The Paradoxes of Participatory Governance: Preliminary Findings from a National Survey on Participatory Budgeting in South Korea

Participatory Budgeting (PB) has been widely advocated by both theorists and practitioners of public administration as its adoption has become a global phenomenon. South Korea is no exception. Since 2004, PB has been widely... [ view full abstract ]

Participatory Budgeting (PB) has been widely advocated by both theorists and practitioners of public administration as its adoption has become a global phenomenon. South Korea is no exception. Since 2004, PB has been widely adopted across local governments in South Korea. A review of PB literature reveals that although the theoretical and practical intentions of PB were to facilitate the accountability of local governments, few studies have provided systematic and comprehensive analyses on the unintentional setbacks of PB in South Korea. With the research gaps in mind, we tried to address the three paradoxical features of PB on which we may have mixed answers: 1) Centralization vs. Customization. Was the centralized adoption of PB conducive to the customization of PB in each local government? 2) Accessibility vs. Responsiveness. Was the increased accessibility of citizens to policy process (i.e., PB) actually led to improved responsiveness of bureaucracy? 3) Participation vs. Trust. Did the increased participation of citizens through PB eventually enhance their trust in government? In order to answer the questions, we conducted a nationwide survey of the local governments of South Korea, and also collected secondary data such as Korean census and socio-political data. Preliminary findings will be reported and discussed to draw theoretical and practical implications to identify and resolve the paradoxical faces of participatory governance.