User:Civictech/sandbox

Peer review 1 response-
Thank you for your thorough review of the article on participatory budgeting. I appreciate your suggestion to provide more balanced coverage of the topic by addressing both the potential benefits and drawbacks of PB. I will be sure to revise the article to include a more balanced perspective and to provide more detail on the examples you mentioned. I will also review the criticism section for grammatical errors and consider elaborating on the issues with PB. Thank you for bringing these points to my attention. I will make sure to carefully consider all perspectives and revise the article accordingly. I have made all the changes necessary o add more examples of asia, africa, latin america, europe, etc. This will adress your concerns.

Peer review 2 response-
Thank you for your review of the article on participatory budgeting. I am glad to hear that you found the article to be clear and informative. I will be sure to address the issues with broken links and missing citations in the article. I appreciate your suggestion to work on improving the coverage of the topic in the article. I will make sure to carefully consider the balance of content in the different sections and ensure that all relevant aspects are covered. Thank you for your feedback.

Peer Review 3 Response-

Thank you for your review of the article on participatory budgeting. I appreciate your suggestion to provide more detail on how PB works in other countries. I will be sure to expand on the information provided in the sections on New York, Argentina, and California to give a more comprehensive understanding of how PB is implemented in these places. I am glad to hear that you found the sections on outcomes and criticism to be useful and informative. Thank you for your feedback. I will work to ensure that the article provides a more in-depth analysis of PB in various countries and contexts.

Article evaluation

Talk:Civic technology

Possible articles to work on

1) CitizenLab

notes:

- small article

-phrased as an advertisement

- less citations and sources

-other relevant information avialable online

2) Government Technology Agency

- article only covers 2 topics (possible explansion options)

- minimal sources and citations

- no talk page discussions

- last edit in the article was years ago

Existing article:Participatory budgeting

To edit and create- a list of countries and/or orgs which implemented the same.

First draft of my edit starts below this sentence--
= Examples = Latin America

Around 40% of the participatory budgets still in existence worldwide in 2012 were located in Latin America, where the concept and mechanics of the system were developed in the 1980s. Following some earlier attempts in smaller towns, Participatory Budgeting came into its own in Porto Alegre as a result of a "window of opportunity" that emerged following the Workers' Party's electoral victory in 1988. Since PB's founding in 1989, three objectives have been set for it. Political was the first. The goal was to "democratize democracy" by engaging the general public, mobilizing the underprivileged who had been left out and left behind by the Brazilian political system, and fighting clientelism. Social was the second. The idea was to “democratize democracy” through grassroots participation and mobilization of the poor, who had been excluded and marginalized by the Brazilian political system, and by waging a struggle against clientelism. The second was social. The aim was to bring about a reversal of priorities in favor of the disadvantaged, and especially those living in the suburbs.

The Porto Alegre process is extremely intricate and a true institutional innovation. The primary idea was to involve non-elected individuals in the distribution of public funds and give them the ability to control at all levels, including direct decision-making authority at the local level and co-decision-making power at the city level. The participatory pyramid consists of three levels: local assemblies that are open to all residents, district participation forums, and a general participatory council at the city level. The meetings' objectives include debating priorities and choosing representatives to oversee the implementation of recommendations. Anyone who desires to participate in open meetings is permitted to do so.

Europe and North America

Adaptations of the participatory democracy model could be found mainly in Spain and Italy. Also widespread on the Iberian Peninsula are participatory budgets that incorporate elements of the multi-stakeholder participation model. The most widespread participatory budgets in Europe, however, are those that closely resemble the proximity participation model. The participatory budgeting movement has spread across Europe, but the majority of new countries have adopted the proximity model. Most notably, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Portugal, Latvia and Estonia have embraced the model. Participatory budgeting has also taken root in North America, particularly Canada and the United States. However, the United States has had an active participatory budgeting program for longer than any other country, and it has also witnessed greater success in spreading the model. The original impetus for participatory budgeting came from socialist movements in the 1970s and 1980s, such as Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay. For example, in Rio de Janeiro, the city council established the first participatory budget process in 1986. Since then, participatory budgeting has grown steadily in popularity around the world.

Africa

In Africa, where the development of PB has been more recent, models developed and the weight given to transnational transfers present a dynamic picture. Development took on impetus when the Federation of African cities and regional governments (UCLGAA) took an active role promoting training and visibility regarding PB at its triennial International Meeting "Africities," held in Dakar in 2012. This continent has drawn on a great deal of exchange with Latin America and Europe stressing the importance of PB as a tool for improving governance. Scarcity of research and difficulties in overcoming communication and technological barriers or their low position in the global flow of knowledge make it difficult to draw an inclusive and systematic panorama.

However, one feature is evident: in a continent where democratic structures and Western-style institutions are weak, PB remains very dependent on the actions of international donors and NGOs even though some social movements have engaged in it. Path followed in Africa is the same as the one followed by Latin American radical movements. It also differs from European case, where local governments have played a major role. During 2000s, "alternative globalization" networks have exerted a strong impact. However, in a continent heavily burdened by social and economic problems, the innovation that Pb represents could be an important resource of hope.