Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Participation, Representation, and Social Justice: Using Participatory Governance to Transform Representative Democracy

  • Symposium Article
  • Published:
Polity

Abstract

The direct incorporation of citizens into complex policy-making processes is the most significant innovation of the “third wave” of democratization in the developing world. Participatory governance (PG) institutions are part of a new institutional architecture that increases the connections among citizens and government officials. This article draws from a single case of PG to explore how its particular mechanisms work to transform representative democracy. In the cases examined here, PG institutions are grafted onto representative democracy and existing state institutions. These are state-sanctioned venues that require the intense involvement of citizens and government officials, without which the programs would grind to a halt. These features can expand citizen participation, enrich political representation, and enhance social justice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Bernard Manin, The Principles of Representative Government (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 8.

  2. John S. Dryzek, Deliberation Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, and Contestations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 29.

  3. Boaventura Santos, Democratizing Democracy: Beyond the Liberal Democratic Canon (London: Verso, 2005); Benjamin Barber, Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics For a New Age (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984); Archon Fung and Erik Olin Wright, Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance (London: Verso Books, 2003); Gianpaolo Baiocchi, “Participation, Activism, and Politics: The Porto Alegre Experiment,” in Deepening Democracy, ed. Fung and Wright (London: Verso, 2003), 45–76; Carole Pateman, Participation and Democratic Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970).

  4. Larry Diamond, Juan José Linz and Seymour Martin Lipset, Democracy in Developing Countries: Latin America (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1999); Adam Przeworski and Susan C. Stokes, Democracy, Accountability, and Representation (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999); Scott Mainwaring and Timothy Scully, eds., “Introduction: Party Systems in Latin America,” in Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1995), 1–36; John Carey and Matthew Shugart, “Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote: A Rank Ordering of Electoral Formulas,” Electoral Studies 14 (1995): 417–40; Guillermo O’Donnell, “The State, Democratization and Some Conceptual Problems: A Latin American View with Glances at Some Post-Communist Countries,” in Democracy, Markets, and Structural Reform in Latin America, ed. William C. Smith, Carlos H. Acuma, and Eduardo A. Gamarra (New Brunswick, CT: Transaction Publishers, 1994), 151–82.

  5. O’Donnell, “The State, Democratization and Some Conceptual Problems”; Matthew Cleary, The Sources of Democratic Responsiveness in Mexico (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2010); Catalina Smulovitz and Enrique Peruzzotti, “Societal Accountability in Latin America,” Journal of Democracy 11 (2000): 147–58.

  6. Civil society organizations are an umbrella category including social movements, community-based organizations, NGOs, and third sector service providers. Following the Brazilian academic and political tradition, unions are a separate category.

  7. Michael Saward, The Representative Claim (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010).

  8. Alfred Hirschman, Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970).

  9. Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999).

  10. Due to space considerations, it is not possible to explain why Brazil emerged as a leader in democratic innovation. The main reasons include the mobilization of civil society based on “the right to have rights” and “participatory publics,” the growth of independent labor unions, the development of a new party system, and the promulgation of the 1988 Constitution, which municipalized service delivery, established social rights, and permitted direct citizen participation in government policymaking. See Leonardo Avritzer, Democracy and the Public Space in Latin America (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002); Leonardo Avritzer, Participatory Institutions in Democratic Brazil (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009); Gianpaolo Baiocchi, Patrick Heller, and Marcelo Silva, Bootstrapping Democracy: Transforming Local Governance and Civil Society in Brazil (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2011); Brian Wampler, Participatory Budgeting in Brazil: Contestation, Cooperation, and Accountability (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2007).

  11. The evidence presented in this article was gathered by the author during the 2009–2010 academic year, when he was a Fulbright Scholar at the Federal University of Minas Gerais. For work, beyond Brazil, see Donna Lee Van Cott, Radical Democracy in the Andes (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008); Stehpanie Mcnulty, Voice and Vote: Decentralization and Participation in Post-Fujimori Peru (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2011); Christopher Gibson and Michael Woolcock, “Empowerment, Deliberative Development, and Local-Level Politics in Indonesia: Participatory Projects as a Source of Countervailing Power,” Studies in Comparative International Development 42 (2008): 151–80; Julien Labonne and Rob Chase, “Who is at the Wheel When Communities Drive Development? Evidence From the Philippines,” World Development 37 (2009): 219–31; Yves Sintomer, Carsten Herzberg, Giovanni Allegretti, and Anja Röcke, Learning from the South: Participatory Budgeting Worldwide—An Invitation to Global Cooperation (Bonn, Germany: InWEnt gGmbH, 2010); Fung and Wright, Deepening Democracy.

