IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/wdevel/v66y2015icp280-292.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Participatory Democracy and Effective Policy: Is There a Link? Evidence from Rural Peru

Author

Listed:
  • Jaramillo, Miguel
  • Wright, Glenn Daniel

Abstract

We examine the relationship between participatory democratic institutions and effective agricultural policy in rural Peruvian municipalities, using a unique quantitative dataset of 100 Peruvian municipalities at two points in time, allowing us to examine (a) bottom-up, grassroots participatory governance institutions, and (b) Peru’s top-down participatory budgeting reform implemented in all Peruvian sub-national governments in the early 2000s. We find that voluntary participatory fora are strongly and significantly associated with more active and more effective agricultural policy. However, we find more ambiguous results when examining Peru’s mandatory participatory budgeting institutions, finding more active, but less effective agricultural policies after their implementation.

Suggested Citation

  • Jaramillo, Miguel & Wright, Glenn Daniel, 2015. "Participatory Democracy and Effective Policy: Is There a Link? Evidence from Rural Peru," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 280-292.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:66:y:2015:i:c:p:280-292
    DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.08.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X14002496
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.08.011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Archon Fung & Erik Olin Wright, 2001. "Deepening Democracy: Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance," Politics & Society, , vol. 29(1), pages 5-41, March.
    2. BOAVENTURA de SOUSA SANTOS, 1998. "Participatory Budgeting in Porto Alegre: Toward a Redistributive Democracy," Politics & Society, , vol. 26(4), pages 461-510, December.
    3. Brown, L. David & Ashman, Darcy, 1996. "Participation, social capital, and intersectoral problem solving: African and Asian cases," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(9), pages 1467-1479, September.
    4. Speer, Johanna, 2012. "Participatory Governance Reform: A Good Strategy for Increasing Government Responsiveness and Improving Public Services?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(12), pages 2379-2398.
    5. Gianpaolo Baiocchi, 2001. "Participation, Activism, and Politics: The Porto Alegre Experiment and Deliberative Democratic Theory," Politics & Society, , vol. 29(1), pages 43-72, March.
    6. Labonne, Julien & Chase, Robert S., 2011. "Do community-driven development projects enhance social capital? Evidence from the Philippines," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 348-358, November.
    7. Boulding, Carew & Wampler, Brian, 2010. "Voice, Votes, and Resources: Evaluating the Effect of Participatory Democracy on Well-being," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 125-135, January.
    8. Patrick Heller, 2001. "Moving the State: The Politics of Democratic Decentralization in Kerala, South Africa, and Porto Alegre," Politics & Society, , vol. 29(1), pages 131-163, March.
    9. Gaventa, John & Barrett, Gregory, 2012. "Mapping the Outcomes of Citizen Engagement," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(12), pages 2399-2410.
    10. Rebecca Abers, 1998. "From Clientelism to Cooperation: Local Government, Participatory Policy, and Civic Organizing in Porto Alegre, Brazil," Politics & Society, , vol. 26(4), pages 511-537, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Davide Luca, 2017. "Boon or bane for development? Turkey’s central state bureaucracy and the management of public investment," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(6), pages 939-957, September.
    2. Paolo de Renzio & Joachim Wehner, 2017. "The Impacts of Fiscal Openness," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 32(2), pages 185-210.
    3. Mayka, Lindsay & Abbott, Jared, 2023. "Varieties of participatory institutions and interest intermediation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    4. Saguin, Kidjie, 2018. "Why the poor do not benefit from community-driven development: Lessons from participatory budgeting," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 220-232.
    5. Catherine Ragasa & Cristina Alvarez-Mingote & Paul McNamara, 2024. "Bottom-Up Approaches and Decentralized Extension Structures for Improving Access to and Quality of Extension Services and Technology Adoption: Multi-level Analysis from Malawi," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 36(5), pages 1093-1146, October.
    6. Junying Lin & Zhonggen Zhang & Lingli Lv, 2019. "The Impact of Program Participation on Rural Household Income: Evidence from China’s Whole Village Poverty Alleviation Program," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-15, March.
    7. Marcin K. Widomski & Anna Musz-Pomorska, 2023. "Sustainable Development of Rural Areas in Poland since 2004 in the Light of Sustainability Indicators," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-29, February.
