Title: Participatory Budgeting in Local Governments: A Scoping Review of Models, Citizen Involvement, Accountability, and Development Outcomes
Authors: Richard C. Pasco
Volume: 10
Issue: 6
Pages: 343-352
Publication Date: 2026/06/28
Abstract:
Participatory budgeting (PB) has developed from an influential democratic innovation into a diverse family of local-government practices through which residents may identify priorities, develop proposals, deliberate, vote, monitor projects, or otherwise influence the allocation of public resources. Yet the mechanisms through which citizens participate, the extent of their decision authority, the accountability safeguards used, and the development outcomes achieved vary substantially across contexts. This scoping review mapped evidence on participatory-budgeting models in local governments, with attention to citizen involvement, accountability, documented development outcomes, and implementation challenges. Guided by the Arksey and O'Malley framework, its refinements, JBI guidance, and PRISMA-ScR, the review applied a Population-Concept-Context lens. The population included local governments, public officials, residents, community organizations, and other actors involved in local budget decisions; the concept included PB models, citizen participation, accountability, equity, public value, and development outcomes; and the context was local and municipal government. A targeted search of peer-reviewed studies, reviews, institutional reports, and practice guidance published from 2004 to 21 June 2026 was conducted. Twenty-nine substantive sources were charted. Five themes emerged: (1) PB has diversified from deliberative assemblies into project-voting, proximity, community-grant, multi-stakeholder, and digital-hybrid models; (2) meaningful participation depends on clear decision rights, accessible information, inclusion supports, and facilitated deliberation; (3) accountability is strengthened when the process links published rules, feasibility review, transparent allocation, and implementation monitoring; (4) documented outcomes include civic learning, more responsive or equitable allocations, improved transparency, and context-dependent fiscal, service, and well-being gains; and (5) limited budget discretion, unequal participation, political turnover, capacity constraints, digital exclusion, and weak follow-through can reduce PB to a symbolic exercise. An emergent framework is proposed to guide the design of accountable and development-oriented PB in local governments. The review concludes that PB should be treated not as a one-time vote but as a continuing public-financial-management cycle in which citizens can understand choices, influence real resource allocations, and track delivery.