  12. There are a limited number of participatory governance institutions at the state, province, and national levels, as they face considerable scaling problems. There are also participatory programs administered by international development agencies, such as the World Bank, which may not be directly housed within the local state. However, these programs should be considered part of a state-sanctioned process because the World Bank needs the active support of national states (the World Bank's client) and because the World Bank typically looks for allies and partners at the local level.

  13. Carey and Shugart, “Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote”; Mainwaring and Scully, “Introduction: Party Systems in Latin America.”

  14. Fung and Wright, Deepening Democracy.

  15. James S. Fishkin, Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993).

  16. Manin, The Principles of Representative Government, 192.

  17. David Plotke, “Representation is Democracy,” Constellations 4 (1997): 19.

  18. Saward, The Representative Claim.

  19. Doug McAdam, John D. McCarthy, and Mayer Zald, Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996).

  20. Hanna F. Pitkin, The Concept of Representation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967), 221–22, emphasis added.

  21. Brian Wampler, Regenerating Democracy: Popular Participation, Social Justice, and Interlocking Institutions in Brazil, unpublished.

  22. Ibid.

  23. Hirschman, Exit, Voice, and Loyalty.

  24. For more information on the survey methodology, see Brian Wampler, Regenerating Democracy. Space limitations do not allow for a detailed discussion here.

  25. Cleary, The Sources of Democratic Responsiveness in Mexico.

  26. Deborah J. Yashar, Contesting Citizenship in Latin America: The Rise of Indigenous Movements and the Post Liberal Challenge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 284–85.

  27. Elinor Ostrom, Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990); Fung and Wright, Deepening Democracy.

  28. Jeffrey C. Alexander, The Civil Sphere (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).

  29. Ibid.

  30. Rebecca Abers, Inventing Local Democracy: Grassroots Politics in Brazil (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publisher, 2000); Gianpaolo Baiocchi, Militants and Citizens: The Politics of Participatory Democracy in Porto Alegre (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2005); Baiocchi, Heller, and Silva, Bootstrapping Democracy; Wampler, Participatory Budgeting in Brazil.

  31. Mcnulty, Voice and Vote; Benjamin Goldfrank, Deepening Local Democracy in Latin America: Participation, Decentralization and the Left (University Park, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2011); Van Cott, Radical Democracy in the Andes; Sintomer et al., “Learning from the South.”

  32. Wampler, Participatory Budgeting in Brazil.

  33. Adelmir Marquetti, “Democracia, Equidade e Effciencia, o Caso do Orcçamento Participativo em Porto Alegre,” in Inovaçāo Democrática no Brasil: O Orçamento Participativo, ed. Leonardo Avritzer and Zander Navarro (São Paulo: Cortez Editores, 2003).

  34. Carew Boulding and Brian Wampler, “Voice, Votes, and Resources: Evaluating the Effect of Participatory Democracy on Well-Being,” World Development 38, (2010): 125–35; World Bank Report, “Brazil: Toward a More Inclusive and Effective Participatory Budget in Porto Alegre.” Report no. 40144-BR; Mike Touchton and Brian Wampler, “Improving Social Well-Being Through New Democratic Institutions,” Paper presented at the 2012 Latin American Studies Association Conference, San Francisco, CA.

  35. Yashar, Contesting Citizenship in Latin America.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Boise State University,

    Brian Wampler

Authors
  1. Brian Wampler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The author would like to thank Carole Pateman and Michael Goodhart for their leadership. The final version of this article has much improved due to comments of Michael Goodhart and other members of the 2010–2011 APSA Taskforce. Stephen Moncrief and Sam Pagano provided valuable research assistance. The Fulbright Commission, Boise State University, and the American Political Science Association's “small grant” program generously provided funding to carry out this research.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wampler, B. Participation, Representation, and Social Justice: Using Participatory Governance to Transform Representative Democracy. Polity 44, 666–682 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1057/pol.2012.21

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/pol.2012.21

Keywords

Search

Navigation