and have to go through a lot of channels in order to approve a demand. In that respect, the interviewee felt that although the digital PB is a direct-vote process, community leaders had broader influence in the process and the citizens that were organized in associations were likely to vote for the same thing. The people who did not take part in any association and who did not engage in the regional PB tended to vote individually.
The digital PB aimed to include all citizens in the process, even those who do not engage in the regional PB. The city hall had huge expectations of participation in this digital format.
In the first year they had 80 thousand votes on the digital platform and they hoped that the next rounds would be even bigger. But the subsequent years were not as good as the first and in the last digital PB round participation amounted to only 8 thousand votes.
The interviewee said that the amount of voters depends on what the proposals are that are being put to the vote. Mostly he thinks that the last digital PB did not engage many people because of its content. Still, they hope that the digital inclusion that happened in Brazil in the last couple of years will improve participation in the digital PB process.
Digital platforms are essential.
“If you are engaging in citizen participation, you need to work with digital platforms. We need to advance on traditional spaces of participation”, said the interviewee. Even though they did not have the amount of participation that they had expected, they are hopeful about using the digital PB as a way of engaging citizens in the decision-making process regarding the municipal budget.
Stay informed. Subscribe for project updates by e-mail.
