Roberto Falanga

Changes need change: A psychosociological perspective on participation and social inclusion

This article aims to contribute on the reflection concerning new political measures and complex social demands in democratic systems worldwide. On recognizing the growing fragmentation of social systems and the effects on both social and individual identities, political participatory mechanisms are required to assume the increasing diversity and inequality among social groups and actors in innovative ways. On the basis of my academic and on-the-field experience with participatory practices aimed at including civil society in policymaking processes, I have acknowledged that there is a widespread necessity to look at the ways the relationship between political institutions and citizens can change through participation. I support this view by making reference to some of the findings of my PhD Thesis concerning participatory processes and public administration which put a light on the necessity of social inclusion measures’ enhancement. Organizational and cultural embedding of public sector in participatory policymaking is a key issue in this article in that public policies represent complex chains of processes making sense of citizens and groups’ identities and activities. Participatory formulation and/or implementation of public policies cannot help but be related to relational patterning among social groups as well as between political institutions and societies. Understanding the multiple ways through which participation in policymaking can work in different political and social systems, the article proposes an in-depth reflection on the ways change can be achieved by public authorities. Supported by psychosociological theories and within an interdisciplinary approach, the final goal is that of opening the debate on the extents through which governments can effectively coordinate participatory processes towards inclusive goals. Indeed, political institutions are very unlikely to work out effective participatory processes without undergoing extensive cultural transformations and, therefore, ensure high impact on fragmented societies.

Administrative Discretion in Participatory Processes

Administrative discretion in participatory processes refers to the degrees of power exerted by public officials at the margins of formal roles. As participatory processes in policymaking require public officials to intermediate between political representatives and social agents, administrative discretion is a key feature for the (re)configuration of public officials’ roles in public administration.

Understanding Participatory Policymaking Processes: Discourse Analysis in Psychosociological Action Research

Worldwide participatory policymaking with civil society has become a case in point for new patterns of governance at different levels. The enhancement of public services’ quality compels intertwined challenges to participants, be they citizens, politicians, or civil servants. Given the limited attention that scientific literature has paid to understanding how roles and functions of civil servants are demanded to change through participatory processes, an exploratory action research was run in 2012 with 29 civil servants of the Municipality of Lisbon. Civil servants were all engaged in—at least—one of the four participatory processes run by the administration at that time: Participatory Budget; Bip/Zip; Local Agenda 21; Simplis. The action research was aimed at grasping the psychological change-driven dynamics played between these subjects, with the support of psychosociological theories and methods. Focusing on the analysis of the discourse, as one of the methods employed towards this end, this text focuses on the specific methodological apparatus of the discourse analysis approach. This contribution will hopefully open to further studies on discourse analysis in action research, and enhance the overall debate on the employment of qualitative methods in participatory policymaking studies.

Women in Budgeting: A Critical Assessment of Participatory Budgeting Experiences

Budgeting has for too long been considered a technical arena for highly skilled elites. Participatory Budgeting (PB) opens up the field and creates a space for local communities to discuss the equitable distribution of resources. However, gender has not been at the forefront of the PB debate. On the other hand, gender responsive budgeting has had its own growth trajectory, often not including participatory methods. The chapter highlights possible intersections between PB and gender mainstreaming and notes PB’s potential in addressing issues of gender mainstreaming and social justice, following dialogues with other complementary democratic innovations.