    8. de Renzio, Paolo & Wehner, Joachim, 2017. "The impacts of fiscal openness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 82521, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Dorota Bednarska-Olejniczak & Jarosław Olejniczak & Libuše Svobodová, 2020. "How a Participatory Budget Can Support Sustainable Rural Development—Lessons From Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-29, March.
    10. Davide Luca, 2016. "Do bureaucracies enhance or constrain policy effectiveness? Evidence from Turkey’s central management of public investment," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 109, European Institute, LSE.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Grillos, Tara, 2017. "Participatory Budgeting and the Poor: Tracing Bias in a Multi-Staged Process in Solo, Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 343-358.
    2. Sheely, Ryan, 2015. "Mobilization, Participatory Planning Institutions, and Elite Capture: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Rural Kenya," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 251-266.
    3. Saguin, Kidjie, 2018. "Why the poor do not benefit from community-driven development: Lessons from participatory budgeting," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 220-232.
    4. Schaeffer, Michael & Yilmaz, Serdar, 2008. "Strengthening local government budgeting and accountability," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4767, The World Bank.
    5. Speer, Johanna, 2012. "Participatory Governance Reform: A Good Strategy for Increasing Government Responsiveness and Improving Public Services?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(12), pages 2379-2398.
    6. de Renzio, Paolo & Wehner, Joachim, 2017. "The impacts of fiscal openness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 82521, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Ganesh Prasad Pandeya & Shree Krishna Shrestha, 2016. "Does Citizen Participation Improve Local Planning? An Empirical Analysis of Stakeholders’ Perceptions in Nepal," Journal of South Asian Development, , vol. 11(3), pages 276-304, December.
    8. Klimovský Daniel & Secinaro Silvana & Baláž Martina Benzoni & Brescia Valerio, 2024. "Participatory Budgeting as a Democratic and Managerial Innovation: Recent Trends and Avenues for Further Research," Central European Journal of Public Policy, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 52-71.
    9. Ackerman, John, 2004. "Co-Governance for Accountability: Beyond "Exit" and "Voice"," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 447-463, March.
    10. Mayka, Lindsay & Abbott, Jared, 2023. "Varieties of participatory institutions and interest intermediation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    11. Catherine Ragasa & Cristina Alvarez-Mingote & Paul McNamara, 2024. "Bottom-Up Approaches and Decentralized Extension Structures for Improving Access to and Quality of Extension Services and Technology Adoption: Multi-level Analysis from Malawi," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 36(5), pages 1093-1146, October.
    12. Gonçalves, Sónia, 2014. "The Effects of Participatory Budgeting on Municipal Expenditures and Infant Mortality in Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 94-110.
    13. Grindle, Merilee, 2010. "Sanctions, Benefits, and Rights: Three Faces of Accountability," Working Paper Series rwp10-026, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    14. Lily - Trinh Hoang Hong Hue, 2019. "Gender Differences of Citizen Participation in Local Government: The Case of Vietnam," Journal of Public Administration and Governance, Macrothink Institute, vol. 9(3), pages 225-238, December.
    15. Apaydin, Fulya, 2012. "Partisan Preferences and Skill Formation Policies: New Evidence from Turkey and Argentina," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1522-1533.
    16. Dorota Bednarska-Olejniczak & Jarosław Olejniczak & Libuše Svobodová, 2019. "Towards a Smart and Sustainable City with the Involvement of Public Participation—The Case of Wroclaw," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-33, January.
    17. repec:agg:journl:3393 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Theesfeld, Insa & Dufhues, Tom & Buchenrieder, Gertrud, 2017. "The effects of rules on local political decision-making processes: How can rules facilitate participation?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 50(4), pages 675-696.
    19. Fox, Jonathan A., 2015. "Social Accountability: What Does the Evidence Really Say?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 346-361.
    20. Mustalahti, Irmeli & Rakotonarivo, O. Sarobidy, 2014. "REDD+ and Empowered Deliberative Democracy: Learning from Tanzania," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 199-211.
    21. Lavalle, Adrian Gurza & Acharya, Arnab & Houtzager, Peter P., 2005. "Beyond comparative anecdotalism: lessons on civil society and participation from Sao Paulo, Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 951-964, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:66:y:2015:i:c:p:280-292. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/worlddev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.